Author Topic: Discerning the wheat from the tares.  (Read 21311 times)

Leonard James

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12443
Re: Discerning the wheat from the tares.
« Reply #75 on: October 12, 2015, 12:24:38 PM »

I usually get my special from being eccentric, a loner, and having my own opinion and, being a bit odd  ;D

I can cope with that.  ;)

Very much my own opinion, too, Rose. But as long as we get along with others and are generally well thought of, what does it matter?

floo

  • Guest
Re: Discerning the wheat from the tares.
« Reply #76 on: October 12, 2015, 12:37:36 PM »
I'm not about to buy into the myth of

" only special people can see the light, I want to be special therefore I have to accept this belief system/theology to achieve it."

It's self affirming and because you re-affirm it in others, they do it in return.

So many religious groups do that.

I usually steer clear of them if I can.

I usually get my special from being eccentric, a loner, and having my own opinion and, being a bit odd  ;D

I can cope with that.  ;)

Good for you! :)

I can cope with being a senile old bat, I wouldn't be me otherwise! ;D

BashfulAnthony

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7520
Re: Discerning the wheat from the tares.
« Reply #77 on: October 12, 2015, 01:52:38 PM »

I usually get my special from being eccentric, a loner, and having my own opinion and, being a bit odd  ;D

I can cope with that.  ;)

Very much my own opinion, too, Rose. But as long as we get along with others and are generally well thought of, what does it matter?


How can you be so hypocritical as to say you hope to get on with others when you totally revile the cherished beliefs of thousands of them?
BA.

Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life.

It is my commandment that you love one another."

BeRational

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8645
Re: Discerning the wheat from the tares.
« Reply #78 on: October 12, 2015, 01:55:10 PM »

I usually get my special from being eccentric, a loner, and having my own opinion and, being a bit odd  ;D

I can cope with that.  ;)

Very much my own opinion, too, Rose. But as long as we get along with others and are generally well thought of, what does it matter?


How can you be so hypocritical as to say you hope to get on with others when you totally revile the cherished beliefs of thousands of them?

You should not have ANY cherished beliefs.

That is a STUPID thing to do.

You should try to believe things that are TRUE, and if they can be shown to be false, you ditch them.
I see gullible people, everywhere!

Outrider

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14572
Re: Discerning the wheat from the tares.
« Reply #79 on: October 12, 2015, 02:10:45 PM »
There is no problem if you happen to have eyes with which to see.

Ah, the 'special pleading' fallacy. It's always nice to see the classics...

O.
Universes are forever, not just for creation...

New Atheism - because, apparently, there's a use-by date on unanswered questions.

Eminent Pedant, Interpreter of Heretical Writings, Unwarranted Harvester of Trite Nomenclature, Church of Debatable Saints

BashfulAnthony

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7520
Re: Discerning the wheat from the tares.
« Reply #80 on: October 12, 2015, 02:12:02 PM »
There is no problem if you happen to have eyes with which to see.

Ah, the 'special pleading' fallacy. It's always nice to see the classics...

O.

They must have credence, otherwise they wouldn't be classics, as with literature, for example.
BA.

Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life.

It is my commandment that you love one another."

Outrider

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14572
Re: Discerning the wheat from the tares.
« Reply #81 on: October 12, 2015, 02:17:24 PM »
There is no problem if you happen to have eyes with which to see.

Ah, the 'special pleading' fallacy. It's always nice to see the classics...

O.

They must have credence, otherwise they wouldn't be classics, as with literature, for example.

So the Qu'ran must have credence, by that reasoning? No, it turns out that billions of people over hundreds of years, can just be wrong.

O.
Universes are forever, not just for creation...

New Atheism - because, apparently, there's a use-by date on unanswered questions.

Eminent Pedant, Interpreter of Heretical Writings, Unwarranted Harvester of Trite Nomenclature, Church of Debatable Saints

Sassy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11080
Re: Discerning the wheat from the tares.
« Reply #82 on: October 12, 2015, 03:03:14 PM »
Wrong: Paul NEVER claimed that Jesus was God but that the truth of the OT showed God spoke through him.
There is NOTHING about the mention of Beareans which shows they had any evidence for such a notion as you suggest.
Sass, even your much-beloved King James Version has Paul stating that Jesus is God on a number of occasions.  Romans 1: 3-7

Romans 1:3-7King James Version (KJV)

3 Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh;

4 And declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead:


5 By whom we have received grace and apostleship, for obedience to the faith among all nations, for his name:

6 Among whom are ye also the called of Jesus Christ:

7 To all that be in Rome, beloved of God, called to be saints: Grace to you and peace from God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ.

