Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all, we have some important news to share. Please follow the link here to find out more!

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058419143/important-news/p1?new=1

Difficult questions to answer

24

Comments

  • #32
    anymore
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,672 ✭✭✭anymore


    lmaopml wrote: »
    My God, my God, why have you foresaken me...?'

    These are the words of a fully 'human' man, with fully human pain and fully human feelings, the word made flesh that chose to set an example, bring good news and understanding, and give faith, hope and love to the world.


    Also to fulfill and highlight scripture and it's depth; reflecting psalm 22:1 To bring together scripture even in the darkest hour when nobody cares. An example for the downtrodden.



    God 'the word' that existed from the beginning became flesh and lived as flesh and blood too....At any moment he could have turned his back, but 'God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son..' he became flesh to live among us..

    He had 'faith' in us, we need to return that in 'faith' too..

    Be honest in our search for truth..being honest is very hard, but not insurmountable...
    With respect, those are the words attributed to him.


  • #33
    ISAW
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 7,142 ✭✭✭ISAW


    anymore wrote: »
    With respect, those are the words attributed to him.

    The duality of Christ Jesus i.e. wholly man and/or wholly God is a different topic to the topic of the Trinity.


  • #34
    dead one
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,320 ✭✭✭dead one


    Puck wrote: »
    Is Jesus God? Yes.
    Is the Father God? Yes.
    Accept my apologies for being Late as i was busy....
    It is very easy to answer something out of context but very difficult to answer same thing in context..... Is Father God?..... I have no problem in accepting this as "yes".... Yes father is God.... Right!!! Friend.....
    Puck wrote: »
    Is the Holy Spirit God? Yes.
    According to Jesus.......... no one knows his coming in judgment except the Father ..... See below examples...
    36 “But about that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son,[a] but only the Father.http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%2024:36&version=NIV
    32 “But about that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.
    http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Mark%2013:32&version=NIV
    No one obviously includes anything whether he is holly spirit or whatever............... Yet,,,,,,,, if the Holy Spirit doesn’t know everything how can he be God?
    Please answer
    Puck wrote: »
    Is Jesus the Father? No.
    Is Jesus the Holy Spirit? No.
    Is the Father Jesus? No.
    Is the Father the Holy Spirit? No.
    Is the Holy Spirit Jesus? No.
    Is the Holy Spirit the Father? No.
    I have no problem with these answers and I agree with these....
    Puck wrote: »
    How many Gods? One.
    Right!!! one God (the son, the father and holly ghost)
    Puck wrote: »
    How many Persons of the Holy Trinity? Three.
    Please answer this question...
    Does these three person including in holly trinity speak of divine knowledge?
    Fanny Cradock wrote: »
    It is rather disingenuous to post a video of some terribly confused individual and expect us to defend him. Why don't you ask for an explanation of the Trinity instead of trying to sneak your Trojan Horse of an argument in?
    If you have problem with video..... You can delete it and can start the thread with second post..... I had posted video because i was confused after listening the answer by priest.....
    Donatello wrote: »
    The Holy Trinity is God. The Holy Trinity is comprised of three Divine Persons - the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.
    There are hints of the Trinity in the Old Testament, e.g.,
    You said three divine persons.... Right!!!! Now your task is to prove all these three person have divine knowledge, ........... But here is hint ......you can't prove it.....
    32 “But about that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.
    http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Mark%2013:32&version=NIV
    See, How you are contradicting bible...
    Now you give me Bible verse..
    26 Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals,[a] and over all the creatures that move along the ground.”
    http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Gen.%201:26&version=NIV
    Is there any human that is like GOD? Lets suppose Adam, the first creation of Mankind and the one in Genesis 1:26-27 certainly isn't. The likeness of GOD Almighty doesn't mean physical appearance, but it means having the knowledge of Good and evil. See the Bible in context.....
    “For God knows that when you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”
    http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis%203:5&version=NIV
    24 and to put on the new self, created to be like God in true righteousness and holiness.
    http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ephesians%204:24&version=NIV
    Then the LORD said to Moses, “See, I have made you like God to Pharaoh, and your brother Aaron will be your prophet.
    http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus%207:1&version=NIV
    Soul Winner wrote: »
    So, anyone who has faith in God will have His Spirit also,
    What do you mean by Spirit.... Are you taking spirit as spirit of God.... or you are taking spirit as angel etc
    Soul Winner wrote: »
    and be thus one with The Father as Jesus and the Spirit are one with The Father.
    Simple really...
    .....
    I am repeating the same question again and again... Has Jesus divine knowledge as Father....


  • #35
    dead one
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,320 ✭✭✭dead one


    strobe wrote: »
    Dead One is your problem now Christianity forum.
    Tag, you're it, no givey backies.
    See, Buddy.... I have no problem with moderators..... but I always have problem with dictators......I believe in Christianity...... there are good people...... They aren't dictators but moderators.... Some people in foram xyz behave like dictators.... Its my life time challenge to them to prove me wrong if they aren't dictator.... You can post my reply as new topic there.............. I am very sorry to say,,,,, some people are using their powers in illegal way to secure their creed..... This is against reason.............. This is against freedom..... Yet you will see, They are the people favoring freedom... See how freedom is being slaughter by those who claim to be guardian of freedom................i hope the answer will pend till the end......
    Plowman wrote: »
    Christians hold that Jesus is entirely human and entirely divine (100% + 100%, if you will).
    If jesus were entirely divine.... it would mean he had divine knowledge....
    clear this verse is contradicting your statement..... Would you kindly clear it....
    32 “But about that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.
    http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Mark%2013:32&version=NIV
    This verse implies only God i.e Father has divine knowledge.... The verse exclude every thing of divinity whether the son or holly ghost or whatever...


  • #36
    PDN
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    dead one wrote: »
    According to Jesus.......... no one knows his coming in judgment except the Father ..... See below examples...

