Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to Die Hard Baseball. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Do you believe in God(s)?
Topic Started: Apr 5 2006, 10:48 PM (2,509 Views)
Cubbies10
Member Avatar

Members
Jesus' first sermon plain or mount?

Matt.5:1,2: "And seeing the multitudes, he went up into a mountain: and when he was set, his disciples came unto him: And he opened his mouth, and taught them, saying...."

Luke6:17,20: "And he came down with them, and stood in the plain, and the company of his disciples, and a great multitude of people...came to hear him.. And he lifted up his eyes on his disciples and said..."
“Every player should be accorded the privilege of at least one season with the Chicago Cubs. That's baseball as it should be played - in God's own sunshine. And that's really living.”

Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
T-O
Member Avatar

Members
2BCano,Jun 9 2006
12:23 PM
Of Course:

MAT 1:16 And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.

LUK 3:23 And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli.


I am some what of a Historian, so have looked at several things closerly

Hi 2BCano: Thanks for the point.

Mathew chapter 1 and Luke chapter 3 list the geneology of Jesus Christ as you know. Mathews account goes back to Abraham, and Lukes account goes right back to Adam and God. A portion of his geneology is given at 1 Chronicles chapters 1 to 3.

Its good to think of this as well, that God is called Adam's father. Even though God is a spirit and Adam was fleshly. But there is no problem with anyone thinking of it that way since God was Adams creator, he is referred to as his father. Just like someone may say that so and so was the father of the atom bomb.

However, getting back to Mathew that refers to Jacob as being Joseph's father and Luke saying Heli was Joseph's father.

Since the matter of Jesus descent was of great importance to the Jews at that time, therefore they kept family records as well as public records very carefully. Its logical then that Mathew and Luke would have access to these records when they compiled their lists.

The lists made by both Matthew and Luke were comprised of names publicly recognized by the Jews of that time as authentic. The scribes and Pharisees as well as the Sadducees were bitter enemies of Christianity, and they would have used any possible argument to discredit Jesus, but it is noteworthy that they never challenged these genealogies. If either Matthew’s or Luke’s genealogy of Jesus had been in error, what an opportunity it would have been for these opponents to prove it then and there! For until 70 C.E. they evidently had ready access to the public genealogical registers and the Scriptures.

The same is true regarding the first-century pagan enemies of Christianity, many of whom were, like those Jews, learned men who would readily have pointed to any evidence that these lists of Matthew and Luke were unauthentic and contradictory. But there is no record that the early pagan enemies attacked Christians on this point.

The two accounts differ in some ways, but this is because Mathews
account traces the lineage through the royal line so that there would be no doubt as to the authenticity of Jesus kingly right. Lukes account traces the lineage of Mary in order to record the fleshly line of descent so that again there would be no doubt as to Jesus credentials.

If one looks at the bible record, at times certain persons would be called ones father even if it was just an adopted son, or a son-in-law, as in Mary's case since Heli was her father and with Joseph being Heli's son-in-law being married to Mary, it wasnt disputed at any time that he could not be correctly referred to as Josephs father if someone wished to refer to him in that way.

Since there is no record of anyone questioning the use of Heli being Josephs father via marriage, or his real father Jacob, we must conclude that both accounts can be referred to as being accurate, altho documented in different way, such as the royal line, and the fleshly line.


This was fairly lengthy. Thanks for listening.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
yankeekiller

Members
Whoever doesn't believe in the almighty powers of God is a blashphemer. They will be burned at the stake for being a witch and a devil-worshiper.
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
eye95
Member Avatar
Gorilla...'nuff said
Members
Telegraph-operator,Jun 9 2006
12:22 PM
eye95,Jun 8 2006
11:36 PM
I see that bluntness does not work either.

Surprise!

Hey, thanks for the response.

I'm sorry I did mean to ask you in my last post which beliefs of JW's do you think are blasphemus. Since you suggested that we are that way, it would be good if you would give me an instance or two.

