1. 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!

Do differences in practices of faith mean we follow the same Jesus Christ?

Discussion in 'Same Faith Debates' started by uss_bigd, Mar 17, 2008.

  1. angellous_evangellous

    Ratings:
    +0
    Everything I needed to know I learned in kindergarten... :rolleyes:


    Lunamoth = Gender: [​IMG] = ma'am

    uss_bigd = Gender: [​IMG] = sir

    Gee whiz. See upper left hand corner of member's post and use the appropriate term. If you're doing this on purpose, it's infantile and completely destroys any credibility you make think you have that would give weight to any rhetorical devise that you're trying to exploit.
     
  2. uss_bigd

    uss_bigd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2008
    Messages:
    1,246
    Ratings:
    +20

    My apologies!

    I am at work. The RF window is usually minimized to about half my computer monitor, which usually hides the upper right hand corner of post. Especially when i type in my responses.

    I will try to take the time to check. thank you!
     
  3. Comprehend

    Comprehend Res Ipsa Loquitur

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2006
    Messages:
    4,560
    Ratings:
    +414

    Okey dokey, I don't have time to ask this question in pictures so please try to read slowly.

    Besides the fact that your color choice is obnoxious, you still have failed to address my point. I find it hilarious that people think they get to throw out random scripture and expect others to accept their interpretation of the scriptures.

    HOW DOES ANYTHING YOU HAVE SAID SHOW THAT THE BIBLE IS THE ONLY SOURCE WHERE THE LIFE AND TEACHINGS OF CHRIST CAN BE FOUND?

    Even if I pretend that your fanciful interpretation of some out of context verses while ignoring other contradictory scriptures is correct, it still only would be saying that we should accept the written word over the spoken word.

    YOUR ARGUMENT SAYS NOTHING ABOUT THE BIBLE BEING THE ONLY SOURCE... (which was the question if you have forgotten) :slap:
     
  4. uss_bigd

    uss_bigd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2008
    Messages:
    1,246
    Ratings:
    +20
    I didnt know i had to explain everyhing word for word sir.

    The apostles lived with Christ, Paul was brought up to the third heavens. Paul said they were the LAST.

    The Last. no one will teach Christ teachings after them. that is why LAST mean LAST.

    so, how will Christ's teachings continue for the next generations? Paul said "do not think of men above that which is written"


    now, if they were the last, and they instructed to keep to what is written. will there be other sources?

    If there were other sources, then the apostles wouldnn't have been the last and the keep to that which is written instruction will be put to naught.


    Now, to further reinforce my point, i included the apostles warnings of false Christs and prophets. meaning, it proves why the apostles were last and why the christians were instructed to keep to what is written.

    I did not forget to answer your question, you just failed to comprehend.:D
    Please take note, i did not interpret anything.

    Last means last, in any dictionary. and the statement "do not think of men above that which is written" is pretty simple. it can never be "SANELY" interpretted to mean that we should refer to other writings.:yes:
     
  5. uss_bigd

    uss_bigd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2008
    Messages:
    1,246
    Ratings:
    +20

    ok, how would you interpret the "the apostles were sent last" to mean that there were apostles who came next?? :slap:

    and how would you interpret " keep to what is written " to mean refer to other writings? do you need to be highly intelligent to "comprehend" that? :slap:
     
  6. Comprehend

    Comprehend Res Ipsa Loquitur

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2006
    Messages:
    4,560
    Ratings:
    +414
    You will have to explain your nonsensical gibberish...

    No, Paul said he *thought* they were sent to *them* last and no matter what way you would like to take that verse, it doesn't address my question so I am a little confused as to why you keep harping on it. All I can figure is that you don't have an answer and you don't know what else to say.



    This is your fanciful interpretation. It says nothing like that AND more importantly, EVEN IF IT DID, it doesn't address my question. :cover:


    I don't see any reason why your fanciful interpretation of scriptures would preclude other sources. That is kind of the point... :flirt:

    Uh, wrong. Your conclusions don't follow your premises.

    Sorry, there have always been false prophets, the existence of such has nothing whatever to do with whether or not there are other sources of scripture. If you think it does mean that, you will have to show why rather than simply assert it.

    tee hee. you are so uh... original...

    Your entire argument is silly interpretation followed by non-sequiters. Nothing you have provided says anything about OTHER SOURCES. The only connection between the scriptures and the question are in your head.


    LOL. At the time that statement was made, the majority of the NEW TESTAMENT WAS NOT WRITTEN... :biglaugh: That means by your fanciful interpretation, the NT is not to be trusted as it is OTHER writings...
     