    No one obviously includes anything whether he is holly spirit or whatever............... Yet,,,,,,,, if the Holy Spirit doesn’t know everything how can he be God?
    Please answer

    Happy to answer. Jesus was speaking to human beings, so obviously the context demands that the "no-one" refers to human beings, not to the Holy Spirit.
    Right!!! one God (the son, the father and holly ghost)
    Yes, we believe in one God who eternally exists in three Persons - the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.
    Please answer this question...
    Does these three person including in holly trinity speak of divine knowledge?
    Yes, all three Persons in the Trinity are omniscient.
    See, How you are contradicting bible...
    Nobody's contradicting the Bible, but you are taking it out of context. As you said yourself, it is very easy to answer something out of context.
    Is there any human that is like GOD? Lets suppose Adam, the first creation of Mankind and the one in Genesis 1:26-27 certainly isn't. The likeness of GOD Almighty doesn't mean physical appearance, but it means having the knowledge of Good and evil. See the Bible in context.....

    Now you're the one contradicting the Bible. Adam and Eve were created in God's image, but it was not until later that they received the knowledge of good and evil. So your theory here is obviously wrong.

    To be made in God's image probably refers to the fact that man, unlike the animals, was created with a spirit.
    What do you mean by Spirit.... Are you taking spirit as spirit of God.... or you are taking spirit as angel etc
    He is talking about the Spirit of God (I understand that English is not your first language, but generally when we capitilise the S in Spirit we make clear that this refers to God the Holy Spirit).
    I am repeating the same question again and again... Has Jesus divine knowledge as Father....
    Jesus, as God the Son, is omniscient - thus having the same divine knowledge as God the Father and God the Holy Spirit.

    While God the Son lived on earth during the Incarnation He voluntarily limited His divine powers in order to live as a human. This is the theological concept called kenosis (Greek for emptiness). So, for example, between His conception in the womb of Mary until His ascension to the Father's right hand 40 days after the Resurrection, Jesus was not omnipresent. He voluntarily submitted to a role that entailed being only in one place at one time. The Bible indicates that He similarly voluntarily limited His divine knowledge.

    This is one reason why the Incarnation means so much to Christians - and, of course, why we celebrate Christmas. God did not just pretend to be a man - He truly became man. Jesus was not 50% man and 50% God. He was 100% man and 100% God.


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    tenchi-fan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,339 ✭✭✭tenchi-fan


    dead one wrote: »
    No one obviously includes anything whether he is holly spirit or whatever............... Yet,,,,,,,, if the Holy Spirit doesn’t know everything how can he be God?

    Op, you'll notice I'm replying to your post in one large, coherent block of text... when replying to mine please don't reply line by line, trying to pick holes in everything I write. I know you're out to disprove Christianity, but there's nothing intelligent about taking people's words and sentiments out of context. I'm sure I could pick plenty of single, out of context and therefore nonsensical lines of the Quran at you and ask you to defend them but I'm better than that.

    Op, first of all, forget about the video. It contains inaccuracies. My post probably contains a few but here is my understanding...


    The Son
    That's Jesus. There are other quotes in the bible the deal with Jesus's divinity.

    Jesus taught the apostles, but he did not reveal everything at once, often speaking in ways which they could not interpret. He would speak to crowds in parables, then explain the lessons to the apostles. Other times he would speak to the apostles using vague language that would only become clear after the events he was referring to occurred.

    Similarly, the apostles and disciples wrote the gospels in a way that reveals the nature of God as they learned about Him, rather than trying to summarise the key points and conclusions.

    If you take words and quotes out of context they will appear contradictory. Often it's because the chapter you are quoting was before the lesson on the full and true nature of God {Father, Son and Holy Spirit} was revealed.

    Another thing is the bible cannot be taken literally. Jesus often speaks figuratively to emphasise points (I have a feeling he was doing so when he said "no one knows, not even the Son") and as discussed above He often obscured the meaning behind what he said. Also, the parables Jesus tells are not actual historic events.

    The Father
    In Judaism and Christianity, the view is that God has a physical body in Heaven, and that man was created in God's image. Muslims do not agree with this view and maybe that is why you have trouble visualising God in this way.

    Back to your quote..
    "But about that day or hour no one knows.. but only the Father"... This implies Jesus is talking about a person. He refers to the Father in this manner in order for the disciples to be able to strengthen their relationship with God.

    It also helps them to understand the nature of the Father and the Son.

    Jesus teaches us to view God as "Our Father", otherwise it would be too easy for people to get caught up trying to worship God without being able to conceptualise what they were trying to worship.

    The Holy Spirit
    The Holy Spirit is also referred to in Islam, although more often in Islam it refers to God communicating by using Angels. The Christian view of the holy Spirit is closer to the Jewish view, but is nonetheless similar to the Islamic view.

    The Holy Spirit IS God, and the term Holy Spirit refers to the means by which divine communications and divine actions are carried out.

    "But about that day or hour no one knows.. but only the Father"...
    The Holy Spirit is not referenced as a person. In Christianity it is sometimes represented by fire or a dove. The Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father/{Father and Son} (depending on your Christian beliefs). It is not a separate being, and it doesn't make sense to say the Father could know something without the Holy Spirit knowing also.

    Back to the Muslim view, it is like saying Allah knows a fact, but the Holy Spirit does not. Or that there is a God of Allah in Heaven, and a God of the Holy Spirit, which is God outside Heaven. This would be incorrect. There is only one God.

    To be honest, I'm surprised you are having such difficulty with understanding the Holy Spirit. I thought you'd have more difficulty with the divinity of Jesus ;)


  • #38
    PDN
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    tenchi-fan wrote: »
    The Holy Spirit IS God, and the term Holy Spirit refers to the means by which divine communications and divine actions are carried out.

    "But about that day or hour no one knows.. but only the Father"...
    The Holy Spirit is not referenced as a person. In Christianity it is sometimes represented by fire or a dove. The Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father/{Father and Son} (depending on your Christian beliefs). It is not a separate being, and it doesn't make sense to say the Father could know something without the Holy Spirit knowing also.

    I can see this getting very confused. What techni-fan has posted above does not express the position of historical Christianity (Orthodox, Catholic or Reformed).

    According to mainstream Christian belief the Holy Spirit is the Third Person of the Trinity and as such is distinct from God the Father.

    He (not it) is much more than a means by which God's communications and actions are carried out.