At the same time I think I may have been a little rude to you which I should not have been so I apologize for that.

Your rudeness is in continuing to try to talk to me about something in which I have NO interest. The way to correct rudeness is to stop being rude, not to merely apologize for it.

As I have been going to great lengths to explain, this is precisely why JWs are so despised. They are perceived as being so insensitive as to not be able to figure out when they should shut up and move on!

Now, I am going to be rude here, again (because you do not respond to polite requests): Bugger off! Get off my virtual porch and bug someone who doesn't have the stomach to tell you off when you need to be told off.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
T-O
Member Avatar

Members
2BCano,Jun 9 2006
12:29 PM
Jesus' first sermon plain or mount?

Matt.5:1,2: "And seeing the multitudes, he went up into a mountain: and when he was set, his disciples came unto him: And he opened his mouth, and taught them, saying...."

Luke6:17,20: "And he came down with them, and stood in the plain, and the company of his disciples, and a great multitude of people...came to hear him.. And he lifted up his eyes on his disciples and said..."

Sorry, I missed this earlier post of yours.

A little background on the "sermon on the mount". This is recorded, as you referred to, in the bible books of Mathew and Luke.

Its interesting to note that Mathew's account is about 4 times longer than Lukes. Does this indicate a discrepancy perhaps in either ones account?
If one is looking to find fault, it may be easy to say yes it does because why were these accounts written differently?

The answer to this is that, although the bible writers were in harmony with each other, they all had different writing styles, as you would expect from say Mathew and Luke for instance. Mathew being a tax collector and Luke being a physician it is logical that they could use differing expressions at times, but all leading and portraying the same ideas.
That just as a point of interest.

As for Luke, his account in chapter 6 was much shorter than Mathews, however he included the left out parts in various other chapters, so the overall message was still accurate from both standpoints.

As for Jesus going up into the mountain (quite possibly near Capernaum, but the bible doesnt specify), he needed time alone to pray to Jehovah, then when his disciples joined him they went down to the plain and he spoke to the large crowd who had followed him. He obviously did this because he needed a larger open area to accomodate them all. Now this doesnt necessarily mean he went all the way down to the valley bottom. There are after all, many large open, flat areas on mountains all over the world.
The obvious conclusion is that he went to a more suitable place on the mountain in order to reach the hearts of those assembled there.

One thing we must remember. Sometimes the writings of these ones who recorded these events isnt word for word, but the explanation from both still convey the prime message.

Instead of people getting all bent out of shape about SEEMING discrepancies, one should realize that the important thing is what is the message and what does it mean to me and my eternal salvation.
If we wish to research the subject to find the small points, please do so, as we are doing now, but dont miss the point of the whole thing.

A lot of it has to do with reasoning and putting things into context. And many times different writers have their own way of expressing events. The seeming variations in this subject of the sermon on the mount are really not variations at all. Simply different writers expressing it and our abilities to reason on it. However if we really want to see if their are discrepencies, then do further research.

Actually there are much better examples in the bible of what people may think of as contradictory than the one just mentioned. But with the context in mind and good research we will always find that the bible is harmonious throughout.

I hope its a bit clearer and thanks again for your comments.


Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
yankeekiller

Members
Telegraph-operator,Jun 9 2006
06:05 PM
2BCano,Jun 9 2006
12:29 PM
Jesus' first sermon plain or mount?

Matt.5:1,2: "And seeing the multitudes, he went up into a mountain: and when he was set, his disciples came unto him: And he opened his mouth, and taught them, saying...."

Luke6:17,20: "And he came down with them, and stood in the plain, and the company of his disciples, and a great multitude of people...came to hear him.. And he lifted up his eyes on his disciples and said..."

Sorry, I missed this earlier post of yours.

A little background on the "sermon on the mount". This is recorded, as you referred to, in the bible books of Mathew and Luke.