  7. Comprehend

    Comprehend Res Ipsa Loquitur

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2006
    Messages:
    4,560
    Ratings:
    +414
    All it says is that apostles were sent after Christ. It doesn't say there was an end to Apostles. That would be where your fanciful interpretation comes in. :flirt:

    "keep to what is written" means to trust the written scripture over the spoken word. AS I HAVE SAID A NUMBER OF TIMES ALREADY, IT SAYS NOTHING ABOUT OTHER WRITINGS AT ALL, JUST THINGS THAT AREN'T WRITTEN. :sorry1:
     
  8. uss_bigd

    uss_bigd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2008
    Messages:
    1,246
    Ratings:
    +20
    sigh! it explicitly stated the apostles were sent LAST. check a synonym, a synonym is End


    so? KEEP means TRUST? what language do you speak? :slap:

    WHAt IS WRITTEN means things that aren't written? geez!

    what kind of a 'comprehension" do you have? :sad4:


    NOW, SINCE YOU PROFESS TO BE WISE. PROVE THAT IT IS BIBLICAL THAT THERE ARE OTHER SOURCES. PROVE THAT IT IS NOT YOUR FANCIFULL INTERPRETATION THAT SAYS THERE ARE OTHER SOURCES.

    AS FAR AS I AM CONCERNED. LAST MEANS END. AND kEEP MEANS REMAIN. MAINTAIN, STAY. CONTINUE ON. AND NOT TRUST.
     
  9. sojourner

    sojourner Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2006
    Messages:
    37,290
    Ratings:
    +5,729
    Religion:
    Christian/Shamanic
    But the ordinal isn't presented as one of time. It's presented as one of place. The members addressed are given first place over the apostles, who are given last place.
    "That whichis written" refers to the Judaic Law, not the teachings of Christ. The teachings of Christ had not been written down scripturally yet when Paul made this statement.
     
  10. uss_bigd

    uss_bigd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2008
    Messages:
    1,246
    Ratings:
    +20

    So Paul, referred to judaic law and not the gospel? whats your proof? as far as the bible is concerned, the apostles taught the gospel of Christ. why are yous aying otherwise?


    "the aposltes were SENT last" was what the verse said, could you elaborate how this referred to place?
     
  11. sojourner

    sojourner Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2006
    Messages:
    37,290
    Ratings:
    +5,729
    Religion:
    Christian/Shamanic
    Paul's letters to Corinth are dated to the 50's c.e. Mark (the earliest gospel) was not written until post-70 c.e. Further, we know that Matthew was written for a Jewish community. Corinth was gentile, so Matthew would not have circulated there as early as Paul in any case. Therefore, what Paul referred to cannot have been the gospels. What was written at the time of the Corinthian letters was the Judaic Law, so that was what Paul referred to when he spoke of "what is written."

    The apostles taught the good news, but could not have taught the written gospels, because they weren't written yet.

    The NRSV (widely accepted by scholars as one of the most accurate English translations) says: "For I think that God has exhibited us apostles as last of all, as though sentenced to death, because we have become a spectacle to the world, to angels and to mortals." This in context with the preceeding vs. 8, talking about how the audience have become kings, apart from the apostles.
     
  12. uss_bigd

    uss_bigd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2008
    Messages:
    1,246
    Ratings:
    +20

    sigh! so you are basing your arguments on information that is not in th bible? this is not going to work. how can you argue with the context of what i say when you don't even refer to the same thing? geez!:sad4:

    Sir, you interpret something you read with what is written, not with when it's written. i dotn know where you got thta logic, but it is totally screwed.:yes:

    Paul referred to the gospel of christ, basing on what was written. Its all over the book of hebrews. " he said we cannot be justified by the law of moses."

    You obviously do not know so much about the bible, thats why i have yet to see verses to support you claims. i knew it, you were basing on your limited opinion al this time. why would you think you can shake biblical fcts with your personal opinion? as i said i am nobody. but the bible contains God's words. if you reject what i read, then it is not me that you reject.:shrug:

    :sad4: Gospel means good news Mr. Sojourner ... i didn't know you didn't know.

    Besides, they taught the Gospel, because they were the ones who wrote it.:slap: come on man, make some sense.
     
  13. sojourner

    sojourner Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2006
    Messages:
    37,290
    Ratings:
    +5,729
    Religion:
    Christian/Shamanic
    My argument is that the Bible doesn't say what you believe it to say, based upon actual scholarship and research.
    Because you obviously don't know what you're talking about when it comes to biblical scholarship.
    This quotation proves my last point. When something was written can make a big difference in interpretation, as well as who wrote it, to whom it was written, and the cultural context in which it was written. Whose logic is "totally screwed?"
    The gospels were not written when Paul wrote that statement.
    and this after my having taken at least 8 college and graduate courses in the Bible...holding a perfect gradepoint average.

    I don't use verses to support my claims, because the verses in question are what we're dealing with. Proof texting is very poor scholarship, because IT DOESN'T WORK. The scope of my "opinion" is limited only by the blinders you choose to wear, not by my lack of scholarship. "Casting pearls before swine" leaps to mind here.

