By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.
SignUp Now!Nope. I did not. But I do have my KJV Bible.It was just published.
Thanks for sharing. I have read Mere Christianity long time ago, but not the other book or that recent one. Not sure I will be buying it any time soon either. Suffice to say I have the KJV for the meat of His words for Him to help me follow Him.From the back cover:
Salt & Light; The Complete Jesus is the highly acclaimed and award-winning definitive statement concerning Jesus of Nazareth, history's most compelling figure. The single most important book about the Historical Jesus in the last 30 years, more comprehensive than Josh McDowell’s Evidence That Demands a Verdict and more powerful than C.S. Lewis’ Mere Christianity.
Compelling figure? That is the understatement of like ever.From the back cover:
Salt & Light; The Complete Jesus is the highly acclaimed and award-winning definitive statement concerning Jesus of Nazareth, history's most compelling figure.
C.S. Lewis was a Catholic and Josh McDowell is an Evangelical.The single most important book about the Historical Jesus in the last 30 years, more comprehensive than Josh McDowell’s Evidence That Demands a Verdict and more powerful than C.S. Lewis’ Mere Christianity.
Well, are the words of Paul's and John's are their own or the Lord's?I agree with you on the many long-held traditions and doctrine that was not taught by Jesus, but I find it odd that in talking about "his words" you do not quote him, only Paul and John the Elder. Why is that?
So that is why I see the whole of the New Testament and the whole of the Old Testament as His words thus scripture.
It was just published.
Now hold on there. I had given you scriptures for how scriptures was not given by men but as moved by the Holy Ghost. So the question here is where did the words of the Holy Ghost come from? I'd say from Jesus Christ, the Word of God.I understand, you have to. Aside from the issue which I see that you place Jesus' teaching at the same level everyone else in the Bible, negating his special role, your stance creates many problems for others who want to be believers. imo
It is not about deifying a piece of literature but to recognize God's words to us as the truth.Thank you. When I read Chapter 14 & 16 of John again I am struck more by the purpose of the passage, it isn't to advertise the Holy Spirit but to emphasise that Jesus' followers should follow his teaching. The Holy Spirit/Spirit of Truth/Paraclete seem more like universal metaphors for the truth. Jesus simply mentions them in passing while not really defining what they are. He even says he is speaking "figuratively" and not plainly. So I think it is better to stick with the plain message, Jesus is going to the Father and after continue to follow Jesus. That is Jesus' message here and the one we should follow, not get distracted by Spirit & Ghost etc etc
The whole construct of the Holy Spirit dictating/leading the gospel writers and Paul simply does not work, the NT is obviously the product of ancient writers given the errors and contradictions and confusion they contain. Why can't the sources on Jesus' teaching and missing be human? I find that a far more compelling case for Jesus, don't you? The Divine intruding into our human world!
As to the OT, again it is a piece of literature which should accept as a plain fact, rather than engage in a mystical project to embellish it. Trying to "deify' pieces of human literature is damaging to the faith.
Jesus used the scripture a lot in defending Himself.Actually, I don't think he did. I don't see in your example how he is stating the OT is true, he is simply saying Your law says so-and-so to make a point, again, about paying attention to his teaching. And I do not doubt that Peter, as did many of his Jewish followers, thought the OT or Jewish Scriptures were 100% true. So he and others started the project of setting Jesus into the Jewish tradition and 'explaining him' from a Jewish worldview point. The only problem is that Jesus did not teach such things in our best sources, others did, he did not. We are luckier as we can see now that the OT is largely fictitious and can see Jesus' and teachings far clearer
Never heard of it.It was just published.
Actually, Jesus rarely mentions 'scripture', the Jewish Scriptures In both the cases you quote it is clear Jesus is not affirming the truth of these 'scriptures' but rather using them as a context to get the crowd to agree with him. In the first instance of John you quote, he refers to the 'scriptures' simply as 'your law', ie the Jewish tribal theology at that time, as an argumentative device - putting it in a context they can relate to. The second he is doing the same because he references Moses and Abraham, who were fictional characters taken from the same 'scriptures'. Jesus would have known they were not real people, but again, he had to cast arguments in forms for his opponents to understand. This makes sense when you take Jesus actions and teachings as a whole, and not as little snippets taken out of context; he teaching a new teaching unrelated to the contents of the 'scriptures' these people followed. And the Marriage at the Resurrection discourse in Mark is not a good argument as Jesus essentially has to correct confusion in the 'scriptures'.Jesus used the scripture a lot in defending Himself.
John 10:30 I and my Father are one.
31 Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him.
32 Jesus answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me?
33 The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.
34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?
35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;
36 Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?
Jesus said scripture even testified of Himself as the God men had seen in the O.T. before His incarnation.
John 5:39 Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.
40 And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life....
46 For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me; for he wrote of me.
47 But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?
What trouble would they have in believing His words? That He had met Abraham in His day and Abraham was glad.
John 8:56 Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad.
57 Then said the Jews unto him, Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham?
58 Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.
59 Then took they up stones to cast at him: but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple, going through the midst of them, and so passed by.
When was the day Abraham saw Him in His day and was glad? I imagined it was when He had come to tell Abraham the news that Sara would have a son.
Genesis 18:1-19 KJV
So Jesus is the Lord God men had seen in the O.T. before His incarnation as the prophesied Son of Man to give His life as a ransom for many.
Anyway, Jesus refer to the truth in scripture a lot when refuting those in error.
Matthew 22:29 Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God.
Since He said scripture cannot be broken and referred to the scripture as the truth, you should also see scripture as the Word of God to us as kept in the KJV, but only Jesus can help you see that.