On Monday, September 26, 2016 at 2:25:25 PM UTC-5, Gary Harnagel wrote:
> On Monday, September 26, 2016 at 10:33:45 AM UTC-6, Jonathan Doolin wrote:
> >
> > On Monday, September 26, 2016 at 9:48:28 AM UTC-5, Gary Harnagel wrote:
> > >
> > > On Monday, September 26, 2016 at 6:54:20 AM UTC-6, Jonathan Doolin wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Now, to Jesus, whom God especially loves because he can do this over
> > > > and over and over (John 10:17),
> > >
> > > You are badly misinterpreting that scripture. He's not talking about
> > > reincarnation.
> > >
> >
> > It's hard to tell. I think John 6:52-66 suggests he's talking about the
> > way meat is eaten. If Jesus was eaten then his body could be said to
> > have lived again.
>
> You're not REALLY that stupid, are you?
>
In the light of the Law of the Torah, cannibalism is a sign of a curse or great distress among the people(Lev.26:29,Deut.28:53-57,Jer.19:9,etc.), so one might think Jesus wouldn't have literally recommended something like this... And if you start questioning John 6:52-56, one might have reason to distrust John as a reliable witness.
These are the two possibilities... Either Jesus DID, or Jesus DIDN'T tell his followers to eat his flesh and drink his blood. Yes I am "that stupid" in your words, that I cannot come up with any other possibilities.
In the first case, Jesus DID ask his followers to cannibalize his body, and it would be reasonable to wonder WHY Jesus would request such a thing. In the latter case, Jesus DID NOT ask this, then John's account is fictional, and it means John is not a reliable witness.
Love is patient. Love is kind, Love does not boast. Love is not proud. Love does not keep a record of wrongs. Love always perseveres.
Dying for other people is not patient. It is not kind. It does boast. It is proud. It keeps a record of wrongs. It does not persevere.
> > > > You can also get an idea of John's concept of Love, and Teaching, in John
> > > > 13:10-17.
> > > >
> > > > [Sorry. Too boring for me]
> > > >
> > > > > What makes you believe God doesn't obey a moral code?
> > > >
> > > > Now, since Jesus can lay down his life and take it back up again, any
> > > > time he wants,
> > >
> > > This is YOUR assumption and is contrary to the record. Did He ever die
> > > again? No, He did not. Ergo, you have NO justification for your assertion.
> > >
> > > > [Bo-o-o-oring]
> >
> >
> > What people mean by "boring" is that it is exhausting to try to parse and
> > interpret, and assign meaning to words.
>
> Yes, I tire of endless nonsense quickly.
>
> > I don't find it boring because I have acknowledged the possibility that
> > the words might not be true.
>
> That would be even more boring.
>
That is the way I sometimes feel about cooking. I trust the grocery store to put good food into the package. It would be boring, I think to check the ingredients, or to confirm the manner in which it was made. I sometimes just shovel the food into my mouth, with the faith that the experts are making sure that there's nothing unhealthy in the food. I have better things to do, I think, than to analyze every ingredient.
Do you find it boring to sniff the food before you eat it, to check whether it is rotten? When I find something that stinks, it isn't exactly boring, but it is unpleasant.... And I don't eat it.
You feel the same way about your religious texts, that you believe every word in them... This isn't entirely your fault. If you only believed in good and true things in the Bible, you'd be accused of "cherry picking". So you mix bad and good, true and false, together in one giant vat of indistinguishable "boring" You believe whatever you find, whether it is cherries or crap. It's this mix of cherries and crap that gives the scripture you believe in its "boring" flavor.
> > You find it boring because you are insisting the words are true, but you
> > cannot find an interpretation that seems fitting.
>
> You are dead wrong, pretending one. I do have a fitting interpretation.
>
You may share, if you like. You may feel free to express it, if you so desire. Jesus asks a question in John 13:12. He asks "Do you understand what I've done for you?"
You have a fitting interpretation... Is it a private interpretation, or a public one. My interpretation is that Judas, by taking 30 pieces of silver and telling some Roman soldiers where Jesus was, went and did something really fairly symbolic and harmless. But Judas provided a scapegoat for John, so that John could break the "Staff of Union" mentioned in Zechariah 11.
