matthew 17:20 - he said to them, because of your little faith.
for truly, i say to you, if you have faith like a grain of mustard seed, you will say to this mountain, move from here to there, and it will move, and nothing will be impossible for you.. i get the 'message' - if you believe enough (in fact, even a tiny amount - a mustard seed being tiny) then nothing is impossible but really, what a ridiculous statement and idea for several reasons.. there are lots of people who believe things completely and sincerely even to the point of death.
so far i've not noticed any sudden movements of any mountain ranges.
what I glean from luke 17:5-10 is: Jesus was talking about forgiving your brother and the apostles asked Him to increase their faith. His answer basicly said...asking for increased faith to do that (forgive) is like expecting to be rewarded (increased faith) for something that you're supposed to do...a reward would make you an unprofitable servant.
Increased faith isn't needed to forgive.
matthew 17:20 - he said to them, because of your little faith.
for truly, i say to you, if you have faith like a grain of mustard seed, you will say to this mountain, move from here to there, and it will move, and nothing will be impossible for you.. i get the 'message' - if you believe enough (in fact, even a tiny amount - a mustard seed being tiny) then nothing is impossible but really, what a ridiculous statement and idea for several reasons.. there are lots of people who believe things completely and sincerely even to the point of death.
so far i've not noticed any sudden movements of any mountain ranges.
Island Man...
the jihadist has something more urgent motivating him than the belief in virgins waiting in heaven. The koran says that if you don't fight in the cause of allah you are a hypocrite and you will be killed by your "brothers"...therefore to avoid being killed, do the truth or be truthful. koran 3:167-168
matthew 17:20 - he said to them, because of your little faith.
for truly, i say to you, if you have faith like a grain of mustard seed, you will say to this mountain, move from here to there, and it will move, and nothing will be impossible for you.. i get the 'message' - if you believe enough (in fact, even a tiny amount - a mustard seed being tiny) then nothing is impossible but really, what a ridiculous statement and idea for several reasons.. there are lots of people who believe things completely and sincerely even to the point of death.
so far i've not noticed any sudden movements of any mountain ranges.
Kingdoms are spoken of as mountains in scripture. If the disciples had the faith to cast out demons they could move mountains. As can be seen in scripture, when they aquired the faith to cast out demons they also had the faith to set about "moving" mountains/kingdoms...
So, this saying of Christ may have been an eschatological teaching instead of just a pep talk. (Jesus said it takes MORE than faith to do what they wanted to do) the ability to cast out demons was given to the disciples as a sign and wonder and they believed in Jesus...became subjects of His kingdom.
daniel 2:34-35; daniel 2:44-45
faith in Christ and what He can accomplish through you is a gift from God.
the purpose of this topic is twofold.. first, any who are endlessly fascinated by scholarship, practised by genuine bible scholars, are urged by me to do what i did, subscribe to bart ehrman's blog.
the subscription money (as little as $3.95) goes entirely to charity.. secondarily, by broadening our view of the new testament era on up through two millennia to the present day, our knowledge of all things 'christian' is deepened to include actual knowledge (as opposed to watchtower fabrication.
by this i don't mean to imply you'll fall to your knees and get saved, but rather, you'll simply have facts to inform your present transitional mindset toward whatever end you finally choose.. now .
"Not worshiping other gods in Yahweh's presence also allows for worship of other gods. Either interpretation admits and allows for worship of other gods."...
your interpretation allows for worship of other gods however the premise of monotheism does not.
the purpose of this topic is twofold.. first, any who are endlessly fascinated by scholarship, practised by genuine bible scholars, are urged by me to do what i did, subscribe to bart ehrman's blog.
the subscription money (as little as $3.95) goes entirely to charity.. secondarily, by broadening our view of the new testament era on up through two millennia to the present day, our knowledge of all things 'christian' is deepened to include actual knowledge (as opposed to watchtower fabrication.
by this i don't mean to imply you'll fall to your knees and get saved, but rather, you'll simply have facts to inform your present transitional mindset toward whatever end you finally choose.. now .
In my comments I'm trying to make a distinction between the words deity (that which is worshipping) and divinity(that which merits "special" appreciation. ie: hebrews 13:17)
"It's a false distinction. The fact that ancient Jewish writings had prohibitions against worshiping angels proves that worship of the divine (and not deity) was happening in the Jewish community. You're making a distinction without difference."...
doesn't the fact that religious authorities made prohibitions against worshiping angels show that they saw a distinction between deity and divinity?
the purpose of this topic is twofold.. first, any who are endlessly fascinated by scholarship, practised by genuine bible scholars, are urged by me to do what i did, subscribe to bart ehrman's blog.
the subscription money (as little as $3.95) goes entirely to charity.. secondarily, by broadening our view of the new testament era on up through two millennia to the present day, our knowledge of all things 'christian' is deepened to include actual knowledge (as opposed to watchtower fabrication.
by this i don't mean to imply you'll fall to your knees and get saved, but rather, you'll simply have facts to inform your present transitional mindset toward whatever end you finally choose.. now .
dear Viviane...
you said, "El (the supreme God) and Yahweh are distinct and different gods, along with Asherah, who was ALSO worshiped. El, in proto-Hebrew Semitic religion (from which the Hebrew religion sprang), El Elyon was dad and Yahweh and Ba'al were brothers... so, exactly what I said. Yahweh is their national God, the one they worship FIRST, but they also worship many others."...
