And the “correct exegesis” is of course, yours?
Who said? We will let Jesus be the judge of that. He is the best judge of everything, after all.
"Correct" refers to the process that yields valid outcomes -- not the outcomes, themselves. There is no "correct" outcome -- only
reasonable outcomes. Yours are unreasonable because your process is flawed.
“Scholastic treatment of the texts”? Who said it needs scholastic treatment?
See above. Scholastic treatment is required because most of us don't speak ancient Hebrew or Koine' Greek, most of us aren't members of the ancient and foreign cultures out of which the texts were written, and most of us weren't eyewitnesses to the events. However, most of us
do read the texts through lenses of preconception which only serves to becloud intended meanings.
Why can’t we take the texts as they are written?
Because they weren't written in our language, from our cultural perspectives.
Why do Jesus’ teachings need to be complex when he made them deliberately simple?
It's not the
particularly the teachings, themselves that are complex (although I believe most of them contain layers of theological meaning that render them complex). It's the cultural and language barriers we have to get around. Apparently, you're unwilling to admit that the texts are what they are.
We can allow scripture to interpret itself by the use of other scripture.
No, that's not "How It Works." Many times, the writers of one text are unaware of the other texts. Plus, there's the redaction process that preclude any text from being "pure" as a resource text.
It does not require scholars to argue over whose interpretation is correct.
They don't argue over whose interpretation is "right." They argue
possibilities and "most likely" scenarios.
.You posture like a wounded animal when someone questions your beliefs
You're projecting.
you do understand that opinions are all we have?
Of course I do. But your post entries come off with a great deal of "I'm right" hubris. Your posts devalue a great swath of the Christian household because we disagree with you and what you *believe* to be the "truth." They also devalue the very scholastic processes that allow you to have a bible to read in the first place. Further, your posts disrespect people. Your posts come off, not as "this is my opinion," but as "this is unequivocally what God 'said.'"
Then what was the point of recording them?
They were a way of hooking Jesus into the lineage. But they disagree with each other, so neither can be literally "correct." They are concocted to make theological statements. For example, in one account, there are included several names that would be considered to be "outsiders." There's a
theological, not
literal reason for that. Unless you're willing to actually exegete the texts, you miss that layer of meaning, as I noted above.
Jesus had to have the right lineage to prove that his claim to be the Messiah was legitimate.
Yes, but note that Jesus' authority lay outside the "right" authority. He was not a military leader who was going to restore the Israeli kingdom from Rome (as was prophesied).
The religious leaders said that his widely acclaimed miraculous power was from the devil. But they could not argue with scripture concerning his lineage, and never tried.
the religious authorities were unaware of the scriptures about Jesus, because
none of them had been written until after Jesus was dead. When your exegetical process isn't
correct (in your case, it's "nonexistent"), you miss that rather important little detail.
Oh please.....that is nothing more than childish ego talking. Read my signature....
I said that I forgive you. What's either childish or egotistical about that? Or are you assuming facts not in evidence again?
Jesus used a whip to drive animals out of God’s house of worship.
...Because whipping animals is so very kind and a highly Christian activity.
Unless you have a good grasp of the meanings and broader application of the terms used in scripture, misinterpretation can run riot.
That's what I've been trying to get across to you. Your misinterpretations and resulting theological statements are, IMO, terrible.
You have identified your own denomination. I looked it up....it’s not really part of mainstream Christianity, and apparently involves spiritistic beliefs and practices, (which I believe are condemned in the Bible) so I have no idea why you feel offended. Did you not remove yourself from the mainstream?
I've identified nothing -- and I don't intend to, for reasons such as your posts. Your posts assume an awful lot of facts not in evidence; they seem very adept at doing that. You have no clue who or what I am, except what I choose to disclose to you. Therefore, you have no idea what beliefs of mine lie outside of anything else. I'll thank you to leave out the
ad hominems with regard to my affiliation and stick to the topic at hand.
I am proud to be NO part of mainstream “Christianity”.
Well, I'd have to say that's obvious. But that's
your hang up, not mine.
Now that was rich coming from you....you ‘know what you are talking about’ according to your own interpretation of scripture....and maybe a piece of paper that says you have a degree in "theology".
No, you misread what I wrote. YOUR posts -- Deeje's -- come off that way. My credentials are not on trial here.
We will allow Jesus to be the judge of anyone's authority
Asked and answered. My authority comes from God and from the Church.
I can see that justification is a large part of the excuses you offer for denying what scripture clearly states.
You're projecting again.
I pointed to the current state of the world as a fulfillment of the end times prophesy.
Ya'll have been doing that for a long time. 1914 is a glaring example. This "current affairs as a fulfillment of prophecy" claptrap is hooey at best and a theological deception at worst.
If you think the God I worship is anything like this description then what hope is there for you ever understanding who he is.
Apparently, judging from your posts, the God you worship is quite willing to condemn many for not believing as you think they ought to.
He never created the sexes to be equal, but complementary, with each assigned a role specifically outlined in the Bible. Its about knowing your place and keeping it. Competition was never promoted.
That's not
my God. But see above. "God-in-a-wife-beater..." Women "keeping their place" is inequitable and unjust.
And nowhere does God condemn homosexuals....but he does condemn homosexual activity.
...Because God delights in creating different sexual orientations, creating a minority to have that different orientation, and then denying them full participation in humanity by denying them full opportunity to express themselves and love another fully. What a shameful way to depict a loving God! This is
not my God.
How convenient for humans to wave away what they find inconvenient in today’s "modern" world.
How convenient for people who are in the majority societal power structure to abuse that power through entitled viewpoints and actions, throwing those under the bus whom they find "inconvenient" to their sensibilities and misunderstood piety.
