Let's compare Jesus and Muhammed (and debate homosexuality) (and Tombstone).

#1,151
#1,151
g8terh8ter_eric said:
If they are written much later than Jesus' death, then they missed one VERY key prophecy that Jesus foretold of. In 70AD, the Romans sacked Jerusalem, and tore down the Temple, which Jesus had prophesied in Matthew, Mark, and Luke. If they had been written much later, one would be very quick to logically ask why this prophesy wasn't included in the text of those three gospels, especially if they had been written so many year later. I have a Schofield Bible, which puts the writing of the Book of Matthew, at or around 50AD, which was only 17 years after Jesus was crucified and rose again. Even the Book of Luke, and the Book of Acts, which were both written by Luke, a traveling companion of Paul, were written in 60AD. You also have to think that these books could have been possibly written before this, and just not published till a later date, due to the conflicts in the region.
Click to expand...

Mark is the first of the synoptic gospels, written shortly before or shortly after 70 CE. Matthew and Luke were definitely written after Mark.

John was written between 90-100 CE.
 
#1,152
#1,152
I would've posted this yesterday, but thanks to IDF I wasn't able to. I have one of the safest jobs in the military. I'm a nerd, I play with and repair electronics. But nothing will tighten up your sphincter like hearing that whistle noise, hearing a boom, looking out and seeing the smoke maybe 100 feet away. Then you realize there's debris right in front of you. I've never tried it, but I don't think butt sects with some other guy is as dangerous. Just a feeling I have.
 
#1,153
#1,153
therealUT said:
Mark is the first of the synoptic gospels, written shortly before or shortly after 70 CE. Matthew and Luke were definitely written after Mark.

John was written between 90-100 CE.
Click to expand...

to be fair though, there is sufficient evidence to support either in the 50s or early 60s, as well as shortly before 70. But there's not enough definite proof to prove any of those timelines. That said, it does seem obvious that Matthew and Luke used Mark as a timeline at the minimum.
 
#1,154
#1,154
volfanbill said:
to be fair though, there is sufficient evidence to support either in the 50s or early 60s, as well as shortly before 70. But there's not enough definite proof to prove any of those timelines. That said, it does seem obvious that Matthew and Luke used Mark as a timeline at the minimum.
Click to expand...

I am using the dates given in my Bible, in which, IMO, there would be no incentive to date these accounts further from the lifespan of Jesus.

Because of its dependence on the Gospel of Mark and because details in Luke's Gospel (12, 35a; 19, 43-44; 21, 20; 23, 28-31) imply that the author was acquainted with the destruction of the city of Jerusalem by the Romans in A.D. 70, the Gospel of Luke is dated by most scholars after that date; many propose A.D. 80-90 as the time of composition.
Click to expand...

Modern research often proposes as the author (Mark) an unknown Hellenistic Jewish Christian, possibly in Syria, and perhaps shortly after the year 70.
Click to expand...
 
#1,155
#1,155
fl0at said:
Maybe confine your answer to "The New Testament says ... " as opposed to "The Bible says ...," then. Consequently, as I have never read either New or Old Testament completely, what verse in the New Testament speaks to homosexuality?
Click to expand...

Never did come back around to respond to this. There is no need to specify if one has an understanding of the Bible as a whole
 
#1,156
#1,156
gsvol said:
Some board monitor is a real clown, or at least thinks he is.

One last comparison between Jesus and Muhammed.

Supernateral powers.

Eyewitness accounts say that Jesus performed many miracles, including making the blind to see and the lame to walk.

Muhammed? NADA.

In other words Jesus could raise the dead, Muhammed could make you dead, and that is still one of the main differences to this day.
Click to expand...

This pretty much some up your view of Islam:

So what if our guys flushed copies of the Quran down the toilet? We hope they did. They probably did; We hope they flush more. Mohammed was a demon-possessed whoremonger and pedophile who contrived a 300-page work of Satanic fiction: The Quran!
Click to expand...
 
#1,158
#1,158
ridethelightening said:
Never did come back around to respond to this. There is no need to specify if one has an understanding of the Bible as a whole
Click to expand...

I have a pretty solid understanding of the Bible as a whole. I've read the entire thing; attended Catholic Schools from Kindergarten until I graduated from High School; I've also been in plenty of Baptist Churches with my Mom, her family, my friends, and my ex-wife; as well, I've read plenty of non-Biblical Christian Theological texts.

While I have heard some people claim that Jesus fulfilled the Old Covenant and, in doing so, nullified the Mosaic Law, I have also heard many people that state that also then go on to justify that law on the basis of hygiene or social codes at the time (which, to me would be unnecessary if they truly thought the law was nullified by Jesus). I have also yet to find anyone who can satisfactorily provide a solution to the dilemma proposed by Jesus' statement concerning the law, the letter of the law, and that it will never pass away.
 
#1,159
#1,159
therealUT said:
I have a pretty solid understanding of the Bible as a whole. I've read the entire thing; attended Catholic Schools from Kindergarten until I graduated from High School; I've also been in plenty of Baptist Churches with my Mom, her family, my friends, and my ex-wife; as well, I've read plenty of non-Biblical Christian Theological texts.

