Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Sexualisation of very young girls - US style

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by thormas View Post

    No, you're definitely in error and now backtracking. Jesus never called me those names - I was not around in 1CE :+} Now you're just making stuff up.


    I simply know enough to not use the word: if I am obedient to the Father it is because I believe. You really don't understand the faith/works interconnection.
    You are indeed stupid if you think I said you were there when Jesus called the scribes and Pharisees vipers and whitewashed tombs. I didn't say that. I compared you to those.

    I understand the faith/works connection as much as any human can, and that connection says nothing about works saving you. We are saved by faith, not of works, so that nobody can boast in their own righteousness, as you are doing in this thread.

    You are preaching a different gospel and a different Jesus. You are preaching heresy.


    Securely anchored to the Rock amid every storm of trial, testing or tribulation.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by mossrose View Post

      You are indeed stupid if you think I said you were there when Jesus called the scribes and Pharisees vipers and whitewashed tombs. I didn't say that. I compared you to those.

      I understand the faith/works connection as much as any human can, and that connection says nothing about works saving you. We are saved by faith, not of works, so that nobody can boast in their own righteousness, as you are doing in this thread.

      You are preaching a different gospel and a different Jesus. You are preaching heresy.

      Good lord, do you grasp the idea of "do not others?"

      Moving on, if Jesus said it in 1st C CE and I was not born until the 20th C CE, then he could not have said it to me. That is now established and agreed. Any comparisons you draw are subject to dismissal since you don't know whom or if Jesus would include anybody other than those specific people.

      I simply don't think you understand the faith/works interconnection given your comments to me and about Catholicism. Someone who truly understood would not be able to make such remarks. I was simply quoting Jesus in Luke. Nobody in that gospel is calling them works, it is just the loving act of mercy and was a follow up to the great commandments discussion. In that discussion there was no consideration of 'boasting about one's own righteousness.'

      I have never disconnect faith and works - whereas you have consistently done that, seeing them as totally separate (see above). If one 'has faith' (as is evident in Luke) then that turns to and/or is seen in acts. It is in this acting out of faith, that is, it is in mercy, that one inherits eternal life (according to Jesus). So, regarding Christian, I have not done what you say I have done ..........whereas you have not recognized or articulated the connection between the faith and works (or, better, acts).

      I am actually not preaching anything, I am having discussions and your understanding of heresy is now suspect since you have written off as 'heretics' Catholics and the Eastern Orthodox to start and I suspect it also includes some Protestant expressions. It is clear that what is heresy to you is not heresy to over 2 billion Christians and counting.



      Comment


      • Originally posted by thormas View Post


        Good lord, do you grasp the idea of "do not others?"

        Moving on, if Jesus said it in 1st C CE and I was not born until the 20th C CE, then he could not have said it to me. That is now established and agreed. Any comparisons you draw are subject to dismissal since you don't know whom or if Jesus would include anybody other than those specific people.

        I simply don't think you understand the faith/works interconnection given your comments to me and about Catholicism. Someone who truly understood would not be able to make such remarks. I was simply quoting Jesus in Luke. Nobody in that gospel is calling them works, it is just the loving act of mercy and was a follow up to the great commandments discussion. In that discussion there was no consideration of 'boasting about one's own righteousness.'

        I have never disconnect faith and works - whereas you have consistently done that, seeing them as totally separate (see above). If one 'has faith' (as is evident in Luke) then that turns to and/or is seen in acts. It is in this acting out of faith, that is, it is in mercy, that one inherits eternal life (according to Jesus). So, regarding Christian, I have not done what you say I have done ..........whereas you have not recognized or articulated the connection between the faith and works (or, better, acts).

        I am actually not preaching anything, I am having discussions and your understanding of heresy is now suspect since you have written off as 'heretics' Catholics and the Eastern Orthodox to start and I suspect it also includes some Protestant expressions. It is clear that what is heresy to you is not heresy to over 2 billion Christians and counting.


