Announcement

Collapse

Christianity 201 Guidelines

orthodox Christians only.

Discussion on matters of general mainstream evangelical Christian theology that do not fit within Theology 201. Have some spiritual gifts ceased today? Is the KJV the only viable translation for the church today? In what sense are the books of the bible inspired and what are those books? Church government? Modern day prophets and apostles?

This forum is primarily for Christians to discuss matters of Christian doctrine, and is not the area for debate between atheists (or those opposing orthodox Christianity) and Christians. Inquiring atheists (or sincere seekers/doubters/unorthodox) seeking only Christian participation and having demonstrated a manner that does not seek to undermine the orthodox Christian faith of others are also welcome, but must seek Moderator permission first. When defining “Christian” or "orthodox" for purposes of this section, we mean persons holding to the core essentials of the historic Christian faith such as the Trinity, the Creatorship of God, the virgin birth, the bodily resurrection of Christ, the atonement, the future bodily return of Christ, the future bodily resurrection of the just and the unjust, and the final judgment. Persons not holding to these core doctrines are welcome to participate in the Comparative Religions section without restriction, in Theology 201 as regards to the nature of God and salvation with limited restrictions, and in Christology for issues surrounding the person of Christ and the Trinity. Atheists are welcome to discuss and debate these issues in the Apologetics 301 forum without such restrictions.

Additionally and rarely, there may be some topics or lines of discussion that within the Moderator's discretion fall so outside the bounds of mainstream orthodox doctrine (in general Christian circles or in the TheologyWeb community) or that deny certain core values that are the Christian convictions of forum leadership that may be more appropriately placed within Unorthodox Theology 201. NO personal offense should be taken by such discretionary decision for none is intended. While inerrancy is NOT considered a requirement for posting in this section, a general respect for the Bible text and a respect for the inerrantist position of others is requested.

The Tweb rules apply here like they do everywhere at Tweb, if you haven't read them, now would be a good time.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

"Boy who came back from heaven" recants his story

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

  • Rushing Jaws
    replied
    Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
    I think he was being more than just a tad sarcastic when he referred to his opponents as "super apostles or "very chiefest apostles" in II Corinthians as well (11:5; 12:11).
    ## They are quite certainly on earth, in this life - but his tone is entirely different when writing of the mystical experience being described. He sounds hesitant, as though searching, with very indifferent success, for words to express the inexpressible. STM he was describing an ecstasy - which is a mystical experience that is "out of the body", as in the text.

    Leave a comment:


  • rogue06
    replied
    Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
    Paul could use biting sarcasm when he wanted to (1 Cor 4:10).
    I think he was being more than just a tad sarcastic when he referred to his opponents as "super apostles or "very chiefest apostles" in II Corinthians as well (11:5; 12:11).

    Leave a comment:


  • Rushing Jaws
    replied
    St John Chrysostom versus that kind of brainless trash = no contest. The destruction of this kind of "Christianity" by atheism may be exactly what's needed. It's hard to say which is more sickening :(

    Leave a comment:


  • Christianbookworm
    replied
    Grecoroman rhetoric FTW.

    Leave a comment:


  • mossrose
    replied
    Originally posted by Christianbookworm View Post
    Maybe he was being sarcastic? But they didn't have sarcasm tags.
    Perhaps. He was telling the truth about his credentials in chapter 11, so we can presume he is also telling the truth about the circumstances in chapter 12. It very well may have been in a sarcastic manner, but the truth was still presented.

    Leave a comment:


  • 37818
    replied
    What he wrote (2 Corinthians 12:2-4) was in the context of his opening and concluding remarks. (vs.1, 5 . . .).

    Leave a comment:


  • One Bad Pig
    replied
    Originally posted by Christianbookworm View Post
    Maybe he was being sarcastic? But they didn't have sarcasm tags.
    Paul could use biting sarcasm when he wanted to (1 Cor 4:10).

    Leave a comment:


  • Christianbookworm
    replied
    Originally posted by mossrose View Post
    I don't think he is contradicting himself. He is very reluctantly discussing the issue because the Corinthian church was so fascinated with visions and revelations from the false prophets. He seemed to think it left him little choice, as he says in verse 11, "I have been a fool! You forced me to it..."

    He used the same phraseology in 11:1, where he feels compelled to set out his apostolic credentials. In chapter 10, he has just told them that one should only boast in the Lord, but his concern for them (11:2) compels him to point out his authority to speak to them on behalf of Christ.

