dougsinc said..
And what, exactly, was Adam's sin? He disobeyed God once, and ate a fruit.
dougsinc,
One wonders why the author bothered with all of those other details in the passage, if the account can be so succinctly summarized.
If you read the passages about how sin entered the world a little more carefully, you will see that your summary is missing some key ideas. In particular, you omit any mention that Eve was deceived by the serpent. We note that Eve has some understanding of the command that was given to Adam. But when she recites it, she changes some of the words. Eve:
- identifies the tree not by what it was (according to God's word), but by it's location in the Garden. (Gen 2:17, 3:3)
- omits the words 'any' and 'freely' (Gen 2:16)
- adds the phrase 'You shall not touch it' (Gen 3:3)
Possibly emboldened by Eve's misrepresentation (?), the serpent directly contradicts the word of God. And it is by deception that sin enters the world.
We should know what these passages actually say. When we omit ideas and change words, we are at great risk of misrepresenting what the Bible actually says. And that misrepresentation leaves open the door for us to be deceived.
Friday, February 3, 2012
Thursday, February 2, 2012
commentary concerned wealth
Steven_J said...
When Jesus confronted the rich young ruler, though, he didn't insist "no, you can't have followed the commandments; have you ever told a lie? lusted after a woman in your heart? Stolen anything no matter how cheap or trivial?" Nor did he tell the young man that a perfectly just God was obliged to punish him with an eternity in Hell, but that Jesus was going to take his punishment (an admittedly really bad weekend) for him. Rather, Jesus told the young man to sell all that he had, give the money to the poor, and follow Jesus. Jesus' commentary on the event to his disciples concerned wealth, not lust, angry words, or even pride, or even evolution. I'm not convinced that the point of this story is quite the point you wish to place upon it.
Steven,
I'm quite convinced that the point of this account is not the point you wish to make of it.
Jesus identified something that the rich young man placed priority on before Jesus. The young man was unwilling to put Jesus first. The man placed his first priority on his material possessions. Jesus was pointing out that following him required the rich young man to re-order his priorities.
The account tells us that the man came to Jesus wanting to know what he should do "to inherit eternal life". The man knelt before Jesus, and called him "good teacher". It wasn't described in the account as the kind of confrontation ("when Jesus confronted") that you make it out to be in your retelling.
Jesus tells the man what he must do: "follow me".
Before Jesus says "follow me", he first points out that no one is "good" except God. He also points out that the commandments are the guide by which we can evaluate whether we can consider ourselves "good" or not.
Jesus lists five of the commandments. (The same five commandments are listed in the three gospel accounts, Matthew's account has one additional commandment, as does Luke's account. Clearly, the point is not that there are exactly five or six commandments that must be kept.)
One commandment Jesus does not list verbatim here the "greatest" commandment of all: "Love the LORD your God with all your heart, all your soul and all your mind." (Matthew 22:37), the whole of the Law summed up: "You must love the LORD your God with all your heart, all your soul, all your strength, and all your mind." (Luke 10:27)
This is the commandment that the rich young ruler sees that he cannot keep. He goes away saddened, not because Jesus has not told him what he must do, no, but because he has chosen to break this greatest commandment by putting something else first before his obedience to God.
Jesus remarks about this event to his disciples was not a comment about "wealth" as you suggest.
Rather, if you read the account a little more carefully, you will see that Jesus is actually commenting on the difficulty that rich people have in making Jesus their number one priority. The rich young ruler chose first to hold on to his accumulated material possessions, rather than first choosing to follow Jesus.
When Jesus confronted the rich young ruler, though, he didn't insist "no, you can't have followed the commandments; have you ever told a lie? lusted after a woman in your heart? Stolen anything no matter how cheap or trivial?" Nor did he tell the young man that a perfectly just God was obliged to punish him with an eternity in Hell, but that Jesus was going to take his punishment (an admittedly really bad weekend) for him. Rather, Jesus told the young man to sell all that he had, give the money to the poor, and follow Jesus. Jesus' commentary on the event to his disciples concerned wealth, not lust, angry words, or even pride, or even evolution. I'm not convinced that the point of this story is quite the point you wish to place upon it.
Steven,
I'm quite convinced that the point of this account is not the point you wish to make of it.