    Techni-fan is of course entitled to his/her own beliefs, but for the sake of clarity I would point out that his/her beliefs as posted above sound a lot closer to what Jehovah's Witnesses believe than to what mainstream Christianity believes. That, of course, may be down due to an unfortunate choice of terms used rather than to any heterodox beliefs.


  • #39
    tenchi-fan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,339 ✭✭✭tenchi-fan


    PDN wrote: »
    I can see this getting very confused. What techni-fan has posted above does not express the position of historical Christianity (Orthodox, Catholic or Reformed).

    According to mainstream Christian belief the Holy Spirit is the Third Person of the Trinity and as such is distinct from God the Father.

    He (not it) is much more than a means by which God's communications and actions are carried out.

    Techni-fan is of course entitled to his/her own beliefs, but for the sake of clarity I would point out that his/her beliefs as posted above sound a lot closer to what Jehovah's Witnesses believe than to what mainstream Christianity believes. That, of course, may be down due to an unfortunate choice of terms used rather than to any heterodox beliefs.

    My apologies, that was my attempt to map the Islamic belief to the Christian belief. I believe the Holy Spirit is the God of the universe and what makes people Holy, as opposed to just a means for the Father to communicate with mankind.

    This is the reason I avoided saying "he" and I meant no disrespect. I was trying to draw parallells with the Christian, Jewish and Islam view of the Holy Spirit, and thought the term "it" was more appropriate than "he/she/it"

    However, you should also get a slap on the wrists. You said "so obviously the context demands that the "no-one" refers to human beings", even though the quote is "But about that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son,[a] but only the Father"

    By your slip of the tongue/keys, you just included the angels, the Son and the Father as "human beings". You are of course entitled to your own beliefs but for the sake of clarity i would point out that this is not the Christian belief ;)


  • #40
    Asry
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 883 ✭✭✭Asry


    wowww this is getting too complicated for my teeny tiny brain.

    Actually. This was probably answered before but I need tiny words and possibly pictures to explain it. I should preface this by saying I have a stupidly active imagination and like to imagine scenarios and things that really are probably blasphemous (I'm not talking sexy things about characters in the bible...mostly things like the following....).

    Jesus, being one with the Father. In the Garden of Gethsemane. I know that he had predicted his death many times before his arrest, but I was just wondering if he would have known the manner of its form? Is that why he was afraid, and asked the cup to pass from him? Because he knew what was to happen and what it would achieve, but just not how they would actually go about killing him? Would there be things in the divine plan of the father that would have been unknown to the son, in order to ensure a fully human 'experience' as it were?

    THERFORE, as both the Son of Man and the Son of God, when on the cross he cries out that he's been forsaken, would there have been a withdrawal of the awareness of his divine father in his mind/soul/consciousness? Would he then have felt utterly alone, as any human does sometimes?


  • #41
    dead one
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,320 ✭✭✭dead one


    PDN wrote: »
    Happy to answer. Jesus was speaking to human beings, so obviously the context demands that the "no-one" refers to human beings, not to the Holy Spirit.
    :)
    tenchi-fan wrote: »
    However, you should also get a slap on the wrists. You said "so obviously the context demands that the "no-one" refers to human beings", even though the quote is "But about that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son,[a] but only the Father"

    By your slip of the tongue/keys, you just included the angels, the Son and the Father as "human beings".
    PDN wrote: »
    Yes, we believe in one God who eternally exists in three Persons - the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.
    Right!!!!
    PDN wrote: »
    Yes, all three Persons in the Trinity are omniscient.
    You said.... all three Persons in the Trinity are omniscient.... It means their knoweldge is omniscient..... Yet you see in the verse....
    “But about that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.
    http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Mark%2013:32&version=NIV
    If the son were omniscient... He would sure have knowledge about that day or unknown hour....... but he denied.......
    PDN wrote: »
    Now you're the one contradicting the Bible. Adam and Eve were created in God's image, but it was not until later that they received the knowledge of good and evil. So your theory here is obviously wrong.
    Please clear what do you mean by Image..... Have God (Father) eyes.... or Has God Nose like human?.........
    PDN wrote: »
    To be made in God's image probably refers to the fact that man, unlike the animals, was created with a spirit.
    Context from bible.... I have provided the context why i believe "God's image" doesn't apply to physical appearance rather the knowedlge
    PDN wrote: »
    He is talking about the Spirit of God (I understand that English is not your first language, but generally when we capitilise the S in Spirit we make clear that this refers to God the Holy Spirit)....
    Thanks:)......
    PDN wrote: »
    Jesus, as God the Son, is omniscient - thus having the same divine knowledge as God the Father and God the Holy Spirit.

    See you aren't understating.... If Jesus, as God the Son, is omniscient.... What context you will make of this verse
    “But about that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.
    http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Mark%2013:32&version=NIV
    PDN wrote: »
    This is one reason why the Incarnation means so much to Christians - and, of course, why we celebrate Christmas. God did not just pretend to be a man - He truly became man. Jesus was not 50% man and 50% God. He was 100% man and 100% God.
    If he was 100% God.... then
    So Jesus said, “When you have lifted upURL="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John%208:28&version=NIV#fen-NIV-26410a"]a[/URL the Son of Man, then you will know that I am he and that I do nothing on my own but speak just what the Father has taught me.
    http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John%208:28&version=NIV


  • Advertisement
  • #42
    lmaopml
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,080 ✭✭✭lmaopml


    Asry wrote: »
    wowww this is getting too complicated for my teeny tiny brain.

    Actually. This was probably answered before but I need tiny words and possibly pictures to explain it. I should preface this by saying I have a stupidly active imagination and like to imagine scenarios and things that really are probably blasphemous (I'm not talking sexy things about characters in the bible...mostly things like the following....).

    Jesus, being one with the Father. In the Garden of Gethsemane. I know that he had predicted his death many times before his arrest, but I was just wondering if he would have known the manner of its form? Is that why he was afraid, and asked the cup to pass from him? Because he knew what was to happen and what it would achieve, but just not how they would actually go about killing him? Would there be things in the divine plan of the father that would have been unknown to the son, in order to ensure a fully human 'experience' as it were?