Its interesting to note that Mathew's account is about 4 times longer than Lukes. Does this indicate a discrepancy perhaps in either ones account?
If one is looking to find fault, it may be easy to say yes it does because why were these accounts written differently?

The answer to this is that, although the bible writers were in harmony with each other, they all had different writing styles, as you would expect from say Mathew and Luke for instance. Mathew being a tax collector and Luke being a physician it is logical that they could use differing expressions at times, but all leading and portraying the same ideas.
That just as a point of interest.

As for Luke, his account in chapter 6 was much shorter than Mathews, however he included the left out parts in various other chapters, so the overall message was still accurate from both standpoints.

As for Jesus going up into the mountain (quite possibly near Capernaum, but the bible doesnt specify), he needed time alone to pray to Jehovah, then when his disciples joined him they went down to the plain and he spoke to the large crowd who had followed him. He obviously did this because he needed a larger open area to accomodate them all. Now this doesnt necessarily mean he went all the way down to the valley bottom. There are after all, many large open, flat areas on mountains all over the world.
The obvious conclusion is that he went to a more suitable place on the mountain in order to reach the hearts of those assembled there.

One thing we must remember. Sometimes the writings of these ones who recorded these events isnt word for word, but the explanation from both still convey the prime message.

Instead of people getting all bent out of shape about SEEMING discrepancies, one should realize that the important thing is what is the message and what does it mean to me and my eternal salvation.
If we wish to research the subject to find the small points, please do so, as we are doing now, but dont miss the point of the whole thing.

A lot of it has to do with reasoning and putting things into context. And many times different writers have their own way of expressing events. The seeming variations in this subject of the sermon on the mount are really not variations at all. Simply different writers expressing it and our abilities to reason on it. However if we really want to see if their are discrepencies, then do further research.

Actually there are much better examples in the bible of what people may think of as contradictory than the one just mentioned. But with the context in mind and good research we will always find that the bible is harmonious throughout.

I hope its a bit clearer and thanks again for your comments.

The Bible is life.
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
T-O
Member Avatar

Members
eye95,Jun 9 2006
04:25 PM
Telegraph-operator,Jun 9 2006
12:22 PM
eye95,Jun 8 2006
11:36 PM
I see that bluntness does not work either.

Surprise!

Hey, thanks for the response.

I'm sorry I did mean to ask you in my last post which beliefs of JW's do you think are blasphemus. Since you suggested that we are that way, it would be good if you would give me an instance or two.

At the same time I think I may have been a little rude to you which I should not have been so I apologize for that.

Your rudeness is in continuing to try to talk to me about something in which I have NO interest. The way to correct rudeness is to stop being rude, not to merely apologize for it.

As I have been going to great lengths to explain, this is precisely why JWs are so despised. They are perceived as being so insensitive as to not be able to figure out when they should shut up and move on!

Now, I am going to be rude here, again (because you do not respond to polite requests): Bugger off! Get off my virtual porch and bug someone who doesn't have the stomach to tell you off when you need to be told off.


Hello eye95:
Your words....
"As I have been going to great lengths to explain, this is precisely why JWs are so despised. They are perceived as being so insensitive as to not be able to figure out when they should shut up and move on!"

Actually this is not correct. JW's are despised for the reason that Jesus said at Mathew 24:9.."Then people will deliver you up to tribulation and will kill you, and you will be objects of hatred by all the nations on account of my name".

Do you know of ANY other group who are hated because they uphold Jesus name and that of Almighty God Jehovah's??

Catholics, Lutherans, Baptists, Penetecostal, Alliance, and on and on. Are these folks objects of hatred everywhere because they uphold these names? Not at all. If they do receive any localized persecution its usually because of some wrongdoing by one of its members and certainly not for upholding Jehovah and Jesus names.
Like Jesus said " in ALL the nations"...

They hated Jesus and his disciples for the same thing. Did Jesus and his disciples stop preaching the good news of God's Kingdom just because someone said "bugger off and get off my porch"..
The record speaks for itself.