Jesus identified something that the rich young man placed priority on before Jesus. The young man was unwilling to put Jesus first. The man placed his first priority on his material possessions. Jesus was pointing out that following him required the rich young man to re-order his priorities.
The account tells us that the man came to Jesus wanting to know what he should do "to inherit eternal life". The man knelt before Jesus, and called him "good teacher". It wasn't described in the account as the kind of confrontation ("when Jesus confronted") that you make it out to be in your retelling.
Jesus tells the man what he must do: "follow me".
Before Jesus says "follow me", he first points out that no one is "good" except God. He also points out that the commandments are the guide by which we can evaluate whether we can consider ourselves "good" or not.
Jesus lists five of the commandments. (The same five commandments are listed in the three gospel accounts, Matthew's account has one additional commandment, as does Luke's account. Clearly, the point is not that there are exactly five or six commandments that must be kept.)
One commandment Jesus does not list verbatim here the "greatest" commandment of all: "Love the LORD your God with all your heart, all your soul and all your mind." (Matthew 22:37), the whole of the Law summed up: "You must love the LORD your God with all your heart, all your soul, all your strength, and all your mind." (Luke 10:27)
This is the commandment that the rich young ruler sees that he cannot keep. He goes away saddened, not because Jesus has not told him what he must do, no, but because he has chosen to break this greatest commandment by putting something else first before his obedience to God.
Jesus remarks about this event to his disciples was not a comment about "wealth" as you suggest.
Rather, if you read the account a little more carefully, you will see that Jesus is actually commenting on the difficulty that rich people have in making Jesus their number one priority. The rich young ruler chose first to hold on to his accumulated material possessions, rather than first choosing to follow Jesus.
a top priority
DiscountDeity said...
Turns out it's easy for rich people to make Jesus a top priority once they find a way to profit from Him.
Discount,
Based on your comment, I fear that I have misled you about what Jesus said.
Jesus didn't say that "making Jesus a top priority" was difficult.
Rather, what Jesus said was that "entering the kingdom of heaven" was difficult.
Jesus uses an exaggeration to highlight how difficult it is.
His apostles take Jesus to mean that it is "impossible". But Jesus doesn't leave them hanging there. He tells his apostles that it is possible.
I apologize for my statement that misled you about what the Bible teaches. It was not my intent to mislead you.
Please don't feel bad about missing the point of this passage. You are in good company. Even our venerable Steven_J misses the point of Jesus commentary to his apostles, and instead summarizes the main point as primarily concerning "wealth".
Perhaps the difficulty some seem to have in understanding what Jesus taught might be due to their preoccupation with "profit" and "wealth". (If this was going to be a difficulty for people, you'd think that Jesus might have bothered to point this out to his apostles somewhere along the way.)
Turns out it's easy for rich people to make Jesus a top priority once they find a way to profit from Him.
Discount,
Based on your comment, I fear that I have misled you about what Jesus said.
Jesus didn't say that "making Jesus a top priority" was difficult.
Rather, what Jesus said was that "entering the kingdom of heaven" was difficult.
Jesus uses an exaggeration to highlight how difficult it is.
His apostles take Jesus to mean that it is "impossible". But Jesus doesn't leave them hanging there. He tells his apostles that it is possible.
I apologize for my statement that misled you about what the Bible teaches. It was not my intent to mislead you.
Please don't feel bad about missing the point of this passage. You are in good company. Even our venerable Steven_J misses the point of Jesus commentary to his apostles, and instead summarizes the main point as primarily concerning "wealth".
Perhaps the difficulty some seem to have in understanding what Jesus taught might be due to their preoccupation with "profit" and "wealth". (If this was going to be a difficulty for people, you'd think that Jesus might have bothered to point this out to his apostles somewhere along the way.)
by faith alone?
Caveman quoted Romans 3:19-20, and asked...
Is Salvation by faith alone?
Caveman,
Salvation is the work of God alone. Psalm 3:8
Faith comes by hearing the message, and the message is heard through the word of Christ. Romans 10:17
Caveman73 said...
FAITH ALONE!!!
ROM 3:28 Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.
NOT BY FAITH ALONE!!!!
JAM 2:17 Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.
Caveman,
The process of "saving" (salvation) is provided by God alone. The process begins with the grace of God, which reaches down to a man and makes him recognize his sinfulness. A man chooses either to accept God's grace or to reject it. The grace of God cannot be earned.
