Posted on 10/10/2001 10:57:30 AM PDT by malakhi
I'm with you in part, but I have a question. If signs are not proof, then why would Jesus have performed any signs at all? If it were in fulfillment of faith, rather than to show authority or inspire faith, then it were unnecessary. Only people who have no need for a sign can get a sign?
Signs are not the event. Signs point to an event. The event is what is important. It's like driving down the road.. you may not see the Billboard stating 'Wendys - 4 miles on right', yet you may still see the Wendys on the right when you get there. On the other hand, one may see the sign and miss the Wendys altogether. More yet will miss or disregard both.
Signs are there for those who can discern them for what they are. They are put up to point to something. They are not put up for the heck of it or to make men happy. They serve a purpose to God for his people who are able to see the signs and understand where they are leading. Shallow people call miracles a 'sign from God.' They completely miss the importance and like liberal reporters use them for face time to build their self importance while debating what it must mean.
Let me ask you the same question I asked Becky: how do you know that the Christian scriptures are divinely inspired?
I know because I have put my faith in God and through faith the scriptures have been proven in my life. I personally cannot doubt the inspired nature of the NT scriptures. I look at them also as a proof of the OT scriptures. Jesus upheld and taught the law. The things he rejected were the likes of:
* 'tradition' conflicting with or superceding the laws of God. Not working on the sabbath means just that - don't work.
* observing rules instead of obeying God. In other words if I were to say wash the dishes, observing rules would mean dipping the plate in soapy water, running a rag over it's surface, rinsing and drying, then putting away. Obeying God would be to ensure that whatever the process, the plate actually got cleaned.
.... just to name a couple of things. He otherwise upheld the law.
Many wish to pretend that the law was just written by men for men to follow. That is a strict secular interpretation that has no basis in reality when it comes to Jew or true Christian. The difference between Jew and Christian is that Jews understand obedience for the most part. Christians generally have to learn it.
So, again, I accepted Christ on faith in his word. That faith has been fulfilled. In the fullfillment, it proves all scripture. The OT becomes as real as the NT at once because the NT is a story of the Messiah fullfilling the OT and reinforcing it. And that is why I reject any 'religion' that thinks it can wontonly add to scripture and usurp authority it does not have. The first true test of Christian Doctrine is a simple one, if absent the impact of the messiah the doctrine is bacward applicable to Judaism without conflict, it is likely on the money. If it cannot meet that test, it is garbage. The same is true with anything claimed to be scripture.
Think you missed the point. You aren't being called a dog you're being compared in your seemed aimless wandering of chasing your tail, cause we sure can't tell where you're going.. I was jokingly wondering if even you knew...
Docetism may be the denial of the reality of Jesus' humanity. And I do not think Pelayo has strayed to that point. Perhaps, a truncation of Jesus' humanity is a better way of characterizing the view which seems to be expressed. If Jesus could not sin, then what was acted out on earth was a divine farce. Now, one could say that there is no possibility that Jesus would sin and that would make all the difference. But to say that He could not sin removes him from the realm of humanity (even the initial form of humanity expressed by Adam and Eve, before the fall).
Pelayo's view seems to fit under the category of Apollinarianism (the friend of Athanasius, Apollinarius) which emphasized the deity of Jesus to the effective suppression of his humanity. It was condemned at the Council of Constantinople in 381.
This is funny on a couple of levels :) I'll leave the discovery to you :)
If I say that Paul told Timothy to pick up a jacket in Troas, ya'll cry private interpretation as a last resort so as not to deal with the issue. It's your "blankey". Ya'll never leave home without your little 2x2 foot blanky that has private interpretation stitched on one side and "sola scriptura" stitched to the other.
One day ya'll will find that the security provided by the blanket is an illusion. Then perhaps you'll stop pulling it over your heads and reading the stitched words.
Even the angels have names signifying identity. The trinity doctrine is tortured logic and represents a frustrated doctrine which is to be believed as some sort of mystery. Who are the following individuals in bold? In what sense are they one? In what sense do "twain become one" in marriage, a type of the church? Paul says that in marriage your interests become that of making your spouse happy. In this sense is God and Jesus one also, but their individual identity remains Father and Son, two beings..
