Mad Dawg (from previous post)
Pistoff
Mad Dawg’s responses in this post.
"The evidence for the miracles is the gospels themselves as they are eyewitness accounts."
This is circular logic.
Not at all, if we can’t use eyewitness accounts, what can we use?
"The synoptic “problem” is not a problem at all. If 2 or 10 people saw the same events, wouldn’t we expect them to give similar accounts? "
But you maintain that the Bible is inspired and inerrant;
So?
similar is not the issue. The gospels have serious differences, including the tone of what Jesus said and did, and the view of what Jesus was, whether extraordinary human or godlike. I agree that to you this is not a problem,
If this is not a problem, then why bring it up?
but it is to me and when I began reading what scholars (with no view to defend)
No view to defend? You are kidding me right? Every writer has biases.
found when analyzing texts, the differences are obvious.
As you said before, differences are not a problem. What is your point?
"Paul did mention the resurrection specifically. "
But Jesus did NOT perform the resurrection, right? Your view is that God resurrected him. Or are you saying that Jesus is God, and resurrected himself?
The best insight on this that have offhand is: Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life , that I might take it again. John 10:17 KJV
I find this argument to be mostly semantics.
"Why would Paul preach the resurrection and discount lesser miracles?"
My point exactly! Either they developed after he wrote, or he DID NOT BELIEVE them.
So you don’t dispute the veracity of the resurrection. You are still trying to argue from silence. It is nothing more than speculation on your part. If he didn’t believe them he would have said so.
"What verse(s) in the gospels “caused” anti-semitism? There are those that twist verses to say what they were never intended to say, just as the WTS does."
“Then the chief priests, the scribes, and the elders of the people assembled at the palace of the High Priest, who was called Caiphas, and plotted to take Jesus by trickery and kill Him" (Matthew 26:4).
“The Chief Priest, the elders, and the council sought false testimony against Jesus to put Him to death” (Matthew 26: 59-61)
“...all the chief priests and elders of the people took counsel against Jesus to put him to death”(Matthew 27:1).
And the crowd? They cried that they would take the blood of Jesus on their head and their children's head.
Ø These are the verses that I had in mind when I referred to twisted verses.
Ø If these are the actual events, how is Matthew an anti-semite for recording them?
Ø Can you show me where the Scriptures confirms that Jesus’ blood would be on the heads of the Children?
Ø Are you aware that the OT says that sins of the father are only passed to the 3 rd and 4 th generation?
Ø If God confirmed the guilt on the children, it would have expired by the end of the 3 rd century.
Ø There is nothing in the Bible that confirms that Jews are to be persecuted for what a small minority of them did.
So Mad do you think that Pilate became a ruler by being bullied by the crowDo you really think that they changed his mind about executing someone that was being called the king of the jews?
It wasn’t the crowd that got Pilate to condemn Jesus, it was the priests – who were very influential in the politics of the time and region. Given the history of Jewish uprisings and Roman brutality in suppressing them, I have no doubt that Pilate would sacrifice an innocent man to keep the peace. Especially if his authority was being challenged.
"The interesting thing is that if we follow the sexual, dietary, sanitation, and other guidelines of the Bible; we would live a healthier life – today."
"I am convinced that God warns us against promiscuity to guard us from such diseases."
By the way, the most RABID anti Jewish accounts are found in Matthew,
Oh? And what may they be?
a book written from and for the Jewish community, who by the time it was written had ejected the Christians from the synagogues.
Rodney Stark, a real scholar, states that the division between the Jews and the Christian was slow and did not fully develop until the 6 th or 8 th centuries. What is your point here? Are you suggesting that Matthew was written after the 8 th century?
You mean I need …? Do I need to avoid pork? Where do you draw the line if you revere Mosaic laws? Should we stone adulterers again?
Why does he not warn us against all of the other health hazards of modern living?
Jesus fulfilled the law, we are no longer under the law. There are commands in the NT that reflect some of the ones of the OT.
As for eating pork, you missed the point. Suppose I gave up eating pork, would my health improve? Yes. Pork products are high in fat and cholesterol. If one goes on a weight loss program, some of the first things to go are bacon, ham, hot dogs, and most everything else made from pork. I am in no way saying that it is wrong to eat pork, just recognizing that one would be healthier without it.
Having numerous sex partners is also detrimental to one’s health. Diseases spread like wild fire. I have had friends die of AIDS that preached the necessity of “safe sex.” It is heart rending to watch them waste away.
It also destroys marriages and families. The familial instability it produces has a deep and lasting negative impact on the children in such situations. Such factors have an impact on the society as a whole. It can be easily argued that it was a significant factor in bringing down the Roman Empire.
Nowhere does the Bible try to warn about ALL hazards of life, past or present.
Thank you for your thoughtful questions and comments.
MD
