Could God reincarnate humans if he wanted to?

[37818]

Why is God's Greek worse in Mark than in Luke?

The Greek as it was given, was it not to be in the common language of the time? So would not differences in the grammar be for the purpose to reach two different classes of gentiles? Luke is understood to have been a physician. You might give an example of what is being referred to as "worst" Greek.

Why did God tell Matthew, Mark, and Luke to describe the same event in different ways?

In my understanding, it would be two fold, 1) For the intended audiences. 2) The use of different witnesses of the same accounts for the sake of man.

If God dictated everything, 4 gospels would be triply redundant.

Why must that be so in order for God to have given it through different men to different audiences? Did not God use Moses for both Exodus and Deuteronomy?

[37818]

Sure, it was one or the other.

You, obviously, believe he did, but why should I believe he did?

If there is no God as you suppose, what argument can be made that a non existent God gave the scriptures?

[Doug Shaver]

If there is no God as you suppose, what argument can be made that a non existent God gave the scriptures?

Why are you asking? I am not claiming that a nonexistent God gave the scriptures.

[firstfloor]

Doubling down on your trolling is duly noted.

Not at all. It is clear to me that the question; what is God, can be answered, paradoxically, by an atheist but not by a Christian.

[Tassman]

If there is no God as you suppose, what argument can be made that a non existent God gave the scriptures?

The obvious argument is that they were not "given by God" at all but written by men, just as were many other "scriptures" ultimately NOT included in the cannon. Scriptures such as:

Shepherd of Hermas
1 Clement
Gospel of Thomas
The Didache
Lost Epistle to the Corinthians
Third Letter to the Corinthians

https://listverse.com/2012/07/06/10-...new-testament/

[37818]

The obvious argument is that they were not "given by God" at all but written by men, just as were many other "scriptures" ultimately NOT included in the cannon. Scriptures such as:

Shepherd of Hermas
1 Clement
Gospel of Thomas
The Didache
Lost Epistle to the Corinthians
Third Letter to the Corinthians

https://listverse.com/2012/07/06/10-...new-testament/

None of those are in our 66 book Bible either.

[37818]

Why are you asking? I am not claiming that a nonexistent God gave the scriptures.

The point of argument being that those who actually have come to know God have done so on account those actual holy writings were given by God.

" . . . these are written, that ye might believe . . . "

[JimL]

The point of argument being that those who actually have come to know God have done so on account those actual holy writings were given by God.

" . . . these are written, that ye might believe . . . "

And what do you know of God other than what you believe to have been written by him? People of other religious beliefs I'm sure feel the same accept the God that they believe to know is a different God than the one that you believe to know.

[37818]

And what do you know of God other than what you believe to have been written by him? People of other religious beliefs I'm sure feel the same accept the God that they believe to know is a different God than the one that you believe to know.

OK. Give me a non Judeo Christian example.

[Cow Poke]

OK. Give me a non Judeo Christian example.

"It's better to burp and bear the shame than not to burp and bear the pain?"






(rogue uses a different bodily "venting to atmosphere" function for "burp" )

[JimL]

OK. Give me a non Judeo Christian example.

A non christian example of what? You think that only christians believe that they know god?

[One Bad Pig]

The Greek as it was given, was it not to be in the common language of the time? So would not differences in the grammar be for the purpose to reach two different classes of gentiles? Luke is understood to have been a physician. You might give an example of what is being referred to as "worst" Greek.

Would not common Greek reach all classes of gentiles?

In my understanding, it would be two fold, 1) For the intended audiences. 2) The use of different witnesses of the same accounts for the sake of man.

Yet if it were all dictated by God, it would not be different witnesses; it would all be God. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

Why must that be so in order for God to have given it through different men to different audiences? Did not God use Moses for both Exodus and Deuteronomy?

Were the gospels limited to immediate audiences? No.

[Sparko]

Sparko, you are asking a question for which there is no simple anwer, and I need to tell you that after you state: "That is why context matters, and having a knowledge of more than one verse at a time." What I have shown quite clearly is that both you and MM have failed to see basic distinctions and that you are missing parts of the context thus not seeing things in context since you ignore important pieces of the text that actually create the context.

I am not the one who claims ther is a one-size-fits-all interpretation of all parts in the Bible or that there is an overall context in which every verse has a particular meaning making sure there are no contradictions. So I can point to different verses seemingly making different statements about what doing God's will is. Here is one. I have already quoted at least one other in texts that you and MM are yet to answer:



So it is not a simple one thing to do. And you can find other verses pointing to different perspectives some which seem contradictory.

OK let's start over. Do a line by line argument of what you are claiming about the verse. Explain your context and meaning of the verses and why you disagree with us.

[37818]

Would not common Greek reach all classes of gentiles?

So are you saying Koine must conform to Classical Greek?

Yet if it were all dictated by God, it would not be different witnesses; it would all be God. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

What was the alleged textual problem?

Were the gospels limited to immediate audiences? No.

The originals were given to a church group, and then copied. And copies where given to other churches. Again what was the alleged problem text?

[Tassman]

None of those are in our 66 book Bible either.

Many of them were nevertheless regarded as authoritative for centuries and some now included in the canon were disputed, e.g. 2 Peter and Revelation. The books that now constitute the Christian biblical canons of both the Old and New Testament was not finally established until the 5th century,