The Forum > Article Comments > A former dean of St George’s cathedral runs afoul of the evangelicals > Comments
A former dean of St George’s cathedral runs afoul of the evangelicals : Comments
By Peter Sellick, published 15/1/2019Before we discuss the culture wars it is useful to examine the claim that the bible must be read literally ie without the aid of analogy and metaphor.
- Pages:
-
- 1
- Page 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- ...
- 22
- 23
- 24
-
- All
Posted by Sells, Tuesday, 15 January 2019 6:32:18 PM
| |
What a "Resurrection" said the actress to the Canon.
Posted by plantagenet, Tuesday, 15 January 2019 6:58:19 PM
| |
Peter,
You are at it again with your attack on evangelicals who support the bodily resurrection of Jesus and not a metaphorical resurrection: <<Those complaining about John's appointment are on the evangelical side of these wars who insist that the bible be read literally rather than analogically or metaphorically.>> Do you want me to read this article of yours analogically or metaphorically to invent lots of postmodern reader-response creativity of your writing. What did Jesus do AFTER he rose from the dead? Those who were in the presence of the resurrected Jesus touched him, ate with him, and talked with him (see Luke 24: http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Lk+24&version=ERV ). That’s not bad for someone whose resurrection actions were a metaphor. Then you have the audacity to state: <<"Now when the centurion, who stood facing him, saw that in this way he breathed his last, he said, "Truly this man was God's Son!" God has been revealed even to the Gentiles, even to the direct persecutors of Jesus! A literalist reading of these verses makes no sense and misses the theological point>> That is Peter Sellick’s creative apparatus to embellish the text. You are way too late in time to want to deny the literal, bodily resurrection of Jesus. Even one of the early church fathers, Justin Martyr (ca. 100-165) refuted your view: “Why did He rise in the flesh in which He suffered, unless to show the resurrection of the flesh? And wishing to confirm this, when His disciples did not know whether to believe He had truly risen in the body, and were looking upon Him and doubting, He said to them, ‘Ye have not yet faith, see that it is I;’ and He let them handle Him, and showed them the prints of the nails in His hands. And when they were by every kind of proof persuaded that it was Himself, and in the body, they asked Him to eat with them, that they might thus still more accurately ascertain that He had in verity risen bodily” (On the Resurrection, ch. 9). See: http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0131.htm. Posted by OzSpen, Tuesday, 15 January 2019 7:02:07 PM
| |
Alan B,
<<Excludes important theology, i.e., we're all fallen angels trying to get back home/our natural state? That the teaching of resurrection could more easily apply to reincarnation? Because only with reincarnation can evil doers reap what they sow. Just as a pebble thrown into a pond makes ripples that are only stopped at the shoreline, so also those things perpetrated in a physical world should be also appropriately rewarded in this world.>> One minute after your last breath you will find that "everyone must die once. Then they are judged [by God]" (Hebrews 9:27). There is no reincarnation in the Almighty God's kingdom. You could deal with those eternal issues if you are open to listening to and responding to the living, resurrected Jesus. Posted by OzSpen, Tuesday, 15 January 2019 7:08:41 PM
| |
John Ryan,
<<The Bible but which version? there's so many, it is not quite as bad as the Book Of Mormon but its just as made up>> What's the topic of this subject written by Peter Sellick? 'A former dean of St George's cathedral runs afoul of the evangelicals'. But along you come with your red herring logical fallacy of Bible versions. I encourage you to deal with the literal vs metaphorical interpretation of Jesus' resurrection that Peter raised. Posted by OzSpen, Tuesday, 15 January 2019 7:12:57 PM
| |
Peter,
You responded to runner: <<So, Runner, where are the bones of Jesus? If you cannot give an account of where they are then all your arguments are confused.>> You know that is a straw man argument, i.e. baloney! It's a false representation of what runner stated. I do wish he would not be so volatile with his comments. As an eminent Anglican, surely you know the answer to that question? Take a read of the Ascension account in Luke 24:50-53, http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Lk+24&version=ERV Jesus' bones are not in the tomb. This historical evidence was and is that it is empty. He's currently not on earth. He has ascended. I await his second coming in majesty and glory, Revelation 19:1-21, http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Rev+19%3A1-21&version=NRSVA Posted by OzSpen, Tuesday, 15 January 2019 7:24:19 PM
|
Peter