Revelation 5
1 And I saw in the right hand of him that sat on the throne a book written within and on the backside, sealed with seven seals.
2 And I saw a strong angel proclaiming with a loud voice, Who is worthy to open the book, and to loose the seals thereof?
3 And no man in heaven, nor in earth, neither under the earth, was able to open the book, neither to look thereon.
4 And I wept much, because no man was found worthy to open and to read the book, neither to look thereon.
5 And one of the elders saith unto me, Weep not: behold, the Lion of the tribe of Juda, the Root of David, hath prevailed to open the book, and to loose the seven seals thereof.
6 And I beheld, and, lo, in the midst of the throne and of the four beasts, and in the midst of the elders, stood a Lamb as it had been slain, having seven horns and seven eyes, which are the seven Spirits of God sent forth into all the earth.
7 And he came and took the book out of the right hand of him that sat upon the throne.
8 And when he had taken the book, the four beasts and four and twenty elders fell down before the Lamb, having every one of them harps, and golden vials full of odours, which are the prayers of saints.
9 And they sung a new song, saying, Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation;
10 And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth.
11 And I beheld, and I heard the voice of many angels round about the throne and the beasts and the elders: and the number of them was ten thousand times ten thousand, and thousands of thousands;
12 Saying with a loud voice, Worthy is the Lamb that was slain to receive power, and riches, and wisdom, and strength, and honour, and glory, and blessing.
13 And every creature which is in heaven, and on the earth, and under the earth, and such as are in the sea, and all that are in them, heard I saying, Blessing, and honour, and glory, and power, be unto him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb for ever and ever.
14 And the four beasts said, Amen. And the four and twenty elders fell down and worshipped him that liveth for ever and ever.
Havoc, I believe this is a profound statement, could you give me an example out of the Bible where you can use this to make your point? Thanks JH
I don't think Pelayo was empasizing Jesus's diety to that extent. I certainly see much more effort here to suppress Jesus' divinity. Do you not admit with me that there is an essential paradox inherent in the Incarnation? That, as I said, Jesus had to be able to freely choose to sin, and yet could not possibly have ended up doing so?
SD
Adam was a man made without sin - made in God's image... Adam sinned. Jesus, through suppression of his divinity is the second Adam. Ya'll make this stuff entirely too difficult. And the Jews do have it right - minus that messiah thing. Salvation comes through the messiah. Add that and the Jews would be perfected as they already understand that they are not to sin and actively work to keep themselves from sin. This is obedience at work. Would be Christians can learn a lot from the Jews. Obedience is required for eternal life for those of you struggling to keep up..
Ok, class. The Central characters in the Bible relate stories in fiction and non fiction types to express points. They discuss spiritual and non spritual issues... (/parody)
Ya'lls problem is that you want to take the spiritual lessens as carnal and the carnal lessens as spiritual. You want to parableize the truth and literalize the parables. Then you attack us when we call the spiritual lessens spiritual, the carnal - carnal, etc. You have to cry personal interpretation and consistantly fight that argument rather than address what the word actually said. Or you fall back to the Sola scriptura arguments. Always anything but face what the scriptures really say. Always anything but face the outright conflicts presented in the RCC claims. Black is white, up is down and true is false if the RCC clergy so declares.... That is not Christianity, it's blind subserviance to an agenda!
Absent in the article I read was any mention of a connection between I.Q.and punctuation. This to me was proof that he knew what he was talking about. And, God bless your wife,living with a genius is not easy.
Relevant question: does God punish disobedient Christians
Relevant Passage: Acts 5
It is said that God put two Christians to death for Blasphemy of the spirit. Can we reverse apply this notion to the OT?
Exodus: Multiple events.
During the time in which Moses was on Sainai recieving the Commandments from God, specifically, the people turned to idolatry and broke pretty much every commandment being given on the mountain to Moses. God punished the people in drastic fashion. Though present with Moses, God struck out and killed countless of the Jews for their flagrant sins before God.
Conclusion: The proffered notion is not only in line with prior known example. It is proven possible - and more than that: Likely. It is proven in the accepted OT scriptures. Therefore it stands as sound.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.