How good are your reasoning skills? ... and historical background on the conception of the NT?

[st_someone]

Trying to prove the divinity of Christ by outside sources???

Have you read Matthew 16:
"He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?”

Simon Peter said in reply, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.”

Jesus said to him in reply, "Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah. For ***flesh and blood ***has not revealed this to you, but my heavenly Father. "

You must be born from above.

 

[PRmerger]

Trying to prove the divinity of Christ by outside sources???

Have you read Matthew 16:
"He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?”

Simon Peter said in reply, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.”

Jesus said to him in reply, "Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah. For ***flesh and blood ***has not revealed this to you, but my heavenly Father. "

You must be born from above.

Exactly!

Not to mention that Catholics believe in the* entire* revelation of God–not just the written revelation. So, the Sacred Tradition that was passed down through the Apostles declares that Jesus is God.

We don’t need to follow Deedat’s artificially imposed directive: “show me where Jesus says in the Bible”. I ask Deedat: “show me why we have to show you in Scripture that Jesus says he’s God!”

 

[Lion_of_Narnia]

Grndslm,

No, markan priority is NOT a fact–despite the assertions of many/most contemporary NT scholars–who remind me of pre-plate techtonics geologists who ONLY reliquished their hold on geology by dying out or retiring. Markan priority came out from a bunch of deist and atheist german scholars in the late 18th & early 19th century w/ a materialist bias seizing on one “fact”–the crudity of mark’s koine greek–so despite the testimony of the ECFs , the “scholars” claimed that Mark was written first and that at a late date

 

[Texas_Roofer]

Very interesting.

I’m gonna go ahead and say that “Markan priority” is about as factual as you can get. “Late Gospel compsition” is also pretty dern factual when you undersand that Mark had to have been written during or after 70 AD, due to something he had written that we know to have historically happened in 70 AD (can’t remember exactly what it is now, because my brain has been overloaded for the past few days, but I’ll find it again, I’m sure).

As for the Q, I have no interest in that. It is a theory alone. There is no Q, and I don’t see when or why this theory arose. I think the Q only helps out Christians, but the non-existence of it just shows that authors were copying from the ones before them and adding in their own narrative twist, if you will.

And as for pseudographic authorship, I have no idea what that is.

Actually, I’m trying to prove the divinity of Christ Jesus. If you think that scripture is irrelevant, as do I… and that we can only rely on word of mouth of those who were persecuted… do you know of anybody who had actually witnessed the resurrection and was persecuted? Because all the authors of the New Testament never actually met him. So what historical references should I look at for those that actually knew him and were persecuted?

Interesting that you think I’m a Muslim because I linked to Deedat’s videos. I was actually raised Catholic, and, even in Catholic elementary school… I had the same thoughts as Deedat, that Jesus was a wise teacher and became misunderstood overtime. As Deedat has said over and over again… "Show me one place where Jesus says, “I am God” and/or “Worship ME”.

As far as I know, Muhammad wrote the Koran from front to back as a revelation he had had from God. I only know this from glancing at some website that one of Deedat’s followers created. I have no idea what’s in it… but I have a feeling that there are far fewer inconsistencies in the Koran than the Bible. I have read only pieces of the Bible and none of the Koran… so I’m not willing to pass judgement on any of these books just yet, but I am willing to admit that I think the writings about Jesus are a bit fishy.

So who wrote about their time with Jesus? Or the Resurrection that they witnessed? The best I can gather is that people did talk about it… and then Saul falls down, bumps his head, and then sees Jesus. From that point, he becomes Paul and doesn’t stop writing about what Catholics were talking about for the past couple years. (P.S. - When & where did the term ‘Catholic’ originate?) You’re right that disproving [the authenticity] of scripture doesn’t disprove the divinity of Jesus… so then what DOES prove his divinity? Some people who never met Jesus being persecuted? Who did know Jesus? Who did see the resurrection? Who then of those last two groups did write about it?

I mean… point blank… if Paul was the closest apostle/author to Jesus… wouldn’t he have known about the Virgin Birth? And if he didn’t… who added that in there? Was it from the great memories of those playing Telephone? Or what??

OK… I am really gone for now. I’ve got to take a break from all this and then research a lot more before I respond again. G’day to you all!

3.3 Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man; for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ. And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day. Josephus Antiquities of the Jews 18.63-64

 

[Lion_of_Narnia]

I have not looked at that site yet…

Do so–especially if you really have a commitment to honest thinking.

