Interpretation that does not match

[savagewind]

I haven't been writing in parables, but Matt.13 applies---the message was received , but not understood.

Mr. strait gave no frubal so I did.

 

[savagewind]

.....and should we not warn them?

 

[sincerly]

Mr. strait gave no frubal so I did.

SW, the Scriptures are the inspired word of GOD.
How can I give or take credit for what I'm supposed to "Go and Tell the whatsoever I have told you"? In the matter of 1Cor.15:33, you were Scripturally correct and "those men" were/are in error.

God will give the "Rewards"---which are better than men's "frubals",

.....and should we not warn them?

Of course, The Scriptures are clear--- "GOD is not the respecter of persons"---God desires that None "should perish". 2Pet.3:9

 

[savagewind]

SW, the Scriptures are the inspired word of GOD.
How can I give or take credit for what I'm supposed to "Go and Tell the whatsoever I have told you"? In the matter of 1Cor.15:33, you were Scripturally correct and "those men" were/are in error.
God will give the "Rewards"---which are better than men's "frubals",

Haha. Cute! Frubals aren't really a reward. Frubals communicate I hear you, I think you are on the right track, you made me laugh, thank you for your trouble, here's a kindness as I just witnessed you got bashed, all the above and more. A reward is what they aren't.
Have you ever sent a greeting card? Was it a reward for something?

Of course, The Scriptures are clear--- "GOD is not the respecter of persons"---God desires that None "should perish". 2Pet.3:9

I think Acts 10:34 is a good scripture in context. Thank you.

 

[sincerly]

Haha. Cute! Frubals aren't really a reward. Frubals communicate I hear you, I think you are on the right track, you made me laugh, thank you for your trouble, here's a kindness as I just witnessed you got bashed, all the above and more. A reward is what they aren't.
Have you ever sent a greeting card? Was it a reward for something?


I think Acts 10:34 is a good scripture in context. Thank you.

SW, Yes, I'm aware of that one and Deut.10:17.

 

[savagewind]

SW, Yes, I'm aware of that one and Deut.10:17.

I know you are. You quoted it.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

In my experience, contradictions are usually resolved by one or more of the following:

1) Two different writers are expressing two different points of view that represent different practices in the church

2) Contradiction is the beginning of wisdom. There's always at least two sides to an issue, and a teacher will use seemingly contradictory examples to show the limits of an idea. So there would be a contradiction if we imagine that there are no bounds to an idea - that it cannot be looked at from different angles to teach us different things about the same or similar topics.

3) The contradictions can represent a change in a particular tradition. Earlier tradition says one thing, later tradition says something else. Along these lines -- it could be an interpolation.

 

[savagewind]

In my experience, contradictions are usually resolved by one or more of the following:

1) Two different writers are expressing two different points of view that represent different practices in the church

2) Contradiction is the beginning of wisdom. There's always at least two sides to an issue, and a teacher will use seemingly contradictory examples to show the limits of an idea. So there would be a contradiction if we imagine that there are no bounds to an idea - that it cannot be looked at from different angles to teach us different things about the same or similar topics.

3) The contradictions can represent a change in a particular tradition. Earlier tradition says one thing, later tradition says something else. Along these lines -- it could be an interpolation.

Number 1 does not apply to the topic as it is about what people THINK was written not about what was written.
Number 2 is good! I would not consider scripture so deeply if it was all right. When it has not sounded right I keep it close to meditate on it. It then becomes unraveled and I can see it by the light of day.
Number 3 is probably the cause of misunderstandings.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Number 1 does not apply to the topic as it is about what people THINK was written not about what was written.
Number 2 is good! I would not consider scripture so deeply if it was all right. When it has not sounded right I keep it close to meditate on it. It then becomes unraveled and I can see it by the light of day.
Number 3 is probably the cause of misunderstandings.

Yes, but this type of contradiction exists in all of the wisdom literature that I've seen, and most philosophers. In other words, it's a common teaching method -- it's almost like exceptions to the rule, but the exception can be very significant.

 

[outhouse]

The contradictions can represent multiple authors plagiarizing and compiling different traditions being far removed from the actual man and events they are building divinity and mythology around using rhetoric as their primary prose.

Which more accurately describes the gospels.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

The contradictions can represent multiple authors plagiarizing and compiling different traditions being far removed from the actual man and events they are building divinity and mythology around using rhetoric as their primary prose.

That's a mouthful.

 

[outhouse]

That's a mouthful.

without a single comma

 

[savagewind]

The contradictions can represent multiple authors plagiarizing and compiling different traditions being far removed from the actual man and events they are building divinity and mythology around using rhetoric as their primary prose.

Which more accurately describes the gospels.

I asked for an example. Do you have one?

