|
Post by rational on Apr 4, 2014 13:34:41 GMT -5
There is no need for independent claims. The Canon of Scripture is by the authority of the Church, Given be Christ in Mt 16. It's a take it or leave it. Many accept it as the inspired written word of God. Some don't. But you made the claim that: The homilies of the early church presbyters also attest to the authenticity of the gospel accounts. I couldn't find any examples and was looking for a link.
|
|
|
Post by StAnne on Apr 4, 2014 13:57:59 GMT -5
Faune - the Canon of the Bible was determined under the authority of the Church. If one doesn't accept it they can write their own bible - as some other religions have done.
rational - we 're traveling - I can't look for the homilies right now. Search early church fathers - homilies.
|
|
|
Post by faune on Apr 4, 2014 14:08:46 GMT -5
Faune - the Canon of the Bible was determined under the authority of the Church. If one doesn't accept it they can write their own bible - as some other religions have done. rational - we 're traveling - I can't look for the homilies right now. Search early church fathers - homilies. StAnne ~ I believe I found your references to these homilies of the ECF's in a previous post of yours and re-posted it on this same Page #9 just earlier? Hopefully, that was what you were referring to here? I took a wild guess, since you gave a pro-board link to an earlier post as a source for your Catholic point of view.
www.newadvent.org/cathen/10057a.htm
However, in regards to the RCC's teachings regarding apostolic succession and the homilies of the ECF's, I would like to provide the following Protestant viewpoint relating to the leadership positions within the early Church and how they were thought to function back in the first century. Honestly, I tend to agree with this viewpoint myself, because I feel it agrees more completely with the N.T. teachings regarding church leadership.
Perhaps you were thinking that the early Church Council at Jerusalem in Acts 15 was an example of this hierarchy that existed in leadership. However from Acts 15:6, it seems clear that all present discussed this matter of what would be required of Gentile believers to resolve a dispute among them?
www.jmm.org.au/articles/9205.htm (Leadership in the Early Church)
www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts+15 (Church Council at Jerusalem ~ Acts 15)
biblehub.com/acts/15-6.htm (Acts 15:6)
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Apr 4, 2014 14:08:57 GMT -5
No, I just found out these things about a year and half ago on my own. Nathan ~ For example, are you saying this is the reason for all those large birds and dinosaurs that were part of the pre-historic age was the result of this reptilian race of fallen angels mingling with man & animals over the years to form these giants which Noah's flood was supposed to have eradicated? But, by some chance, they even survived this world-wide flood and are amongst us today? NathanB said:
"No, I just found out these things about a year and half ago on my own."
So, you didn't get your ideas from the workers, -what I wonder is how the workers react to the sci-fi ideas of yours.
When you tell them these ideas, what do they answer?
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Apr 4, 2014 14:41:59 GMT -5
Isn't this what most Christians do; impute qualities to Jesus that they think Jesus should have?
Isn't this one of the reasons that there so many thousands of Christian denominations in the worlds today?
Its been a spectacular creative animal, huh? If you mean Christianity "has been a spectacular creative animal," yes, I agree Christianity certainly has been immensely creative !
The big problem is that after they created all the myths & ideas surrounding Christianity, they forgot that they were the "creators" and now worship their own creation!
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Apr 4, 2014 14:54:45 GMT -5
There is no need for independent claims. The Canon of Scripture is by the authority of the Church, Given be Christ in Mt 16. It's a take it or leave it. Many accept it as the inspired written word of God. Some don't. But you made the claim that: The homilies of the early church presbyters also attest to the authenticity of the gospel accounts. I couldn't find any examples and was looking for a link. Why should the homilies of the early church presbyters add anything to the authenticity of the gospels?
The homilies were created from the same fabric as the gospels!
They are just commentaries ON the gospels.
So, every effort by the RCC has been to just add layer upon layer in an attempt to provide "authenticity" to something of their own making!
That is a perfect example of "circular reasoning" !
|
|
|
Post by faune on Apr 4, 2014 15:10:59 GMT -5
But you made the claim that: The homilies of the early church presbyters also attest to the authenticity of the gospel accounts. I couldn't find any examples and was looking for a link. Why should the homilies of the early church presbyters add anything to the authenticity of the gospels?
