• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

The Words of Jesus.

SalixIncendium

अग्निविलोवनन्दः
Staff member
Premium Member
Those words probably came from an AA group in Knoxville Tennessee in 1981, but attach the name of Einstein to them and a small meme industry is born. Amazing how much value those words written only 40 years ago have acquired because people think they were written by Einstein. Do you still think the value is in the words and not the name?

Insanity Is Doing the Same Thing Over and Over Again and Expecting Different Results – Quote Investigator

It is to me.
 

Justanatheist

Well-Known Member
There is evidence in the Gospels that Jesus could read and Matthew was a tax collector who would have had a command of reading. Luke and Paul could obviously read and the letter of Paul went to people who could read.

No we do not know who wrote the Gospels, this is just tradition.

The four canonical gospels were first mentioned between 120 and 150 by Justin Martyr, who lived c.100-185.[51] Justin had no titles for them and simply called them the "memoirs of the Apostles", but around 185 Iraneus, a bishop of Lyon who lived c.130–c.202, attributed them to: 1) Matthew, an apostle who followed Jesus in his earthly career; 2) Mark, who while himself not a disciple was the companion of Peter, who was; 3) Luke, the companion of Paul, the author of the Pauline epistles; and 4) John, who like Matthew was an apostle who had known Jesus.[51] Christian apologists and most lay Christians assume on the basis of 4th century Church teaching that the gospels were written by the Evangelists c.50-65 AD, but the scholarly consensus is that they are the work of unknown Christians and were composed c.68-110 AD
Historical reliability of the Gospels - Wikipedia
 

SalixIncendium

अग्निविलोवनन्दः
Staff member
Premium Member
Did you use that example knowing they were not from Einstein?

Yes.

Will you use the example again in debate and accredit it to an AA group?

I don't know where it came from. When I use it, I attribute it to no one. I typically say, "attributed to Einstein, though he never said it."

Why do you think someone accredited them to Einstein if not to give them an added value?

I don't know. I wasn't there. Speculating on this is a waste of my time.
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
I do not pretend to fully understand Christian Theology but it would appear at least some Christians would agree with my assessment based on a quick google.

The Bible’s Answer

Introduction
The Bible’s answer to this question is yes, Jesus Christ is omnipotent, the most powerful being in existence. The Bible tells us in many passages that Jesus is God (e.g. John 1:1, 14; John 20:28; Hebrews 1:8; Revelation 1:17). By definition, God is all-powerful. For God to be God, there cannot be anything above him in power, otherwise the more powerful thing would be God. Since the Bible calls Jesus God, this demands, then, that he must be all-powerful.
Is Jesus Omnipotent (All-powerful)? | Redemption of Humanity

The majority of scholars agree with you really.
 

rrobs

Well-Known Member
Often in debates people write "Jesus says" or "Jesus tells us" but as far as I can see in the bible the only things Jesus wrote are,
"




"
Everything else is what someone else tells us about what Jesus said, often many years after his death and from people who never met him. How much importance do you give to "he said" "she said" in your normal life outside religion?
I'll tell you what the Bible says about itself. Whether you believe it or not is another question, but I'll quote a couple of scriptures which are actually in the Bible.

2 Tim 3:16,

All scripture [is] given by inspiration of God, and [is] profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
According to this verse Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John did not write what they heard from other people or what they themselves may or may not have heard. Instead they wrote what God told them to write. God knew what Jesus said, so if you believe the Bible, you can take the words of who said what to who to the bank.

2 Pet 1:20-21,

20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.

21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake [as they were] moved by the Holy Ghost.​

We in the modern West think of "prophecy" as foretelling the future, but that is not how the word was used in the Bible (meanings of words do change over time, this being but one example). It can be foretelling, but it can also be forth-telling. In other words it's all prophecy and this verse says none of it was man's idea. The word "moved" in verse 21 is the Greek word "phero" and it meant "to be carried along."

Bottom line: if you take the Bible as being authored, not by 25 or so different people over the course of 1,500 years or so, but as coming straight from God then you can be sure that what the Bible claims Jesus said he actually said.

Take care.
 
Last edited:

RestlessSoul

Well-Known Member
Ok thanks for your input I found it quite interesting whether words acquire a value because of who they are attributed too, especially in the context of this thread.:)


"The things we do in life, echo through eternity."
"We are but shadows and dust, Maximus. Shadows and dust."

Two great quotes off the top of my head, from the movie Gladiator. Just because they're from a movie, doesn't mean they aren't profound. But if you attribute them to Marcus Aurelius (played by Richard Harris in the movie), that probably adds a bit of gravitas.
 

Justanatheist

Well-Known Member
"The things we do in life, echo through eternity."
"We are but shadows and dust, Maximus. Shadows and dust."