,

…but I have heard of a decent theory (my emphasis**)** on how no one inside the Towers could see anybody drilling holes in the building support columns…

Hire a bunch of Zionist Jews (!!!) to sit on top of the elevator shaft and ride it up and down for a weekend. There were actually reports of people OUTSIDE the Towers who saw flashing lights the weekend before 9/11… but I doubt I’ll ever find that article again…

Explosive demolition is a process that takes WEEKS to enact. No one could have been using the elevators (let alone just being in nearby offices) without hearing high speed drills boring into concrete. It also strains credulity to imagine an explosives bearing terrorists (whatever ethnicity, your edging towards anti-semitism comment noted) riding up and down a “weekend” not just w/ plastique but highly sensitive detonators. Since the late John O’Neil (the new WTC security director) was in the building that weekend moving into his office I think he might have noticed as well.

 

[Lion_of_Narnia]

Grndslam,

The key difference between 9/11 troofers and the the Earliest Church is that troofers knowingly engage in lies and deceit. Their lopsided and altered “evidence” is obviously such, so that amateur debunkers can blow their claims to smithereens

Except for a few out-and-out psychotics, I don’t think there is a single troofer who could withstand the mildest persecution and keep at their ludicrous and often hateful claims. If we didnt have the First Amendment (USA) and the Gov’t decided that the troofer movement represented a threat to order, you would undoubtedly have prominent troofers fessing up to their lies at just the threat of incarceration in a local jail–let alone prison.

Contrast this to the Early Church. No gain for their claims. Ridicule. Ostracism (often deadly in pre-industrial world to lose your support group). Prison (in conditions that make a mexican jail seem like Club Fed) Torture (“What and where are you going to stick those red-hot irons!!!”) Death (by torture unless, like Paul or Justin Martyr, you were a citizen)

 

[Lion_of_Narnia]

Late composition, like markan priority, is more of an academic habit that an actual reasoned position. Even Markan priorists today are starting to edge toward a pre-70 AD composition.

Late Composition was those same deists & atheists who originally were saying 150-200+ years from the crucifiction–because they had a pretty good idea of how long it actually takes to mythologize a historical person.

Too bad for them for the increasingly older texts that have been found.

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

To Grndslm

The reason they crucified Jesus is because Jews denied his divinity and miracles and tried Jesus for them, Jesus followers followed Jesus because of his divine revelations and miracles who witnessed and were healed by Jesus, the Romans scourged and placed Jesus on trial for his Truth and Kingship, which their feared when the procurator learned Jesus was divine.

I never claimed you to be a Muslim, My commentary kept within the range of topic discussions without changing subjects. You introduced “Arianism” heresy through the Islam faith, I kept within the subject matters of the topic.

The Muslim claim that the Koran comes from a **“new” revelation from an Angel **Gabriel who gave this new teaching to Mohammad the founder of Islam, the Koran did not come from God. Let us speak clearly here what the Koran records not what others may want to think it says.

St.Paul and new testament writers foretold the Catholic Church of this coming over 600 years before Muhammad was ever born. Here is the record and prophecy that predates Islam over 600 years, and this is why the New Testament is the inspired Word of God because it contains only “Truth”. Please read the following scriptures that foretold of Islam’s new gospel by an angel over 600 years before it came to be.

Galatians 1: 6 **I am amazed that you are so quickly forsaking the one who called you by (the) grace (of Christ) for a different gospel
7 (not that there is another). But there are some who are disturbing you and wish to pervert the gospel of Christ. **8 But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach (to you) a gospel other than the one that we preached to you, let that one be accursed!
9 As we have said before, and now I say again, if anyone preaches to you a gospel other than the one that you received, let that one be accursed! **
11 Now I want you to know, brothers, that the gospel preached by me is not of human origin.
12 For I did not receive it from a human being, nor was I taught it, but it came through a revelation of Jesus Christ. **

2 John 7 Many deceivers have gone out into the world, those who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh; such is the deceitful one and the antichrist. 5
9 Anyone who is so “progressive” 7 as not to remain in the teaching of the Christ does not have God; whoever remains in the teaching has the Father and the Son.
10 If anyone comes to you and does not bring this doctrine, do not receive him in your house or even greet him;
11 for whoever greets him shares in his evil works.

1 Timothy 6; 3 Whoever teaches something different and does not agree with the sound words of our Lord Jesus Christ and the religious teaching
4 is conceited, understanding nothing, and has a morbid disposition for arguments and verbal disputes. From these come envy, rivalry, insults, evil suspicions,
5 and mutual friction among people with corrupted minds, who are deprived of the truth, supposing religion to be a means of gain.
6 Indeed, religion with contentment is a great gain.

cont;

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

Colosians 2; 16 Let no one, then, pass judgment on you in matters of food and drink or with regard to a festival or new moon or sabbath. 8
17 These are shadows of things to come; the reality belongs to Christ.
18 Let no one disqualify you, delighting in self-abasement and worship of angels, **taking his stand on visions, 9 inflated without reason by his fleshly mind, **21 “Do not handle! Do not taste! Do not touch!”
22 These are all things destined to perish with use; they accord with human precepts and teachings.