While I have heard some people claim that Jesus fulfilled the Old Covenant and, in doing so, nullified the Mosaic Law, I have also heard many people that state that also then go on to justify that law on the basis of hygiene or social codes at the time (which, to me would be unnecessary if they truly thought the law was nullified by Jesus). I have also yet to find anyone who can satisfactorily provide a solution to the dilemma proposed by Jesus' statement concerning the law, the letter of the law, and that it will never pass away.
Click to expand...

Was your x wife a christan? If so, was that a big problem with you both?
 
#1,161
#1,161
So in reflection from this thread i thought it would be good to update the 8ter eric reference picture.


YW.
wantsit.jpg
 
#1,163
#1,163
therealUT said:
I have a pretty solid understanding of the Bible as a whole. I've read the entire thing; attended Catholic Schools from Kindergarten until I graduated from High School; I've also been in plenty of Baptist Churches with my Mom, her family, my friends, and my ex-wife; as well, I've read plenty of non-Biblical Christian Theological texts.

While I have heard some people claim that Jesus fulfilled the Old Covenant and, in doing so, nullified the Mosaic Law, I have also heard many people that state that also then go on to justify that law on the basis of hygiene or social codes at the time (which, to me would be unnecessary if they truly thought the law was nullified by Jesus). I have also yet to find anyone who can satisfactorily provide a solution to the dilemma proposed by Jesus' statement concerning the law, the letter of the law, and that it will never pass away.
Click to expand...

Need more info. What dilemma?
 
#1,164
#1,164
ridethelightening said:
Need more info. What dilemma?
Click to expand...

Matthew 5:18
For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished.
Click to expand...

The law Jesus routinely refers to is the Mosaic Law, expressed in Exodus, Numbers, Leviticus, and Deuteronomy. Feel free to quote the passages where Jesus says that with the coming of the Holy Spirit, the Law is now written on the hearts of men; however, that would still be the same Law.

The only place Jesus presumably runs counter to the Law is when he stops the stoning of the woman; however, he never says that executing the Law is a Sin. He simply states that he who is without sin should cast the first stone. Might someone who has just been Baptized and therefore purified of Sin cast that stone? Then, apparently, others can cast the second, third, fourth stones.

There are many opportunities for Jesus to specifically rebuke the Law (what were they going to do to, Crucify him if he took issue with the Laws regarding capital punishment, homosexuality, menstruation, etc.?), and he chose not to.
 
#1,165
#1,165
therealUT said:
I have a pretty solid understanding of the Bible as a whole. I've read the entire thing; attended Catholic Schools from Kindergarten until I graduated from High School; I've also been in plenty of Baptist Churches with my Mom, her family, my friends, and my ex-wife; as well, I've read plenty of non-Biblical Christian Theological texts.

While I have heard some people claim that Jesus fulfilled the Old Covenant and, in doing so, nullified the Mosaic Law, I have also heard many people that state that also then go on to justify that law on the basis of hygiene or social codes at the time (which, to me would be unnecessary if they truly thought the law was nullified by Jesus). I have also yet to find anyone who can satisfactorily provide a solution to the dilemma proposed by Jesus' statement concerning the law, the letter of the law, and that it will never pass away.
Click to expand...

I assume you are talking about Matthew 5: 17-18. The law was fulfilled when He died on the cross. So that we may have everlasting life through His blood.
 
#1,170
#1,170
How about Paul telling the Gentiles that do not have the Mosaic Law that it is okay, because if they are Baptized it will be written on their hearts?

He still never rebukes the Mosaic Law; to the contrary, he perpetuates it, does he not?
 
#1,171
#1,171
therealUT said:
How about Paul telling the Gentiles that do not have the Mosaic Law that it is okay, because if they are Baptized it will be written on their hearts?

He still never rebukes the Mosaic Law; to the contrary, he perpetuates it, does he not?
Click to expand...

Rebuked it by saying marrying multiple wives was not as God intended...no?
 
#1,172
#1,172
It's quite simple, really. Jesus fulfilled the law, and then continued on building the Lord's church. The Lord's church was established in the New Testament.
 
#1,174
#1,174
therealUT said:
Please cite book and verse.
Click to expand...

Sorry, it was divorce and remarriage, although one could make the case for multiple wives. Passage hits on other things in this thread too.

Matthew 19: 3-9

3*And Pharisees came up to him and tested him by asking, "Is it lawful to divorce one's wife for any cause?" 4*He answered, "Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female, 5*and said, 'Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh'? 6*So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate." 7*They said to him, "Why then did Moses command one to give a certificate of divorce and to send her away?" 8*He said to them, "Because of your hardness of heart Moses allowed you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so. 9*And I say to you: whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery."
 
#1,175
#1,175
I feel like that just kicked even more dust up on this. I actually read this recently in my current New Testament run-through I started last week.

It seems that Moses was bending rules for the ole grumpy Israelites and their shrew wives.

And why didn't Jesus answer the original question directly?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top