    THERFORE, as both the Son of Man and the Son of God, when on the cross he cries out that he's been forsaken, would there have been a withdrawal of the awareness of his divine father in his mind/soul/consciousness? Would he then have felt utterly alone, as any human does sometimes?

    I could be way off, but I'll say what I think about why Jesus would have cried out those words just before he died. Jesus would have known about Psalm 22 ( I'll post it Asry so you can read through it..)

    1 My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?
    Why are you so far from saving me,
    so far from the words of my groaning?
    2 O my God, I cry out by day, but you do not answer,
    by night, and am not silent.
    3 Yet you are enthroned as the Holy One;
    you are the praise of Israel.a
    4 In you our fathers put their trust;
    they trusted and you delivered them.
    5 They cried to you and were saved;
    in you they trusted and were not disappointed.
    6 But I am a worm and not a man,
    scorned by men and despised by the people.
    7 All who see me mock me;
    they hurl insults, shaking their heads:
    8 “He trusts in the Lord;
    let the Lord rescue him.
    Let him deliver him,
    since he delights in him.”
    9 Yet you brought me out of the womb;
    you made me trust in you
    even at my mother’s breast.
    10 From birth I was cast upon you;
    from my mother’s womb you have been my God.
    11 Do not be far from me,
    for trouble is near
    and there is no one to help.
    12 Many bulls surround me;
    strong bulls of Bashan encircle me.
    13 Roaring lions tearing their prey
    open their mouths wide against me.
    14 I am poured out like water,
    and all my bones are out of joint.
    My heart has turned to wax;
    it has melted away within me.
    15 My strength is dried up like a potsherd,
    and my tongue sticks to the roof of my mouth;
    you lay meb in the dust of death.
    16 Dogs have surrounded me;
    a band of evil men has encircled me,
    they have piercedc my hands and my feet.
    17 I can count all my bones;
    people stare and gloat over me.
    18 They divide my garments among them
    and cast lots for my clothing.
    19 But you, O Lord, be not far off;
    O my Strength, come quickly to help me.
    20 Deliver my life from the sword,
    my precious life from the power of the dogs.
    21 Rescue me from the mouth of the lions;
    saved me from the horns of the wild oxen.
    22 I will declare your name to my brothers;
    in the congregation I will praise you.
    23 You who fear the Lord, praise him!
    All you descendants of Jacob, honor him!
    Revere him, all you descendants of Israel!
    24 For he has not despised or disdained
    the suffering of the afflicted one;
    he has not hidden his face from him
    but has listened to his cry for help.
    25 From you comes the theme of my praise in the great assembly;
    before those who fear youe will I fulfill my vows.
    26 The poor will eat and be satisfied;
    they who seek the Lord will praise him—
    may your hearts live forever!
    27 All the ends of the earth
    will remember and turn to the Lord,
    and all the families of the nations
    will bow down before him,
    28 for dominion belongs to the Lord
    and he rules over the nations.
    29 All the rich of the earth will feast and worship;
    all who go down to the dust will kneel before him—
    those who cannot keep themselves alive.
    30 Posterity will serve him;
    future generations will be told about the Lord.
    31 They will proclaim his righteousness
    to a people yet unborn—
    for he has done it.

    It's basically a prophesy of the coming of the Messiah in human form, tortured and reviled and put to death - but the end also conveys the huge 'victory'! Jesus would have cried out those words on the cross at that point in time to let us know exactly who he was, what he did, and he was still teaching even with his last breath, he said it for us so that we could understand - It's not that he thought he was 'alone', he was letting us know that we really aren't alone even in the darkest hour to have faith.

    Imo he would have known exactly what was to become of him, it's what he came for, and the last words 'for he has done it' are so important in the psalm too...

    I can't read through that psalm without choking up a little to be honest. Right so, I'm gonna get a coffee...lol....:)


  • #43
    JimiTime
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,418 ✭✭✭JimiTime


    lmaopml wrote: »
    I could be way off, but I'll say what I think about why Jesus would have cried out those words just before he died. Jesus would have known about Psalm 22 ( I'll post it Asry so you can read through it..)

    1 My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?
    Why are you so far from saving me,
    so far from the words of my groaning?
    2 O my God, I cry out by day, but you do not answer,
    by night, and am not silent.
    3 Yet you are enthroned as the Holy One;
    you are the praise of Israel.a
    4 In you our fathers put their trust;
    they trusted and you delivered them.
    5 They cried to you and were saved;
    in you they trusted and were not disappointed.
    6 But I am a worm and not a man,
    scorned by men and despised by the people.
    7 All who see me mock me;
    they hurl insults, shaking their heads:
    8 “He trusts in the Lord;
    let the Lord rescue him.
    Let him deliver him,
    since he delights in him.”
    9 Yet you brought me out of the womb;
    you made me trust in you
    even at my mother’s breast.
    10 From birth I was cast upon you;
    from my mother’s womb you have been my God.
    11 Do not be far from me,
    for trouble is near
    and there is no one to help.
    12 Many bulls surround me;
    strong bulls of Bashan encircle me.
    13 Roaring lions tearing their prey
    open their mouths wide against me.
    14 I am poured out like water,
    and all my bones are out of joint.
    My heart has turned to wax;
    it has melted away within me.
    15 My strength is dried up like a potsherd,
    and my tongue sticks to the roof of my mouth;
    you lay meb in the dust of death.
    16 Dogs have surrounded me;
    a band of evil men has encircled me,
    they have piercedc my hands and my feet.
    17 I can count all my bones;
    people stare and gloat over me.
    18 They divide my garments among them
    and cast lots for my clothing.
    19 But you, O Lord, be not far off;
    O my Strength, come quickly to help me.
    20 Deliver my life from the sword,
    my precious life from the power of the dogs.
    21 Rescue me from the mouth of the lions;
    saved me from the horns of the wild oxen.
    22 I will declare your name to my brothers;
    in the congregation I will praise you.
    23 You who fear the Lord, praise him!
    All you descendants of Jacob, honor him!
    Revere him, all you descendants of Israel!
    24 For he has not despised or disdained
    the suffering of the afflicted one;
    he has not hidden his face from him
    but has listened to his cry for help.
    25 From you comes the theme of my praise in the great assembly;
    before those who fear youe will I fulfill my vows.
    26 The poor will eat and be satisfied;
    they who seek the Lord will praise him—
    may your hearts live forever!
    27 All the ends of the earth
    will remember and turn to the Lord,
    and all the families of the nations
    will bow down before him,
    28 for dominion belongs to the Lord
    and he rules over the nations.
    29 All the rich of the earth will feast and worship;
    all who go down to the dust will kneel before him—
    those who cannot keep themselves alive.
    30 Posterity will serve him;
    future generations will be told about the Lord.
    31 They will proclaim his righteousness
    to a people yet unborn—
    for he has done it.