 

[sincerly]

The contradictions can represent multiple authors plagiarizing and compiling different traditions being far removed from the actual man and events they are building divinity and mythology around using rhetoric as their primary prose.

Which more accurately describes the gospels.

Outhouse, your post reflects your own actions. A writer(author) compiling supposedly contradictions far removed from the events which were recorded for our admonition.

The Ever Lasting Gospels will continue on to the end.

 

[outhouse]

I asked for an example. Do you have one?

Did baby Jesus go to Egypt.

Luke says one thing Matthew says the opposite.


Any attempt to reconcile the two accounts is not really honest either, as both accounts state what they do.


there is a reason why all credible scholars claim both are fiction.

 

[sincerly]

In my experience, contradictions are usually resolved by one or more of the following:

1) Two different writers are expressing two different points of view that represent different practices in the church

2) Contradiction is the beginning of wisdom. There's always at least two sides to an issue, and a teacher will use seemingly contradictory examples to show the limits of an idea. So there would be a contradiction if we imagine that there are no bounds to an idea - that it cannot be looked at from different angles to teach us different things about the same or similar topics.

3) The contradictions can represent a change in a particular tradition. Earlier tradition says one thing, later tradition says something else. Along these lines -- it could be an interpolation.

A_E, In my experience, All contradictions are man contrived to satisfy one's own lusts. The messages given by GOD can not be improved upon.

The "traditions and decrees made by man" are NOT from the Creator GOD. Right?

 

[savagewind]

Did baby Jesus go to Egypt.

Luke says one thing Matthew says the opposite.


Any attempt to reconcile the two accounts is not really honest either, as both accounts state what they do.


there is a reason why all credible scholars claim both are fiction.

Apologetics Press - When Did Jesus Go to Egypt?

Matthew indicates that Joseph and Mary took Jesus and fled to Egypt at the command of God (Matthew 2:13-14). Later, after Herod’s death, Jesus’ family departed Egypt for Nazareth where they made their home (Matthew 2:19-23)...... Luke indicates that after Jesus’ birth, and once Mary’s days of “purification according to the law of Moses were completed” , which would have been about six weeks after Jesus was born, Joseph and Mary took Jesus to the temple in Jerusalem (Luke 2:22-38). The inspired physician then writes: “So when they had performed all things according to the law of the Lord, they returned to Galilee, to their own city, Nazareth” (Luke 2:39, emp. added). Since Luke mentions nothing about Egypt, and Matthew says nothing about a trip to Nazareth soon after Jesus’ birth, allegedly either Matthew or Luke is mistaken.

It is

likely, that Luke simply omitted Joseph, Mary, and Jesus’ trip to Egypt, which sequentially could be placed between Luke 2:38 and 2:39.

Is it possible one account omits what the other includes? Why not?

 

[angellous_evangellous]

A_E, In my experience, All contradictions are man contrived to satisfy one's own lusts. The messages given by GOD can not be improved upon.

The "traditions and decrees made by man" are NOT from the Creator GOD. Right?

It seems like your experience is a product of a bias - your experiences have been dictated to you and now your are trying to dictate it to other people.

As a Christian, I elect to have the Scriptures teach me rather than me teaching the Scriptures. I don't tell the Scriptures what they are, I let them be what they are and learn from them. It works much better than waving your finger at the text, insisting that it is the word of God and refusing to understand what it actually says.

As a scholar, I know that every word of Scripture is written by human beings. Not only written but transcribed, fragmented, collected, preserved, copied, translated and interpreted by human beings.

Now I would agree with you that every contradiction is the result of human lust -- if I thought that the Bible presents no wisdom at all -- if the teachings of God could be expressed flatly with absolutely no color and no artistic quality. I think that God is more complex than the stupid limitations that people want to put on Scripture so they can justify their own ignorance.

Furthermore - if the Bible was devoid of wisdom and unable to teach people in anything other than lifeless sayings that have no depth at all - people wouldn't be able to relate to such an unusual thing.

That's why evangelicalism is dead today. It's irrelevant to people in general and useless to its followers.

 

[outhouse]

It is

Is it possible one account omits what the other includes? Why not?

likely, that Luke simply omitted Joseph, Mary, and Jesus’ trip to Egypt

Because it is more Likely he had no clue, and then factually stated he went somewhere else. :yes:


either way it contradicts matthew because it states he went somewhere else

 

[outhouse]

Flight into Egypt - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Gospel of Luke makes no mention of this event at all, relating instead that the Holy Family went to the Temple in Jerusalem, and then directly home to Nazareth.[3]


Robert Funk of the Jesus Seminar has suggested that both Luke's and Matthew's birth and infancy accounts are fabrications.[4][5] A theme of Matthew is likening Jesus to Moses for a Judean audience, and the Flight into Egypt does just that.