Waterboy,

I don't believe the literal truth of the Bible. Which bits do you believe are literally true?

If God exists, suggesting that he killed all the first-born of Egypt OR that he murdered innocent children and babies in Noah's flood OR that he came up with the Mad Moses' laws is the greatest sacrilege possible! What does your Church teach?

If he exists he is intelligent, not stupid, and to state that he did these things would be blasphemous!

But you didn't answer any of my questions in my last post! Please at least try!

It is not what you learnt in the seminary that is important, it is what is taught in your Churches.

How does your Church teach the Passover?

If the last supper was the Passover meal - Why would Jesus (the son of God) celebrate something that never happened?

Jesus actually didn't break the rule about the Sabbath. He healed people on the Sabbath. Mark 2:23-26 is a very reasonable explanation!

However, aren't you being very selective in your discussion of Matthew 5:18...not the least point nor the smallest detail of the law will be done away with...."?

By changing an unequivocal statement to a much softer statement aren't you manipulating Jesus' word to suit yourself? Is this mischievous?

Jesus may have a problem with you calling what I say as "mischievous misrepresentation". John 8:7…let he who has not sinned cast the first stone….”

Your Bible, Christian Churches and preachers misrepresent, not me!

Forget the straw man rubbish..please answer the questions? My quotations are directly from your Bible!

Finally, the gospels, are also very flawed.

On judgment alone Jesus allegedly doesn't know what he is doing.

John 5:22 "The Father has committed all judgment to the Son."
John 8:16 "My judgment is true..."
John 9:39 "For judgment I have come into the world."

BUT he also says

Luke 12:14 "Who made me a judge?."
John 12:47 "I did not come to judge but to save."
John 3:17 "God did not send the Son to judge the world."
John 8:15 "I judge no one."

Ox2 This is not for you,for obvious reasons.

The texts from John that O2 has so carefully selected to misrepresent S. are worth discussing.On the face ofit this is off-topic since the thread is about the resurrection but it is pertinent to the theme of interpreting S.

O2's use of8:16 illustrates well the problem with quoting texts out of context.A slightly expanded quote demonstrates the problem.O2's quote "My judgement is true.." (capitalising the M wasa particularly clever trick.)
What John really says..
"8:15 You judge according to the flesh,I judge noone.8:16 Yet even if I do judge,my judgement is true,for itis not I alone who judge but I and He who sent me."

The context of 5:22 includes 5:19 through to at least 5:32.It's too much to quote inits entirety here.In context two things become evident.Firstly from 5:25 it is evident that John is talking about the 'final judgement' which will take place at the resurrection of the dead.Secondly from verse 24 we find that John's idea of Jesus' judgement is not that Jesus makes any decision of judgement but that His mere presence 'provokes'a kind of judgement that people bring on themselves.

It is very clear from 8:15&16 that the writer of John's Gospel is developing a theology of judgement that doesnot require Jesus to 'decide in judgement' over anyone.

9:39 then must be read in the light of all that has preceded it.It is no longer contradictory but follows from the extended development of John's theology of judgement.Johns Gospel appears to be a very carefully contructed work (unless we accept Bultmann's analysis, of course) that uses contrasting imagery to develop his ideas and theological point.Light and darkness,blindness and seeing,deafness and hearing all fit with the major theme of Jesus presence precipitating the crisis of faith which is judgement culminating in His being raised up in glory on the cross.The idea of judgement is developed in the contrast between condemning and saving.Jesus does not condemn but came to save.

This is better explained by Raymond Brown in his commentary on John from which I have drawn the preceding discussion.

opinionated<<However,aren't you being very selective in your discussion of Matthew 5:18...not the least point nor the smallest detail of the law will be done away with...."?>>

as waterboy replied context bro

your taking the quote out of its context,the preceeding words that lead up to your quote are some of the most important words written[mourning/comforted,..hunger/thirst for rightiousness fullfuilled, mercyfull get mercy,..bless the peacemakers..pure in heart will see god..those percicuted for rightiousness sake will be blessed

what is saLT THAT HAS L0ST ITS FLAVOUR..[WHAT USE A LIGHT THAT SHEDS NO LIGHT...mat5;16..let your light shine before men, that they masy see YOUR GOOD WORKS and glorify your father in heaven,..17..do not think i came to destroy the law[or the prophets]..i did not come to destroy but to fullfill..18..your quote..ADD IN.till all is fullfilled

well the previous verse revealed..he was here to fullfill..[get it?]

19 whoever therefor breaks con of the least of THESE commandments and teaches men so, shall be called least in heaven, but whoever DOES and teaches THEM..shall be called great..20..for i say unto you

..THAT UNLESS YOUR RIGHTIOUSNESS EXCEEDS..the rightiousness of the scribes and the pharisees, YOU will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven...

[think ye they were rightious?..any honest reading reveals we simply by not murdering beasts[sacrificial goats [or nation states] are more rightious

[or rather are you able to be more rightious than those who wrote the old test-i -ment?]

<<By changing an unequivocal statement to a much softer statement aren't you manipulating Jesus' word to suit yourself?>>by making it haRSHER ARE YOU MORE RIGHTIOUS?