The religion of the hebrews sprang from encounters with God. In their efforts to conceptualize for themselves Who this God they encountered was, what He did, what He would do etc. they drew on local mythologies to express themselves. The God they encountered did exist prior to the local god Yahweh (as JD pointed out with reference to Melchizadek, Abraham and jacob). The God they encountered is creator of earth, God of the earth and He chose the hebrews. Some of these actions in time resemble actions attributed to a local god named Yahweh...that NAME and what it means is a perfect expression of who their one God is. That's how Yahweh can pre-date the semetic religion from which he sprang.
one reason I think that the commandment to worship no other God before Me means in my presence or in front of me (instead of your interpretation, worship Me as the highest God of many gods you can worship) is in the israelite sacrificial system itself. The sacrifices and offerings that were required throughout the year appear to be something that is required by other gods as a means of worship...a god of the harvest, a god of livestock...a god of tribal protection/preservation etc. All those "things" that were distributed to many gods by other tribes for gain were to be given to one God.
love michelle
the purpose of this topic is twofold.. first, any who are endlessly fascinated by scholarship, practised by genuine bible scholars, are urged by me to do what i did, subscribe to bart ehrman's blog.
the subscription money (as little as $3.95) goes entirely to charity.. secondarily, by broadening our view of the new testament era on up through two millennia to the present day, our knowledge of all things 'christian' is deepened to include actual knowledge (as opposed to watchtower fabrication.
by this i don't mean to imply you'll fall to your knees and get saved, but rather, you'll simply have facts to inform your present transitional mindset toward whatever end you finally choose.. now .
Thank you Viviane...
I recall recently posting a lengthy article by a fellow poster Leolaia regarding the hebrews drawing on various elements in other local religions in their conceptualization of their God. I should have been more clear about the fact that I was talking about pious jews who kept the commandment to worship ONLY the One God.
In my comments I'm trying to make a distinction between the words deity (that which is worshipping) and divinity(that which merits "special" appreciation. ie: hebrews 13:17) Divinity being less than God and having some attributes of God in a limited way...holiness and godliness without the miraculous, so to speak. Jesus possessed the miraculous as well as the holiness and godliness. For a time some apostles had the miraculous too according to the text the "Lord bearing witness to the word of His grace, granting signs and wonders to be done by their hands." (act 14:3) but they rejected the notion that they were the highest Gods, zeus and hermes and they rejected worship (acts 14:14-15)...because they taught that all believers should strive for holiness and godliness and Jesus Himself said "be perfect as I am perfect"...I get the sense that divinity is in view here. A "higher calling". An early example of this higher calling is the one referred to as, saint john the divine.
love michelle
the purpose of this topic is twofold.. first, any who are endlessly fascinated by scholarship, practised by genuine bible scholars, are urged by me to do what i did, subscribe to bart ehrman's blog.
the subscription money (as little as $3.95) goes entirely to charity.. secondarily, by broadening our view of the new testament era on up through two millennia to the present day, our knowledge of all things 'christian' is deepened to include actual knowledge (as opposed to watchtower fabrication.
by this i don't mean to imply you'll fall to your knees and get saved, but rather, you'll simply have facts to inform your present transitional mindset toward whatever end you finally choose.. now .
the purpose of this topic is twofold.. first, any who are endlessly fascinated by scholarship, practised by genuine bible scholars, are urged by me to do what i did, subscribe to bart ehrman's blog.
the subscription money (as little as $3.95) goes entirely to charity.. secondarily, by broadening our view of the new testament era on up through two millennia to the present day, our knowledge of all things 'christian' is deepened to include actual knowledge (as opposed to watchtower fabrication.
by this i don't mean to imply you'll fall to your knees and get saved, but rather, you'll simply have facts to inform your present transitional mindset toward whatever end you finally choose.. now .
Matthew 16:13-17
According to the text Jesus called Himself, "Son of Man" in verse 13. Without verbal prompting Peter elevated the Son of Man to Son of God by verse 16.
also according to the text the reaction of the religious jews to the title, "Son of God" in their interaction with Jesus suggests they had equality with deity on their minds more than divinity...as you say, the idea of human "divinity" wasn't unfamiliar. (John 10:33-36)
if religious jews ALWAYS sought to stone every prophet, priest and king for claiming a human divinity it simply makes no sense that their very words were kept generation after generation.
if a bible writer / scribe refers to a particular book text or scripture by name , for one reason or another, shouldn`t that be a legitimate reason for including it in the bible cannon as a part of the bible ?.
just how many texts , books, scriptures are left out of the old testament bible that are mentioned there in and how many, if any are their in the new testament..
dear smiddy...
you said, "i`m sorry dear , but did you miss the point of my OP ? And my subsequent post ? For example who is to say from the list Splash gives us what is inspired and what is not inspired , who determines it,? Their is no evidence that God had anything to do with the now accepted books of the bible."...
I hope I didn't miss the point :)
I was just looking at the question differently, I guess.
For the sake of argument, let's assume ALL of those books and ALL the books in the bible are inspired.
my post reflected my belief that the books of the bible were chosen because they teach about the faith, encompassing the how, what, why, who and when.
I responded "inspired for what" not "what is inspired"...if the church wanted to teach the faith so that people could live the faith it had to be reasonably concise while maintaining important elements. (like a textbook) if the church wanted to teach angelogy they could have incorporated more of that in the book but, like judaism the leaders led the people AWAY from that kind of study because it is peripheral to the faith (I believe that some people can be susceptible to negative spirit forces so there are ancient texts that should be avoided, but that's beside "the point")
If God desires that all men be saved then inspires men to write about the means of salvation WHY wouldn't He be present and involved in the selection of books?...
love michelle