    It's basically a prophesy of the coming of the Messiah in human form, tortured and reviled and put to death - but the end also conveys the huge 'victory'! Jesus would have cried out those words on the cross at that point in time to let us know exactly who he was, what he did, and he was still teaching even with his last breath, he said it for us so that we could understand - It's not that he thought he was 'alone', he was letting us know that we really aren't alone even in the darkest hour to have faith.

    Imo he would have known exactly what was to become of him, it's what he came for, and the last words 'for he has done it' are so important in the psalm too...

    I can't read through that psalm without choking up a little to be honest. Right so, I'm gonna get a coffee...lol....:)

    Amen sister, Amen!


  • #44
    Monty Burnz
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,455 ✭✭✭✭Monty Burnz


    Puck wrote: »
    Yes.

    And now, Father, glorify me in your own presence with the glory that I had with you before the world existed.
    - John 17:5 ESV
    This is getting very confusing: there were always three parts of God? And he deployed one as Jesus? Was this part of a long range plan? Or were there always three parts just waiting for a use?


  • #45
    Monty Burnz
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,455 ✭✭✭✭Monty Burnz


    Plowman wrote: »
    This post has been deleted.
    To be honest, if I knew I was a god, and guys were crucifying me, I wouldn't have been too bothered about it, knowing that I'd be fine in a few days. And a god.

    The sacrifice of an ordinary person coming to the aid of someone being attacked, or trying to save a drowning child is a far greater sacrifice as they know that they don't have Jesus's 'get out of jail free' card.


  • #46
    anymore
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,672 ✭✭✭anymore


    PDN wrote: »
    Happy to answer. Jesus was speaking to human beings, so obviously the context demands that the "no-one" refers to human beings, not to the Holy Spirit.


    Yes, we believe in one God who eternally exists in three Persons - the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.


    Yes, all three Persons in the Trinity are omniscient.


    Nobody's contradicting the Bible, but you are taking it out of context. As you said yourself, it is very easy to answer something out of context.



    Now you're the one contradicting the Bible. Adam and Eve were created in God's image, but it was not until later that they received the knowledge of good and evil. So your theory here is obviously wrong.

    To be made in God's image probably refers to the fact that man, unlike the animals, was created with a spirit.


    He is talking about the Spirit of God (I understand that English is not your first language, but generally when we capitilise the S in Spirit we make clear that this refers to God the Holy Spirit).

    Jesus, as God the Son, is omniscient - thus having the same divine knowledge as God the Father and God the Holy Spirit.

    While God the Son lived on earth during the Incarnation He voluntarily limited His divine powers in order to live as a human. This is the theological concept called kenosis (Greek for emptiness). So, for example, between His conception in the womb of Mary until His ascension to the Father's right hand 40 days after the Resurrection, Jesus was not omnipresent. He voluntarily submitted to a role that entailed being only in one place at one time. The Bible indicates that He similarly voluntarily limited His divine knowledge.

    This is one reason why the Incarnation means so much to Christians - and, of course, why we celebrate Christmas. God did not just pretend to be a man - He truly became man. Jesus was not 50% man and 50% God. He was 100% man and 100% God.

    How can the Holy Spirit be a person ? Doesnt make sense !

    Also, the context doesnt ' demand' anything - it suits your purpose to say it must mean only humans are being addressed !

    Also, what does ' in God's image' ? mean

    You are obivously incorrect to say, he limited his powers or knowledge - he, we are told, did miracles as and when it suited him, including, it is alleged, bringing Lazarus back from the dead. Talking about theological concepts devised long after Jesus's death is what I call 'Working backwards' to prove past events by reference to present requirements.


  • #47
    PDN
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    dead one wrote: »
    You said.... all three Persons in the Trinity are omniscient.... It means their knoweldge is omniscient..... Yet you see in the verse....

    If the son were omniscient... He would sure have knowledge about that day or unknown hour....... but he denied.......

    I already addressed this in my last post where I explained the concept of kenosis. You know, there's not much point in asking questions if you aren't going to bother reading the answers.
    Please clear what do you mean by Image..... Have God (Father) eyes.... or Has God Nose like human?.........
    In my last post I made clear what I mean by 'image' - that man is created with a spirit.

    God is Spirit. Spirits don't have noses.

    However, in order to communicate in a way that we can understand, God uses anthromorphic language in Scripture (ie He speaks of 'lifting His hand' etc).

    And, of course, God the Son (Jesus) became incarnate in human flesh.
    Context from bible.... I have provided the context why i believe "God's image" doesn't apply to physical appearance rather the knowedlge
    No you haven't. You have made an assertion, devoid of context, and in contradiction to the Scripture which states that Adam and Eve were made in God's image before they received the knowledge of Good and Evil.
    See you aren't understating.... If Jesus, as God the Son, is omniscient.... What context you will make of this verse
    I'm sorry. What you've said there doesn't actually make much sense in English, so I don't know what your question is.
    If he was 100% God.... then
    This is what theologians refer to as 'The Economic Trinity'. (Nothing to do with money, but rather based on a Greek word referring to arrangement of activities). The Three Persons of the Trinity are co-equal in power and glory, however, in order to implement the plan of salvation for mankind, the Son and the Spirit willingly and voluntarily acted in a subordinate role to the Father.

