(July 14, 2012 at 9:51 pm)spockrates Wrote: my side of the fence

What fence, no god no fence

Thanks, everyone for the enjoyable conversation. Maybe we will talk more, soon?

spockrates Wrote:Jesus gives an alternat interpretation of the relationship between John the Baptist and Elijah in Matthew, chapter 11, if you care to discuss it:

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?sea...on=NIV1984

My thought is that Jesus' explanation is closer to what is true, for he knew John better than me, or you.

My thoughts are that Matthew tried to explain away what Mark had done. Convenient that this explanation came from Jesus' mouth eh?

Quote:Are you not surprised to learn, Fallen that Jesus states the words describing Elijah in the Old Testament actually are predictions?

I already knew that. But do you see that what Jesus 'quotes' is a prediction about Elijah himself and not John the Baptist? He's talking about Malachi 3:1 and if we read the end of this book we read Malachi 4:5 which says 'I will send you the prophet Elijah before the great and terrible day of the Lord comes.'

As we can see, the author of Matthew picked up on Mark's allegorical construct of John the Baptist but then by using Jesus (a person with authority) he tried to turn John into a historical figure.

(July 14, 2012 at 8:30 pm)spockrates Wrote: "Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.”

(Matthew 19)

Jesus had an appreciation for the absurd, too. And the courage to poke fun at the wealthy and powerful. Don't you think?

---

I saw a documentary which among other things explained that the word Camel was actually a misstranslation of the word rope.

Quote:the Greek word kamilos ('camel') should really be kamêlos, meaning 'cable, rope', as some late New Testament manuscripts1 actually have here. Hence it is easier to thread a needle with a rope rather than a strand of cotton than for a rich man to enter the kingdom

(July 14, 2012 at 9:04 pm)FallentoReason Wrote:

spockrates Wrote:If God were alive today and visited us in human form, would you expect him to do anything less than--well, miraculous? But what evidence would you accept to prove that someone did things no other man ever did? If the written accounts do not convince, then what would?

The written accounts are a step down to what would be convincing; a modern day miracle. If prayer actually healed once out of all the times I've seen it 'at work' around my church then I wouldn't be in disbelief today.

Agreed about so-called modern miracles. There is much hype, rather than miraculous healing, in some Christian circles.

When it comes to Jesus, however, he appears to be the real deal. Telling a crippled man who has not moved his legs in years to get up and walk and seeing him do so in front of a crowd of skeptics and enemies, and causing a man born blind to see for the first time are two that come to mind. I think it is worth noting that the enemies of Jesus who sought to discredit him never said his miracles were faked. Instead, they accepted the reality of them, but claimed they were caused by demonic powers. This claim is made in both biblical and non-biblical writings.

---

(July 15, 2012 at 2:58 am)FallentoReason Wrote:

spockrates Wrote:Jesus gives an alternat interpretation of the relationship between John the Baptist and Elijah in Matthew, chapter 11, if you care to discuss it:

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?sea...on=NIV1984

My thought is that Jesus' explanation is closer to what is true, for he knew John better than me, or you.

My thoughts are that Matthew tried to explain away what Mark had done. Convenient that this explanation came from Jesus' mouth eh?

I don't follow you, yet. Please explain how Matthew tried to explain away Mark.

---

(July 15, 2012 at 2:58 am)FallentoReason Wrote:

spockrates Wrote:Are you not surprised to learn, Fallen that Jesus states the words describing Elijah in the Old Testament actually are predictions?

I already knew that. But do you see that what Jesus 'quotes' is a prediction about Elijah himself and not John the Baptist? He's talking about Malachi 3:1 and if we read the end of this book we read Malachi 4:5 which says 'I will send you the prophet Elijah before the great and terrible day of the Lord."

I believe there are two predictions, here. Since the Day of the Lord (or the day of Jesus' return to earth in physical form) has not occurred, Malachi 4:5 has yet to come true. It is entirely possible the Elijah of the Old Testament will return, and there are some Jewish families even today who keep an empty chair for him at their dinner tables during a certain annual Jewish religious observance.

That leaves us with Malachi 3. Are you saying Jesus was mistaken in saying the prediction was of his cousin, who was a type of Elijah?

---

(July 15, 2012 at 7:09 am)downbeatplumb Wrote:

(July 14, 2012 at 8:30 pm)spockrates Wrote: "Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.”

(Matthew 19)

Jesus had an appreciation for the absurd, too. And the courage to poke fun at the wealthy and powerful. Don't you think?

---

I saw a documentary which among other things explained that the word Camel was actually a misstranslation of the word rope.

Quote:the Greek word kamilos ('camel') should really be kamêlos, meaning 'cable, rope', as some late New Testament manuscripts1 actually have here. Hence it is easier to thread a needle with a rope rather than a strand of cotton than for a rich man to enter the kingdom

I suppose that idea gives a little more hope to rich folk!



In either case, I suppose Jesus would be using hyperbole. The thought of trying to thread a needle with a camel would get more laughs, I think.

(July 15, 2012 at 7:09 am)downbeatplumb Wrote: I saw a documentary which among other things explained that the word Camel was actually a misstranslation of the word rope.

I suppose that idea gives a little more hope to rich folk!



In either case, I suppose Jesus would be using hyperbole. The thought of trying to thread a needle with a camel would get more laughs, I think.
[/quote]

It does show that errors creep into the bible, small changes can affect the meaning in large ways.

What do you think you are doing here?

(July 15, 2012 at 9:50 am)downbeatplumb Wrote:

(July 15, 2012 at 7:09 am)downbeatplumb Wrote: I saw a documentary which among other things explained that the word Camel was actually a misstranslation of the word rope.

I suppose that idea gives a little more hope to rich folk!



In either case, I suppose Jesus would be using hyperbole. The thought of trying to thread a needle with a camel would get more laughs, I think.

Quote:It does show that errors creep into the bible, small changes can affect the meaning in large ways.

I think it shows that those in the know, know better than those who are not in the know. You know? Can you find one reputable translation based on sound scholarship that translates the Greek word as rope, rather than camel? If someone wants to believe Jesus said rope, that's OK. But I'm unsure how a view not supported by any reliable translation prooves a vast majority of modern scholarship wrong.

(July 15, 2012 at 10:02 am)spockrates Wrote: I think it shows that those in the know, know better than those who are not in the know. You know? Can you find one reputable translation based on sound scholarship that translates the Greek word as rope, rather than camel? If someone wants to believe Jesus said rope, that's OK. But I'm unsure how a view not supported by any reliable translation prooves a vast majority of modern scholarship wrong.

Lets look at it logically shall we, the word Rope or cable is almost identical to the word Camel, looking at the context the word rope is a much better fit.

But hey maybe it was camel, it dont mean shit.

But errors do occur in the bible.

My favourite is the "wicked bible", where the important word "not" was ommited from thou shalt NOT commit adultary.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wicked_Bible

Quote: Faith in science works, hence faith works!

Your saying this betrays abysmal ignorance of science and scientific method.

---

(July 14, 2012 at 4:31 pm)spockrates Wrote: If so, please explain why. If not, please explain why a logical person should still not become, or remain Christian.

Nice straw man you got there. What do you call yourself doing here?