2 Peter 2: 1 **There were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you, who will introduce destructive heresies and even deny the Master who ransomed them, bringing swift destruction on themselves. **2 Many will follow their licentious ways, and because of them the way of truth will be reviled.
3 In their greed they will exploit you with fabrications, but from of old their condemnation has not been idle and their destruction does not sleep.

1John 2: 18 Children, it is the last hour; 9 and just as you heard that the antichrist was coming, so now many antichrists have appeared. Thus we know this is the last hour.
20 But you have the anointing that comes from the holy one, 11 and you all have knowledge.
22 Who is the liar? Whoever denies that Jesus is the Christ. Whoever denies the Father and the Son, this is the antichrist.
23 No one who denies the Son has the Father, but whoever confesses the Son has the Father as well. **
24 Let what you heard from the beginning remain in you. If what you heard from the beginning remains in you, then you will remain in the Son and in the Father**. 13
25 And this is the promise that he made us: eternal life.
26 **I write you these things about those who would deceive you. **
27 **As for you, the anointing that you received from him remains in you, so that you do not need anyone to teach you. But his anointing teaches you about everything and is true and not false; just as it taught you, remain in him. **

1 John 4: 1 **Beloved, do not trust every spirit but test the spirits to see whether they belong to God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world.
2 This is how you can know the Spirit of God: every spirit that acknowledges Jesus Christ come in the flesh be longs to God, **3 **and every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus 2 does not belong to God. This is the spirit of the antichrist that, as you heard, is to come, but in fact is already in the world. **4 You belong to God, children, and you have conquered them, for the one who is in you is greater than the one who is in the world.
5 **They belong to the world; accordingly, their teaching belongs to the world, and the world listens to them. **
6We belong to God, and anyone who knows God listens to us, while anyone who does not belong to God refuses to hear us. This is how we know the spirit of truth and the spirit of deceit.

 

[Randy_Carson]

ignited jetfule is no where hot enough to cause the steel in the concrete to melt for the building to collapse unto itself like that. Foreign engineers have stated that fact many times

And yet, it is hot enough to set the building and its contents on fire…could THAT be hot enough?

BTW, do you know what a “charcoal chimney” or “chimney starter” is and how it works?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chimney_starter

 

[Lion_of_Narnia]

While there was some early speculation that the cross beams melted, that was not the case.

Close up zoom shots show a catestropic cascade-chain of the cross beam building connections snapping

see www.pbs.com, look under Nova: Why the Towers Fell

 

[grndslm]

While there was some early speculation that the cross beams melted, that was not the case.

Close up zoom shots show a catestropic cascade-chain of the cross beam building connections snapping

see www.pbs.com, look under Nova: Why the Towers Fell

Interestingly enough, I found a copy of that show’s transcript… and it doesn’t look like it mentions anything about Building 7 whatsoever. So if you come up with the reason for its collapse, please let me hear it.

Until then, you’ve got some more questions to answer that you guys keep avoiding…

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=6129615&postcount=39

 

[grndslm]

Late composition, like markan priority, is more of an academic habit that an actual reasoned position. Even Markan priorists today are starting to edge toward a pre-70 AD composition.

Really?? I do believe that the Catechism teaches Markan priority. Here’s the point in Mark where Jesus says that “There is only one that is good”, and it comes with footnotes that are from the Catechism, perhaps?? Sorry about the formatting, I had made this a long time ago but can’t get all the bolded areas to come up right… and different size fonts, etc. Taken from here: usccb.org/nab/bible/index.shtml …
…
Holy Bible:

Mark - Chapter 10
17 As he was setting out on a journey, a man ran up, knelt down before him, and asked him, “Good teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?”
18 Jesus answered him, "Why do you call me good? (3) No one is good but God alone.

Footnote
3 [18] Why do you call me good?: Jesus repudiates the term “good” for himself and directs it to God, the source of all goodness who alone can grant the gift of eternal life; cf Matthew 19:16-17.

Matthew - Chapter 19
16 (11 12) Now someone approached him and said, “Teacher, what good must I do to gain eternal life?”
17 He answered him, “Why do you ask me about the good? There is only One who is good. (13) If you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments.”

