FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 03:12 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 01-13-2005, 09:42 AM   #51
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Eagle River, Alaska
Posts: 7,816
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Seeker2000
What do you mean with the fourfold typology of the gospel?
Vorkosigan is referring to the four groups or types of people described in the parable.

Quote:
What are you actually talking about?
Chili follows a relatively unique interpretation.
Amaleq13 is offline  
Old 01-13-2005, 02:54 PM   #52
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Barrayar
Posts: 11,866
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Seeker2000
What do you mean with the fourfold typology of the gospel?
In Mary Tolbert's reading, the Parable of the Sower sets the typology of characters for the Gospel of Mark. Those who hear the Word and reject it are the chief priests and scribes. Those who hear the Word and accept it eagerly, but then fall away, are the disciples. Those who hear the Word and are attracted, but are prevented by the exigencies of the world from accepting it, are Pilate, Herod, and the rich man. Finally there are those who hear the Word and embrace it, and are healed through faith.

Vorkosigan
Vorkosigan is offline  
Old 01-13-2005, 03:04 PM   #53
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Alberta
Posts: 11,885
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Seeker2000

What's all this "one leg in heaven, one on earth" stuff?
If you regard the resurrection story as myth, why can't you believe that the crucifixion did happen? We don't know with certainty which parts of the bible might be historical, but I don't see a problem with a crucifixion - we know people were crucified back then and it's also not a supernatural event. So it might have happened...

What are you actually talking about?
According to me "born again christians" have one leg in heaven and one on earth. This is just is a different way of saying that born again people are torn in the saved sinner complex. They, as you may know, were sinners who got saved but cannot find relief from their sin nature and will eventually die in that same unresolved state of mind where peace of mind is in steady conflict with doubt.

Why have a historic crucifixion and a supernatural resurrection if that violates the laws of nature? Why not have both as metaphysical events if that would be a natural consequence of the fall wherein our second nature was only conjectured in and by our tree of knowledge (left brain)?

I object to the synoptic viewpoint that is held by most people. In this argument I allow the OT to be the OT and propose that before the NT can call itself a New testament it must take the physics of the OT and remove Judaism from it. This purification is achieved between Matthew and Mark. Let me emphasize there that Jesus my have been a reformer but he sure was not a protestant.

This leaves Mark empty, undressed and cold but densified and explosive because salvation is real.

From there the new insights are added in Luke to arrive at a good working Gospel in John that is meant for Catholics only . . . who can therefore co-exist with Jews in Christendom without allegiance or animosity.
Chili is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:15 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.