The homilies were created from the same fabric as the gospels!
They are just commentaries ON the gospels.
So, every effort by the RCC has been to just add layer upon layer in an attempt to provide "authenticity" to something of their own making!
That is a perfect example of "circular reasoning" !
Dmmichgood ~ You make some valid points here along with the one just previously stated below about the RCC worshiping its own creation. The more I research this topic, the more convinced I become that the ECF's went out of their way to justify their own creation of the Bible and to rule out all other forms of early writings to be heresy, which accounts for the Gnostics being almost wiped out completely by the Church Inquisitions and many of their books burned. Those writings which managed to escape such a fate were well hidden and discovered only within the 20th century.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Apr 4, 2014 16:02:59 GMT -5
I think the most interesting thing people do when trying to prove the bible is true, is refer people to the bible for proof that it's true.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Apr 4, 2014 16:09:44 GMT -5
Nathan here is a quite simplistic website that talks about the logistics of a worldwide flood, the ark and all that. It is not possible in so many ways yet people still continue to say it happened. To do that you have to ignore a huge number of things that would have been impossible. www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-noahs-ark.html
|
|
|
Post by faune on Apr 4, 2014 16:43:40 GMT -5
Nathan here is a quite simplistic website that talks about the logistics of a worldwide flood, the ark and all that. It is not possible in so many ways yet people still continue to say it happened. To do that you have to ignore a huge number of things that would have been impossible. www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-noahs-ark.html Snow ~ You don't say? Those definitely are facts that need to be considered in taking this story literally ~ no doubt about it?
|
|
|
Post by rational on Apr 4, 2014 17:13:00 GMT -5
rational - we 're traveling - I can't look for the homilies right now. Search early church fathers - homilies. Thanks for the reference. I found them and read some of them. They offer no external proof at all. They were written 350 years after the fact and, of course, there was a gospel that had been developed named Matthew long after Matthew was moldering in the ground. I found it interesting that the first one listed contained the same that are still raised today (the genealogy list, for example) and there are no answers, then or now. Again, there is no proof that Matthew had anything to do with the gospel named after him.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Apr 4, 2014 17:17:32 GMT -5
The homilies of the early church presbyters also attest to the authenticity of the gospel accounts. The Roman Catholic Church did not exist in Jesus' lifetime, and no Catholics were there to witness anything Jesus said. Everything else is really hearsay.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Apr 4, 2014 17:56:25 GMT -5
The Bible specifically teaches that the Flood of Noah's time was global in extent and that all air-breathing, land animals and all humans were killed, except those saved in the Ark. How could the Bible be any more clear concerning the global nature of the Flood?! Or, if this was actually a local flood, how could the Bible have been any more misleading about its extent?! The bible also says: If he bible is so exact there is a question about air breathing animals like whales and dolphins. Did the go in the ark? Of course, it could be claimed that all fish have the "breath of life".
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 4, 2014 18:11:42 GMT -5
i believe it says everything that creepeth on the earth went into the ark so that would not include whales and dolphins...whales and dolphins don't creepeth...
Gen_7:8 Of clean beasts, and of beasts that are not clean, and of fowls, and of every thing that creepeth upon the earth,
Gen_7:14 They, and every beast after his kind, and all the cattle after their kind, and every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind, and every fowl after his kind, every bird of every sort.
Gen_7:21 And all flesh died that moved upon the earth, both of fowl, and of cattle, and of beast, and of every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth, and every man:
|
|
|
Post by rational on Apr 4, 2014 18:21:29 GMT -5
i believe it says everything that creepeth on the earth went into the ark so that would not include whales and dolphins...whales and dolphins don't creepeth... It also said everything with the breath of life. That would include, at the very least, all animals that breath air. I don't see these joined by an 'and' except in your mind.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 4, 2014 18:26:59 GMT -5
Gen_7:22 All in whose nostrils was the breath of life, of all that was in the dry land, died.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Apr 4, 2014 19:01:00 GMT -5
Gen_7:22 All in whose nostrils was the breath of life, of all that was in the dry land, died. Here is what, according to Genesis, god said: Genesis 6:17I am going to bring floodwaters on the earth to destroy all life under the heavens, every creature that has the breath of life in it. Everything on earth will perish.So, I guess, after reading this and then reading what is claimed to have happened, that god lied. Everything on earth did not perish. And the whales, who by any measure, had the breath of life, also survived.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 4, 2014 20:03:37 GMT -5
Faune quoteQuote - "YES. It is funny that Jesus is only recorded making such a prediction AFTER the destruction had occurred."