Paul is correct. A man is not justified by the Law. The Law makes a man aware of his sinful condition.
James is not saying anything contrary to what Paul said in Romans. Your suggestion that he said something contrary shows that you have chosen to misread what James is actually saying.
James is talking here about two kinds of faith: a faith that saves and faith that does not save. He asks (rhetorically)
"Can such a faith save?"
The "works" that James is talking about are a product of a "faith" that is alive. The faith that saves is alive, and is evidenced by the works that stem from it. A faith that is dead does not produce works.
The analogy here is that a branch that is alive produces fruit, and a branch that is cut off will not produce fruit (cf. John 15:5) The fruit on the branch is evidence that the branch is alive.
What you are suggesting (erroneously) that James means is akin to saying that by our effort to attach fruit to a dead branch, that we can make the branch alive. You are suggesting that James is saying that attaching "works" to a dead faith that we can make the faith alive. A careful reading of James 2 reveals that this is not what James is saying.
Notice also that faith is not a human work.
Rather, faith is a gift granted by God (cf. 2 Tim 2:25, Phil 1:29, John 6:37,65)
Is Salvation by faith alone?
Caveman,
Salvation is the work of God alone. Psalm 3:8
Faith comes by hearing the message, and the message is heard through the word of Christ. Romans 10:17
Caveman73 said...
FAITH ALONE!!!
ROM 3:28 Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.
NOT BY FAITH ALONE!!!!
JAM 2:17 Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.
Caveman,
The process of "saving" (salvation) is provided by God alone. The process begins with the grace of God, which reaches down to a man and makes him recognize his sinfulness. A man chooses either to accept God's grace or to reject it. The grace of God cannot be earned.
Paul is correct. A man is not justified by the Law. The Law makes a man aware of his sinful condition.
James is not saying anything contrary to what Paul said in Romans. Your suggestion that he said something contrary shows that you have chosen to misread what James is actually saying.
James is talking here about two kinds of faith: a faith that saves and faith that does not save. He asks (rhetorically)
"Can such a faith save?"
The "works" that James is talking about are a product of a "faith" that is alive. The faith that saves is alive, and is evidenced by the works that stem from it. A faith that is dead does not produce works.
The analogy here is that a branch that is alive produces fruit, and a branch that is cut off will not produce fruit (cf. John 15:5) The fruit on the branch is evidence that the branch is alive.
What you are suggesting (erroneously) that James means is akin to saying that by our effort to attach fruit to a dead branch, that we can make the branch alive. You are suggesting that James is saying that attaching "works" to a dead faith that we can make the faith alive. A careful reading of James 2 reveals that this is not what James is saying.
Notice also that faith is not a human work.
Rather, faith is a gift granted by God (cf. 2 Tim 2:25, Phil 1:29, John 6:37,65)
unquestionably true
JeffreyK622 said ...
Among the things you expect readers to accept as unquestionably true:
1) There is a God;
2) There is a day of judgment;
3) On the day of judgment, God will declare our eternal punishment for thoughtcrime unless we have put on the proper parachute;
4) No nonbeliever is aware of the Christian beliefs regarding points 1,2 and 3; we need to be reminded of these "facts" by "helpful" believers;
5) There is no such thing as a good question regarding Christian beliefs, only sinful challenges to God Himself.
Thanks for your thoughtful comments, Jeffrey.
But I expect nothing of the sort from you. Actually, I encourage you to ask questions as a way to seek after truth.
I myself was brought to the knowledge of the truth by seeking answers to questions. I encourage anyone who seeks truth to ask questions. I will respond to each of the points you make with an answer that I found.
Q: 1) There is a God;
A: 1) I know that God exists, because the Creator has provided ample evidence of his existence. The entire book of nature testifies to it. The Bible testifies to it. I recognize that not everyone has reached the same answer that I did.
Q: 2) There is a day of judgment;
A: 2) On the appointed final day, I will stand before the throne. I will be held accountable for all my words and deeds, and a verdict will be delivered by the perfect Judge.
Q: 3) On the day of judgment, God will declare our eternal punishment for thoughtcrime unless we have put on the proper parachute;
A: 3) The Judge's verdict will be perfect and just. The judge has made me personally aware of his standards, and his sentencing guidelines. So I know the verdict that he will hand down.