        Indeed, the pearls of wisdom from the Lord are too costly for you to even have a hope of grasping, if you can't even understand the concept of my comparing you to the Pharisees of Jesus' day.

        Enjoy your heresy, I'm tired of you.


        Securely anchored to the Rock amid every storm of trial, testing or tribulation.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
          On the contrary I look at these texts as I would any other ancient written source. And it is noticeable that very few ever refer the gospel of Mark in their dogmatic pronouncements about scripture or what constitutes their Christian duty. It is invariably either the gospel of John or the writings of Paul that get cited.


          Forgive me but that sounds as psychologically unhealthy as believing oneself to be a "Bride of Christ" and going through a faux marriage ceremony complete with wedding band.
          We eat Jesus's flesh and drink his blood too!

          Comment


          • Originally posted by mossrose View Post

            Indeed, the pearls of wisdom from the Lord are too costly for you to even have a hope of grasping, if you can't even understand the concept of my comparing you to the Pharisees of Jesus' day.

            Enjoy your heresy, I'm tired of you.
            Yet again, have you forgotten what 'do unto others' means?' Did you ever know? Your inability to 'be Christian' towards others, including on this site, is revelatory.

            But at least you now recognize the I'm nothing like the Pharisees who look to the letter and forgot the spirit of the Law. Sort of like you, who quotes the letter of scripture and completely misses the spirit ..........of love. Indeed, you are closer to the Pharisees than am I.

            Is this a long goodbye? Didn't you already say buh-bye once already? Will you stick to your word this time? Only time will tell:+[
            Last edited by thormas; 10-20-2020, 04:32 PM.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Sparko View Post

              We eat Jesus's flesh and drink his blood too!
              Yes the Eucharist was a decidedly non-Jewish invention of Paul's. However, ritual meals were not unknown among various Mystery religions at the time.
              "Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful" Attrib. Seneca 4 BCE - 65 CE

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post

                Yes the Eucharist was a decidedly non-Jewish invention of Paul's. However, ritual meals were not unknown among various Mystery religions at the time.
                You have intrigued me here.

                I have typically concentrated on the 'how' of the Eucharist, i.e. 'real presence, explained as transubstantiation or, better, transignification. I have not really through much about the 'when.'

                So some of my remarks are subject to change as I read but:

                I agree that there were ritual meals in the mystery religions........but there were also such meals in Judaism.

                Also, I have come to appreciate that Paul inherited or 'received' much from the earliest Jesus communities (that he once persecuted and then embraced) as opposed to 'inventing' things (not that he didn't develop and expand what became Christianity).

                Gera Vermes, in his 'Christian Beginnings', a Biblical scholar and Dead Sea Scrolls expert, stated that "In addition to baptism.....Paul inherited from his predecessors a second great cult practice, the communal meal, referred to as 'breaking of the bread' as well as 'thanksgiving' or eucharist in Greek." Verses continues, "As in the case of baptism, Paul supplied a new meaning to the community meal and turned it into an initiation and repetition of the 'Lord's Supper'...........Paul implies that the mystical significance of this meal was revealed to him by the risen Christ........"

                Finally, Vermes adds, "If my understanding is correct, the mystical significance of the Last Supper must be attributed to..........Paul writing in the 50s."

                So, first,we do have Paul inheriting baptism and eucharist, the shared communal meal, from the earliest communities (he didn't invent that part). However, it does seem to be the case that Paul did give that meal a new meaning (he did 'invent' this part). Therefore, we can validly say that the original meal was indeed Jewish (since the earliest community were practicing Jews) but it is also valid to say that Paul's innovation went beyond what was found in both 2nd Temple Judaism and the early 'Christian' community.

                Although I believe I understand your reasoning, I would not call it non-Jewish (Paul being a Jew). The scholar, Larry Hurtado, uses the idea of mutation or innovation, from 2nd Temple Judaism, when discussing the movement of Christianity to 'worship/devotion' of Jesus as Lord, along side of the Father (and laying the groundwork for the trinity) and I think it might also fit here. Paul's idea is definitely a departure from Judaism and the early community but it is of a piece and a mutation/innovation of what he inherited. Playing with words? Perhaps but that is, in part, what we do to try to get a handle on such issues.