As you can see Paul called Jesus the Son of God.He refers to God and Jesus Christ as two persons and note he says Jesus was made flesh.

Romans  9: 5; 4 Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises;

5 Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen.


Does not say Christ is God...




Colossians 2: 9.

9 For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.


Is Christ the God head or does the Godhead dwell in Christ...

We know God dwells in all men by the power of the Holy Spirit.
If you do not have the Spirit you do not belong to God. We see that Christ says;-

Make them one as we are one...

King James Bible
And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one:


What Glory had God given Christ that he gave to us that we may be one as he and the Father are one.

11 And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are.







Quote
  If you add examples from the books that may or may not have been written by Paul, but traditionally bear his name as author, you also have 1 Timothy 3:16, 6:



16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.



King James Bible
No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.

No man has seen God the Son of God hath made him known to us.



Quote
Hebrews 1: 3.
1 God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,

2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;

3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high:


These verses confirm that God sent Jesus, Spoke through Jesus and that Jesus made God known. Jesus was the image of Gods person. Nowhere does it give any belief that God was made flesh. It confirms that Christ was sent by God and God spoke through him,
Quote
Note that I have taken these examples from the King James Version Chain-Reference Bible by Frank Charles Thompson (4th Edition 1964)

Perhaps you ought to re-read your copy of the KJV rather more carefully.

It is you who need to see that what you proclaim is not confirmed in those verses. It confirms Christ sent by God and is the Son of God. Also I note you produced nothing from the OT. It is there where WE have confirmation.
What I have done is printed the KJV which shows you are misrepresenting what is actually written.
We know we have to work together to abolish war and terrorism to create a compassionate  world in which Justice and peace prevail. Love ;D   Einstein
 "Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."

BeRational

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8645
Re: Discerning the wheat from the tares.
« Reply #83 on: October 12, 2015, 03:07:03 PM »
Sass

The verses confirm nothing and it is pointless to post them if you are debating with atheists.

We just do not give them any credence.

Why should I care what ANY scripture says about ANYTHING?
I see gullible people, everywhere!

Sassy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11080
Re: Discerning the wheat from the tares.
« Reply #84 on: October 12, 2015, 03:18:23 PM »
King James 2000 Bible
But while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went his way.




King James Bible
These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.


Note to reader: The NT did not exist and the scriptures they checked were OT.

So to ensure what you believe it must be checked out by the OT not the NT.

So discuss beliefs and origins without using the NT.
Show in the OT where the Prophets taught that the Messiah would be God made man. It is clear that the Messiah was to be a man raised from their own brethren.

Deuteronomy 18: 15-18.

God himself saying he would raise them up a Prophet from amongst their own brethren.

The NT must reflect the truth of the OT. If it cannot be found in the OT it must (as in the times of the disciples) be rejected. Because at no time during the preaching of the good news did a copy of the NT become included in scripture.
Christ fulfilled the scriptures about himself and he foretold of the things still to come.


Which is why, when I want to know what the Jesus of the nt was probably like, I look at Judaism and then try and work out what Christianity has added.

You need to remove all that theology that was only made up to explain for example how Christians could also be worshipping one God, while having a Jesus with a divine nature.

The Sadducees and the Pharisees held different beliefs. Thos as because the Messiah was to bring the truth of all that God was teaching. As a person Christ would represent the person who is God and also live as God would live.

Quote
Don't even get me started on the mythology that surrounds Mary  :o

Immaculate conception? 


http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07674d.htm

Mary as a maiden would have been unmarried and therefore a virgin.
It is not really a surprise that Christ would be born of a virgin/maiden as in Isaiah.
But it takes away from the original teachings that Christ was the Son of God and died for sins. That change comes with belief in the truth and baptism of the Holy Spirit. We come to know God through Christ. Which is far greater than anything written.


Quote
Some of these ideas are fairly modern and it's what you get when you shut a bunch of celibate men away for too long with their own thoughts  ::)

It's Opinion, there's no proof.  ( not even if you took the NT as proof)

Someone's opinion that then had to be accepted by everyone as some sort of ultimate truth.

It is not a required belief. Because it was never part of the teachings of the disciples when coming to the truth about Christ from a personal conception.

Quote
It's still someone's opinion though.

But you are up against years of brainwashing and discouragement from questioning.

You will just get called a heretic.

