Another sign.......

Originally posted by Agerg
Here's a thought...perhaps the Bible is wrong! Or that your interpretation of it is wrong. Or perhaps the Bible is wrong and you compound this wrongness with a wrong interpretation of it!

Do you seriously believe that any events mentioned by huma...ahem...supposedly inspired by "God" 2000 years ago specifically relate to events taking place now??? 😕 What a ...[text shortened]... happened all throughout history? Why do such scriptural verses fail to apply to those times?

As I've mentioned before the majority of these things have always happened and I'm not denying that. So since they've always happend and Jesus knew that when he described them, then there has to be more to it then a simple or meaningless description as he would have known these things have happend to some extenct before he lived and of course after he lived.
Right? Why would he describe these things in the detail he did if they were not going to be something that would stick out at some time in the future that we could see with our own eyes and actually notice something different?
As an example a couple of these things he mentioned never happened before 1914. The obvious is WW1 and soon WW2. This is where he said "Nation against Nation" would be one of the signs.
Also he mentioned that the "Good News of the Kingdom would be preached in all the inhabited earth".
I commented on this fact earlier if you did read that.

Originally posted by galveston75
I'm not avoiding any discussion with you are anyone else.

Well it took you over a month to answer one simple question which followed obviously from your OP in the other thread. In this thread you are yet to answer the question I asked in the very second post of the thread despite my asking it several times.

I just think it's sad that ones like yourself seem to be blind to the facts that the whole world can see as to the fear and confusion that most have wondering where things are going and how life is going to end up for us all.
You cant have it both ways. You cannot claim that the whole world can see something and simultaneously claim that many of us cannot. So far, you are the only person I know who can see it, who else can you add to your list?

The Bible is very clear with it's description of what was to happen in the future of mankind with certian events that would affect us all, and what to do when we see those things happen.
I found it rather vague, but then you added in words to make it fit your desired outcome so that explains why it is clearer to you.

It is out of love from God to give us signs even though the Bible says the majority will not see and recognize them.
But you just said the whole world sees them.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Well it took you over a month to answer one simple question which followed obviously from your OP in the other thread. In this thread you are yet to answer the question I asked in the very second post of the thread despite my asking it several times.

[b]I just think it's sad that ones like yourself seem to be blind to the facts that the whole world can ...[text shortened]... he majority will not see and recognize them.
But you just said the whole world sees them.[/b]

No. The answers were there all the time. You just don't see them and no I'm not the only to see these events and understand them.

Originally posted by finnegan
In the study of folklore, a myth is a sacred narrative explaining how the world and humankind came to be in their present form. Many scholars in other fields use the term "myth" in somewhat different ways. [b] In a very broad sense, the word can refer to any traditional story.

A story may be considered true (and therefore a myth) in one soc ...[text shortened]... r any circumstances.

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

My selection and highlights.[/b]

Thank you, Professor Finnegan. Now, complete the assignment by asking 100 people if the word 'myth' conjures up an idea of truth or fiction for them and then come back with the results.

Originally posted by finnegan
Such a view demands that Paul be an opportunist rather than a man of faith

Why does it have that implication? Jesus did not found a religion. Jesus did not determine how people might interpret his words and death. Jesus wrote nothing. According to you and Jaywill, even his disciples were idiots (which I would debate another time - a curious way to ...[text shortened]... e suffered for being in the wrong place at the wrong time. It is not a relevant consideration.[/b]

Why does it have that implication?
What other possible motivation could one point to in order to explain Saul's sudden change of heart toward Christianity? He was a reputable man of faith, firmly planted within the Judaism of his day-- and a promising leader of the same, to boot! To say the least, his upside within the circles of the Jewish power elite was limitless. The only thing that he could count on by leaving that system was loss... unless he left for better opportunity elsewhere, of course.

When someone makes the half-baked assertion that Saul became Paul, reinventing himself via a new religion and thereby gaining more power/prestige than what was available to him otherwise, they are simply showing their complete ignorance of ancient history as well as demonstrating a pitiful grasp of basic human nature.

If Paul was not an opportunist, what possible reason did he have for leaving a system which had not only embraced him thoroughly, but which was fully prepared to bestow more power upon him?

Jesus did not found a religion. Jesus did not determine how people might interpret his words and death.
In the traditional sense--- ala Joseph Smith, L. Ron Hubbard, Mary Baker Eddy, et al--- no He did not. However, His actions somehow motivated thousands of people to worship Him as the sovereign God He claimed to be. That there were several disparate directions said worship undertook in the beginning is inconsequential: anything new is bound to cause some confusion for those being introduced to it. That being said, the leadership came from the apostles and of the apostles, Paul soon established himself as the one whose grasp was superior to the others'.

According to you and Jaywill, even his disciples were idiots...
Confused, yes. Idiots, no. Once they heard from Paul they understood the nature of the new covenant more clearly.

If Jesus is the subject under scrutiny as it were, who determines its significance and who decides how best to carry the message forward?
Holy Spirit.

Who even decides what to include or not include in the record?
Ibid.

Was his death a failure (as many people thought of course), was he to be resurrected as an Earthly messiah in their lifetimes, or could it all be interpreted as something very different?
Again, often times those closest to an event haven't an opportunity to consider the significance or ramifications of it. Seemingly insignificant occurrences (in retrospect) can have huge impact later in the game... and vice versa.