Two great quotes off the top of my head, from the movie Gladiator. Just because they're from a movie, doesn't mean they aren't profound. But if you attribute them to Marcus Aurelius (played by Richard Harris in the movie), that probably adds a bit of gravitas.
I met Richard Harris when I was a YOP at the Bristol Old Vic, he could make "pass the bog roll" sound profound!
 

leroy

Well-Known Member
Often in debates people write "Jesus says" or "Jesus tells us" but as far as I can see in the bible the only things Jesus wrote are,
"




"
Everything else is what someone else tells us about what Jesus said, often many years after his death and from people who never met him. How much importance do you give to "he said" "she said" in your normal life outside religion?
In ancient history pretty much all we have is “he said that” from author who lived long after he was alive.

So if you reject the claim that “Jesus said X” for that reason, you should reject all ancient history
 

Justanatheist

Well-Known Member
In ancient history pretty much all we have is “he said that” from author who lived long after he was alive.

So if you reject the claim that “Jesus said X” for that reason, you should reject all ancient history

I am indeed skeptical of any words attributed to people in ancient history, particularly when an original manuscript does not exist. Are you not?
 

Justanatheist

Well-Known Member
I'll tell you what the Bible says about itself. Whether you believe it or not is another question, but I'll quote a couple of scriptures which are actually in the Bible.

2 Tim 3:16,

All scripture [is] given by inspiration of God, and [is] profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
According to this verse Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John did not write what they heard from other people or what they themselves may or may not have heard. Instead they wrote what God told them to write. God knew what Jesus said, so if you believe the Bible, you can take the words of who said what to who to the bank.

2 Pet 1:20-21,

20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.

21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake [as they were] moved by the Holy Ghost.​

We in the modern West think of "prophecy" as foretelling the future, but that is not how the word was used in the Bible (meanings of words do change over time, this being but one example). It can be foretelling, but it can also be forth-telling. In other words it's all prophecy and this verse says none of it was man's idea. The word "moved" in verse 21 is the Greek word "phero" and it meant "to be carried along."

Bottom line: if you take the Bible as being authored, not by 25 or so different people over the course of 1,500 years or so, but as coming straight from God then you can be sure that what the Bible claims Jesus said he actually said.

Take care.
If you believe in what is written in the bible then you believe what is written in the bible, that is circular reasoning.
 

rrobs

Well-Known Member
How interesting, I've never seen a book with a brain and a mouth that can speak.
While the Bible is certainly interesting, it does not have a brain or speak words.

You may want to do a study on figures of speech. A figure of speech is a legitimate grammar tool used to emphasize something or to draw one's attention to something. You can tell a figure of speech because it is not true to fact. So the Bible having a brain or speaking words is not true to fact, so it has to be a figure of speech. It emphasize what is actually written down in the Bible. The fact that it is written is true to fact. I mean you can see the words written down (if you argue with that then my suspicions are true, i.e. you just like to argue). That it actually utters words is a figure of speech meant to emphasize that it does have a message.
 

rrobs

Well-Known Member
If you believe in what is written in the bible then you believe what is written in the bible, that is circular reasoning.
Not really. There is actually stuff written in the Bible. That is for certain. It is independent of belief. The question is whether one believes it or not. But I have to give you credit for twisting my words in to saying something you know darn well I didn't mean.

Have you and I talked about a straw man? I know a lot of people do here, but I don't think they know what it really is. It is twisting the words or adding words that someone didn't actually say in an argument in order to make for an easier attack, when the debater has no substantive reply to the actual content. This reply of yours is a great example of a straw man. You appear to have no meaningful rebuttal to what I said.
 

Justanatheist

Well-Known Member
Not really. There is actually stuff written in the Bible. That is for certain. It is independent of belief. The question is whether one believes it or not. But I have to give you credit for twisting my words in to saying something you know darn well I didn't mean.

Have you and I talked about a straw man? I know a lot of people do here, but I don't think they know what it really is. It is twisting the words or adding words that someone didn't actually say in an argument in order to make for an easier attack, when the debater has no substantive reply to the actual content. This reply of yours is a great example of a straw man. You appear to have no meaningful rebuttal to what I said.
No it is not my intention to create a strawman lets start again, what do you mean by this?

Bottom line: if you take the Bible as being authored, not by 25 or so different people over the course of 1,500 years or so, but as coming straight from God then you can be sure that what the Bible claims Jesus said he actually said.
 

rrobs

Well-Known Member
How interesting, I've never seen a book with a brain and a mouth that can speak.
I had Chinese food for lunch today. Of course it comes with a fortune cookie. Mine said,
"Fortune cookie says ....blah, blah."

Would you take that to mean a fortune cookie has a brain and a mouth that can speak?
 

rrobs

Well-Known Member
No it is not my intention to create a strawman lets start again, what do you mean by this?
I wouldn't know how to say it any more plainly.

I don't know if you really can't understand rather simple grammatical constructions or you just want to argue. In either case, there's not much more I can say.
 
Top