Fotnotes
11 [16-30] Cf Mark 10:17-31. This story does not set up a “two-tier” morality, that of those who seek (only) eternal life (Matthew 19:16) and that of those who wish to be perfect (Matthew 16:21). It speaks rather of the obstacle that riches constitute for the following of Jesus and of the impossibility, humanly speaking, for one who has many possessions (Matthew 16:22) to enter the kingdom (Matthew 16:24). Actual renunciation of riches is not demanded of all; Matthew counts the rich Joseph of Arimathea as a disciple of Jesus (Matthew 27:57). But only the poor in spirit (Matthew 5:3) can enter the kingdom and, as here, such poverty may entail the sacrifice of one’s possessions. The Twelve, who have given up everything (Matthew 16:27) to follow Jesus, will have as their reward a share in Jesus’ (the Son of Man’s) judging the twelve tribes of Israel (Matthew 16:28), and all who have similarly sacrificed family or property for his sake will inherit eternal life (Matthew 16:29).

12 [16] Gain eternal life: this is equivalent to “entering into life” (Matthew 19:17) and “being saved” (Matthew 16:25); the life is that of the new age after the final judgment (see Matthew 25:46). It probably is also equivalent here to “entering the kingdom of heaven” (Matthew 19:23) or “the kingdom of God” (Matthew 19:24), but see the notes on Matthew 3:2; 4:17; 18:1 for the wider reference of the kingdom in Matthew.

13 [17]** By Matthew’s reformulation of the Marcan question and reply (Mark 10:17-18) Jesus’ repudiation of the term “good” for himself has been softened. **Yet the Marcan assertion that “no one is good but God alone” stands, with only unimportant verbal modification.

Footnote to Footnote 12; Matthew 16
25 For whoever wishes to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for my sake will find it. (21)

Footnote to the Footnote’s Footnote
21 [25] See the notes on Matthew 10:38, 39.

Matthew - Chapter 10
38 and whoever does not take up his cross (15) and follow after me is not worthy of me.
39 (16) Whoever finds his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for my sake will find it.

Footnotes
15 [38] The first mention of the cross in Matthew, explicitly that of the disciple, but implicitly that of Jesus (and follow after me). Crucifixion was a form of capital punishment used by the Romans for offenders who were not Roman citizens.

16 [39] One who denies Jesus in order to save one’s earthly life will be condemned to everlasting destruction; loss of earthly life for Jesus’ sake will be rewarded by everlasting life in the kingdom.

(And BTW, sake means “cause”, so Jesus’ cause is love & forgiveness)

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

Really?? I do believe that the Catechism teaches Markan priority. Here’s the point in Mark where Jesus says that “There is only one that is good”, and it comes with footnotes that are from the Catechism, perhaps?? Sorry about the formatting, I had made this a long time ago but can’t get all the bolded areas to come up right… and different size fonts, etc. Taken from here: usccb.org/nab/bible/index.shtml …
…

(And BTW, sake means “cause”, so Jesus’ cause is love & forgiveness)

Iam confused by these postings of Mark? I thought Lion of Narnia was referencing the document of “Q” which is an earlier document from Mark’s Gospel that the other synoptic gospels draw their parallel from this Mark-an document of “Q”.

When Jesus speaks to the Person about God is only good, does not negate Jesus divinity. Jesus speaks from his humanity to teach those lost that only God is good. It goes along the same “parable” teaching call no man “Father”. Yet from the old testament to the New testament we have believers calling their teacher, priests including Paul who references himself as Timothy’s “father” in the faith.

When God spoke to Moses from the burning bush, God’s presence was in the burning bush, which the bush made the area holy enough that God told Moses to remove his sandals. The bush remained a bush, yet was filled with God’s presence that Moses fell on his face before a bush.

From this same example, Jesus speaks from his flesh so that those of the flesh can understand him. When Jesus speaks from his divinity for example “Eat my flesh, drink my Blood” Those of the flesh cannot comprehend these mysteries of the divine Spirit, because to those belonging to the flesh it appears as foolish talk. To those of the Spirit are those who belong to God, and can only comprehend God’s revelation by his Spirit, not the flesh, as Jesus teaches "it’s the Spirit that gives life, while the flesh availeth nothing.

1Corinthians 2:9… But as it is written; “What eye has not seen, and ear has not heard, and what has not entered the human heart, what God has prepared for those who love him,” v10… This God has revealed to us through the Spirit.** For the Spirit scrutinizes everything, even the depths of God. 11… no one knows what pertains to God except the Spirit of God. 12 We have not received the spirit of the world but the Spirit that is from God, so that we may understand the things freely given us by God**. 13** And we speak about them not with words taught by human wisdom, but with words taught by the Spirit, describing spiritual realities in spiritual terms.14 Now the natural person does not accept what pertains to the Spirit of God, for to him it is foolishness, and he cannot understand it, because it is judged spiritually.** 15 The spiritual person, however, can judge everything but is not subject to judgment by anyone.16 For “who has known the mind of the Lord, so as to counsel him?” But we have the mind of Christ.