    Same thing in chapter 12.

    All needs to be read in context.

    Maybe he was being sarcastic? But they didn't have sarcasm tags.

    Leave a comment:


  • 37818
    replied
    Originally posted by Cerebrum123 View Post
    Why do I have to cite a commentator when I've made it clear why I believe Paul couldn't have been mentioning himself there?
    OK. Then do you have insight as to why most interperters wrongly conclude he was referring to himself?

    Leave a comment:


  • mossrose
    replied
    Originally posted by Cerebrum123 View Post
    I don't know, but I don't see how it could be unless he was blatantly contradicting himself.

    I don't think he is contradicting himself. He is very reluctantly discussing the issue because the Corinthian church was so fascinated with visions and revelations from the false prophets. He seemed to think it left him little choice, as he says in verse 11, "I have been a fool! You forced me to it..."

    He used the same phraseology in 11:1, where he feels compelled to set out his apostolic credentials. In chapter 10, he has just told them that one should only boast in the Lord, but his concern for them (11:2) compels him to point out his authority to speak to them on behalf of Christ.

    Same thing in chapter 12.

    All needs to be read in context.

    Leave a comment:


  • Cerebrum123
    replied
    Originally posted by mossrose View Post
    Yes, well, just a few verses later, in 7, Paul says this:



    Don't think Paul would be given a thorn in the flesh to keep him humble regarding the greatness of the revelations he was referring to a few verses earlier if it weren't him having the revelations.
    I don't know, but I don't see how it could be unless he was blatantly contradicting himself.

    Leave a comment:


  • mossrose
    replied
    Originally posted by Cerebrum123 View Post
    Actually, it wasn't necessarily a vision, but doesn't appear to be death.



    Well, there is a difference between revealing details, and saying something happened. Again, to say it's Paul makes it a huge contradiction in just a few sentences, and I for one don't think Paul was that stupid.
    Yes, well, just a few verses later, in 7, Paul says this:

    Because of the surpassing greatness of the revelations, for this reason, to keep me from exalting myself, there was given me a thorn in the flesh, a messenger of Satan to torment me—to keep me from exalting myself!
    Don't think Paul would be given a thorn in the flesh to keep him humble regarding the greatness of the revelations he was referring to a few verses earlier if it weren't him having the revelations.

    Leave a comment:


  • Cerebrum123
    replied
    Originally posted by mossrose View Post
    It doesn't matter who it was! The point is that it was a vision, not death, and the person, whoever it was, was not permitted to speak about what he heard and saw!
    Actually, it wasn't necessarily a vision, but doesn't appear to be death.

    But if it wasn't Paul, and the person wasn't permitted to talk about it, how did Paul find out about it???
    Well, there is a difference between revealing details, and saying something happened. Again, to say it's Paul makes it a huge contradiction in just a few sentences, and I for one don't think Paul was that stupid.

    Leave a comment:


  • mossrose
    replied
    Originally posted by Cerebrum123 View Post
    Why do I have to cite a commentator when I've made it clear why I believe Paul couldn't have been mentioning himself there?
    It doesn't matter who it was! The point is that it was a vision, not death, and the person, whoever it was, was not permitted to speak about what he heard and saw!

    But if it wasn't Paul, and the person wasn't permitted to talk about it, how did Paul find out about it???

    Leave a comment:


  • One Bad Pig
    replied
    Originally posted by Chaotic Void View Post
    Yeah, it's kind of sad that this sort of thing is picked up by truckloads of Christians... when in contrast, I've been trying to get people to read something decent on the topic (Randy Alcorn's book Heaven), and not a single person will take me up on it
    That was a surprisingly decent book.

    Leave a comment:

Related Threads

Collapse

Topics Statistics Last Post
Started by Thoughtful Monk, Today, 08:19 AM
0 responses
5 views
0 likes
Last Post Thoughtful Monk  
Started by NorrinRadd, 09-07-2021, 04:03 AM
12 responses
62 views
0 likes
Last Post tabibito  
Started by Thoughtful Monk, 09-03-2021, 10:54 AM
21 responses
144 views
0 likes
Last Post KingsGambit  
Started by Cow Poke, 08-20-2021, 10:14 AM
27 responses
146 views
1 like
Last Post Cow Poke  
Started by Thoughtful Monk, 08-18-2021, 08:10 AM
21 responses
121 views
0 likes
Last Post Cow Poke  
Working...
X