I understand what you are saying but it does not mean it works that way.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
how does a christian understand the bible?
- Thread starter waitasec
- Start date
I understand what you are saying but it does not mean it works that way.
Civil Shephard
Active Member
I think you two are wonderful to read and discrediting aside...
the very act of trying to understand another human being is I believe why Jesus came and why we are here. We try to understand one another and we try to understand God and for my part... Don't the two go hand in hand?
Nothings about to change the fact that I love Jesus teachings as the best words ever spoken and that I believe and indeed know that the very presence of our Creator I AM are in those words. To me its hardest to see exactly how Jesus said what he said. And the conclusion I've come to is that Jesus was always kind and humble even in rebuke. I could be wrong... but how can a man turn the other cheek if he allows himself to get offended or angry?
Thankfully, I've gotten angry on these forums sometimes and it's refreshing to see what I lack as much as what I believe I posses in the matter of being poor in spirit or meek.
Anywho... you guys are two of my favorites and always a fun read.
the very act of trying to understand another human being is I believe why Jesus came and why we are here. We try to understand one another and we try to understand God and for my part... Don't the two go hand in hand?
Nothings about to change the fact that I love Jesus teachings as the best words ever spoken and that I believe and indeed know that the very presence of our Creator I AM are in those words. To me its hardest to see exactly how Jesus said what he said. And the conclusion I've come to is that Jesus was always kind and humble even in rebuke. I could be wrong... but how can a man turn the other cheek if he allows himself to get offended or angry?
Thankfully, I've gotten angry on these forums sometimes and it's refreshing to see what I lack as much as what I believe I posses in the matter of being poor in spirit or meek.
Anywho... you guys are two of my favorites and always a fun read.
Thanks. I think there is a lot of love between us. Love for humanity type love that is.
Last edited:
Pegg
Jehovah our God is One
you know, most biographies are written decades after said events such as the biography of a president for instance...or the biography of a musician... just because it is written decades later does not mean that it is unreliable and falsified.
after Jesus resurrection he spent 40 days with his apostles, teaching them and im pretty sure that they would have had many questions for him which he would have answered. Everything you find in the gospels would either have been their eyewitness testimony, or the information they gleaned from Jesus himself.
Abraham never saw his decedents enter the promised land either, but that doesn't mean that the promise made to Abraham was never realised.
are you reading these accounts before you draw these sorts of conclusions? Im just wondering if maybe you are speaking from second hand knowledge rather then from reading what is written yourself??
Mark 16:5 When they entered into the memorial tomb, they saw a young man sitting on the right side clothed in a white robe, and they were stunned. 6 He said to them: Stop being stunned. YOU are looking for Jesus the Naz‧a‧rene′, who was impaled. He was raised up, he is not here. See! The place where they laid him. 7 But go, tell his disciples and Peter, He is going ahead of YOU into Gal′i‧lee; there YOU will see him, just as he told YOU.
waitasec
Veteran Member
waitasec
Veteran Member
even if they were written decades later you still have documentation of various events. think of the 3 hour eclipse that occurred at the crucifixion
and yet there are no accounts of this happening anywhere else from any astronomer. extraordinary claims need extraordinary evidence
another example, how were the people to know at that moment jesus died the curtain in the temple ripped..it's another extraordinary event...i think it's metaphor only because there isn't a jewish account for this event, to my knowledge.
i see where this is going. my premise is that the gospel of mark, which is arguably the 1st gospel, doesn't have the resurrection account in the earliest manuscripts... only an empty tomb and a hope. which would explain given the circumstances the jewish people were going through at the time this gospel was written. it ends with, "they were afraid" why has god forsaken his people?
but why direct this statement at that person as if they will experience this?
"and you will see the son of man..."
my take from what i've read in the bible and from other sources is that
the jews of that time where confused and wondered why would god allow for the destruction of the temple for a second time... the christian jews thought jesus would come back within their lifetime. we see it in the letters that, the time is at hand.
are you reading these accounts before you draw these sorts of conclusions? Im just wondering if maybe you are speaking from second hand knowledge rather then from reading what is written yourself??
Mark 16:5 When they entered into the memorial tomb, they saw a young man sitting on the right side clothed in a white robe, and they were stunned. 6 He said to them: “Stop being stunned. YOU are looking for Jesus the Naz‧a‧rene′, who was impaled. He was raised up, he is not here. See! The place where they laid him. 7 But go, tell his disciples and Peter, ‘He is going ahead of YOU into Gal′i‧lee; there YOU will see him, just as he told YOU.’”