                I for one, as a Christian, have no real difficulty with Paul's mutation and I actually like the idea of the eucharist; the idea of being 'nourished' by the bread of Life. Transubstantiation is a bit of a weird concept to get one's head around but the more modern explanation of transignification can be easily understood and it better allows the symbol to 'come alive' and be appreciated (note: symbol does not negate 'real presence'). It is also mystical - allowing for a sense of 'spiritual fascination' - if one has the right mindset.

                Anyway, you got rethinking and researching. Thanks.
                Last edited by thormas; 10-21-2020, 09:13 AM.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post

                  Yes the Eucharist was a decidedly non-Jewish invention of Paul's.
                  More ignorance from Hyper Alexander. It is not Paul's invention but is based on the Passover meal which Jesus ate with his disciples prior to his crucifixion.

                  Scripture Verse: Luke 22:14-20

                  And when the hour came, he reclined at table, and the apostles with him. And he said to them, “I have earnestly desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer. For I tell you I will not eat it until it is fulfilled in the kingdom of God.” And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he said, “Take this, and divide it among yourselves. For I tell you that from now on I will not drink of the fruit of the vine until the kingdom of God comes.” And he took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to them, saying, “This is my body, which is given for you. Do this in remembrance of me.” And likewise the cup after they had eaten, saying, “This cup that is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood."

                  © Copyright Original Source


                  (Also referenced in Matthew 26 and Mark 14.)
                  Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                  But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                  Than a fool in the eyes of God


                  From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                    More ignorance from Hyper Alexander. It is not Paul's invention but is based on the Passover meal which Jesus ate with his disciples prior to his crucifixion.

                    Scripture Verse: Luke 22:14-20

                    And when the hour came, he reclined at table, and the apostles with him. And he said to them, “I have earnestly desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer. For I tell you I will not eat it until it is fulfilled in the kingdom of God.” And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he said, “Take this, and divide it among yourselves. For I tell you that from now on I will not drink of the fruit of the vine until the kingdom of God comes.” And he took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to them, saying, “This is my body, which is given for you. Do this in remembrance of me.” And likewise the cup after they had eaten, saying, “This cup that is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood."

                    © Copyright Original Source


                    (Also referenced in Matthew 26 and Mark 14.)
                    Actually, she is not ignorant at all.

                    First, you do know that the Luke's version was changed from his original, correct?

                    But leaving that aside, as I showed above, there is more to the story than you assume: Paul both inherited and took it a step further. And he is the first NT writer - Luke's version more closely resembles (based on?) Paul than do Mark and Matthew. So before Paul, we have nothing in writing about the eucharist.

                    No one has any real problem with Paul's understanding but there is, seemingly, an innovation from the earliest community (see my post above). And, all the NT writers see in the meal, the connection to the 'life-giving' death of Jesus.


                    And of course there is the whole discussion of when the Supper took place and whether it was a Passover meal.



                    But, really, enough with slamming other people. Live what you supposedly believe: do unto others.
                    Last edited by thormas; 10-21-2020, 10:28 AM.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by thormas View Post

                      Actually, she is not ignorant at all.

                      First, you do know that the Luke's version was changed from his original, correct?

                      But leaving that aside, as I showed above, there is more to the story than you assume: Paul both inherited and took it a step further. And he is the first NT writer - Luke's version more closely resembles (based on?) Paul than do Mark and Matthew. So before Paul, we have nothing in writing about the eucharist.

                      No one has any real problem with Paul's understanding but there is, seemingly, an innovation from the earliest community (see my post above). And, all the NT writers see in the meal, the connection to the 'life-giving' death of Jesus.


                      And of course there is the whole discussion of when the Supper took place and whether it was a Passover meal.