<<Is this mischievous?>>..LET OTHERS READ THE TEACHINGS THEM SELF[THEN LETS SEE IF THEY CAN REALISE rightiousness MORE HOLY THAN WAS WROTE..YOU HAVE HEARD IT was SAID to those of days of old...[YOU SHALT NOT MURDER....but i say to you..simply being in anger...25 agree with your adversary quickly

why dont people see that adulterating gods laws ...is true adultery

Waterboy,

Why won't you answer my questions? Scared?

Did you sleep through the "do not judge others"…Matthew 7:1-5 and John 8:7…let he who has not sinned cast the first stone.." lectures.”

I notice that you totally ignored my questions and jumped to the judgement section...If you do a word count you will see I had to shorten them because I was running out.

So when you said "carefully selected to misrepresent" & "capitalising the M was a particularly clever trick"you failed Exodus 20:16…"Do not bear false witness"! AGAIN!

You false accuser you...lol I did neither of your judgemental accusations!

Put the L plates back on!

Now let's correct you

Firstly, isn't John quoting Jesus' alleged words?

If they aren't Jesus' words but Johns' you have opened a nest of worms.

You have proven that the Bible isn't God's word and churches preach falsehoods...Do your priests ever say "Jesus said"? Well done!

John 8:14 "NO" Jesus answered... If as you state they are John's words could John therefore be making all this up and pretending Jesus said them?

Which of Jesus' words in the Gospels are actually his and which are the words of the gospel writers?

Do you realise what you have stated here?

So let's pretend they are Jesus' words afterall it often states "Jesus said"

Jesus contradicts himself in

"8:15.....I JUDGE NOONE.8:16 Yet even if I do judge,my judgement is true,FOR IT IS NOT I ALONE WHO JUDGE but I AND HE WHO sent me."

Did Jesus understand words?

But in your zeal you failed again

John 5:25 Jesus (or John) makes a mistake....."the time is coming - the time has already come..." or KJV "...The hour is coming, and now is" but by John 5:28 ... the time is coming again...

He sounds confused.

But wait John 5:27 says God has given the Son the right to judge.

Whomever's words these are they sure are contradictory.

So tell me - Are they Jesus' words or John's? And if John's shouldn't you tell your Church they are teaching wrongly?

Please answer my previous questions...you seem timid & evasive!

Of course it was quite right of Waterboy to point out that I had over-simplified my characterisation of the Bible in saying it was “imaginative narrative and metaphor.” The book is, as he said, a mixture of genres. My description concentrated on the aspect that seems to be most vehemently denied, probably out of fear, by a sizeable portion of the OLO posters. Opinionated2 is the most conspicuous of them at present.

Notice the linguistic style of the posts in the name of Opinionated2. Sentences are generally very brief, and almost every one is written as a paragraph in itself to create a punching or stabbing effect. Add to that the extraordinary number of exclamation marks per post and you have a way of screeching on the screen. The proliferation of question marks is also remarkable. The incessant quoting of the scriptures in this style is the written equivalent of the hand savagely pounding the Bible.

These devices all combine to produce the language of the bullying interrogator who is secretly terrified of relating to another person on an equal footing. To do so would involve seriously questioning one’s own assumptions and conclusions, which in turn would tend to make one’s own assertions more qualified and one’s own questions more gentle and nuanced.

This is so like the behaviour of many fundamentalist Christian campaigners that it isn’t funny. In their crazed quest for complete domination, aggressive religionists and aggressive atheists equally deny the humanity of others. That is why I said earlier that their mindset leads to violence in our world.

I must refrain from abbreviating the name of Opinionated2 to simply O2, which denotes life-giving oxygen. Perhaps a better term would be H2SO4 (if I could insert subscripts).

opinionated2<<..Jesus contradicts himself>>..lol it is you who are revealed to be fool, back to that you wrote

jesus contradicted himself yet you missrepresent what he is saying, to finish your QUOTE..<< in "8:15.....I JUDGE NOONE.8:16 Yet even if I do judge,my judgement is true,FOR IT IS NOT I ALONE WHO JUDGE but I AND HE WHO sent me.">>>..im curious why you persist in missleading o2, thats not what was written[and certainly not in FULL CONTEXT

if you were able to comprehend law at the time you would realise that TWO people need to testify a truth..[recall at the end TWO testified, well re read from 8;13...YOU BEAR WITNESS of yourself..[ie one][thus]..YOUR WITNESS IS not TRUE

8;14 even if i bear witness of myself[one]..my witness is true..for i know where i came from and where i am going..but you know not where i come from, nor know you of where i am going

then your 8;15..you judge according to the flesh..[i judge no-one]..16..and IF i do judge...my judgement is true;..for i am not alone..[ie one witness]..but i am with my father, who sent me[thus two]...17 note..IT IS ALSO written in YOUR law..that THE TESTIMONY OF TWO MEN IS TRUE..18..I AM ONE...and the father who sent mebears witness of me [TOO ,ie making two witness]

now let me ask[your own words back at you

Did Jesus understand words?

<<in your zeal [to make points]..you failed again

re your john 5;27...yet another selective quote
it must be read in the light of deuteronomy 17;15-22
and must be read in its full context 5;16-47

but how can me..[but an ignorant fool]..convince one as wise as you...lol
words quoted out of con-text,will allways seem contradictory, because they serve a pre-set adgenda