Yes, and its funny how so many Christians heeded Jesus' warnings and escaped Roman destruction, like, long after the Roman destruction. And funny how Jacob, Isaiah, Ezekiel, Daniel etc also spoke of the destruction of Israel AFTER THE MESSIAH HAS COME. Bert ~ You failed to comment here? Do you have something you would like to comment in relation to this person's post? It kind of left me hanging for something more from you on this subject? Sorry but the question is not clear to me. Could you rephrase it?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 4, 2014 20:09:17 GMT -5
Dmichgood quote re Jacob's prophecy of Judah - "NO, IT WASN'T WRITTEN IN THE FIRST CENTURY AD. but it was interpreted by the writers in the FIRST CENTURY AD and fitted it into their story. It was the concept that they wanted people to understand.
The writers as well THE PEOPLE reading it, understood that it was a concept and didn't have to be HISTORICALLY correct!
What so many people today don't understand is that the gospels written in the FIRST CENTURY AD wasn't even expected to be HISTORICALLY correct! Both the writers & those that heard the stories knew that!
No one was lying or being lied to!
It is only that people understanding how history is written today, believe those tomes written in FIRST CENTURY AD were written as actual events of history."
Jacob's prophecy was 1 - accurate 2 - historical 3 - written L.O.N.G. before it transpired.
no-one would contest that.
Even those with Jesus still hoped He would "restore again the kingdom of Israel" without grasping what was about to happen to their nation.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 4, 2014 20:12:01 GMT -5
Gen_7:22 All in whose nostrils was the breath of life, of all that was in the dry land, died. Here is what, according to Genesis, god said: Genesis 6:17I am going to bring floodwaters on the earth to destroy all life under the heavens, every creature that has the breath of life in it. Everything on earth will perish.So, I guess, after reading this and then reading what is claimed to have happened, that god lied. Everything on earth did not perish. And the whales, who by any measure, had the breath of life, also survived. i think that the average person after reading ALL the verses would come to the conclusion that it was land animals that were to die and not whales and dolphins
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Apr 4, 2014 20:42:28 GMT -5
Dmichgood quote re Jacob's prophecy of Judah - "NO, IT WASN'T WRITTEN IN THE FIRST CENTURY AD. but it was interpreted by the writers in the FIRST CENTURY AD and fitted it into their story. It was the concept that they wanted people to understand.
The writers as well THE PEOPLE reading it, understood that it was a concept and didn't have to be HISTORICALLY correct!
What so many people today don't understand is that the gospels written in the FIRST CENTURY AD wasn't even expected to be HISTORICALLY correct! Both the writers & those that heard the stories knew that!
No one was lying or being lied to!
It is only that people understanding how history is written today, believe those tomes written in FIRST CENTURY AD were written as actual events of history."Jacob's prophecy was 1 - accurate 2 - historical 3 - written L.O.N.G. before it transpired.
no-one would contest that.
Even those with Jesus still hoped He would "restore again the kingdom of Israel" without grasping what was about to happen to their nation. You still don't get what I am talking about. However, I really don't feel like repeating it!
But I will!"NO, IT WASN'T WRITTEN IN THE FIRST CENTURY AD. but it was interpreted by the writers in the FIRST CENTURY AD and fitted it into their story. It was the concept that they wanted people to understand.
The writers as well THE PEOPLE reading it, understood that it was a concept and didn't have to be HISTORICALLY correct!
What so many people today don't understand is that the gospels written in the FIRST CENTURY AD wasn't even expected to be HISTORICALLY correct!