This good news WILL continue to be preached, in spite of hatred and persecution, until Jehovah says it is enough and brings on Armageddon.

Eye, your continued responses show that you are not as miserable as you appear and you actually enjopy our discussions..
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
T-O
Member Avatar

Members
yankeekiller,Jun 9 2006
03:39 PM
Whoever doesn't believe in the almighty powers of God is a blashphemer. They will be burned at the stake for being a witch and a devil-worshiper.

Wow..Where did that come from?

Explain please...and thank you
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
eye95
Member Avatar
Gorilla...'nuff said
Members
[Since the original post has been read by its intended addressee and since it is unimportant to anyone else, I have deleted the original content of the post.]
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
yankeekiller

Members
Telegraph-operator,Jun 9 2006
06:27 PM
Wow..Where did that come from?

Explain please...and thank you

Oh, I've heard some preachers talk before. Scary, huh?
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
T-O
Member Avatar

Members
yankeekiller,Jun 9 2006
05:32 PM
Telegraph-operator,Jun 9 2006
06:27 PM
Wow..Where did that come from?

Explain please...and thank you

Oh, I've heard some preachers talk before. Scary, huh?

No, not scary. Because they dont know what they are talking about.
They sure dont get it from the bible.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
NateFizzle

Members
yankeekiller,Jun 9 2006
04:39 PM
Whoever doesn't believe in the almighty powers of God is a blashphemer. They will be burned at the stake for being a witch and a devil-worshiper.

Now I'm Christian, and not only is that an inacurate statement, but it makes Christians look bad.
Jim Thome: 564 Homeuns (12th All-Time)
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
yankeekiller

Members
natefizzle,Jun 9 2006
07:10 PM
Now I'm Christian, and not only is that an inacurate statement, but it makes Christians look bad.

Not saying all Christians are like that...
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
T-O
Member Avatar

Members
2BCano,Jun 9 2006
12:29 PM
Jesus' first sermon plain or mount?

Matt.5:1,2: "And seeing the multitudes, he went up into a mountain: and when he was set, his disciples came unto him: And he opened his mouth, and taught them, saying...."

Luke6:17,20: "And he came down with them, and stood in the plain, and the company of his disciples, and a great multitude of people...came to hear him.. And he lifted up his eyes on his disciples and said..."

Sorry Cano...I think I responded to yankeekiller by mistake on the topic of the sermon on the mount. My mistake not being proficient at how this board works yet.

[Post edited to remove false charge and personal insult. Warning given.]
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Element
The Original
Admin
If this doesn't cool down, this thread will be locked.
Posted Image
Posted Image
Posted Image
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
RedRuffing15
Member Avatar
Charles Herbet Ruffing
Members
I believe in god, and I've prayed to god every night since I was 8. But I respect anyone who doesn't believe, becuase they have their reason, and Much more often then not, its a good reason. And just becuase I believe there is a god doesn't make me any better or worse than anyone, becuase weather I'm one of the Zillions who have been fooled over the years, or one of the Zillions who have been right, its just my belief, as much as a child and the Easter Bunny, some have their reasons for its realness and others have their reason for its unrealness, and I'm in no place to decide whos right, becuase that, I will not know until my day has come.
[align=center]Posted Image
Posted Image
Charles Herbert 'Red' Ruffing
Red Ruffing: The Unofficial Site
RedRuffing15 GFX Page[/align]
NateFizzle
 

Who cares what everybody else thinks? If it makes the team better, that's all that is important.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
T-O
Member Avatar

Members
RedRuffing15,Jun 9 2006
07:30 PM
I believe in god, and I've prayed to god every night since I was 8. But I respect anyone who doesn't believe, becuase they have their reason, and Much more often then not, its a good reason. And just becuase I believe there is a god doesn't make me any better or worse than anyone, becuase weather I'm one of the Zillions who have been fooled over the years, or one of the Zillions who have been right, its just my belief, as much as a child and the Easter Bunny, some have their reasons for its realness and others have their reason for its unrealness, and I'm in no place to decide whos right, becuase that, I will not know until my day has come.

