Thief
Rogue Theologian
Can you not tell the difference?
He said....Let the dead bury the dead.
Picture that.
The kingdom is not of this world.
It is not of flesh, but spirit.
-
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!
Where did Jesus go?
- Thread starter savagewind
- Start date
Can you not tell the difference?
He said....Let the dead bury the dead.
Picture that.
The kingdom is not of this world.
It is not of flesh, but spirit.
If I am to read scripture guided by love I have to throw a lot of it out still. Writers are fallible humans.
Desert Snake
Veteran Member
Metaphor. We obviously can't believe two contradicting ideas in the same Scripture. We can infer what is metaphor by knowing the parameters of the belief/religion. The less someone knows the 'framework', the less they will understand Scripture.
On the other hand, Christianity is complicated by the fact that it is more difficult to tell what is/isn't metaphor because it is very belief based. But that's the religion, we have to deal with that, we have to accept that or we aren't reading Scripture properly, we are 'making a story up' as we go along, instead. I find that for some reason this simple idea is not generally applied to most religions, however people love to read Christian Scripture in this mode.
The Catholics developed a whole framework based on their concepts. They chose which Gospels were "truly inspired" and in order for it to be truly inspired they tell us what is metaphor and what is not. Same for every branch ever since. Every branch is "truly inspired" and has to change the entire framework to fit their truly inspired branch of Christianity. However we are still talking about fallible writers chosen by the Councils to begin with. Some favored Paul other favor others but why? I do not believe any saint is even perfect, even Paul can have an off day. The only thing to go by is the words of Jesus which I believe contradict some of Pauls fallible views, which is to be expected. The apostles themselves struggled because they were not Jesus. The framework to read it in is how Jesus summed up the law, the very reason for the law to begin with, which is LOVE.
Desert Snake
Veteran Member
Makes sense to me. However, I don't really argue points like that with various Christians because I understand the larger nature of Christian belief /as a Religion/
Fair enough. I'm a heathen anyway and I get chastised for arguing points like that cause Paul is the bomb, the bible is the bomb, my particular denomination is the bomb etc etc....
Yes spirit. But you say it is on the other side. Yes or no? Is it not here?
outhouse
Atheistically
No
Factually scripture is not all history.
It factually is all religion though.
And mythology and rhetoric as well as metaphor and alegory were used.
Ever read a parable?
outhouse
Atheistically
You dont have the knowledge or credibility to make that statement.
It is why you attack me, because you cannot refute what I stated :slap:
outhouse
Atheistically
College class.
Watching lectures from professors.
A deep passion for the history of jesus and Israel.
One day you may learn biblical jesus is not the historical jesus. Th ebible is not accurate word for word, that woul dbe taking it out of context from the authors intent.
outhouse
Atheistically
Again.
Weak attacks on your part are due to your severe ignorance on the topic at hand.
Attack the message, you cant
Not the messenger.
outhouse
Atheistically
Show examples of how I have used any bias what so ever to make a historical statement.
Ones religion does not determine credibility of what one states.
If that were the case, we would only have a biased version of what happened in the past.
Ridiculous.
Spirit did not write the books.
MAN DID!
Spirit is not required for interpretation :slap:
outhouse
Atheistically
You keep coming with these weak attacks.
I stated quite clearly and you may have English comprehensive problems, that there was not one flock, there were many.
Please learn what your talking about before you touch a keyboard.
Many might say your embarrassing good Christians everywhere by this behavior, because what Im posting i some cases, has came from Christians
YOU do not understand. Have you ever read this?: Just as a body, though one, has many parts, but all its many parts form one body, so it is with Christ. 13 For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free, and we were all made to drink of one Spirit.
How many? 1 Corinthians 12:12,13
outhouse
Atheistically
So your claiming everyone in the world is his flock? A wee bit out of context are we?
The early christian movement had many different beleifs about Jesus, who he was and what he preached and taught. There were many different groups with different beliefs. SOME OF WHICH, did not follow Paul or that verse.
Taking pauls view in this case is only reflecting Pauls opinion, nothing more. Because Paul said it, does not make it so.
Last edited:
outhouse
Atheistically
All your doing now is showing how much you want to fight and argue over nothing at all.
Are all christians like this?
In context, I was explaining to you there were multiple groups of christians that were not orthodox early on. That calling all early christians as one flock was not a accurate description.
Then you post material that was only later deemed orthodox and established as dogma.
Do you agree that early groups of christians were wide and diverse, and had many different beliefs about what and how the movement should progress????
Are all christians like this?
In context, I was explaining to you there were multiple groups of christians that were not orthodox early on. That calling all early christians as one flock was not a accurate description.
Then you post material that was only later deemed orthodox and established as dogma.
Do you agree that early groups of christians were wide and diverse, and had many different beliefs about what and how the movement should progress????
Now I have forgot what we were talking about. ;(
There is one true flock of God. Israel was it first. Were they not one flock? Now believers in Jesus Christ are one flock. It is not a religious flock. It is a believing flock. We listen and follow the master Christ Jesus. One shepherd. One flock. It is not about CHURCH. It is not about doctrine. It is about growing up in Jesus Christ. How many Jesus Christs are there?
Amechania
Daimona of the Helpless
At least as many as there are "flocks."
Haha. I mean how many for real?
outhouse
Atheistically
It is a complicated question, a good one but complicated.
One? Not really, but WHEN is also very important.
Before the NT Judaism was not one static culture. It was multicultural and diverse. And there was no orthodox Judaism. There were many different ways people chose to worship.
Before lets say 400BC ish, "some" Jews were still polytheistic, worshipping both El and Yahweh, Baal and Asherah.
When Jesus was killed, there were many different kinds of jews and multi cultural, all with different beliefs on what they believed and worshipped.
And these flocks exactly alike or are there different views and opinions on how they view Jesus??????
And if Jesus was a man who lived and died and martyred, and not a real god, then there is no real flock, is there?