Attack Against Christendom

Discussion in 'Religion & Philosophy' started by Kyklos, Sep 14, 2018.

  1. Paul7

    Paul7 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2012
    Messages:
    8,304
    Likes Received:
    3,681
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Wow, a whole lot of pejorative terms there. Is that what your're doing, apologizing for your dogma?

    So what, we decide based on facts presented, not a bio.

    I disagree with him. Now what?

    More people apologizing for their dogma. See how that works? What do they know that the early church fathers didn't?

    We agree on that, although I reject your premise that 'serious' belongs only to people who agree with you.


    That is a view nobody had prior to 1,400, and that even today isn't a majority opinion. Here are some similarities between a letter of 1 Clement and Ephesians:

    First Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians:

    (1)
    Clement 36
    “By Him are the eyes of our hearts opened. By Him our foolish and darkened understanding blossoms up anew towards His marvelous light.”<

    Ephesians 1:18
    “I pray that the eyes of your heart may be enlightened, so that you will know what is the hope of His calling, what are the riches of the glory of His inheritance in the saints.” (NASB)

    Ephesians 4:17-18
    “This I say, therefore, and testify in the Lord, that you should no longer walk as the rest of the Gentiles walk, in the futility of their mind,having their understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God, because of the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of their heart”

    (2)
    Clement 38
    “Let our whole body, then, be preserved in Christ Jesus; and let every one be subject to his neighbor, according to the special gift bestowed upon him.”

    Ephesians 5:21
    “…be subject to one another in the fear of Christ.” (NASB)

    (3)
    Clement 46
    “Have we not [all] one God and one Christ? Is there not one Spirit of grace poured out upon us? And have we not one calling in Christ?”

    Ephesians 4:4-6
    “There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called in one hope of your calling; one Lord, one faith, one baptism; one God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.”


    CRITICAL scholarship, i.e. people who agree with you and who begin with an anti-supernatural bias. On Timothy from Wikipedia:

    "The authenticity of Pauline authorship was accepted by Church orthodoxy as early as c. AD 180, as evidenced by the surviving testimony of Irenaeus and the author of the Muratorian. Possible allusions are found in the letters from Clement of Rome to the Corinthians (c. 95), Ignatius of Antioch to the Ephesians (c. 110) and Polycarp to the Philippians (c. 130),[6][7] though it is difficult to determine the nature of any such literary relationships. Modern scholars who support Pauline authorship nevertheless stress their importance regarding the question of authenticity: I. H. Marshall and P. H. Towner wrote that "the key witness is Polycarp, where there is a high probability that 1 and 2 Tim were known to him".[8] Similarly M. W. Holmes argued that it is "virtually certain or highly probable" that Polycarp used 1 and 2 Timothy.[6]

    Late in the 2nd century there are a number of quotations from all three Pastoral Epistles in Irenaeus' work Against Heresies. The Muratorian Canon (c. 170–180) lists the books of the NT and ascribes all three Pastoral Epistles to Paul. Eusebius (c. 330) calls it, along with the other thirteen canonical Pauline Epistles, "undisputed".[9] Exceptions to this positive witness include Tatian,[10] a disciple of Justin Martyr turned heretic, as well as the Gnostic Basilides."

    We can go back and forth, but is someone other that Paul wrote the epistles it does not follow that they are therefore not divinely inspired.

    So is it academic fraud when your guys don't mention the traditional view?

    Be specific, which posts are you talking about? And while you're at it, in which posts did you ever answer my questions:

    1. How good do you have to be?
    2. What if God's standard is just a little bit higher than yours?
    3. Why did Christ have to die on the cross if we can earn our way to heaven?

    Try to keep up, I did discuss that, and you didn't prove anything, you gave my your opinion, which I reject.