                      But, really, enough with slamming other people. Live what you supposedly believe: do unto others.
                      There is no significance between what is described in the Gospels and the writings of the Apostle Paul.

                      Scripture Verse: Matthew 26

                      Now as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and after blessing it broke it and gave it to the disciples, and said, “Take, eat; this is my body.” And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, saying, “Drink of it, all of you, for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.

                      © Copyright Original Source


                      Scripture Verse: Mark 14

                      And as they were eating, he took bread, and after blessing it broke it and gave it to them, and said, “Take; this is my body.” And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, and they all drank of it. And he said to them, “This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many."

                      © Copyright Original Source


                      Scripture Verse: Luke 22

                      And he took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to them, saying, “This is my body, which is given for you. Do this in remembrance of me.” And likewise the cup after they had eaten, saying, “This cup that is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood."

                      © Copyright Original Source


                      Scripture Verse: 1 Corinthians 11

                      For I received from the Lord what I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night when he was betrayed took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it, and said, “This is my body, which is for you. Do this in remembrance of me.” In the same way also he took the cup, after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.”

                      © Copyright Original Source


                      So Paul didn't invent it but was simply passing on a tradition that had been started by Jesus himself.
                      Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                      But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                      Than a fool in the eyes of God


                      From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                      Comment



                      • If you mean significance difference.........of course, because Paul came first some 20-40+ years prior to the gospels.

                        The point was innovation from the earliest communities, 40-65 years before any gospel, to Paul (not Paul to the gospels) who converted circa 33 CE.

                        Last edited by thormas; 10-21-2020, 11:08 AM.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by thormas View Post

                          You really do need to have an open mind, remain a bit humble and READ :+}
                          Scripture Verse: Matthew 12:37

                          By your words you will be condemned.

                          © Copyright Original Source

                          Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                          But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                          Than a fool in the eyes of God


                          From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                            Scripture Verse: Matthew 12:37

                            By your words you will be condemned.

                            © Copyright Original Source

                            Is that a confession, you owning up to your misuse of words?

                            Bravo!

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                              More ignorance from Hyper Alexander. It is not Paul's invention but is based on the Passover meal which Jesus ate with his disciples prior to his crucifixion.

                              Scripture Verse: Luke 22:14-20

                              And when the hour came, he reclined at table, and the apostles with him. And he said to them, “I have earnestly desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer. For I tell you I will not eat it until it is fulfilled in the kingdom of God.” And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he said, “Take this, and divide it among yourselves. For I tell you that from now on I will not drink of the fruit of the vine until the kingdom of God comes.” And he took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to them, saying, “This is my body, which is given for you. Do this in remembrance of me.” And likewise the cup after they had eaten, saying, “This cup that is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood."

                              © Copyright Original Source


                              (Also referenced in Matthew 26 and Mark 14.)
                              Do you know anything about blood and Judaism? No Jew would speak of drinking blood even metaphorically.
                              "Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful" Attrib. Seneca 4 BCE - 65 CE

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post

                                Do you know anything about blood and Judaism? No Jew would speak of drinking blood even metaphorically.
                                Do you know anything about the NEW COVENANT that Jesus instituted at the last supper? Which did away with the old covenant of the shedding of the blood of sheep and other animals. Jesus was the ultimate blood sacrifice.



                                Securely anchored to the Rock amid every storm of trial, testing or tribulation.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by Mountain Man, Yesterday, 10:00 AM
                                20 responses
                                132 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Mountain Man  
                                Started by CivilDiscourse, Yesterday, 06:45 AM
                                72 responses
                                372 views
                                2 likes
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Started by Cow Poke, 01-21-2021, 03:35 PM
                                40 responses
                                266 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post whag
                                by whag
                                 
                                Started by Ronson, 01-21-2021, 09:45 AM
                                34 responses
                                185 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Ronson
                                by Ronson
                                 
                                Started by Sparko, 01-21-2021, 09:10 AM
                                4 responses
                                44 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post Mountain Man  
                                Working...
                                X