Very intelligent post. Somewhat fatalistic perhaps, or misguided, but intelligent nevertheless
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Cubbies10
Member Avatar

Members
Element please dont lock this thread it is very interesting to me to hear other peoples opinions.

Telegraph-operator: Thank you for your replys and full replys at that, i can appreciate that they were written by different people and i believe at slightly different times, but surely there should not be so many inconsistencies, my main reason for not believing in God is the Bible, can you to an extent understand if i said that it was a piece of propaganda, and i was talkign to a religious historian at a local university who said that in some parts of the world taking hold of a bible is not allowed and people learn the bible from sermens in church?? quite interesting

I have no problem with people who believe i am not trying to say they are wrong or anything like that, BUT i do have a problem with people who say that because i do not believe i am going to hell and what did somone on here say? Buirned at the Stake for being Devil Worshippers??? who worships the Devil, just because i dont worship God does not mean i worship the Devil
“Every player should be accorded the privilege of at least one season with the Chicago Cubs. That's baseball as it should be played - in God's own sunshine. And that's really living.”

Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
T-O
Member Avatar

Members
2BCano,Jun 10 2006
04:09 AM
Element please dont lock this thread it is very interesting to me to hear other peoples opinions.

Telegraph-operator: Thank you for your replys and full replys at that, i can appreciate that they were written by different people and i believe at slightly different times, but surely there should not be so many inconsistencies, my main reason for not believing in God is the Bible, can you to an extent understand if i said that it was a piece of propaganda, and i was talkign to a religious historian at a local university who said that in some parts of the world taking hold of a bible is not allowed and people learn the bible from sermens in church?? quite interesting

I have no problem with people who believe i am not trying to say they are wrong or anything like that, BUT i do have a problem with people who say that because i do not believe i am going to hell and what did somone on here say? Buirned at the Stake for being Devil Worshippers??? who worships the Devil, just because i dont worship God does not mean i worship the Devil

Good morning 2B...

Good post and interesting.

I think he was referring to some hell fire and brimstone preachers that he has heard somewhere and not really his own opinion.

Since there is no such thing as hell fire anyway.

You know, as far as what folks think of as contradictions in the Bible, you will notice that they are small things, that if you want to, they can be reconciled by doing a little research.

Now if for instance, Jesus said that the only hope for mankinf was God's Kingdom, and then if the apostle Paul for instance turned around and said that he was wrong or that his opinion of this was incorrect...Now that would be a real contradiction. Something to really get stumbled over if it were like that, but no such contradictions exist in scripture.

I hope the mod's on here realize that this topic is one that is listed as available on this board, so they should really have no problem when two people are discussing things in clean language and respect.

[Edited to remove language intended to start trouble. Warned.]

Have a good one and I want you to know that your comments are appreciated.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Cubbies10
Member Avatar

Members
Thanks for your reply!

They are little things but i find that there are so many little things it makes the bigger aspects harder to believe, and there are so many things round the world that i think make a mockery of the foundations of religion.

I cant remember where it is (Mayby you will know) but a church claimed to have the Wood from Jesus's Cross and the Nails from his crucifiction, and when Scientists carbon dated one piece of the material it was found to be from 200AD the church would then not allow any other items to be carbon dated.

I would not have a problem with it if they did not claim for the relics to carry miracle working powers when they were not even the proper ones!

Its just little things like that!

Im sure mods/admins will see this is a healthy debate/discussion and wont have a problem with it continuing
“Every player should be accorded the privilege of at least one season with the Chicago Cubs. That's baseball as it should be played - in God's own sunshine. And that's really living.”

Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Politics · Next Topic »
Add Reply