Started By
Message
1
Posted on 8/23/09 at 9:45 pm to Duke
quote:
Nothing. I'm pointing out how the two gospels contradict each other.
in my mind, they both left something out. the sum of both of his statements equals the truth of what happened.
Posted on 8/23/09 at 9:46 pm to inelishaitrust
quote:
It's a fictional creation.
join the actual argument. i'm not trying to force the truth. i'm saying, i believe him to have said both things.
*edit*
i just realized how much of a butt that made me sound like. i wasn't trying to sound obtuse. i was just saying, what i was doing was not fictional creation.
This post was edited on 8/23/09 at 9:49 pm
Posted on 8/23/09 at 9:47 pm to m2pro
quote:
in my mind, they both left something out. the sum of both of his statements equals the truth of what happened.
You are fricking hopeless.
I'm sorry for wasting our time.
Posted on 8/23/09 at 9:48 pm to m2pro
quote:
in my mind, they both left something out. the sum of both of his statements equals the truth of what happened.
How convenient.
The Gospels were written towards different groups and they reflect that. Matthew is all about fulfilling prophecy because he wrote to the Jews. Luke didn't care, because he was writing to non Jews. It goes on and on. You can't mix them together, because they were never intended to be mixed.
Posted on 8/23/09 at 9:55 pm to Duke
quote:
I'm a fan of that Jesus guy. I just don't think he was God.
Jew?
Posted on 8/23/09 at 9:55 pm to Duke
quote:
How convenient.
i'm also not trying to make it sound convenient. maybe i ought to go read them and try to understand the context of all of this. but, i definitely believe He said both things on the cross as of this moment.
one thing i havent fully rectified in my own mind yet is the mentality that the Bible is infallible. to use my logical mind, humans wrote the Bible. Not the hand of the living Lord. I do believe the scriptures to be fully inspired by God.. i do believe they are sufficient for us. what i have a hard time with is believing they are infallible. so, i'm not trying to REALLY argue that the Bible is perfect btw. my logic on the differences between the gospel remains one that simply gives the benefit of the doubt to the Almighty who I know inspired the writings. so i defend it blindly a little bit in the face of several folks here that want to find an angle and attack my weak points.
but just for the record, my faith is in Jesus as my Messiah. not a book.
Posted on 8/23/09 at 9:55 pm to alu
if you think Philly fans are the worse, you've obviously never been to Oakland.
Posted on 8/23/09 at 9:56 pm to F machine
quote:
Jew?
I should try it out. I'd make a fine Jew.
Posted on 8/23/09 at 9:56 pm to Duke
fwiw.. 4 people can read this thread tonight and have different accounts if they repeated or wrote it down tomorrow. Doesn't make any of them not true, just seen from different perspectives.
Posted on 8/23/09 at 9:56 pm to Duke
quote:
Jesus on the cross is very different. In Mark he says one thing. "My God, My God, why have you forsaken me." In Luke, he's forgiving criminals, promising their place in heaven. The difference is huge. We just like to melt them into one, it hides the contradictions better.
Ah this I think I can offer the difference in the gospel particularly the different versions of what was said on the cross can be attributed to the fact that each witness took from the scene what was most important to them. One is a representation of forgiveness even unto the end. It is the reason for the differences in the gospels as well. For instance Mathew discuses the entire lineage of David to tie those 2 together because it was prophesized in the old testament that Christ would come from his line. Mark the shortest was written that way to convey urgency as in the return is nigh be ready. It does not mean that all accounts were not true just that the writers took from them what was most important. People will try to find subtle difference and exxagerate those but in fact all 4 gospels all reflect the same basic message.
Posted on 8/23/09 at 9:58 pm to m2pro
quote:
i'm also not trying to make it sound convenient. maybe i ought to go read them and try to understand the context of all of this. but, i definitely believe He said both things on the cross as of this moment.
I don't know if he said any of it or all of it. I'm just saying the Gospels are different.
quote:
so i defend it blindly a little bit in the face of several folks here that want to find an angle and attack my weak points.
Yeah, I am. I mean, you know I'm just debating for fun right? This isn't an attack on faith. This is me bored on a Sunday night. Now keep arguing with me!
Posted on 8/23/09 at 9:59 pm to Alahunter
quote:
fwiw.. 4 people can read this thread tonight and have different accounts if they repeated or wrote it down tomorrow. Doesn't make any of them not true, just seen from different perspectives.
i tried relating that to him in another way. i told him to have him and his wife/girl go watch a movie and not discuss it... but to go write down as descriptively as possible the same scene and see how different they come out.
Posted on 8/23/09 at 9:59 pm to Duke
quote:
I should try it out. I'd make a fine Jew.
If you try, please make sure you are a stereotypical Jew. That would be awesome to see in the deep south
This post was edited on 8/23/09 at 10:02 pm
Posted on 8/23/09 at 10:00 pm to labamafan
quote:
Ah this I think I can offer the difference in the gospel particularly the different versions of what was said on the cross can be attributed to the fact that each witness took from the scene what was most important to them. One is a representation of forgiveness even unto the end. It is the reason for the differences in the gospels as well. For instance Mathew discuses the entire lineage of David to tie those 2 together because it was prophesized in the old testament that Christ would come from his line. Mark the shortest was written that way to convey urgency as in the return is nigh be ready. It does not mean that all accounts were not true just that the writers took from them what was most important. People will try to find subtle difference and exxagerate those but in fact all 4 gospels all reflect the same basic message.
My basic point actually. The message is what matters, not proving the Bible's infallible.
Posted on 8/23/09 at 10:00 pm to F machine
Thanks Elisha...there is a good chance I will end up there 
Posted on 8/23/09 at 10:01 pm to Duke
quote:
Yeah, I am. I mean, you know I'm just debating for fun right? This isn't an attack on faith. This is me bored on a Sunday night. Now keep arguing with me!
yeah, i dig. but i also feel that you actually give a crap enough in our conversation to truly pay attention to what little i know. else i wouldn't be wasting my time!
<or would i?... it is Sunday night!>
Posted on 8/23/09 at 10:01 pm to m2pro
quote:
in my mind, they both left something out. the sum of both of his statements equals the truth of what happened.
No remember even as weak of a believer as I am I understand that these books were not written in a vaccuum and these people were not writing in a transe(sp) This is considered the inspired word of God. God conveyed his message to us thru his followers some of which were actual witnesses to the event. If I am not mistaken that is why those 4 gospels were cannonized because they are believed to have been written by those who were actually a witness to the life of Christ or at least the last 3 yrs.
Posted on 8/23/09 at 10:02 pm to m2pro
quote:
yeah, i dig. but i also feel that you actually give a crap enough in our conversation to truly pay attention to what little i know.
Na, I'm just attacking your weak points.
Posted on 8/23/09 at 10:03 pm to roadGator
quote:
roadGator
you are rapidly becoming my favorite poster on here. you have a lot to say and it is well thought out. your analysis of the fan base is right on. every sec school is pretty much the same (except vandy).
Page 18 of 22
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News