    Jesus, as God the Son, is equal with the Father (as Paul wrote to the Phillipians He thought it not robbery to be equal with God). But He willingly lived His life on earth as a servant. Servanthood, as it is taught in the New Testament, is not a sign of inferiority, but rather as a way of loving others (so Jesus, although clearly superior to the disciples, washed their feet).


  • #48
    Monty Burnz
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,455 ✭✭✭✭Monty Burnz


    PDN wrote: »
    He (not it) is much more than a means by which God's communications and actions are carried out.
    I'm wondering is there any meaningful way that something that was never embodied in human form can be male or female?
    PDN wrote: »
    God is Spirit. Spirits don't have noses.
    This makes total sense to me, but I would take it further in that I don't think that spirits have primary or secondary sexual characteristics either, or hormones, or brain structures.

    Also, how come males have a monopoly in the hierarchy of religion coincidentally revealed to an ancient patriarchical society? Surely the odds are that one of the three would be female, if we can meaningully ascribe genders to the Holy Spirit and God? :confused:

    Sorry if this is going O/T. But it does seem to fall under the thread topic, 'difficult questions to answer'. :)


  • #49
    anymore
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,672 ✭✭✭anymore


    tenchi-fan wrote: »
    Op, you'll notice I'm replying to your post in one large, coherent block of text... when replying to mine please don't reply line by line, trying to pick holes in everything I write. I know you're out to disprove Christianity, but there's nothing intelligent about taking people's words and sentiments out of context. I'm sure I could pick plenty of single, out of context and therefore nonsensical lines of the Quran at you and ask you to defend them but I'm better than that.

    Op, first of all, forget about the video. It contains inaccuracies. My post probably contains a few but here is my understanding...


    The Son
    That's Jesus. There are other quotes in the bible the deal with Jesus's divinity.

    Jesus taught the apostles, but he did not reveal everything at once, often speaking in ways which they could not interpret. He would speak to crowds in parables, then explain the lessons to the apostles. Other times he would speak to the apostles using vague language that would only become clear after the events he was referring to occurred.

    Similarly, the apostles and disciples wrote the gospels in a way that reveals the nature of God as they learned about Him, rather than trying to summarise the key points and conclusions.

    If you take words and quotes out of context they will appear contradictory. Often it's because the chapter you are quoting was before the lesson on the full and true nature of God {Father, Son and Holy Spirit} was revealed.

    Another thing is the bible cannot be taken literally. Jesus often speaks figuratively to emphasise points (I have a feeling he was doing so when he said "no one knows, not even the Son") and as discussed above He often obscured the meaning behind what he said. Also, the parables Jesus tells are not actual historic events.

    The Father
    In Judaism and Christianity, the view is that God has a physical body in Heaven, and that man was created in God's image. Muslims do not agree with this view and maybe that is why you have trouble visualising God in this way.

    Back to your quote..
    "But about that day or hour no one knows.. but only the Father"... This implies Jesus is talking about a person. He refers to the Father in this manner in order for the disciples to be able to strengthen their relationship with God.

    It also helps them to understand the nature of the Father and the Son.

    Jesus teaches us to view God as "Our Father", otherwise it would be too easy for people to get caught up trying to worship God without being able to conceptualise what they were trying to worship.

    The Holy Spirit
    The Holy Spirit is also referred to in Islam, although more often in Islam it refers to God communicating by using Angels. The Christian view of the holy Spirit is closer to the Jewish view, but is nonetheless similar to the Islamic view.

    The Holy Spirit IS God, and the term Holy Spirit refers to the means by which divine communications and divine actions are carried out.

    "But about that day or hour no one knows.. but only the Father"...
    The Holy Spirit is not referenced as a person. In Christianity it is sometimes represented by fire or a dove. The Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father/{Father and Son} (depending on your Christian beliefs). It is not a separate being, and it doesn't make sense to say the Father could know something without the Holy Spirit knowing also.

    Back to the Muslim view, it is like saying Allah knows a fact, but the Holy Spirit does not. Or that there is a God of Allah in Heaven, and a God of the Holy Spirit, which is God outside Heaven. This would be incorrect. There is only one God.

    To be honest, I'm surprised you are having such difficulty with understanding the Holy Spirit. I thought you'd have more difficulty with the divinity of Jesus ;)
    I must say that your explantion of the Holy Spirit not being a person ties in more with my memory of what we told/taught in school. I.e Jesus and God could be looke don as persons but not the Holy Spirit. I expect dufferent denomination have different versions - does anyone know what the orthodox church views on this are / The Orthodox view I understnad tends to be closer to what the early christians thought than the other denominations who are more prone to ' updating'.


  • #50
    PDN
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    anymore wrote: »
    How can the Holy Spirit be a person ? Doesnt make sense !

    Here's a wee tip for you - just because you yourself don't understand something doesn't mean that it doesn't make sense.

    If you look up 'Person' on wikipedia you will find the following:
    wikipedia wrote:
    The word "person", and the initial concepts to which it referred, were developed during the Trinitarian and Christological debates of the first through sixth centuries.

    So the Holy Spirit was defined as a person before you and I were. Indead applying the word 'person' to our fellow humans is derived from taking a word that was previously used to refer to God the father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit.
    Also, the context doesnt ' demand' anything - it suits your purpose to say it must mean only humans are being addressed !
    Contexts frequently do 'demand' a particular interpretation. Unless, of course, you want to take us into a postmodern mush where words have no objective meanings.
    Also, what does ' in God's image' ? mean
    I've already shared what I think it means. Maybe you should read my post instead of asking a question that I've already answered? I think it means that we were created with a spirit - because God is spirit.
    You are obivously incorrect to say, he limited his powers or knowledge - he, we are told, did miracles as and when it suited him, including, it is alleged, bringing Lazarus back from the dead.
    It's probably better not to accuse someone of being obviously anything unless you have a good grasp of what you're talking about.

    There is a huge difference between saying Jesus could work miracles (as other humans have been able to do so, such as Old Testament prophets and New Testament disciples) and saying that He had unlimited powers during His incarnation.