16:8 Trembling and bewildered, the women went out and fled from the tomb. They said nothing to anyone, because they were afraid[/U].
yes i read these accounts from the bible, in fact i went to bible college believe it or not.
but i also open myself up to getting a bigger idea of what was happening historically and culturally from various sources.
for example, normally a person being crucified wouldn't get a burial as an enemy of the roman empire... this doesn't add up.
if you want, here is a link to a documentary which points to provocative ideas.
FRONTLINE: from jesus to christ - the first christians: watch the full program online | PBS
for what it's worth the story of jesus is a humanistic story. if only the majority of believers throughout history would have applied, love your neighbor/enemies, then maybe it's influence would have been a peaceful one. but it seems to me that is religion is tied with a notion that we are more important than what we really are because "god is on our side."
Last edited:
Pegg
Jehovah our God is One
You cant use anything after Mark 16:8 for the reason that it is believed to have been added onto marks gospel many centuries after by someone else. Mark stops after vs 8.
Lukes account does not say it all happened on the same day, besides that, he is relating the things Jesus taught, not the events as they happened. John mentions that it was 8 days after the 'resurrection' when Jesus appeared to the disciples who were gathered in a locked room. But that does not mean that he was only around for 8 days. If you keep reading Johns words he says "30 To be sure, Jesus performed many other signs also before the disciples, which are not written down in this scroll. 31 But these have been written down that YOU may believe that Jesus is the Christ the Son of God..."
John obviously left a lot of things out as he mentions here. He does not specifically mention how many days Jesus remained with them teaching them. It is Peter who gives us that detailed information in Acts.
You can read each account as a complete document... we have to take all of them into account to get the full picture. and just because one does not mention something that another does, does not mean they are contradicting each other.
Pegg
Jehovah our God is One
i'd just like to say that i can see you are using different translations here and I think that is where the confusion is coming from.
The time was early in the morning as the sun was rising. As the sun rises gradually and it turns from dark to light, John is merely speaking as from the time the sun began to rise...when it is still dark... the other accounts are all stating early in the morning as the sun is still rising.
Anyway, it was early in the morning.
Mary Magdalene and all the other women mentioned go together to the tomb early in the morning together. They get there and find the tomb open and empty. At the sight of the empty tomb Mary immediately runs off alone to tell Peter and John. (That is why it is Johns account that mentions only Mary, because Mary came to him)
But the other women remained behind and an angel appears to them explaining that Jesus had been raised up and to Go quickly and tell his disciples, So all together they begin to leave to deliver the news when Jesus himself also appears to them and then they go to the rest of the dicsiples. (Matthew 28:1-10; Mark 16:1, 2; John 20:1, 2)
In the meantime, Mary Magdalene returns to the tomb for the 2nd time. She is crying because the other women have left, the tomb is empty and she's waiting for Peter and John to get there to inspect the tomb. While she's there Jesus appears to her and tells her Be on your way to my brothers and say to them, I am ascending to my Father and your Father and to my God and your God. So she's now happily runs off to the rest of the disciples and eventually meets up with the other women who are already there.
some may have gone to observe, some had spices for the body, and the body had already been 'hastily' spiced on the day he was crucified but was only half done because the sun was going down they had to stop, so he was quickly wrapped and they had planned to come and finish the spicing.
Matthew does say that tomb was open..."the stone had been rolled away'
matthew is relating that one angel spoke, Mark calls him a 'young man' because the angel was mistaken for a young man 'in a white robe'
Luke and John mention the specific number of angels present, but only one of them spoke.
Sorry to end it there, if you want i can do some more in a new post.
Isn't Matthew writing to the reader at Matthew 28v2?
Matthew does not directly write 'they saw'.
As it 'began to dawn' there is still relative darkness.
Mark adds 16v2 relative darkness [at the rising of the sun]
Isn't Mark 16v4 clear to the question of verse 3 that the stone was away ?
John 20v1 mentions 'early' how 'early' in the morning? dark or still relative darkness.
This time of relative darkness before breakfast is also mentioned as 'night' at Proverbs 31v15.
Pegg
Jehovah our God is One
well it is John who says 'while it was still dark' and his account tells from the perspective of Mary Magdalen. Do you know how far Mary had to travel to get to the tomb? Do you think its impossible that she got up so early in the morning that it was still dark outside?
I think John is speaking from her perspective. Her account of the time she got up to go to the tomb may very well have been so early that it was still dark...as the sun began to rise could be still dark, there is an early morning twilight when it still appears dark outside. She would have told her story in terms of how she began the day ie "i got up when it was still dark and went to the tomb, by the time we arrived at the tomb it was in the morning light."
