Posts by myelaine

67

Exactly what is the HISTORIC view of the DIVINE or of what being GOD meant long ago?

by TerryWalstrom in

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 .

myelaine

The jewish people held beliefs that were different than other people. Almighty God was the center of belief and any divinity that a human (or angel) possessed, whether prophet, priest or king, was conferred by their godliness and holiness in relation to THE God and His statutes and precepts. Though jewish leaders could claim or earn the status of divinity...there was no mistaking that they were God(diety)...they were only gods(divinity).

what we see with the jewish religious authorities is inquiry regarding the divinity of Jesus and the escalation of contempt for Him once He crossed the strict division between god and God by claiming that He was THE Son of God (which they understood to be equality with God. ie: God) and not merely a son of God(which was equated with divinity)

the jews had a much more compact hierarchy, one God drove their expectation.

So, I disagree with his general statement that modern ideas about the "divine realm" are different than ancient ideas about the divine realm. a significant number of people did see the divine realm just as the three major religions see it today. (the One God and "divine" subordinates)

67

Exactly what is the HISTORIC view of the DIVINE or of what being GOD meant long ago?

by TerryWalstrom in

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 .

myelaine

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.

12

Books/texts/scriptures mentioned in the bible , though not incorporated in the bible cannon .

by smiddy in

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..

myelaine

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

67

Exactly what is the HISTORIC view of the DIVINE or of what being GOD meant long ago?

by TerryWalstrom in

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 .

myelaine

I can understand where OT prophets, priests and kings could acquire an air of divinity. The NT saints were even given this type of honour by some people but, Jesus was more closely aligned with DEITY where the others both OT and NT were kept firmly on the ground in their roles as "divinity" as can be seen in their strictly human foibles being included in the text. How these roles were appreciated in the day to day lives of the OT hebrew people likely CAN be seen in jewish literature of the time. I just doubt that it had any influence on the main purveyors of the religion of the jews by the time of Christ. The silence of God for 400 years likely contributed to their hesitance to see ANYONE "new" as divine...think JtB.

matthew 16:16-17

67

Exactly what is the HISTORIC view of the DIVINE or of what being GOD meant long ago?

by TerryWalstrom in

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 .

myelaine

Wasn't it jewish disciples who started calling Jesus Son of God because of the miracles(works of God)? Does Bart suggest that these jewish disciples bought into the notion that earthly entities were entitled to the title of God merely because it was de rigueur?

the thought than Jesus WASN'T the Son of God was contested by other factions in the jewish population. This leads me to believe that the titles Son of God and God weren't borne of the "pyramid scheme".

10

Uh oh ... caching issues

by Simon in

seems to be some caching issues with the latest update i just released - i'm looking into it.. strange - seems like certain pages are 'stuck'..

myelaine

merci beaucoup <3 <3 <3

10

Uh oh ... caching issues

by Simon in

seems to be some caching issues with the latest update i just released - i'm looking into it.. strange - seems like certain pages are 'stuck'..

myelaine

dear Simon...

I've noticed that my post count is halved from 1200ish to 600ish. I was looking for a specific thread I started called, "THE SEED" and it's gone...the first two years of my posting history is gone. infact, my profile says I've been posting for 10 years and I know that it's been over 11. (August 4, 2004)

(my boyfriend deleted ten years worth of my "stuff" this week...everything...all my pictures, files...everything...my entire desktop...gone. I'm hypersensitive about my "stuff" now as you can imagine. *sob*)

love michelle <3

12

Books/texts/scriptures mentioned in the bible , though not incorporated in the bible cannon .

by smiddy in

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..

myelaine

dear smiddy....

you said: "Imperfect human beings had their own agenda for selecting what was to be considered scriptures inspired by God and what was not ,giving us the Bible we have today"...

it's also possible that God desired to focus on the doctrine of the faith and was present in whittling down the books to be chosen as the christian canon. (1 timothy 1:3-4; 1 timothy 2:4-5,7; 1 timothy 3:14-15; 1 timothy 4:6; 1 timothy 4:13; 1 timothy 4:16...)

perhaps those books not included aren't profitable for teaching the christian doctrine.

love michelle <3

17

Rev 17:9 - Thoughts?

by leaving_quietly in

rev 17:9 describes something about the "woman", the harlot, babylon the great:.

here is where the intelligence that has wisdom comes in: the seven heads mean seven mountains, where the woman sits on top.

and there are seven kings: five have fallen, one is, the other has not yet arrived, but when he does arrive he must remain a short while.. i was dreaming about this verse last night, so i thought i'd look it up.

myelaine

Sorry, correction re: my previous post. this is the video that talks about rev 17:9 at the 32:00 minute mark.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=KIzyji-eVdY

17

Rev 17:9 - Thoughts?

by leaving_quietly in

rev 17:9 describes something about the "woman", the harlot, babylon the great:.

here is where the intelligence that has wisdom comes in: the seven heads mean seven mountains, where the woman sits on top.

and there are seven kings: five have fallen, one is, the other has not yet arrived, but when he does arrive he must remain a short while.. i was dreaming about this verse last night, so i thought i'd look it up.

myelaine

Interesting biblical exposition of babylon et al...fast forward to 12:00 minute mark. 32:00 minute mark starts to cover rev 17:9

http://youtu.be/BD_N9t2j9jg