I will have no need for a parachute on judgement day. Sentence will be passed and payment of the penalty will be due. On that day, my hope is in the one who has already paid the penalty.
Q: 4) No nonbeliever is aware of the Christian beliefs regarding points 1,2 and 3; we need to be reminded of these "facts" by "helpful" believers;
A: 4) Some people have a desire to share their understanding of what the Bible says. Some demonstrate they have good understanding, others do not.
Some people egregiously misrepresent what the Bible teaches. Some do so out of an apparent ignorance, others appear to do so with a wilful malevolence towards God.
Some people will offer responses to what they view as misstatements others make about what the Bible teaches. Some of these people are earnest in their desire to be helpful. Their efforts are imperfect at best. People make mistakes.
Q: 5) There is no such thing as a good question regarding Christian beliefs, only sinful challenges to God Himself.
A: 5) Not all questions are equally good. Some questions are excellent. Some are better than others, and some are not really questions at all. Some statements punctuated by a question mark are really opinions and objections.
A good question is interrogative, and it's intent is to seek the truth.
Asking a question is only the starting point; finding the right answer is the ultimate goal.
A question asked sometimes receives an answer. The first answer received is frequently not the best answer. Very often, an answer serves to raise more questions.
If a Christian has chastised you, and discouraged you from asking questions, we owe you a sincere apology. We should all be encouraging you to ask questions, and we should all be striving to share with you the answers we have found.
---
I sincerely apologize to you if I have failed you by discouraging you from asking a question. Unfortunately, the only question I recall you asking me was what number (between one and a hundred) that you were thinking of. Apparently, you were under the impression I was clairvoyant, and had claimed an ability to read your mind.
I attempted to answer your question to the best of my ability.
I suggested that there were other things, some more important things, which you could think about instead. Again, I apologize to you if I discouraged you from seeking after the truth by asking questions.
Among the things you expect readers to accept as unquestionably true:
1) There is a God;
2) There is a day of judgment;
3) On the day of judgment, God will declare our eternal punishment for thoughtcrime unless we have put on the proper parachute;
4) No nonbeliever is aware of the Christian beliefs regarding points 1,2 and 3; we need to be reminded of these "facts" by "helpful" believers;
5) There is no such thing as a good question regarding Christian beliefs, only sinful challenges to God Himself.
Thanks for your thoughtful comments, Jeffrey.
But I expect nothing of the sort from you. Actually, I encourage you to ask questions as a way to seek after truth.
I myself was brought to the knowledge of the truth by seeking answers to questions. I encourage anyone who seeks truth to ask questions. I will respond to each of the points you make with an answer that I found.
Q: 1) There is a God;
A: 1) I know that God exists, because the Creator has provided ample evidence of his existence. The entire book of nature testifies to it. The Bible testifies to it. I recognize that not everyone has reached the same answer that I did.
Q: 2) There is a day of judgment;
A: 2) On the appointed final day, I will stand before the throne. I will be held accountable for all my words and deeds, and a verdict will be delivered by the perfect Judge.
Q: 3) On the day of judgment, God will declare our eternal punishment for thoughtcrime unless we have put on the proper parachute;
A: 3) The Judge's verdict will be perfect and just. The judge has made me personally aware of his standards, and his sentencing guidelines. So I know the verdict that he will hand down.
I will have no need for a parachute on judgement day. Sentence will be passed and payment of the penalty will be due. On that day, my hope is in the one who has already paid the penalty.
Q: 4) No nonbeliever is aware of the Christian beliefs regarding points 1,2 and 3; we need to be reminded of these "facts" by "helpful" believers;
A: 4) Some people have a desire to share their understanding of what the Bible says. Some demonstrate they have good understanding, others do not.
Some people egregiously misrepresent what the Bible teaches. Some do so out of an apparent ignorance, others appear to do so with a wilful malevolence towards God.
Some people will offer responses to what they view as misstatements others make about what the Bible teaches. Some of these people are earnest in their desire to be helpful. Their efforts are imperfect at best. People make mistakes.
Q: 5) There is no such thing as a good question regarding Christian beliefs, only sinful challenges to God Himself.
