Can you believe in the infallabilty of the bible?

[waitasec]

Your skepticism of Jesus having a deeper understanding of God is based on what?

he was just a person and
the contradictions found in the bible


ok, now your turn...

 

[sojourner]

he was just a person and
the contradictions found in the bible


ok, now your turn...

What makes you think he was "just a person?" The only historical references to Jesus tout him as being more than "just a person."
Those references also state that he did have special knowledge.

 

[waitasec]

What makes you think he was "just a person?" The only historical references to Jesus tout him as being more than "just a person."

i suppost you can say the same thing about
gandhi, martin luther king jr, the dali lama ...


ahem, what happened to your turn...?

 

[waitasec]

Those references also state that he did have special knowledge.

so what? it's just a claim...like many before and many since.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

What makes you think he was "just a person?" The only historical references to Jesus tout him as being more than "just a person."
Those references also state that he did have special knowledge.

That is not true. The Josephus reference widely thought to be authenticmakes no such claim, while the ones upon which you rely are clearly agenda driven.

 

[sojourner]

i suppost you can say the same thing about
gandhi, martin luther king jr, the dali lama ...

Can you? Really? C'mon! You don't suppose any such thing -- at least not to the degree the biblical references report Jesus as such.

 

[sojourner]

That is not true. The Josephus reference widely thought to be authenticmakes no such claim, while the ones upon which you rely are clearly agenda driven.

Josephus wouldn't have bothered referencing Jesus at all, unless there was something remarkable about him.

Every source is agenda-driven in some way -- even those that claim they're not. There's no such thing as pure journalism.

I understand your bias, just as you understand mine. But the fact remains: Jesus is significantly touted as being more than "just a person."

 

[waitasec]

Can you? Really? C'mon! You don't suppose any such thing -- at least not to the degree the biblical references report Jesus as such.

why not? these people changed the course of history...

 

[1robin]

right, i'm glad you finally caught up...so which one is it...there are manuscripts that use the definitions 4 and 6
as per the NIV

Matthew 5:22
New International Version (NIV)
22 But I tell you that anyone who is angry with a brother or sister[a] will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to a brother or sister, ‘Raca,’[c] is answerable to the court. And anyone who says, ‘You fool!’ will be in danger of the fire of hell.

Not a single one of these translations use sister in the verse. If the NIV does then I would suggest it not by viewed as a reliable source for this issue.
New International Version (©1984)
New Living Translation (©2007)
English Standard Version (©2001)
New American Standard Bible (©1995)
King James Bible (Cambridge Ed.)
International Standard Version (©2008)
Aramaic Bible in Plain English (©2010)
GOD'S WORD® Translation (©1995)
King James 2000 Bible (©2003)
American King James Version
American Standard Version
Douay-Rheims Bible
English Revised Version
Webster's Bible Translation
Weymouth New Testament
World English Bible
Young's Literal Translation

Footnotes:
Matthew 5:22 The Greek word for brother or sister (adelphos) refers here to a fellow disciple, whether man or woman; also in verse 23.
Matthew 5:22 Some manuscripts brother or sister without cause
Matthew 5:22 An Aramaic term of contempt

Matthew 5:22 NIV - But I tell you that anyone who is angry - Bible Gateway

there is a world of difference between a fellow man and a brethren in christ
a brother and sister and a brethren in christ, belonging to the same people and and a brethren in christ....right?