    "He could not do any miracles there, except lay his hands on a few sick people and heal them." (Mark 6:5)

    Oh-oh, it looks like you are the one who is obviously incorrect. The New Testament clearly refers to limitations to both Jesus' powers and knowledge during the Incarnation.
    Talking about theological concepts devised long after Jesus's death is what I call 'Working backwards' to prove past events by reference to present requirements.
    No more so than when we use scientific concepts devised in the 19th and 20th Centuries and use them to work backwards to understand events that occurred in the past. That is how we develop understanding in any area of life.


  • #51
    PDN
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    anymore wrote: »
    I must say that your explantion of the Holy Spirit not being a person ties in more with my memory of what we told/taught in school. I.e Jesus and God could be looke don as persons but not the Holy Spirit. I expect dufferent denomination have different versions - does anyone know what the orthodox church views on this are / The Orthodox view I understnad tends to be closer to what the early christians thought than the other denominations who are more prone to ' updating'.

    An excellent example of why schools should be secular rather than attempting (very poorly) to conduct religious indoctrination.

    The Roman Catholic view (presuming your school was Catholic) is that the Holy Spirit is a Person. Any view that deviates from this would be considered heretical by the RC Church.


  • Advertisement
  • #52
    Zombrex
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    anymore wrote: »
    How can the Holy Spirit be a person ? Doesnt make sense !

    Don't be a Christian then. Seems to be the obvious solution to that one :P


  • #53
    Asry
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 883 ✭✭✭Asry


    lmaopml wrote: »
    I could be way off, but I'll say what I think about why Jesus would have cried out those words just before he died. Jesus would have known about Psalm 22 ( I'll post it Asry so you can read through it..)

    It's basically a prophesy of the coming of the Messiah in human form, tortured and reviled and put to death - but the end also conveys the huge 'victory'! Jesus would have cried out those words on the cross at that point in time to let us know exactly who he was, what he did, and he was still teaching even with his last breath, he said it for us so that we could understand - It's not that he thought he was 'alone', he was letting us know that we really aren't alone even in the darkest hour to have faith.

    Imo he would have known exactly what was to become of him, it's what he came for, and the last words 'for he has done it' are so important in the psalm too...

    I can't read through that psalm without choking up a little to be honest. Right so, I'm gonna get a coffee...lol....:)

    You know, I'd never considered that. I know that he did frequently do things that were predicted in the Old Testament or directly quote it. This psalm makes me sad as well, but it helps when you're feeling really down. :)


  • #54
    anymore
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,672 ✭✭✭anymore


    PDN wrote: »
    Here's a wee tip for you - just because you yourself don't understand something doesn't mean that it doesn't make sense.

    If you look up 'Person' on wikipedia you will find the following:

    So the Holy Spirit was defined as a person before you and I were. Indead applying the word 'person' to our fellow humans is derived from taking a word that was previously used to refer to God the father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit.


    Contexts frequently do 'demand' a particular interpretation. Unless, of course, you want to take us into a postmodern mush where words have no objective meanings.


    I've already shared what I think it means. Maybe you should read my post instead of asking a question that I've already answered? I think it means that we were created with a spirit - because God is spirit.

    It's probably better not to accuse someone of being obviously anything unless you have a good grasp of what you're talking about.

    There is a huge difference between saying Jesus could work miracles (as other humans have been able to do so, such as Old Testament prophets and New Testament disciples) and saying that He had unlimited powers during His incarnation.

    "He could not do any miracles there, except lay his hands on a few sick people and heal them." (Mark 6:5)

    Oh-oh, it looks like you are the one who is obviously incorrect. The New Testament clearly refers to limitations to both Jesus' powers and knowledge during the Incarnation.

    No more so than when we use scientific concepts devised in the 19th and 20th Centuries and use them to work backwards to understand events that occurred in the past. That is how we develop understanding in any area of life.
    For the record, regarding Mark, it should be said that are doubts about the meanings and translations and what should or should not be regarded ahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Mark

    Revision and editorial error may also contribute. Most differences are trivial but Mark 1:41, where the leper approached Jesus begging to be healed, is significant. Early (Western) manuscripts say that Jesus became angry with the leper while later (Byzantine) versions indicate that Jesus showed compassion. This is possibly a confusion between the Aramaic words ethraham (he had pity) and ethra'em (he was enraged).[28] Since it is easier to understand why a scribe would change "rage" to "pity" than "pity" to "rage," the earlier version is probably original.[29]
    s text :
    So for that reason quoting one line out of Mark to prove a point is probably best not done - Hope you dont mind me giving you ' wee tips'.;)
    ( Intersting comment about " The Messianic secret remains a topic of debate.["
    You will find further comment regarding mark here :
    http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/mark.html


  • #55
    anymore
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,672 ✭✭✭anymore


    Wicknight wrote: »
    Don't be a Christian then. Seems to be the obvious solution to that one :P
    Do you mean christians arent allowed to ask questions ?
    :rolleyes:


  • #56
    PDN
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    anymore wrote: »
    For the record, regarding Mark, it should be said that are doubts about the meanings and translations and what should or should not be regarded ahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Mark

    Revision and editorial error may also contribute. Most differences are trivial but Mark 1:41, where the leper approached Jesus begging to be healed, is significant. Early (Western) manuscripts say that Jesus became angry with the leper while later (Byzantine) versions indicate that Jesus showed compassion. This is possibly a confusion between the Aramaic words ethraham (he had pity) and ethra'em (he was enraged).[28] Since it is easier to understand why a scribe would change "rage" to "pity" than "pity" to "rage," the earlier version is probably original.[29]
    s text :
    So for that reason quoting one line out of Mark to prove a point is probably best not done - Hope you dont mind me giving you ' wee tips'.;)
    ( Intersting comment about " The Messianic secret remains a topic of debate.["
    You will find further comment regarding mark here :
    http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/mark.html

    Mark was was written in Greek. There is no difficulty or doubt about the verse in Mark that I cited. It reads: και ουκ εδυνατο εκει ποιησαι ουδεμιαν δυναμιν ει μη ολιγοις αρρωστοις επιθεις τας χειρας εθεραπευσεν. There is no problem in translation there. Even a first year student can manage it.

    Please tell me you are not seriously suggesting, because different manuscripts use a different word in Mark 1:41, that somehow the whole of Mark's Gospel is to be treated as unreliable? That would really be dragging the bottom of the barrel.