Acts 10;35-46 shows that being saved is not about whether Mary was a virgin. The experience of life in God and Christ becomes a reality through belief in them.
Quote
Calling people that, means they don't have to look at the contents of your argument.

People's opinion became theology and dogma and no one reading just the NT and the OT would ever come up with the vast majority of it.
I am sure you would agree that when I have called them out... they have not produced scripture to prove their stance. Because the truth is that Christianity has to be something more than a belief i what men have taught. A powerful belief in the main things which Christ taught.
We know we have to work together to abolish war and terrorism to create a compassionate  world in which Justice and peace prevail. Love ;D   Einstein
 "Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."

Sassy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11080
Re: Discerning the wheat from the tares.
« Reply #85 on: October 12, 2015, 03:19:59 PM »
Sass

The verses confirm nothing and it is pointless to post them if you are debating with atheists.

We just do not give them any credence.

Why should I care what ANY scripture says about ANYTHING?
##Is Hope an atheist....
We know we have to work together to abolish war and terrorism to create a compassionate  world in which Justice and peace prevail. Love ;D   Einstein
 "Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."

BeRational

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8645
Re: Discerning the wheat from the tares.
« Reply #86 on: October 12, 2015, 03:20:57 PM »
Sass

The verses confirm nothing and it is pointless to post them if you are debating with atheists.

We just do not give them any credence.

Why should I care what ANY scripture says about ANYTHING?
##Is Hope an atheist....

No I am pretty sure he is not.

But posting verses in relation to discussions with non Christians is pointless.
I see gullible people, everywhere!

Aruntraveller

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11092
Re: Discerning the wheat from the tares.
« Reply #87 on: October 12, 2015, 03:23:01 PM »
Quote
Mary as a maiden would have been unmarried and therefore a virgin.
It is not really a surprise that Christ would be born of a virgin/maiden as in Isaiah.

First sentence - complete assertion with no facts to substantiate it. Unmarried does not equate to being in/having a virginal status.

Second sentence - I thought the whole point of virgin birth was that it is only supposed to have happened once and is therefore a humungous surprise.
« Last Edit: October 12, 2015, 03:24:38 PM by Trentvoyager »
Before we work on Artificial Intelligence shouldn't we address the problem of natural stupidity.

Hope

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 25569
    • Tools With A Mission
Re: Discerning the wheat from the tares.
« Reply #88 on: October 12, 2015, 03:29:48 PM »

3 Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh;

4 And declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead:


Does not say Christ is God...
OK, Sass, let's look at this section.  Who does the 'he' in verse 3 refer to?  Similarly, why the stressing of "made of the seed of David according to the flesh"?  Then verse 4 says that the resurrection 'declared' or 'marked/determined/defined' Jesus as the Son of God.  The verb used here is 'ὁρισθέντος' - from 'orizo', which is used 8 times in the New Testament

Quote
Luke 22:22: "of man goeth, as it was determined: but woe unto that man"
Acts 2:23: "Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God,"
Acts 10:42: "that it is he which was ordained of God to be the Judge of quick"
Acts 11:29: "every man according to his ability, determined to send relief"
Acts 17:26: "face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the"
Acts 17:31: "by that man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised"
Romans 1:4: " And declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness,"
Hebrews 4:7: "Again, he limiteth a certain day, saying in David, Today,"

Are your, or your friends'/relatives', garages, lofts or sheds full of unused DIY gear, sewing/knitting machines or fabric and haberdashery stuff?

Lists of what is needed and a search engine to find your nearest collector (scroll to bottom for latter) are here:  http://www.twam.uk/donate-tools

Hope

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 25569
    • Tools With A Mission
Re: Discerning the wheat from the tares.
« Reply #89 on: October 12, 2015, 03:37:20 PM »
Quote
Mary as a maiden would have been unmarried and therefore a virgin.
It is not really a surprise that Christ would be born of a virgin/maiden as in Isaiah.

First sentence - complete assertion with no facts to substantiate it. Unmarried does not equate to being in/having a virginal status.
Trent, in 1st century Palestine, it would have done.  You are applying 20th/21st century Western mores to an ancient civilisation.  Mind you, the story of Jesus birth doesn't say that Mary was unmarried.  In fact, it makes it very clear that she was married to Joseph; 1st century Jewish bethrothal is equivalent to out legal marriage.

Quote
Second sentence - I thought the whole point of virgin birth was that it is only supposed to have happened once and is therefore a humungous surprise.
I think that Sass is pointing out that Isaiah prophesied that the Messiah would be born of a 'virgin'.
Are your, or your friends'/relatives', garages, lofts or sheds full of unused DIY gear, sewing/knitting machines or fabric and haberdashery stuff?