So I take it that your contention is that who knows who brothers are referring to. I thought I have already adressed this. I will do so again:

The word "brother" here refers not merely to one to whom we are nearly related, having the same parent or parents, as the word is commonly used, but includes also a neighbor, or perhaps anyone with whom we may be associated. As all people are descended from one Father and are all the creatures of the same God, so they are all brethren: and so every man should be regarded and treated as a brother,
Barnes' Notes on the Bible
By "brother" is meant, not in a religious sense, one that is of the same faith, or in the same church state; nor, in a strict natural sense, one that is so in the bonds of consanguinity; but in a large sense, any man, of whatsoever country or nation: for we are to be angry with no man; that is, as is rightly added,
Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible
By our brother, here, we are to understand any person, though ever so much below us, for we are all made of one blood.
Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary

That is three commentators saying the same thing. There was not one who differed in this determination. Most did not get deep into it mainly IMO because it is so obvious. Are you actually suggesting that the bible teaches I can kill anyone I want as long it is neither a desciple, a Hebrew, or a family member. Jesus sure never did any of that. That is one desperate hail mary.

so what it's there isn't it?
translated by these folks
Committee on Bible Translation

What was I supposed to see at this link?

here's another one for ya captain...
mark 14:60 Then the high priest stood up before them and asked Jesus, “Are you not going to answer? What is this testimony that these men are bringing against you?” 61 But Jesus remained silent and gave no answer.

Again the high priest asked him, “Are you the Messiah, the Son of the Blessed One?”Again the high priest asked him, “Are you the Messiah, the Son of the Blessed One?”

One at a time. I am having a hard time believing what you seem to be saying is what you actually think on the previous one. I am no Captain. I was a petty officer third class aviation support equipment electronic techinician. So you must post all that if nautical references are used.

62 “I am,” said Jesus. “And you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven.”

guess what...that dude died. so really he didn't get to see jesus at the right hand of the mighty one on a cloud did he...guess jesus was very mistaken...
in fact the other gospels that followed reconciled this embarrassing fact that they actually omitted the entire gist of jesus claiming of having the sanhedrin the opportunity of witnessing his return .... convenient, huh?

This is one of the hardest ones I have ever seen in the bible to reconcile. Commentators and theologians don't seem to have trouble but I do. In fact this one is the only one I have as of yet to discover a completely satasfactory answer to. It is far more complecated than what the reading of it suggests. However let's finish the strange journey we were on before another is taken, I just don't have time right now.

 

[waitasec]

Josephus wouldn't have bothered referencing Jesus at all, unless there was something remarkable about him.

Every source is agenda-driven in some way -- even those that claim they're not. There's no such thing as pure journalism.

I understand your bias, just as you understand mine. But the fact remains: Jesus is significantly touted as being more than "just a person."

what is remarkable would be the claims of the walking dead and the 3 hour eclipse being confirmed from an outside source

 

[waitasec]

Not a single one of these translations use sister in the verse. If the NIV does then I would suggest it not by viewed as a reliable source for this issue.
New International Version (©1984)
New Living Translation (©2007)
English Standard Version (©2001)
New American Standard Bible (©1995)
King James Bible (Cambridge Ed.)
International Standard Version (©2008)
Aramaic Bible in Plain English (©2010)
GOD'S WORD® Translation (©1995)
King James 2000 Bible (©2003)
American King James Version
American Standard Version
Douay-Rheims Bible
English Revised Version
Webster's Bible Translation
Weymouth New Testament
World English Bible
Young's Literal Translation

then its ok to hate any female in your heart
you are funny.

care to actually discuss the point...
did he mean a fellow believer or anyone?

 

[1robin]

what is remarkable would be the claims of the walking dead and the 3 hour eclipse being confirmed from an outside source

There is a reference to the darkness in an extra biblical source but I forget the name. One of the ones I posted previously has a supernatural reference of some kind. However even if it was on television critics would just find another reason to disbelieve.

 

[sojourner]

why not? these people changed the course of history...

every person does that, simply by being born.

 

[1robin]

then its ok to hate any female in your heart
you are funny.

If you hadn't said I was funny I would have thought you were just as serious as any other point. In fact it is no worse than what you are saying. I just meant that you kept posting sisters in the verses and I could not find it in any.

care to actually discuss the point...
did he mean a fellow believer or anyone?

I have already posted three commentators, cross-references at blue letter bible, the absence of any commentator agreeing with you, and my own personal interpretation and reason why it applies to our fellow man. What do I have to post that you consider on the issue if this wasn't enough? It is far more substantial than the missenterpretation made in an evidence vacume and for no other reason than preference that I can see. He meant everyone for the 10th time.