Both the writers & those that heard the stories knew that!
No one was lying or being lied to!
It is only that people understanding how history is written today, believe those tomes written in FIRST CENTURY AD were written as actual events of history."
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 4, 2014 21:00:32 GMT -5
Quote - " NO, IT WASN'T WRITTEN IN THE FIRST CENTURY AD. but it was interpreted by the writers in the FIRST CENTURY AD and fitted it into their story. It was the concept that they wanted people to understand."
Still can't understand the logic here. Sorry if I am dumb. It wouldn't have readily been apparent to anyone until well into the Second Century, after the third and final rebellion of Jews, what the Judah prophecy really meant: No more Law (it was banned in the Roman Empire - even the Sabbaths) No more Nation (the Jews were driven out of Israel completely) No more monarchy (all the genealogies were destroyed as well as Jewish autonomy - there was no longer any "tribe of Judah" or opportunity for a new Judean kingdom.) Judah's prophecy of a Gentile based Messiahship, in the ashes of Israel, would have very slowly dawned upon people who read Genesis 49:10. nb in fact I suspect MANY if not MOST of those prophecies were not fully understood at the time they transpired, or years after. One we do know was understood immediately was when Jesus purged the temple, "the zeal of your house has eaten me up."
|
|
|
Post by rational on Apr 4, 2014 21:06:30 GMT -5
Here is what, according to Genesis, god said: Genesis 6:17I am going to bring floodwaters on the earth to destroy all life under the heavens, every creature that has the breath of life in it. Everything on earth will perish.So, I guess, after reading this and then reading what is claimed to have happened, that god lied. Everything on earth did not perish. And the whales, who by any measure, had the breath of life, also survived. i think that the average person after reading ALL the verses would come to the conclusion that it was land animals that were to die and not whales and dolphins So the verse I quoted doesn't mean every creature that has the breath of life in it will die? Nor is the phrase "Everything on earth will perish" accurate? And the phrase "...to destroy all life under the heavens..." is also not true? I think the average person reading "...to destroy all life under the heavens..." would think all living things were going to die. I think the average person reading "...Everything on earth will perish..." would arrive at the conclusion that everything was going to perish. Can you point to the text that states that only animals that have the breath of life and were land animals would die? I can't find that conjunction.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 4, 2014 21:11:21 GMT -5
There was no concept of "world" in early Genesis. in Jesus' time the "world" was the Roman Empire. The "world" like our "universe" changes from generation to generation. IMO Noah's flood was localized to the known world of his generation, and his animals would have largely been the domestic variety.
|
|
|
Post by Lee on Apr 4, 2014 21:39:15 GMT -5
Its been a spectacular creative animal, huh? If you mean Christianity "has been a spectacular creative animal," yes, I agree Christianity certainly has been immensely creative !
The big problem is that after they created all the myths & ideas surrounding Christianity, they forgot that they were the "creators" and now worship their own creation!
Oh no. There is nothing that exists that does not exist from God.
|
|
|
Post by Lee on Apr 4, 2014 21:41:34 GMT -5
Does your wife find you interesting or boring? Consistent in my beliefs and able to provide either logical or material support. You're both boring.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 4, 2014 22:08:47 GMT -5
i think that the average person after reading ALL the verses would come to the conclusion that it was land animals that were to die and not whales and dolphins So the verse I quoted doesn't mean every creature that has the breath of life in it will die? Nor is the phrase "Everything on earth will perish" accurate? And the phrase "...to destroy all life under the heavens..." is also not true? I think the average person reading "...to destroy all life under the heavens..." would think all living things were going to die. I think the average person reading "...Everything on earth will perish..." would arrive at the conclusion that everything was going to perish. Can you point to the text that states that only animals that have the breath of life and were land animals would die? I can't find that conjunction. i'm not that good with english but i think the term "of all" is what you want? Gen_7:22 All in whose nostrils was the breath of life, of all that was in the dry land, died.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Apr 4, 2014 23:25:38 GMT -5
Consistent in my beliefs and able to provide either logical or material support. You're both boring. May I say the same about you? You are boring (zzz)zzz and NOT logical!
|
|