Freethought & Rationalism Archive

DBT · 02-02-2008, 10:33 PM

If the sentiments expressed in the parable did not apply to Jesus, why would he have used it?

WishboneDawn · 02-03-2008, 03:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crimson Glory

Is it not the 'word of God'? Isn't it supposed to be valuable for all times and places? If Jesus was God indeed, shouldn't he know the way people would interpret such words in the future? Why shouldn't we look at the Scriptures with modern eyes? If we don't, then Scriptures are completely useless! (which in fact, you know, they are)

If you don't believe it's the word of God then why insist that you should look at it with modern eyes? I can see that at some fundy forum I guess, for the sake of debate, but here where most of the people are in the same boat as you?

I think scripture is the work of men. You're under no obigation to work to counter the view that it's the work of God with me.

reniaa · 02-03-2008, 04:30 AM

you can overwork a parable looking at every aspect till it loses it's original simple meaning, i think this one shouldn't be to hard for us to grasp even now as we still do work for emplyers and are given responsibilities

Crimson Glory · 02-03-2008, 03:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WishboneDawn

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crimson Glory

Is it not the 'word of God'? Isn't it supposed to be valuable for all times and places? If Jesus was God indeed, shouldn't he know the way people would interpret such words in the future? Why shouldn't we look at the Scriptures with modern eyes? If we don't, then Scriptures are completely useless! (which in fact, you know, they are)

If you don't believe it's the word of God then why insist that you should look at it with modern eyes? I can see that at some fundy forum I guess, for the sake of debate, but here where most of the people are in the same boat as you?

I think scripture is the work of men. You're under no obigation to work to counter the view that it's the work of God with me.

Didn't you get the irony?

DCHindley · 02-03-2008, 04:35 PM

It's Luke's narrative, and agenda, not Jesus'. Luke simply places his words in Jesus' mouth. Oh, Jesus may have said something similar, or on a similar subject, or with a similar punch line, but the teller of tales has the luxury of spinning them a different way as well.

DCH

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steven Carr

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCHindley

The king is the same man who has his enemies executed before him. I don't think this is even debatable.

If Jesus actually said this parable, he is referring either to Herod the Great or to his son Archelaus, probably the latter.

I see. So it has nothing whatever to do with the Kingdom of God, or Jesus answering the questions of people who thought the Kingdom of God was about to appear at once?

reniaa · 02-03-2008, 04:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCHindley

It's Luke's narrative, and agenda, not Jesus'. Luke simply places his words in Jesus' mouth. Oh, Jesus may have said something similar, or on a similar subject, or with a similar punch line, but the teller of tales has the luxury of spinning them a different way as well.

DCH

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steven Carr

I see. So it has nothing whatever to do with the Kingdom of God, or Jesus answering the questions of people who thought the Kingdom of God was about to appear at once?

And your proof of this is? mark may have written his gospel but what possible proof can you bring forward that he didn't write what jesus actually said?
Basically this is all just supposition.

WishboneDawn · 02-03-2008, 04:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crimson Glory

Quote:

Originally Posted by WishboneDawn

If you don't believe it's the word of God then why insist that you should look at it with modern eyes? I can see that at some fundy forum I guess, for the sake of debate, but here where most of the people are in the same boat as you?

I think scripture is the work of men. You're under no obigation to work to counter the view that it's the work of God with me.

Didn't you get the irony?

D'oh! Apologies, I'm usually a tad brighter then this. Can I blame the sinus medication? :redface:

WishboneDawn · 02-03-2008, 04:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by reniaa

And your proof of this is? mark may have written his gospel but what possible proof can you bring forward that he didn't write what jesus actually said?
Basically this is all just supposition.

What proof is there that what was written IS what Jesus said? I tend to think the safest path is to acknowledge that what we're reading is what the gospel authors wanted us to read, whether it's what Jesus said or not, and talking about it as DCHindley is, is the best acknowledgement of that.

reniaa · 02-03-2008, 05:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WishboneDawn

Quote:

Originally Posted by reniaa

And your proof of this is? mark may have written his gospel but what possible proof can you bring forward that he didn't write what jesus actually said?
Basically this is all just supposition.

What proof is there that what was written IS what Jesus said? I tend to think the safest path is to acknowledge that what we're reading is what the gospel authors wanted us to read, whether it's what Jesus said or not, and talking about it as DCHindley is, is the best acknowledgement of that.

Why is it safest to assume it's not jesus's words and life they wrote about? from your opinion or DCHindley, again it is just supposition. We have 4 gospels on jesus's life, but we stand back and say it's better not to believe just in case those guys must have made it up copied off each other etc.
Basically we have a choice to decide if we believe these words are inspired and accurate renditions of jesus's life of just fictional myths of men.

but again you offer no proof these are not accurate, just opinions of men.

the proof for me is that they exist and are there.

makerowner · 02-03-2008, 07:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by reniaa

Quote:

Originally Posted by WishboneDawn

What proof is there that what was written IS what Jesus said? I tend to think the safest path is to acknowledge that what we're reading is what the gospel authors wanted us to read, whether it's what Jesus said or not, and talking about it as DCHindley is, is the best acknowledgement of that.

Why is it safest to assume it's not jesus's words and life they wrote about? from your opinion or DCHindley, again it is just supposition. We have 4 gospels on jesus's life, but we stand back and say it's better not to believe just in case those guys must have made it up copied off each other etc.
Basically we have a choice to decide if we believe these words are inspired and accurate renditions of jesus's life of just fictional myths of men.

but again you offer no proof these are not accurate, just opinions of men.

the proof for me is that they exist and are there.

So I assume then that you use the Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Judas, etc. in your religious practice as well. They "exist and are there" too, so you have no reason to believe that some are inspired/accurate and some aren't.

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

02-02-2008, 10:33 PM	#41
DBT Contributor Join Date: May 2003 Location: ɹǝpunuʍop puɐן ǝɥʇ Posts: 17,906	If the sentiments expressed in the parable did not apply to Jesus, why would he have used it?

02-03-2008, 04:30 AM	#43
reniaa Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: russia Posts: 1,108	you can overwork a parable looking at every aspect till it loses it's original simple meaning, i think this one shouldn't be to hard for us to grasp even now as we still do work for emplyers and are given responsibilities

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.