 

[sojourner]

what is remarkable would be the claims of the walking dead and the 3 hour eclipse being confirmed from an outside source

You're placing unrealistic expectations upon the gospel texts for this kind of factual veracity. Remember, we're dealing with theological treatments -- not scientific facts here. Therefore, in viewing Jesus in a way that is consistent with his mythic portrayal in the gospels (and elsewhere in the NT), Jesus had a greater sense of God than we do.

 

[1robin]

You're placing unrealistic expectations upon the gospel texts for this kind of factual veracity. Remember, we're dealing with theological treatments -- not scientific facts here. Therefore, in viewing Jesus in a way that is consistent with his mythic portrayal in the gospels (and elsewhere in the NT), Jesus had a greater sense of God than we do.

I have been wanting to ask you how you ever arrived at suffecient faith that enabled you to be born again given the unreliablity that you suggest for the bible. Unlike others I am sure you have a reasoned response but I do not think without the high degree of reliability I have in the bible I would have ever been able to trust God enough to be saved. Also if you believe in God and his soverignty why do you think it consistent with his purpose to allow corruption to the degree you support for his word? He went to a lot of trouble just to have it watered down later.

Shalom,

I still wanted to get into Thomas specifically when there is time if you are interested.

 

[waitasec]

You're placing unrealistic expectations upon the gospel texts for this kind of factual veracity. Remember, we're dealing with theological treatments -- not scientific facts here. Therefore, in viewing Jesus in a way that is consistent with his mythic portrayal in the gospels (and elsewhere in the NT), Jesus had a greater sense of God than we do.

but of course, jesus is god :sarcastic

seriously though, thats all good sojourner...but i am not pulling these unrealistic expectations out of thin air....many many believers do and thusly put unrealistic expectations of how they should be understood.

 

[waitasec]

I have been wanting to ask you how you ever arrived at suffecient faith that enabled you to be born again given the unreliablity that you suggest for the bible.

why would this matter to you?

are you in the mood for some judging?

 

[sojourner]

I have been wanting to ask you how you ever arrived at suffecient faith that enabled you to be born again given the unreliablity that you suggest for the bible. Unlike others I am sure you have a reasoned response but I do not think without the high degree of reliability I have in the bible I would have ever been able to trust God enough to be saved. Also if you believe in God and his soverignty why do you think it consistent with his purpose to allow corruption to the degree you support for his word? He went to a lot of trouble just to have it watered down later.

Shalom,

I still wanted to get into Thomas specifically when there is time if you are interested.

Because my faith is not solely derived from "what the bible says," but mainly from the Tradition -- actions of my parents and people of faith whom I've met and trusted.

The bible is as unreliable as we are in its use of verifiable fact. But it is what it is: a theological treatment of the Tradition of God's people. In that treatment it is consistent and reliable, provided we exegete the texts carefully. The value of the bible isn't in the truth it contains, but in its ability to foster any number of interpretations that mirror the wide variety of God's created order.

God "allows" "corruption" (if I take your meaning correctly) of the texts in the same way that God "allows" "corruption" of humankind. I don't believe God is either a micromanager or a control freak. I don't see the texts as "watered down" in any way. There have been some translational problems, and some things have been lost -- and that's a shame, but not devastating to the Faith. I think the texts are remarkably well-preserved from the earliest we have, and I think those are fairly reliable in terms of reporting quotations and events -- especially the NT.

God has always used a fallible humanity to achieve God's purposes -- and most of the time it seems God uses the worst of us: Liars, thieves, and whores. That's the beauty of grace -- that broken vessels can still carry God.

 

[sojourner]

but of course, jesus is god :sarcastic

seriously though, thats all good sojourner...but i am not pulling these unrealistic expectations out of thin air....many many believers do and thusly put unrealistic expectations of how they should be understood.

Absolutely.