A: 5) Not all questions are equally good. Some questions are excellent. Some are better than others, and some are not really questions at all. Some statements punctuated by a question mark are really opinions and objections.
A good question is interrogative, and it's intent is to seek the truth.
Asking a question is only the starting point; finding the right answer is the ultimate goal.
A question asked sometimes receives an answer. The first answer received is frequently not the best answer. Very often, an answer serves to raise more questions.
If a Christian has chastised you, and discouraged you from asking questions, we owe you a sincere apology. We should all be encouraging you to ask questions, and we should all be striving to share with you the answers we have found.
---
I sincerely apologize to you if I have failed you by discouraging you from asking a question. Unfortunately, the only question I recall you asking me was what number (between one and a hundred) that you were thinking of. Apparently, you were under the impression I was clairvoyant, and had claimed an ability to read your mind.
I attempted to answer your question to the best of my ability.
I suggested that there were other things, some more important things, which you could think about instead. Again, I apologize to you if I discouraged you from seeking after the truth by asking questions.
what is it?
JeffreyK622 said...
I'm thinking of a number between one and a hundred. What is it?
(If you're as good at mind-reading as you're implicitly claiming, that should be no trouble.)
Jeffrey,
What is it?
It's a number between one and a hundred. Unless, of course, it isn't, because you are actually thinking about something else.
I can suggest to you something else you can think about. Why not think about what is going to happen on the appointed day of judgement, when God returns to this world, to bind Satan forever, and to judge the living and the dead.
Think about your fate on that day, when you stand before the judge, to give account for all your thoughts, words, and deeds. That's something to think about.
I'm thinking of a number between one and a hundred. What is it?
(If you're as good at mind-reading as you're implicitly claiming, that should be no trouble.)
Jeffrey,
What is it?
It's a number between one and a hundred. Unless, of course, it isn't, because you are actually thinking about something else.
I can suggest to you something else you can think about. Why not think about what is going to happen on the appointed day of judgement, when God returns to this world, to bind Satan forever, and to judge the living and the dead.
Think about your fate on that day, when you stand before the judge, to give account for all your thoughts, words, and deeds. That's something to think about.
Tuesday, January 31, 2012
potential political rivals
Steven_J says...
From the standpoint of the Gibeonites, it was "retaliation."
Yes, retaliation, as in meaning the Gibeonites were seeking just compensation for an evil done to them. Yes, we see that in the text.
Steven_J says...
From David's point of view, who knows? I personally suspect David saw it as a way to get rid of potential political rivals, but I admit I cannot prove that.
Not only can you "not prove that", Steven there is not any suggestion of that in the text. There is no verse or passage that supports your inference.
Rather, the text clearly states David's intent. David was seeking a blessing on Israel, he was seeking an end to the drought. But you disregard the statement that is made in the text, and you instead ascribe to David a motive of your own invention.
You also suggest that David is "utterly ignorant" of God's principles of justice, when the text clearly tells us that David received word from God. You suggest that David's response to God's instruction is to "get rid of potential political rivals".
For some reason, you find it necessary to infer ideas that are contrary to what the author of the text says, and then use those ideas to bolster your other peculiar interpretations of the text. It's almost as if you are choosing to reject outright any reading which would allow the author's meaning to be represented by the author's words.
From the standpoint of the Gibeonites, it was "retaliation."
Yes, retaliation, as in meaning the Gibeonites were seeking just compensation for an evil done to them. Yes, we see that in the text.
Steven_J says...
From David's point of view, who knows? I personally suspect David saw it as a way to get rid of potential political rivals, but I admit I cannot prove that.
Not only can you "not prove that", Steven there is not any suggestion of that in the text. There is no verse or passage that supports your inference.
Rather, the text clearly states David's intent. David was seeking a blessing on Israel, he was seeking an end to the drought. But you disregard the statement that is made in the text, and you instead ascribe to David a motive of your own invention.
You also suggest that David is "utterly ignorant" of God's principles of justice, when the text clearly tells us that David received word from God. You suggest that David's response to God's instruction is to "get rid of potential political rivals".
For some reason, you find it necessary to infer ideas that are contrary to what the author of the text says, and then use those ideas to bolster your other peculiar interpretations of the text. It's almost as if you are choosing to reject outright any reading which would allow the author's meaning to be represented by the author's words.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)