i think jesus was confused...or maybe luke and john were

[waitasec]

Verbs show actions---My dictionary shows "confused" to a verb as well.
"From"--in my statement-- included your subsequent posts as well. Now, you are trying to stray from the subject/topic.

i see you are being dishonest...

interesting route, for a christian that is.

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

The Greek word in question is: "epistrephō"

Well, the lexical entry is anyway. The text reads epistrepsas, and the use of the participle is important in understanding the meaning. Here, I would say the translation "when you are converted" is a little to strong. The sense is much more "when you change your mind/turn back to the 'right' path." But as you point out it's a rather small issue if it is an issue at all.

 

[sincerly]

Well, the lexical entry is anyway. The text reads epistrepsas, and the use of the participle is important in understanding the meaning. Here, I would say the translation "when you are converted" is a little to strong. The sense is much more "when you change your mind/turn back to the 'right' path." But as you point out it's a rather small issue if it is an issue at all.

Hi LOM, Thanks for the input. I don't recall "when you are converted" being a small issue. Jesus had said those who "deny HIM"--He will "deny before the Father". Also, There will be no liars in heaven. Clearly that which is/was needed by Peter is that which he showed--genuine remorse, repentance, and a turning again to the fold and love of Jesus. That is "Conversion" in the true sense. Others made an issue/denied the fact.

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

Clearly that which is/was needed by Peter is that which he showed--genuine remorse, repentance, and a turning again to the fold and love of Jesus. That is "Conversion" in the true sense. Others made an issue/denied the fact.

Well then for what it's worth "turning back to the fold" is a pretty good way to get across the sense of the participle. "Convert" in English tends to carry connotations which don't fit in the passage. According to the gospel, Peter was a follower of Jesus already, and it was more a matter of turning back to a path he had left. The english "conversion" doesn't (in my opinion) get that across very well.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

i think each gospel was written for a specific purpose and audience
each with a particular agenda. and since there are no eye witnesses there is no way of really knowing what this person named jesus, who became a legend, actually said...and to suppose one can rely on these inconsistent accounts for any kind of accuracy is pretty far reaching as far as i'm concerned.

Who alive at the the end of the first century wrote that 'the gospel' was wrong?
Who alive at that time wrote what 'the gospel' writers wrote was wrong?
Who challenged Jesus genealogical record [Luke 3vs23-38]
which was public record for all to see at that time ?

Not a separate gospel, but as Scripture teaches 'The' gospel according to four writers. One gospel having four writers of one gospel.
Even though a different audience addressed, it still is just one gospel.

 

[waitasec]

Who alive at the the end of the first century wrote that 'the gospel' was wrong?
Who alive at that time wrote what 'the gospel' writers wrote was wrong?
Who challenged Jesus genealogical record [Luke 3vs23-38]
which was public record for all to see at that time ?

there is no way of really knowing what this person named jesus, who became a legend, actually said. none.

Not a separate gospel, but as Scripture teaches 'The' gospel according to four writers. One gospel having four writers of one gospel.
Even though a different audience addressed, it still is just one gospel.

that contradict each other...as each gospel was written for a different audience

 

[sincerly]

there is no way of really knowing what this person named jesus, who became a legend, actually said. none.

Waitasec, using your criteria, then no written material concerning any person, place of thing from the concept of recording any material can be stated as "actual said or done". It is all a myth. However, "eyewithess accounts" are still held as reliable--especially, two or more "eyewitnesses". Again, no one is forcing you to believe anything. It has been shown that your suppositions are what is contrary to the recordings of the Scriptures.

that contradict each other...as each gospel was written for a different audience

There was two classes of audiences. Those who Believed (of the Jews and Gentiles) and those who disbelieved (of the Jews and Gentiles).

First, the Gospels were written as Luke stated,(1:1-3), "Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us, Even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word; It seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus","

second, Paul had this to say concerning the written history: 1Cor.10:6, 11, "Now these things were our examples, to the intent we should not lust after evil things, as they also lusted......Now all these things happened unto them for ensamples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come."

And Rom.15:4, "For whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning, that we through patience and comfort of the scriptures might have hope."

Yes, Jesus was, indeed, a very factual "legend"...."fulfilling" all that the prophets had written concerning HIM.

 

[waitasec]

Waitasec, using your criteria, then no written material concerning any person, place of thing from the concept of recording any material can be stated as "actual said or done". It is all a myth. However, "eyewithess accounts" are still held as reliable--especially, two or more "eyewitnesses". Again, no one is forcing you to believe anything. It has been shown that your suppositions are what is contrary to the recordings of the Scriptures.