    Here is NT Wright on Pauline authorship of these disputed books, one of many scholars who would agree with me:

    "Arguments from style are clearly important in principle. But they are hard to make in practice. We have such a tiny sample of Paul’s writing, hardly an adequate database for definite conclusions about authorship. Those who have done computer analyses of Paul’s style come up with more ‘conservative’ results than we might have expected. In fact, if it’s stylistic differences we want, the most striking are, in my opinion, the radical differences between 1 and 2 Corinthians. The second letter to Corinth is much jerkier; its sentences are dense and convoluted, bending back on themselves, twisting to and fro with language about God, Jesus Christ, and Paul’s ministry. The organization of the material is much less crisp. There is a far greater difference between those two Corinthian letters that there is between Galatians and Romans on the one hand and Ephesians and Colossians on the other; yet nobody for that reason cast doubt on 2 Corinthians. As John A.T. Robinson pointed out from personal experience a generation ago, a busy church leader may well write in very different styles for different occasions and audiences. The same person can be working simultaneously on a large academic project with careful, ponderous sentences and a short, snappy talk for Sunday school. It has not be unknown for senior biblical scholars to write children’s fiction [in fn.135 ...Among NT scholars who have written children's fiction we might mention C.H. Dodd and R.J. Bauckham]. More directly to the point, it has recently been argued strikingly that Ephesians and Colossians show evidence of a deliberate ‘Asiatic’ style which Paul could easily have adopted for readers in Western Turkey. I regard the possibility of significant variation in Paul’s own style as much higher than the possibility that someone else, a companion or co-worker could achieve such a measure of similarity. Other historical examples of that genre do not encourage us to suppose they would have been so successful." –Paul and the Faithfulness of God, Vol. 1, pg. 60

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N._T._Wright

    Is Wright not a serious scholar?
     
    Last edited: Aug 5, 2019
    ToddWB likes this.
  2. FreshAir

    FreshAir Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2012
    Messages:
    84,173
    Likes Received:
    24,159
    Trophy Points:
    113
    in the same way the Pope is picked by God... right?
     
  3. Paul7

    Paul7 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2012
    Messages:
    8,304
    Likes Received:
    3,681
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You'll have to ask a Roman Catholic about that one.
     
  4. FreshAir

    FreshAir Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2012
    Messages:
    84,173
    Likes Received:
    24,159
    Trophy Points:
    113
    it's the same thing though, they claim their pick inspired by God, do you believe it is? same as some claim the stories of the bible are....
     
    Last edited: Aug 5, 2019
  5. Giftedone

    Giftedone Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    39,993
    Likes Received:
    6,127
    Trophy Points:
    113
    1) you consistently accuse me of things I did not say or do so you have something to attack - in order to avoid the teachings of Jesus. I have not professed any Dogma - I can if you like but have not done so thusfar. I have simply pointed out that the teachings of Jesus contradict Sola Fide.

    2) Bringing up Pauline scripture - and scripture that is universally disputed as written by Paul - is just another way for you to try and avoid the teachings of Jesus which contradict Sola Fide.

    3) You can disagree with Kummel and the various other respected scholars all you like - this does not change the fact that the person you cited is a disingenuous clown for stating defacto - something that is highly disputed. This is academic fraud. Wright does not defacto state that the disputed texts were penned by Paul.

    What is laughable is that you try and claim that Kummel and others do not mention the traditional view .. of course he does .. he has to in order to argue against it. Your claim is desperate grasping at non existent straws.

    4) Your claim of "majority opinion" is both unsupported and patently false. Almost all serious academics accept that the Pauline scripture in question was not penned by Paul - for the reasons given in the links provided.

    5) That ideas that were around at the time - those expressed by Clement and penned by the author of Ephesians - does not mean that Paul penned them.

    6) You then restate this gibberish as if I have not dealt with it previously - upon which you went running to the playground to stick head deep in the sandbox of denial and avoidance.
    My answering the above questions will not change the teachings of Jesus which contradict Sola Fide. Whats laughable hypocrisy is that you claim that no one questioned the authenticity of the pseudo- Pauline texts until 1400 (at a time when one would burn at the stake for doing so) but then buy into Sola Fide - a doctrine which was not around till after the 1400's.

    1) Jesus states that you have to be more righteous than the Pharisees and Teachers of the Law.- fortunately for us - this is a low bar as Jesus had no respect for these folks.

    2) What if the moon is made of green cheese - Either you accept the standard given by Jesus or you don't.