Matthew also says that an angel 'descended from heaven' but nobody saw the angel descending. Its quite obvious that Mathew is adding 'obvious' facts that no one needed to see. If an angel was sitting on the stone, it had obviously descended from heaven because thats where angels usually reside.
Also you should note that matthew doesnt actually say that the women saw the angel roll the stone away...he says an "angel had descended from heaven and approached and rolled away the stone, and was sitting on it"
the 'and was sitting on it' indicates that the women didnt actually see the angel roll the stone away. The implication is that the stone was already rolled away because the women 'saw an angle sitting on it'....they didnt say he rolled it away and proceeded to sit on it but simply that there was an angel sitting on it.
Rather than take the Bible at face-value why not just focus on what Jesus did and said as what we are to do. Paul ,widely quoted, was not even an Apostle but a popular preacher and the others were not Jesus they had their own foibles and who knows if they embellished things. After all Jesus never said a minister shouldn't work like regular folks and also serve God in fact historically most of God's people had jobs. Abraham was a businessman, Joseph served in government, Moses was a political leader and administrator, Esther toiled in the fields gleaning grain and even Jesus was a builder likely a stonemason and not poor but a tradesman much of his adult life. His ministry was three years and no one mentioned if he and the Apostles etc. did or didn't work. Timothy was the one that came up with the mooching off the faithful ploy that curses much of the minstries since then.
Rather what did Jesus say and do - focus just on that and keep the faith simple. Love your enemies, do good to others, be charitable with what you have since God gives such to you, treat the poor fairly, love God and honor Him and live modestly as Christ did. And trust that in His death and rising we to are not free from sin and like Him will see paradise due to our faith in that sacrifice.
Rather what did Jesus say and do - focus just on that and keep the faith simple. Love your enemies, do good to others, be charitable with what you have since God gives such to you, treat the poor fairly, love God and honor Him and live modestly as Christ did. And trust that in His death and rising we to are not free from sin and like Him will see paradise due to our faith in that sacrifice.
Pegg
Jehovah our God is One
the apostle Paul was a tent maker by trade. His letter the the Thessalonian congregation shows that he encouraged everyone to imitate his example at being self supportive.
7 For YOU yourselves know the way YOU ought to imitate us, because we did not behave disorderly among YOU 8 nor did we eat food from anyone free. To the contrary, by labor and toil night and day we were working so as not to impose an expensive burden upon any one of YOU. 9 Not that we do not have authority, but in order that we might offer ourselves as an example to YOU to imitate us. 10 In fact, also, when we were with YOU, we used to give YOU this order: If anyone does not want to work, neither let him eat.
And in Acts it shows that he worked along with another couple in the trade of tentmaking
Acts 18:1-3 After these things he departed from Athens and came to Corinth. 2 And he found a certain Jew named Aq′ui‧la,...3 and on account of being of the same trade he stayed at their home, and they worked, for they were tentmakers by trade
The gospel accounts tell us that Matthew was a tax collector, Luke was a Doctor... James, John Peter & Andrew were in a large fishing business together. There is plenty of info about the work of the apostles.
Timothy didnt write any books of the NT. The books with his name on them are actually letters from Paul TO Timothy. And Paul certainly did not encourage anyone to 'mooch'
starlite
Texasgirl
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Jesus was called not only the carpenters son but the carpenter as well. Since the Hebrew father usually taught his son his trade, Jesus no doubt learned carpentry from his adoptive father Joseph.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Matthew 13:55[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Is this not the carpenters son? Is not his mother called Mary, and his brothers James and Joseph and Simon and Judas? [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Mark 6:3[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]This is the carpenter the son of Mary and the brother of James and Joseph and Judas and Simon, is it not? And his sisters are here with us, are they not? So they began to stumble at him.[/FONT]
My point was Jesus never said anywhere a minister shouldn't work like everyone else, Timothy clearly deviated from that by making ministry a profession unto itself. Alright a letter but its in the NT just the same giving a reason for the pillaging of the faithfuls wallets and purses ever since. I'm not opposed to donations to faith centers but it should not go to the clergy or teachers or anyone else but to support the building costs only.
As for the topic I still will point out why any of the books should be accepted as fact I'd be willing to see a Jeffersonian version with just what Jesus said and did and His miracles to the ascention and leave it at that. A book on Jesus to emulate free of the rest of the NT. After all the Apostles should not be given any more authority than any man, Paul was NOT even an Apostle and the Revelation is so complex it should be striken from consideration as any book to base teachings on. I would call the rest at best secondary minor texts on what the followers did not what we should believe.