There was two classes of audiences. Those who Believed (of the Jews and Gentiles) and those who disbelieved (of the Jews and Gentiles).

First, the Gospels were written as Luke stated,(1:1-3), "Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us, Even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word; It seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus","

second, Paul had this to say concerning the written history: 1Cor.10:6, 11, "Now these things were our examples, to the intent we should not lust after evil things, as they also lusted......Now all these things happened unto them for ensamples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come."

And Rom.15:4, "For whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning, that we through patience and comfort of the scriptures might have hope."

Yes, Jesus was, indeed, a very factual "legend"...."fulfilling" all that the prophets had written concerning HIM.

circular reasoning gets me no where...
but if you're happy with settling with that...good for you.

 

[sincerly]

circular reasoning gets me no where...
but if you're happy with settling with that...good for you.

I agree, your "circular reasoning" produced no factual answers. However, the facts which I presented were the true/facts of the Scriptures----and I am happy and satisfied with the Scriptural truths.

 

[waitasec]

I agree, your "circular reasoning" produced no factual answers. However, the facts which I presented were the true/facts of the Scriptures----and I am happy and satisfied with the Scriptural truths.

no i think i pointed out your dishonest tactics which tend to creep up when one is going no where with their circular logic.

i came across this on another post.
just because spiderman was from NY doesn't mean he's real...

 

[sincerly]

no i think i pointed out your dishonest tactics which tend to creep up when one is going no where with their circular logic.

i came across this on another post.
just because spiderman was from NY doesn't mean he's real...

Waitasec, that red highlighted area is where you went astray from the OP. "your" "trying to manipulate the Scriptures"(Gospels) to say what their message doesn't say. Isn't that "dishonest"?

This Thread isn't about "spiderman", nor any other superhero. Paul, in Acts 17:22-30 said concerning such false idols, "And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent:"
Again, believe that which you choose.

 

[waitasec]

Waitasec, that red highlighted area is where you went astray from the OP. "your" "trying to manipulate the Scriptures"(Gospels) to say what their message doesn't say. Isn't that "dishonest"?

This Thread isn't about "spiderman", nor any other superhero. Paul, in Acts 17:22-30 said concerning such false idols, "And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent:"
Again, believe that which you choose.

everyone manipulates the scriptures...
you included.

 

[sincerly]

everyone manipulates the scriptures...
you included.

Waitasec, That may be your philosophy, but it isn't mine and you have failed to show that accusation concerning me.
Peace.

 

[waitasec]

Waitasec, That may be your philosophy, but it isn't mine and you have failed to show that accusation concerning me.
Peace.

all of my replies to your nonsense has proven you manipulate scripture.
pick one.

 

[sincerly]

all of my replies to your nonsense has proven you manipulate scripture.
pick one.

The "nonsense" has been your manipulative replies and have been shown to be such from the OP. your projections do not make it so.
Peace.

 

[waitasec]

The "nonsense" has been your manipulative replies and have been shown to be such from the OP. your projections do not make it so.
Peace.

i see you didn't pick one...
you have a nasty habit of not supporting your nonsense.

 

[sincerly]

i see you didn't pick one...
you have a nasty habit of not supporting your nonsense.

Waitaec, From the OP they are all "manipulative/erroneous, How can "I just pick one"? And the posted in context scriptures which I posted with my answers were supporting. It is Truth which you call "nonsense".

You haven't proved that anyone, but yourself is "confused". It appears that you can't confirm your accusations from the stated Gospels.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

....or stated gospel. One gospel with four writers.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

everyone manipulates the scriptures...
you included.

Satan manipulated Scripture when speaking with Jesus.
Jesus however never manipulated Scripture.

Corresponding or parallel passages and verses show the internal harmony among the Bible writers.
In other words, where there is one verse or passage there is another like it to verify it.

For example:
Matthew 4v4; Luke 4v4; John 4v34; Deut. 8v3
Matthew 4v6; Psalm 91 vs11,12; Luke 4 vs10,11
Matthew 4v7; Deut 6v16; Luke 4v12; 1st Cor. 10v9

 

[waitasec]

Waitaec, From the OP they are all "manipulative/erroneous, How can "I just pick one"? And the posted in context scriptures which I posted with my answers were supporting. It is Truth which you call "nonsense".

You haven't proved that anyone, but yourself is "confused". It appears that you can't confirm your accusations from the stated Gospels.

ok i'll pick one...
you claim jesus wasn't hiding out or resisting arrest, why then did a fight ensue when he was being arrested?