    3) We can get into the "dying God" myths if you like and how this is a parallel to the sacrifice as Jesus. - I am sure however that such a discussion will send you screaming into the playground once again. Regardless - such as discussion will not change the teachings of Jesus - one that you are desperately trying to avoid and ignore by asking such questions.
     
    Kyklos likes this.
  6. Paul7

    Paul7 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2012
    Messages:
    8,304
    Likes Received:
    3,681
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I agree with the RCC on the inspiration of Scripture, but not on the office of the papacy, even thought God can control that choice, for good or ill.
     
  7. FreshAir

    FreshAir Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2012
    Messages:
    84,173
    Likes Received:
    24,159
    Trophy Points:
    113
    and for the same reason you disagree on the pick of the pope, many disagree on the words of the bible
     
  8. Paul7

    Paul7 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2012
    Messages:
    8,304
    Likes Received:
    3,681
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Again, state your case. This thread is a waste of time, you don't believe the statements already presented by Jesus.

    It isn't universal, who is fraudulent?

    Oh brother, more name calling, that says a lot about how weak your position is.

    Excuse me, he pretty much did. There are a whole lot more serious scholars who would agree with me.

    That was a rhetorical statement, and my earlier link also mentioned the opposing view in order to argue against it.

    LOL, let me guess, an opposing scholar by definition isn't serious?

    I was rebutting your claim that I Clement was unfamiliar with Ephesians.

    You really need to read forum rules against juvenille name calling. And I'm still waiting for you to state your case, if you have what post?

    Addressed above.

    What? The only thing the early church could be burned for was being Christians.

    Nonsense, it was around since the NT was written, the fact doctrine was later corrupted doesn't change that. The church, like OT Israel is in a constant cycle of apostasy and faithfulness.

    So what are you saying, we have to be righteous to be saved or we don't? From what theological position are you coming? You look at the Bible in context of other passages. Here is one explanation: https://www.ligonier.org/learn/articles/unless-your-righteousness-exceeds-pharisees/

    I would say the same of you.

    More pearls of wisdom from critical theologians, huh? I'll save you the trouble and debunk it here: https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/gospels-borrow-pagan-myths/ Not that I think you'll read it, but others might.

    Pot, meet kettle.
     
    Last edited: Aug 5, 2019
  9. Giftedone

    Giftedone Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    39,993
    Likes Received:
    6,127
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You are in denial dude. Most of the stuff you posted has no relation to the actual post you are responding to - and you have still yet to address the teachings of Jesus that contradict sola fide.
     
    Kyklos likes this.
  10. The Wyrd of Gawd

    The Wyrd of Gawd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2012
    Messages:
    25,455
    Likes Received:
    2,447
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Why are you basing your life on an ancient ethnocentric Middle Eastern Jewish religious fairy tale?
     
  11. The Wyrd of Gawd

    The Wyrd of Gawd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2012
    Messages:
    25,455
    Likes Received:
    2,447
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The Jesus character said that you had to do some animal sacrifices. You need to kill some birds and goats to stay on his good side or he gets angry.
     
  12. FreshAir

    FreshAir Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2012
    Messages:
    84,173
    Likes Received:
    24,159
    Trophy Points:
    113
    they say God loves his burnt offerings - I like mine more on the rare side
     
    Last edited: Aug 6, 2019
  13. The Wyrd of Gawd

    The Wyrd of Gawd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2012
    Messages:
    25,455
    Likes Received:
    2,447
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The first thing Noah did when he got off the ark was to slaughter and roast a lot of animals.
     
  14. Paul7

    Paul7 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2012
    Messages:
    8,304
    Likes Received:
    3,681
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I'm against believing in fairy tales too.
     
    ToddWB likes this.
  15. Paul7

    Paul7 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2012
    Messages:
    8,304
    Likes Received:
    3,681
    Trophy Points:
    113
    We've been through all that already, I'm still waiting for you to answer my three questions.
     
  16. Giftedone

    Giftedone Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    39,993
    Likes Received:
    6,127
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I responded to all your questions - you are projecting your issues on to me.
     