As for the topic I still will point out why any of the books should be accepted as fact I'd be willing to see a Jeffersonian version with just what Jesus said and did and His miracles to the ascention and leave it at that. A book on Jesus to emulate free of the rest of the NT. After all the Apostles should not be given any more authority than any man, Paul was NOT even an Apostle and the Revelation is so complex it should be striken from consideration as any book to base teachings on. I would call the rest at best secondary minor texts on what the followers did not what we should believe.
Doesn't Revelation have corresponding or parallel passages or verses in the other Bible books?
How did Timothy make a monetary [$] profession out of the ministry?
What does 1st Tim 5v8 say?
The only time Jesus 'passed the plate', so to speak, was when he fed the crowds with bread and fish. Jesus taught for free and instructed his followers to do the same. -Matt 10v8 B
The monetary clergy class started after first-century Christianity ended.
Acts 20vs29,30 shows that wolf-like clergy dressed in sheep's clothing would fleece the flock of God.
The genuine wheat Christians would grow together over the centuries along with the fake weed/tares Christians until the time of the harvest, or time of separation in our day.-Matt 25vs31,32.
Doesn't Luke write that Paul is a 'chosen vessel' at Acts 9v15?
Doesn't Romans 1v1,5; 11v13 call Paul an apostle?
Did the others object to Paul at Acts 15 vs22-25?
I don't care what the Apostles did frankly save as a secondary concern to the life of Jesus. And since Timothy said a minister should be supported by the flock in a letter how would you take that if you were a minister, give me support as in things and money so I can sit on my duff.
Paul was a fine preacher and brought in oogles of converts it was all political we declare him an Apostle so that he is legitimate like us and we can get even more converts and power. Can't have those dirty Gnostics do their thing you know. Its not odd the second the core were in with the government under Constantine they turned on everyone with prisons and the sword to crush any other sect they didn't approve of for heresy. Very godly.
Thats why I say toss the mess out the Protestants had it right just kept their own version of the tired system. A Christian Anarchist is simple we read the Bible, let God through His continuing revelation explain it to us through the Holy Spirit anc cut out the middle man. To me I will let no man get between me and God no minister, no priest and no councils of men (and I note the councils shared by the Christian faith were all humans with male organs not women). And being in the modern age isn't it just silly to assume things out of a 2000+ year old book as the will of God alone. I'm sure the Commandments don't change murder is murder after all but we don't follow Levitical Law as Christians do we? No. So why do we assume the teachings of a bunch of ministers should hold such authority?
Paul was a fine preacher and brought in oogles of converts it was all political we declare him an Apostle so that he is legitimate like us and we can get even more converts and power. Can't have those dirty Gnostics do their thing you know. Its not odd the second the core were in with the government under Constantine they turned on everyone with prisons and the sword to crush any other sect they didn't approve of for heresy. Very godly.
Thats why I say toss the mess out the Protestants had it right just kept their own version of the tired system. A Christian Anarchist is simple we read the Bible, let God through His continuing revelation explain it to us through the Holy Spirit anc cut out the middle man. To me I will let no man get between me and God no minister, no priest and no councils of men (and I note the councils shared by the Christian faith were all humans with male organs not women). And being in the modern age isn't it just silly to assume things out of a 2000+ year old book as the will of God alone. I'm sure the Commandments don't change murder is murder after all but we don't follow Levitical Law as Christians do we? No. So why do we assume the teachings of a bunch of ministers should hold such authority?
Civil Shephard
Active Member
I like this and don't know exactly why. I don't know about Gnostic and all that... I think that the main focus of any Christian should be the teachings of Jesus and then the rest of the Gospels and then the NT and OT. However I'm not a classic bible believer. I think that God is quite capable of teaching us through his Holy Spirit but in that I focus on Jesus saying the the Holy Spirit will bring to mind the things He (meaning Jesus himself) said to us. For my part my whole focus on scripture starts and ends with the filter of Jesus teaching.
Lastly... I remember Moses saying 'I would that ye were all prophets' when Joshua came to him and complained about a couple of elders who were prophesying. It seems to me that this one statement of Moses showed his awesome humility toward God and Man. I've always respected most those who have sharing bible studies where everyone shares and the only authority is the Spirit of God amoungst us. I've had no greater times with other Christians than when simply reading and praying over the words of Jesus. A few times I've done this reading the whole Sermon on the Mount with some relatively new Christians and we simply read and prayed. Wow... nothing better in life than letting Jesus do the talking... the conversations we had when we were done were long and full of the spice of life.
Civil Shephard
Active Member
Biblestudent_007
Active Member
By the practice of reading it. (the bible)