What Would Jesus Do?

[leibowde84]

Source? Not that it matters to me but this seems like a stretch.

The source is the Bible. There is no mention of committed homosexual relationships.

 

[RedDragon94]

But practically nobody could read it, and there's no evidence that Jesus could.

Jesus quotes the prophet Isaiah from the passage in the Gospel of Luke I told you about.

 

[leibowde84]

Jesus quotes the prophet Isaiah from the passage in the Gospel of Luke I told you about.

Is that really proof of anything? I mean, the Gospel of Luke was written by someone who never met Jesus, but, nevertheless, claimed to know the words that Jesus spoke. While, they cannot be proven false, it is surely a stretch of plausibility to assume that the quotes were accurate.

 

[RedDragon94]

Is that really proof of anything? I mean, the Gospel of Luke was written by someone who never met Jesus, but, nevertheless, claimed to know the words that Jesus spoke. While, they cannot be proven false, it is surely a stretch of plausibility to assume that the quotes were accurate.

Well, my study Bible says that "the great majority of scholars believe that Luke made use of Mark in writing his Gospel." And we know that Mark had a relationship with Peter.

 

[leibowde84]

Well, my study Bible says that "the great majority of scholars believe that Luke made use of Mark in writing his Gospel." And we know that Mark had a relationship with Peter.

Ok ... and, how does that help to prove accuracy of Jesus' quotes? I know when I quote even a friend of mine as saying something the day before, I am often wrong about certain words, tone, etc.

 

[fantome profane]

Well, my study Bible says that "the great majority of scholars believe that Luke made use of Mark in writing his Gospel." And we know that Mark had a relationship with Peter.

But the great majority of scholars do not believe the Gospel of Mark was actually written by Mark. What we call the Gospel of Mark was actually written anonymously.

 

[RedDragon94]

Ok ... and, how does that help to prove accuracy of Jesus' quotes?

The story could have originally come from Peter who spent three years with Jesus.

 

[RedDragon94]

But the great majority of scholars do not believe the Gospel of Mark was actually written by Mark. What we call the Gospel of Mark was actually written anonymously.

"Widespread evidence from the early church fathers affirms that Peter passed on reports of the words and deeds of Jesus to his attendant and writer, John Mark."

 

[fantome profane]

"Widespread evidence from the early church fathers affirms that Peter passed on reports of the words and deeds of Jesus to his attendant and writer, John Mark."

I can't help noticing he quote marks around that sentence. Who or what are you quoting?

 

[RedDragon94]

The English Standard Version Study Bible.

 

[Domenic]

Jesus gave an example of what to do in a bake shop, or any other situation when confronted with a situation of a sinner.

Two gay people want a baker to make them a wedding cake. The Christian feels doing so would be saying he approves. What would Jesus do?

When people wanted to stone a women for a sin, Jesus picked up a stone, held it out, and said: “He who is without sin, cast the first stone.”

We are all sinners. Is your sin less than mine? or mine less than his, or his less than hers?

 

[fantome profane]

The English Standard Version Study Bible.

Well you need to take a closer look at what the vast majority of modern scholars say on that question.

 

[leibowde84]

The story could have originally come from Peter who spent three years with Jesus.

But, Peter didn't write them down. And, the Gospel of Peter was discarded as illegitimate. So, why should we take the author of Luke's word for it when Mark could have made mistakes as well? My point is that in every other situation where stories were passed multiple times before being written down, quotes are often wrong. What makes the Bible different? I'm not saying in any way that it isn't possible that the quotes might be accurate. It just seems extremely unlikely that they would be without error.

 

[leibowde84]

The English Standard Version Study Bible.

You might want to use a source other than your Bible in efforts to prove that your Bible is accurate. Just a thought, as it seems to be circular logic ... using your Bible to prove that your Bible is accurate. The point is that we don't have much to go off of. Any feeling that the Gospels are accurate is largely based off of faith or speculation. We do not know what Jesus said. We only know what the writers of the Gospels claim that he said.

 

[leibowde84]

Jesus gave an example of what to do in a bake shop, or any other situation when confronted with a situation of a sinner.

Two gay people want a baker to make them a wedding cake. The Christian feels doing so would be saying he approves. What would Jesus do?

When people wanted to stone a women for a sin, Jesus picked up a stone, held it out, and said: “He who is without sin, cast the first stone.”

We are all sinners. Is your sin less than mine? or mine less than his, or his less than hers?

I agree. It is not our place to "shun" anyone for their sins. We are to love our neighbor as we love ourselves, and not force our own version of morality on anyone else.

 

[xkatz]

Nor had he ever read the Bible.

Not the Gospels perhaps, but certainly he read the OT/Torah seeing that he references it quite often.

This being the case, what would Jesus have done in that same situation?

WWJD? It used to be a popular Christian Meme set out as a poignant and relevant reminder of what the job of a Christian is. Why did so many Christians forget? And is it about time they remembered?

Christ is by no means a conservative in the modern sense, but that doesn't mean he's some hippie liberal SJW either. People on both sides have made the mistake of making Christ into something he is not- and in doing so are inventing a new Christ of sorts that is nothing more than a justification of their own sins and viewpoints. Christ said, "go and sin no more" I think what is he would say in the hypothetical situation you pose. (Plus homosexuality is spoken about very clearly in the Bible)

 

[BSM1]

The source is the Bible. There is no mention of committed homosexual relationships.

So anything not specifically mention in the Bible is ok?

 

[Mycroft]

Not the Gospels perhaps, but certainly he read the OT/Torah seeing that he references it quite often.

There's no evidence of that. Historical evidence even suggests the contrary: that a simple carpenter wouldn't have been able to read.

 

[leibowde84]

Not the Gospels perhaps, but certainly he read the OT/Torah seeing that he references it quite often.

Christ is by no means a conservative in the modern sense, but that doesn't mean he's some hippie liberal SJW either. People on both sides have made the mistake of making Christ into something he is not- and in doing so are inventing a new Christ of sorts that is nothing more than a justification of their own sins and viewpoints. Christ said, "go and sin no more" I think what is meant by that is obvious. (Plus homosexuality is spoken about very clearly elsewhere in the Bible)

So, you think that "go and sin no more" meant, "unless you don't sin anymore, you aren't welcome to converse/do business with me or any of my followers"?

Further, Jesus changed a lot about the Old-Testament teachings, and we really have no idea what he did and did not say in the Gospels, as it is, at the very best, hearsay twice removed. So, I think that it is just as foolish to consider the lack of a passage as evidence that Jesus did not want change.

 

[leibowde84]

So anything not specifically mention in the Bible is ok?

Of course not. But, unless there is a logical/reasonable argument for such things being "not-ok", then we should assume that they are. I've never heard a reasoned/logical argument that shows that homosexuality is immoral when in a committed relationship (marriage), so I'm inclined to believe that it is OK.