  17. XploreR

    XploreR Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2014
    Messages:
    5,774
    Likes Received:
    1,858
    Trophy Points:
    113
    There are, but they are NOT part of traditional Christianity, & they total small numbers.
     
  18. XploreR

    XploreR Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2014
    Messages:
    5,774
    Likes Received:
    1,858
    Trophy Points:
    113
    True. So VERY true. In fact, almost no "Christians" even know what Yeshua actually taught. They settle for the fairy tale about Jesus assuming personal responsibility for their misbehaviors, & offering salvation in spite of them, which are the opposite of Jesus' teaching that we must all walk the walk for ourselves, if we are to carve out our own place in Heaven. The traditional twisted version was offered by the original Church as a means to place the Church in a more powerful position in the daily lives of its members, at the expense of Jesus' assertion that we are all individually self-empowered to follow his example. Truth became a victim of the Church's quest for power & influence. Christianity became something its founder could never recognize.
     
    The Wyrd of Gawd likes this.
  19. Paul7

    Paul7 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2012
    Messages:
    8,304
    Likes Received:
    3,681
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Nonsense, there is no difference between Paul's theology and that of Jesus, Paul said he got his teachings from Jesus. There are different emphasis, as Jesus' audience was mainly Jewish and Paul's mainly gentile. Hence Paul discusses homosexuality and Jesus didn't, it was a non-issue to Jews.
     
    ToddWB likes this.
  20. XploreR

    XploreR Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2014
    Messages:
    5,774
    Likes Received:
    1,858
    Trophy Points:
    113
    IF what you say is true, then homosexuality was not an issue with Jews or with Jesus himself--which I would completely agree with. It should be no issue with us today either.
     
  21. Giftedone

    Giftedone Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    39,993
    Likes Received:
    6,127
    Trophy Points:
    113
    True believers or otherwise - it is from that ilk from where modern Christian doctrine and dogma originated.
     
  22. Giftedone

    Giftedone Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    39,993
    Likes Received:
    6,127
    Trophy Points:
    113
    There are many differences between the teachings of Jesus and the teachings of Paul. Your problem is that you cherry pick the teachings of Jesus you like (then ones which conform best to the Pauline dogma you were raised on) and ignore the ones you don't.

    Jesus does discuss homosexuality - "Let ye who is without sin cast the first stone" ... Judge not Let you be Judged.

    This was not the teaching of Paul - quite the opposite in fact.
     
    Last edited: Aug 16, 2019
    XploreR and The Wyrd of Gawd like this.
  23. yabberefugee

    yabberefugee Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2017
    Messages:
    7,978
    Likes Received:
    2,184
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Homosexuality was not even an issue in the community that Jesus addressed. When Paul went to the Gentiles it was most definitely an issue. Jesus did not come to do away with the law, he came to fulfill it. His words. Jesus also told the woman caught in the act of adultery, "go your way and sin no more". Adultery is sin and so is homosexual behavior as defined by the Mosaic law that Jesus came to fulfill.. So to homosexuals His message would be, "go your way and sin no more". Don't try and use the words of Jesus to condone your behavior.
     
    ToddWB likes this.
  24. Giftedone

    Giftedone Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    39,993
    Likes Received:
    6,127
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Jesus himself violated Mosaic Law - and you are confusing the "Commands" Mosaic Law.

    I did not say Jesus condoned either homosexuality or adultery.

    What behavior of mind did I use Jesus words to condone ?
     
  25. yabberefugee

    yabberefugee Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2017
    Messages:
    7,978
    Likes Received:
    2,184
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Typically, those that would water down the Gospel, point to the command "to not judge others" as one to not discern and judge ":behavior or actions taken". In Christian circles that is often referred to as "sloppy agape and greasy grace". If a behavior is non-edifying, it is the duty of Christian Culture to point that out. There are points in Leviticus and other places of Old Testament precepts where homosexuality was shown as abhorrent behavior. In Jesus's culture that was understood. There was a time in my own culture, that was understood. Apostle Paul pointed it out because in many Gentile circles the behavior was rampant.
     
    Last edited: Aug 17, 2019
    ToddWB likes this.

Share This Page