Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Solitary Man · 06-01-2008, 02:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

Quote:

Originally Posted by mg01

<edit.brevity>
If there are passages in the epistles that can be related to the events in the gospels I'd be interested to know what they are.

Read the book of Acts.. . IIRC, Paul literally is blinded by the light on his road to Damascus encounter with the Risen Lord which correlates perfectly with the Gospels.

Say what?? Besides, Acts is not the epistles.

arnoldo · 06-01-2008, 03:29 PM

Ok, Acts was written by the same author as the Gospel of Luke. Let's take a look at Romans 1:1-4 and look for correlations with the Gospels.

Quote:

Paul, a bond-servant of Christ Jesus, called as an apostle, set apart for the gospel of God, 2 which He promised beforehand through His prophets in the holy Scriptures,

(this correlates to Luke 1:70: As he spake by the mouth of his holy prophets, which have been since the world began:

3 concerning His Son, who was born of a descendant of David according to the flesh,

(this correlates to Matthew 1:1: The record of the genealogy of Jesus the Messiah, the son of David, the son of Abraham)

4 who was declared the Son of God with power by the resurrection from the dead, according to the Spirit of holiness, Jesus Christ our Lord,

(this correlates to Matthew 3:17:. . . and behold, a voice out of the heavens said, "This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well-pleased.")

Solitary Man · 06-01-2008, 04:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

Ok, Acts was written by the same author as the Gospel of Luke. Let's take a look at Romans 1:1-4 and look for correlations with the Gospels.

Do you have any idea what you're talking about?

arnoldo · 06-01-2008, 08:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Solitary Man

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

Ok, Acts was written by the same author as the Gospel of Luke. Let's take a look at Romans 1:1-4 and look for correlations with the Gospels.

Do you have any idea what you're talking about?

Yes.

Solitary Man · 06-01-2008, 09:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

Quote:

Originally Posted by Solitary Man

Do you have any idea what you're talking about?

Yes.

Then please make it clear for the rest of us.

arnoldo · 06-02-2008, 05:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Solitary Man

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

Yes.

Then please make it clear for the rest of us.

Do you have a specific question?

arnoldo · 06-02-2008, 05:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GakuseiDon

Doherty suggests some passages in Psalms:
http://jesuspuzzle.humanists.net/supp09.htm

Quote:

In that unseen reality, the writer is concerned with establishing certain things about the Son. If we go on from verse 4 above, we find that one of these is that he is “superior to the angels.” To prove this, the writer quotes several passages from the Psalms and elsewhere, comparing what God says about the angels with what he says (as the writer sees it) about the Son. The latter includes Psalm 2:7’s famous: “Thou art my Son; today I have begotten you.” In quoting Psalm 45:6, the writer seems to regard the Son as being addressed by the term “God.” Psalm 102’s declaration that through the Son was the earth’s foundation laid, and Psalm 110’s invitation to the Son to sit at God’s right hand, proves for the writer that he is “superior to the angels.”

Doherty also suggest that the (mis?) interpretation of Hebrews 8:4 is used to give creedence to the concept the Yeshua never had a physical existence of earth.

Quote:

Finally, there is a startling statement made in chapter 8, one which most commentators manage to gloss over or ignore completely. The writer is speaking of Jesus’ ministry in the heavenly sanctuary and begins to compare him to the earthly high priest. At verse 4, he says: Now, if he had been on earth, he would not even have been a priest . . . No matter how one tries to detect a feasible qualification to this phrase, there is no denying that the writer seems to be saying that Jesus was never on earth. The Greek is “ei men oun en epi ges,” which is literally: “Now, if accordingly he were on earth . . .” The verb en is the imperfect, which is strictly speaking a past tense, and the NEB (above) chooses to reflect this. But the meaning within the context is probably present, or at least temporally ambiguous, much like the conditional sense in which most other translations render it: “Now if he were on earth (meaning at this time), he would not be a priest.”

. . . <edit....brevity> . . . (Of course, such a life and death on earth, as noted earlier, would have thrown a monkeywrench into his carefully crafted Platonic picture.)

GakuseiDon · 06-02-2008, 06:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

Quote:

Originally Posted by GakuseiDon

Doherty suggests some passages in Psalms:
http://jesuspuzzle.humanists.net/supp09.htm

Doherty also suggest that the (mis?) interpretation of Hebrews 8:4 is used to give creedence to the concept the Yeshua never had a physical existence of earth.

OK, but the OP asked for OT passages, so NT is OT according to the OP.

arnoldo · 06-02-2008, 06:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GakuseiDon

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

Doherty also suggest that the (mis?) interpretation of Hebrews 8:4 is used to give creedence to the concept the Yeshua never had a physical existence of earth.

OK, but the OP asked for OT passages, so NT is OT according to the OP.

Fair enough, from the OT, Israel has always had a strong tradition of expecting to have a physical earthly king establish the Kingdom of Israel. For example for a time Israel was ruled by Judges however they longed to be like other nations and desired to have a king rule over them. The prophet Samuel is distressed over this however the Lord eventually has King Saul (from the tribe of Benjamin) begin the line of Kings who would rule over Israel. As you know King David subsequently replace Saul and later Solomon became King. According to jewish prophecy a "Son of David" would eventually establish the Kingdom of Israel. Despite the OP there is no indication that the Jews were expecting a symbolic messiah to rescue them from real enemies which often threatened them throughout their history.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.