I have to add that people have suffered horribly for very strange causes over history and that is not in itself an assurance of anything much that is helpful to us. Just the history of people dying for their (diverse) religious beliefs is vast. People have suffered horribly for trying to express scientific beliefs. People have suffered for being in the wrong place at the wrong time. It is not a relevant consideration.
I beg to differ. It is wholly relevant to the discussion, as we are considering why Paul would leave prestige to embrace disgrace. He may have been wrong in his calculations, but once the second path made its misery more and more clear, had he left because of mundane motivations, the road back would have been shortly covered.

Paul did not leave Judaism in order to broaden its appeal to the masses. He abandoned the Law for that which replaced it: the New Covenant of Life.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
Thank you, Professor Finnegan. Now, complete the assignment by asking 100 people if the word 'myth' conjures up an idea of truth or fiction for them and then come back with the results.

I am not sure that I am terribly interested in the views of 100 random people on most subjects, though I wonder sometimes what they might think about my preferred washing powder.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH

Why does it have that implication? [viz that Paul was "opportunistic"]
What other possible motivation could one point to in order to explain Saul's sudden change of heart toward Christianity?

Conversion experience is the usual account, including his own. What's your problem about stating the obvious?

When someone makes the half-baked assertion that Saul became Paul, reinventing himself via a new religion and thereby gaining more power/prestige than what was available to him otherwise, they are simply showing their complete ignorance of ancient history as well as demonstrating a pitiful grasp of basic human nature.

I agree. Who are you referring to and can I see a quote supporting that?

the leadership came from the apostles and of the apostles, Paul soon established himself as the one whose grasp was superior to the others'.

I do not agree that Paul was one of the apostles, which is quite incompatible with his role persecuting their followers prior to his epiphany on the Damascus road.

Otherwise I differ from you only in the manner of expressing the point, well established historically, that Paul was a major and indeed indispensible influence in establishing the new Christian religion. Since you take the view that he was only discovering a pre existing truth, your terminology is that Paul had a superior grasp of this but we are not in dispute about this except for your dogged reluctance to confirm what is not even contentious.

That there were several disparate directions said worship undertook in the beginning is inconsequential: anything new is bound to cause some confusion for those being introduced to it.

Well in fact the several different directions led to several different religions. The Gnostics are interesting to read about for example. The Jewish faith went through changes and splits. I could go on if I cared. In the present context all that is interesting is that Christians took a particular direction under the influence of Paul's teaching. Their subsequent survival is a whole tale of its own.

According to you and Jaywill, even his disciples were idiots...
Confused, yes. Idiots, no. Once they heard from Paul they understood the nature of the new covenant more clearly.

I checked and you did not directly call them idiots. What am I like?

"Once they heard from Paul"[i] - how often do we hear this said? Paul converted the apostles - Paul gave the new religion its key messages. They were not idiots, of course, but they were confused and did not have a coherent way forward until "they heard from Paul."

Jesus did not found a religion. Jesus did not determine how people might interpret his words and death.
In the traditional sense--- ala Joseph Smith, L. Ron Hubbard, Mary Baker Eddy, et al--- no He did not.

We agree then that He did not found a religion. As you wittily note, many other people have founded religions quite intentionally and for various purposes so we know it can be done and Jesus did not do it.

If Jesus is the subject under scrutiny as it were, who determines its significance and who decides how best to carry the message forward?
Holy Spirit.

Who even decides what to include or not include in the record?
Ibid.

Well the Holy Spirit (aka ibid) presumably already knew. My son converted me to support Everton Football Club, but I don't think God's Son converted him to Christianity.

So it's a fat lot of use the Holy Spirit having all these great ideas if He forgets to tell anyone back on our planet, where the worshipping / sinning / saving stuff has to be done. Oh where was Facebook when it was needed?

What would you say? I'm guessing that He told Paul and Paul told the others.

Again, often times those closest to an event haven't an opportunity to consider the significance or ramifications of it. Seemingly insignificant occurrences (in retrospect) can have huge impact later in the game... and vice versa.

Just so. It would be so tiresome to write a whole Gospel and forget to mention something that later becomes central to the whole story.

But what is significant is determined with respect to the sequel; in particular what is significant is what will become important later to the new religion. So the Last Supper is significant, the Resurrection is significant, for the new religion. It is impossible to know what will become significant until one has first determined what is the message, what is the story and what does it all mean.

[i][How many people went to the stake during the Reformation because of the careless account of the Last Supper, when a little more detail, just a few well chosen words, could have been so helpful? I imagine Bishop Cranmer had a few words to say about this after his burning when he met St Peter at the gate!]


Paul did not leave Judaism in order to broaden its appeal to the masses. He abandoned the Law for that which replaced it: the New Covenant of Life.

And this of course was very much his contribution, when others argued long and hard for retaining a Jewish identity, witness for example the discussions about circumcision (lucky escape there for you and me!).

Originally posted by galveston75
No. The answers were there all the time. You just don't see them and no I'm not the only to see these events and understand them.

No they weren't. I didn't ask you what the Bible said, I asked you what you understood from the Bible and what you thought you saw. To date, you have not given an answer (for this threads OP). For someone who claims to understand the events and see them, you are remarkably zip lipped on the matter.

Originally posted by twhitehead
No they weren't. I didn't ask you what the Bible said, I asked you what you understood from the Bible and what you thought you saw. To date, you have not given an answer (for this threads OP). For someone who claims to understand the events and see them, you are remarkably zip lipped on the matter.

I have answered you. Just read the posting.....