Posted on 07/06/2013 6:25:34 PM PDT by boatbums
Pope Francis said on Saturday it pained him to see priests driving flashy cars, and told them to pick something more "humble".
As part of his drive to make the Catholic Church more austere and focus on the poor, Francis told young and trainee priests and nuns from around the world that having the latest smartphone or fashion accessory was not the route to happiness.
"It hurts me when I see a priest or a nun with the latest model car, you can't do this," he said.
"A car is necessary to do a lot of work, but please, choose a more humble one. If you like the fancy one, just think about how many children are dying of hunger in the world," he said.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
Jesus rode a borrowed donkey.
That's not a "fact" recorded in Scripture.
The Bible says nothing about how Mary got to Bethlehem.
Luke 2:1-7In those days a decree went out from Caesar Augustus that all the world should be registered. 2 This was the first registration when Quirinius was governor of Syria. 3 And all went to be registered, each to his own town. 4 And Joseph also went up from Galilee, from the town of Nazareth, to Judea, to the city of David, which is called Bethlehem, because he was of the house and lineage of David, 5 to be registered with Mary, his betrothed, who was with child. 6 And while they were there, the time came for her to give birth. 7 And she gave birth to her firstborn son and wrapped him in swaddling cloths and laid him in a manger, because there was no place for them in the inn.
While no arrangement of these books can be made with absolute confidence, the following dates are sufficiently reliable to serve the purpose of the Bible student....These.
James - 50 A.D.
First Thessalonians - 52-53.
Second Thessalonians - 52-53.
Galatians - 55.
First Corinthians - 57.
Second Corinthians - 57.
Romans - 57-58.
Philippians - 62-63.
Colossians - 62-63.
Philemon - 62-63.
Ephesians - 62-63.
Luke - 63.
Acts - 64.
First Timothy - 65.
Titus - 65.
Second Timothy - 66.
Mark - 66.
Matthew - 67.
Hebrews - 67.
First Peter - 67-68.
Second Peter - 68.
Jude - 68.
Apocalypse - 68.
John - c. 85.
Epistles of John - 90-95.
Exactly what I was trying to say: The myth(? I dunno), of Jesus’ family is poor is rebuked from the fact his family was of the lineage of King David....”because he was of the house and lineage of David,”. You said it and so did the Bible.
That's exactly what ZZ Top said.
Winner ! (Apologies to Walter P. Chrysler, the true father of our country)
Regardless of what Joseph the businessman left Him and His mother as an inheritance, I do not believe that there was any lack in His ministry.
Let’s not forget the gifts that Jesus received at his birth from the Wise Men (Matthew 2:11).
You prove my point.
Thanks for attending to my ongoing education!
LOL!
A hard bargain.
Think about it...
5.56mm
The Bible does not say that. Being of the house and lineage of David is not solid evidence of being prosperous and it does not by default imply wealth.
The offering of two turtledoves is a poor person's offering. That's what Joseph and Mary brought for their offering.
Leviticus 12:1-8The Lord spoke to Moses, saying, 2 “Speak to the people of Israel, saying, If a woman conceives and bears a male child, then she shall be unclean seven days. As at the time of her menstruation, she shall be unclean. 3 And on the eighth day the flesh of his foreskin shall be circumcised. 4 Then she shall continue for thirty-three days in the blood of her purifying. She shall not touch anything holy, nor come into the sanctuary, until the days of her purifying are completed. 5 But if she bears a female child, then she shall be unclean two weeks, as in her menstruation. And she shall continue in the blood of her purifying for sixty-six days.
6 “And when the days of her purifying are completed, whether for a son or for a daughter, she shall bring to the priest at the entrance of the tent of meeting a lamb a year old for a burnt offering, and a pigeon or a turtledove for a sin offering, 7 and he shall offer it before the Lord and make atonement for her. Then she shall be clean from the flow of her blood. This is the law for her who bears a child, either male or female. 8 And if she cannot afford a lamb, then she shall take two turtledoves or two pigeons, one for a burnt offering and the other for a sin offering. And the priest shall make atonement for her, and she shall be clean.”
Nobody was talking about His ministry and its being prosperous.
The discussion was whether Mary and Joseph were wealthy, and evidence from Scripture indicates they were not.
He didn't necessarily receive them at his birth. There's no indication that the wise men arrived at that time.
Matter of fact, since Herod had all the male children under two killed based on the information the wise men gave him, there is plenty of room for concluding that Jesus was older almost a toddler, when the wise men finally arrived.
If women were told, "In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with modesty and sobriety; not with braided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array; But (which becomes women professing godliness) with good works." (I Timothy 2:9,19), I can't imagine men, who are the leaders within a church, should be expected to not follow that same principle.
And of course they went off to Egypt to escape. Leaving Joesph’s occupation behind. I imagine those gifts were used in the initial time in Egypt to survive until Joesph could find work.
Of course, if the wise men hadn’t come in the first place - they wouldn’t have had to flee!
But then Jesus wouldn’t have known what it was like to be lonely, far from home, in exile and in fear. Just one more aspect of the human condition that He fully felt.
I wouldn’t disagree with most of those dates except for Revelation which the current consensus puts at about 95 AD, as stated by Irenaeus in the second century and affirmed by Eusebius in the 4th century. Granted there is a considerable minority view among Preterists, best argued by Gentry, that Revelation was written before the fall of Rome. But you asked what specific word was used in the original manuscript and to the best of my knowledge there is no record of anyone seeing an “original” manuscript of any NT books in at least 1800 years. There are literally thousands of manuscript copies, the earliest going back to the early second century. (P52) Those who favor the majority text argue that the earliest copies are not the most accurate. Those who favor the critical text (NA27) argue for the earlier copies. Thus my question as to just what you were referring to as the “original manuscript” I’m supposed to comment on - which of these thousands of copies are you equating with the “original manuscript”?
Believe me, I am NO Biblical scholar. I believe in Christ’s words, deeds and existence. I also weigh what some others have found in historical records. I DO NOT believe in the King James version of the Bible, Or the Greek version or any of the other versions that have been interpreted over 1500 years. I believe historical reference to Christ, shipping bills of laden(?) and tax payer records may be true. I look for a common thread of evidence to explain something that may be true from 2000 years ago. The Jesus we reference today WAS a person as is evidenced by the Islamic texts, the Buddhists and (believe it or not) the Druid texts from his time in England (which I have said is not the name of the place at the time). Joseph of A. is a real person, Jesus was a real person (names may have been changed to protect the innocent) but His message is true but diluted through interpretation, wording and time. I have no threats to this thread.
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.