    I'm not seeking to "shake Biblical fact." I seek to support Biblical evidence with scholarship and reason. What I hope to shake is the hopelessly abysmal line of reasoning you present with regard to the Bible.

    What I reject is not what the Bible says, but what you think it says.
    Of course I knew. In the time of the letter to the Corinthians, that good news was largely spoken, not written.
    That point cannot be proven and scholarship doesn't place much confidence in the attribution.
    Right back at ya.
     
  14. uss_bigd

    uss_bigd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2008
    Messages:
    1,246
    Ratings:
    +20
    Your biblical scholarship certainly means it did not teach basic vocabulary.

    "keep to what is written" means the same as " remain or continue on what is written"
    how can your scholarship explain that this what " keep to what is written, also refer to the nicene creed":slap:

    I'd rather be called dumb than to have your reasoning...:D

    By the way, The gospel weren't written yet during the time of people, because it was in the process of being written. oops let me guess your scholarship doesn't say so.:thud:



    Your perfect GPA definitely does not include reading comprehension. explain how "keep to that which is written" could mean "refer to the nicene creed too?:slap:

    The pearls refer to the word of God, as as i can recall i am the one who persistently threw "pearls" at you. who is the swine now?:slap:


    fine fine, i will send a fifth grade teacher to talk to you...:angel2:
     
  15. DavyCrocket2003

    DavyCrocket2003 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2005
    Messages:
    1,444
    Ratings:
    +156
    Religion:
    Christian (LDS Perspective)
    I think Sojourner's argument makes perfect sense. How can thinking about the Bible and its context in an attempt to understant it better be a bad thing? And where does Sojourner ever even mention the Nicene Creed? I'm having a hard time following your logic USS BigD. I don't think insults will help. We're all rational, thinking creatures. We all have pretty good reasons for the things we believe. Maybe we should all make more of an effort to understand each other? Maybe?
     
  16. uss_bigd

    uss_bigd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2008
    Messages:
    1,246
    Ratings:
    +20

    he did mention the nicene creed, in one of the 4 threads we are sparring with eachother.

    In a nutshell, i read the bible, interpret it as it is written. and sojourner interprets it the way his creed or council taught him to.

    so is that sane? reading comprehension focuses on the material being read... period!
     
  17. Captain Civic

    Captain Civic version 2.0

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2007
    Messages:
    401
    Ratings:
    +30
    I don't know why you can't understand this.

    The Gospel was originally spread by word of mouth and actions.

    A standardised NT was not instantly available at the resurrection of Christ.

    Can you understand, then, if you take these things to be true, that it is important (perhaps even necessary) to take such cultural situations and understandings into consideration when reading the NT?
     
  18. uss_bigd

    uss_bigd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2008
    Messages:
    1,246
    Ratings:
    +20

    Granting without accepting.

    If Paul said " we, the apsotles were sent last." man, what ever cultural situations you want to consider, these statement can never mean someone came next.

    Paul said " keep to that which is written" this further makes the " the apostles beings ent last as absolute. what ever cultural situation people may want to consider, these statement can never mean refer to another thing like the nicene creed.

    That is my point. i do not wish to deviate from what is written from the scripture.:D
     
  19. DavyCrocket2003

    DavyCrocket2003 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2005
    Messages:
    1,444
    Ratings:
    +156
    Religion:
    Christian (LDS Perspective)
    Yes, this statement could mean what you claim it means– that the apostles were the last men to sent by God and there would be no more apostles. But that isn't the only thing it could mean though. For instance it could mean the apostles were the latest sent. Not that there would be no more. As in " the Utah Jazz beat Houston on the road durring their last game." (An awesome game btw.) Or it could mean, as has been pointed out, that "last" is referring to how the apostles fit into the foundation of the Church (of which Christ is the chief cornerstone). Not their chronological order. It could even mean that the apostles really are the last to come with no one to come after the apostles. But who said the apostles were finished being sent? Paul never met Jesus before he died and was resurected.

    Then don't. Just realize that what was written in the scriptures sometimes leaves room for confusion. That's why we have hundreds of sects who honestly follow the Bible but end up with hundreds of different beliefs (most of their differences minor, however).
     
  20. uss_bigd

    uss_bigd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2008
    Messages:
    1,246
    Ratings:
    +20
    1 Corinthians 4:9
    For I think that God hath set forth us the apostles last, as it were appointed to death: for we are made a spectacle unto the world, and to angels, and to men.


    1 Corinthians 4:9 (NIV)
    For it seems to me that God has put us apostles on display at the end of the procession, like men condemned to die in the arena. We have been made a spectacle to the whole universe, to angels as well as to men.

    It is pretty clear to me sir. " end of procession" end of discussion:D

    There are hundred denominations today because most sects are just after money!!:yes: let me know if you require biblical proof. :D
     
Loading...