Lists of what is needed and a search engine to find your nearest collector (scroll to bottom for latter) are here:  http://www.twam.uk/donate-tools

Nearly Sane

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 64369
Re: Discerning the wheat from the tares.
« Reply #90 on: October 12, 2015, 03:47:25 PM »
Can you cite the evidence that all those unmarried  in Palestine in 1st century were virgins, Hope? If not it, it is merely longer assertion. Note 'mores' are not evidence of such an absolute claim.
« Last Edit: October 12, 2015, 03:49:41 PM by Nearly Sane »

Leonard James

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12443
Re: Discerning the wheat from the tares.
« Reply #91 on: October 13, 2015, 06:34:53 AM »
Can you cite the evidence that all those unmarried  in Palestine in 1st century were virgins, Hope? If not it, it is merely longer assertion. Note 'mores' are not evidence of such an absolute claim.

Anybody who believes that at any time in history all unmarried girls were virgins is seriously deluded.

Nearly Sane

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 64369
Re: Discerning the wheat from the tares.
« Reply #92 on: October 13, 2015, 06:55:53 AM »
Can you cite the evidence that all those unmarried  in Palestine in 1st century were virgins, Hope? If not it, it is merely longer assertion. Note 'mores' are not evidence of such an absolute claim.

Anybody who believes that at any time in history all unmarried girls were virgins is seriously deluded.

Or rather possibly just wrong. Would it be at all possible to have discourse on here without simplistically and ignorantly using terms like deluded?

Leonard James

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12443
Re: Discerning the wheat from the tares.
« Reply #93 on: October 13, 2015, 07:10:02 AM »
Can you cite the evidence that all those unmarried  in Palestine in 1st century were virgins, Hope? If not it, it is merely longer assertion. Note 'mores' are not evidence of such an absolute claim.

Anybody who believes that at any time in history all unmarried girls were virgins is seriously deluded.

Or rather possibly just wrong. Would it be at all possible to have discourse on here without simplistically and ignorantly using terms like deluded?

The word describes accurately what such thinking is.

ad_orientem

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7929
Re: Discerning the wheat from the tares.
« Reply #94 on: October 13, 2015, 07:28:29 AM »
Can you cite the evidence that all those unmarried  in Palestine in 1st century were virgins, Hope? If not it, it is merely longer assertion. Note 'mores' are not evidence of such an absolute claim.

Anybody who believes that at any time in history all unmarried girls were virgins is seriously deluded.

Or rather possibly just wrong. Would it be at all possible to have discourse on here without simplistically and ignorantly using terms like deluded?

The word describes accurately what such thinking is.

Only if you're willing to admit the possibility that you indeed are the deluded one.
Peace through superior firepower.
Do not believe anything until the Kremlin denies it.

2Corrie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5636
  • Not to us, O Lord, But to Your name give glory
Re: Discerning the wheat from the tares.
« Reply #95 on: October 13, 2015, 07:32:33 AM »
When God said "let us make man in our image"  who was He referring to Sass?

 
"It is finished."

ad_orientem

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7929
Re: Discerning the wheat from the tares.
« Reply #96 on: October 13, 2015, 07:55:48 AM »
When God said "let us make man in our image"  who was He referring to Sass?

Maybe he was just using the royal "we". ;)
Peace through superior firepower.
Do not believe anything until the Kremlin denies it.

Aruntraveller

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11092
Re: Discerning the wheat from the tares.
« Reply #97 on: October 13, 2015, 08:32:39 AM »
Quote
You are applying 20th/21st century Western mores to an ancient civilisation.

I'm not. But never mind.
Before we work on Artificial Intelligence shouldn't we address the problem of natural stupidity.

Leonard James

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12443
Re: Discerning the wheat from the tares.
« Reply #98 on: October 13, 2015, 08:50:30 AM »

Only if you're willing to admit the possibility that you indeed are the deluded one.

No! That would be as good as admitting to be a fool, for only a fool would believe that ALL unmarried girls were virgins at any time in history.

floo

  • Guest
Re: Discerning the wheat from the tares.
« Reply #99 on: October 13, 2015, 08:58:43 AM »
Is virginity really something to be prized? I am not suggesting people should sleep around, or underage kids indulge in sex, however if you are in a steady relationship what is wrong with having sex? It is daft to go into marriage without seeing if you are compatible sexually.