  • #57
    Asry
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 883 ✭✭✭Asry


    but that issue has nothing to do with the issue at hand, apart from the fact that there are sometimes confusions in minor details due to translation variables (again, I point to the variables in word means regarding homosexual sex but I'm riding my own personal hobbyhorse there). I would like to stress that apart from these minor issues (apart from the LGBT one of course:rolleyes:), the life and acts of Jesus are perfectly bang-on clear and always have been. [note I'm vaguely joshing here, don't be taking me up wrong :)]


  • #58
    anymore
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,672 ✭✭✭anymore


    PDN wrote: »
    An excellent example of why schools should be secular rather than attempting (very poorly) to conduct religious indoctrination.

    The Roman Catholic view (presuming your school was Catholic) is that the Holy Spirit is a Person. Any view that deviates from this would be considered heretical by the RC Church.
    Before you pass judgement on the quality of Roman Catholic religous education standards, perhaps you might be able to give some adivce on which of the 30,000 plus protestant denominations an unhappy catholic seeking to leave the RC church might choose or how he would even go about choosing one. :confused::confused: For example I have frequently seen commentators in the english media pose the question of whther the Church of England is even a religion anymore, so diverse is the range of beliefs to be found there ? Indeed if I am right, did not a group of C of E clergy transfer over to the RC church lately ?


  • #59
    PDN
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    anymore wrote: »
    Before you pass judgement on the quality of Roman Catholic religous education standards, perhaps you might be able to give some adivce on which of the 30,000 plus protestant denominations an unhappy catholic seeking to leave the RC church might choose or how he would even go about choosing one. :confused::confused: For example I have frequently seen commentators in the english media pose the question of whther the Church of England is even a religion anymore, so diverse is the range of beliefs to be found there ? Indeed if I am right, did not a group of C of E clergy transfer over to the RC church lately ?

    I didn't pass judgement on RC educational standards. I passed judgement on Irish educational standards where tax-payers money is used to indoctrinate children into a (sometimes very poor) understanding of RC doctrine. But that is another topic. :)

    As for joining denominations. Join which ever one you feel like, it's no skin off my nose at all. I don't consider myself Protestant anyway.

    Christianity is about having a relationship with God. You can have that relationship in many different churches. Any church should be happy to explain their beliefs to you, so find one you're happy with and where people will love you and encourage you to worship Christ.


  • #60
    anymore
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,672 ✭✭✭anymore


    PDN wrote: »
    Mark was was written in Greek. There is no difficulty or doubt about the verse in Mark that I cited. It reads: και ουκ εδυνατο εκει ποιησαι ουδεμιαν δυναμιν ει μη ολιγοις αρρωστοις επιθεις τας χειρας εθεραπευσεν. There is no problem in translation there. Even a first year student can manage it.

    Please tell me you are not seriously suggesting, because different manuscripts use a different word in Mark 1:41, that somehow the whole of Mark's Gospel is to be treated as unreliable? That would really be dragging the bottom of the barrel.

    Well the problem is that you may, speaking generally about the gospels, you may have recollections about what Jesus is alleged to have said, which were spoken by Jesus through the medium of aramiac, which is then passed down throught the oral tradition and recorded in Greek and then translated into english and the end product, some particular phrase or verse, is then quoted, quite often devoid of context, and it is presentes as proof of something.
    Now you took great umbrage at my quoting a part of Luke to make some point, and yet here you do the very same thing !
    I am sure you are aware how traditional irish as spoken say in Donegal, would have slightly different words or meanings attrubed to words, than say in Kerry. I rather assume the same would also apply in Palestine in those early times and I am not sure how the Gospels would have taken that into account. Also, as I am sure you are aware, Classical Latin, as used by schoolars, was different than ordinary every day latin. I presume this may also have been the same for greek. In other words there are so many reasons why is difficult to accept the accuracy of words quoted in the bible which are alleged to be exactly what Jesus said.


  • Advertisement
  • #61
    PDN
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    anymore wrote: »
    Well the problem is that you may, speaking generally about the gospels, you may have recollections about what Jesus is alleged to have said, which were spoken by Jesus through the medium of aramiac, which is then passed down throught the oral tradition and recorded in Greek and then translated into english and the end product, some particular phrase or verse, is then quoted, quite often devoid of context, and it is presentes as proof of something.

    Look, it is obvious that you have some kind of gripe about the New Testament. But the fact is that Christians build their beliefs on the Bible.

    This forum exists for the discussion of Christian issues. It is, quite frankly, impossible for Christians to discuss those issues if you keep attempting to derail threads by riding your hobby horse and banging on about how you don't trust the Bible.

    The mods are not going to permit that to happen. So, if you wish to start a thread where we can discuss the accuracy or reliability of the New Testament text then you are free to do so. But if you continue to try to drag threads off-topic like this then you will be infracted.
    Now you took great umbrage at my quoting a part of Luke to make some point, and yet here you do the very same thing !
    Stop being so silly. You are either not reading what I post, or you are just trolling.

    I pointed out that you were twisting a verse from Luke out of context and ignoring everything that we know about the use of parables in 1st Century Palestine.

    It is perfectly OK to quote from Scripture to support one's argument, but if you use in Scripture in a way that is contrary to the findings of any reputable biblical scholar then you may expect other posters to call you out on it.
    I am sure you are aware how traditional irish as spoken say in Donegal, would have slightly different words or meanings attrubed to words, than say in Kerry. I rather assume the same would also apply in Palestine in those early times and I am not sure how the Gospels would have taken that into account. Also, as I am sure you are aware, Classical Latin, as used by schoolars, was different than ordinary every day latin. I presume this may also have been the same for greek. In other words there are so many reasons why is difficult to accept the accuracy of words quoted in the bible which are alleged to be exactly what Jesus said.

    We have manuscripts, written in koine Greek, and koine Greek is not hard to translate. Where different shades of meaning are possible, as occasionally happens with all translation, then that is usually indicated by a footnote in any decent modern translation. Also, if there is any slight variation between manuscripts, that is also noted in footnotes.


Advertisement