Posted on 08/24/2007 9:45:54 AM PDT by NYer
> And you believe it not to be true, as a matter of faith???
No, what I believe is irrelevant. You don’t KNOW it as FACT, you BELIEVE it as a matter of FAITH.
Because we have already established that it cannot be proved, therefore it cannot be a Fact. Or don’t you believe what Jesus said to St Thomas?
> The book says it’s true...I believe the book...And I don’t mean I ‘think’ it’s true...I know it’s true...
Prove it.
> But the apostles skipped town (all but John) during the crucifixion so their accounts of the event were obviously heresay...
Yup...
> Therefore, none of the scripture is relevant...Only the parts you like to accept...
No, that’s a non-sequitir, too. It’s relevant as a matter of Faith, not as a matter of Fact. You begin to get into dangerous waters when you argue Scripture as a matter of FACT. Inconvenient bits like the Creation record (did not happen in 7 literal days) and the flood (could not have been universal) and the untidy FACT of Evolution, and the untidy FACT that life on this planet is much, much older than 7,000 years...
Far better to do what you are told by Jesus, and to accept Him as a matter of Faith.
> Regardless, Jesus told John to WRITE scripture...The fact that you don’t believe it bolsters the idea that your religion is not based on the scripture...
I haven’t once said that I don’t believe Jesus said this to John. What I have said is that you cannot claim it as a FACT because it isn’t. It’s a matter of Faith.
You’re not really in any position to assess what my religion is based upon.
Did the religion mod quit?
This thread is a bait job pure and simple, I thought you all couldn't do that any longer?
BigMack
***Is it just me or what?***
I’m not sure. When I post the Greek writting it converts to Roman letters.
At least the other translations print correctly so we can compare.
If you make a statement, at least support it.
The problems with the passage in question are maybe textual, but certainly grammatical. What might be literally translated as "of good will" in Greek could mean "the ones who have good will" or 'the ones in the good will group'. The latter would guive you "with whom He is pleased."
If we reflect on how in the age of cyber-wonders things get misquoted, I don't find the textual variations astonishing.
- now either youve ignored my question - or it hits close to home - which is it ?
BUMP!
I’d agree with that - he created a state religion, in part with the funds that he looted from the Catholic monastaries and churches. The Anglicans didn’t tolerate very well.
Christianity is the Western world's cultural and spiritual link with the classical world of Greece and Rome. Christianity is also our theological link with Judaism, which was also connected to Greece and Rome, because the Jews were a factor in every Roman and Greek city, well before the so-called 'Diaspora'.
One problem non-Mediterranean folks have always had with Catholicism is that it is very Greek, and more especially Roman. . When Christianity became the state religion of the Roman Empire ... guess what ... it got even more Roman. Maybe even too Roman.
In order to pick up new Christians, the church in those early days "borrowed" bits and pieces of practices, if not beliefs, from all the cults around ...Roman Gods, Greek Gods, Isis , Ishtar, Mithraditic,etc. The Pope is the Pontifex Maximus, which was a Roman Government Title, which literally means "Chief Bridge Builder," the man in charge of public works and spiritual life. In general, every Protestant sect has tried to distance itself from these obvious borrowings from the pagan world, some more successfully than others.
Some Protestant sects tried to define themselves as the "New Chosen People." Because the first Christians were Jews and the Romans considered Christianity a Jewish sect. It actually led to a lot of problems with Jewish communities around the Empire, especially after the Romans branded Christians as subversive. Among the first big controversies, there was a major fight over circumcision, or did one have to be Jewish first to even become Christian?
The marketing genius of St. Paul solved that one ... and he took Christianity international. So, you're right. The churches who follow the Pope, and the Orthodox are really old, with practices and customs which certainly predate Christ and Christianity.
Theological students of every sect study Hebrew, Greek, Latin, and even Aramaic. They all read the "Church Fathers." In short, Christians of various sectarian stripe have a lot more in common than not.
placemarking...
Good point. I think "proved" (and cognates) in religious discourse has a different meaning from that which we, modelling our notion on geometry, I suspect, give it.
And I'll say again. The newsies talk about something or other "proving" Einstein or Newton, and especially proving the laws of motion. But the laws of motion are not "proved" technically, because they are axiomata, assumptions on which we can build coherent explanations of what we observe.
I think a lot of what is presented as a "proof" actually, upon examination, comes down to,"If you start with my assumptions, you'll find this text is consistent with them, AND, what's more, I can construct an explanation which preserves my assumptions for texts which seem to contradict them."
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.