Jesus also said he was only washing the feet, even though some people's minds, and hands, and whole bodies were unclean. Do you understand what John Gospel Jesus has done for us? He's allowed the wheat and the weeds to mix up together. Matthew 13:24-30
The trouble is, Jesus may not even have know who was going to betray him. He just knew, according to Zechariah, a bad Shepherd was going to rise up, (Zechariah 11:16). Jesus knew he was bringing up his twelve disciples to be shepherds, and he knew of this prophecy in Zechariah. And he intended that the weeds would grow up with the wheat, until the time of harvest.
Washing of the feet-without fixing the mind, the hands... It's like when people on TV say "Religious views must be respected, even though they're obviously stupid and wrong."
True, ignoring people's beliefs is better than persecuting them, shouting them down, and killing them. But it is not as good as understanding, and questioning, and offering better beliefs. Yes, wash their feet. But look at their hands. Question their minds. Check the health of their bodies. If they do evil works with their hands, and have false beliefs in their minds, and their bodies are filthy and stink, it is not enough just to wash their feet.
> > It is this "reading without judgment" that you find booring. Because you
> > have been taught over and over and over again that what Jesus did here,
>
> followed by more boring stuff, as well as crass idiocy.
>
> > > > Laying down your life might, on extremely rare occasion be one possible
> > > > method of showing love--for instance, running into a burning building
> > > > to save a child... But this is not an act of seeking death for self...
> > > > It is an act of forgetting self and seeking life for another.
> > >
> > > Which is exactly what Jesus did.
> > >
> >
> > It's exactly what Jesus did in Matthew, Mark, and Luke.
> >
> > But it's not what Jesus did in John's gospel.
>
> Only according to your misguided misinterpretations.
>
> > > > So what do you think, then? If John defines "God is Love" in 1 John 4:8,
> > > > and John says "My command is this: Love each other as I have loved you.
> > > > Greater love has no one than this: to lay down one’s life for one’s
> > > > friends." Isn't John also saying "God is Death"?
> > >
> > > Nope. It's saying eternity is better than mortality.
> > >
> > > > [Excessive wordage ignored]
> >
> > John 12:25 does not say that eternity is better than mortality. It says
> > that hatred of life is kept for eternal life. John 12:25 doesn't grant
> > immortality either. It just says, if someone hates their life, that
> > hatred will be inherited by eternal life.
>
> Again, you misinterpret. "Not loving" isn't the same thing as "hate."
> There is no point continuing this discussion until you learn that your
> own interpretations aren't God's:
>
I am what I am. I believe in acknowledging hypotheses, and recognizing when the facts are uncertain. Whereas most people who study the Bible are quick to say "miracle" I generally try to find a more likely explanation... Either that the author is so impressed by something in human behavior that it seems miraculous, or that someone has performed a trick which many believe is a miracle.
I have fairly firm prejudices on these things... I don't believe God changes laws of physics or biology from day-to-day to punish, to reward, or to impress. So my interpretations have to fit these criteria. I believe that words have actual intent... a meaning they convey, even if that meaning is to demonstrate meaninglessness.
If the words of the Bible appear to say one thing, but all the believers of the Bible report that it means something else, then I think it is reasonable to point this out.
You say I need to learn that my own interpretation aren't God's. Or perhaps you need to learn that your own interpretation isn't Gods. Do you find Christians saying "Jesus is the Messiah"? Have you found many Jews lining up to say "Jesus is the Messiah?" Have you found many Muslims, lining up to say "Jesus is the Messiah?"
If all Judeo Christian religions were united under this banner, then I might think their interpretation was God's. As it is, though, it looks like there's something wrong, because these three groups who should be allied under the banner of "Judeo-Christian-Religions" are persecuting one another for blasphemy.
I think NONE of them have God's interpretation in mind, so when you say I need to learn that my own interpretation is not God's, I am perfectly aware of this... I might not have it right. But I also know that few people are trying to fix it, or seem to be aware that there is a problem.
Both KJV and NIV use the word "Hate" here.
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=john%2012%3A25&version=NIV;KJV
> I Peter 1:20 "Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is
> of any private interpretation."
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2+Peter+1%3A20&version=NIV;KJV
2 Peter 1:20 differes greatly in meaning, between NIV and KJV.
KJV says that no one is allowed to come to their own understanding of the Bible. "Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation."
NIV says that no prophet understood exactly how their own prophecy was going to be fulfilled: " Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation of things."
Where NIV and KJV differ significantly on meaning, I tend to favor the NIV meaning. In this case, 2 Peter 1:20 says that the prophets do not always know exactly how things are going to pan out.
Did Zechariah think that he prophesied Jesus and John? Did John think that he prophesied Paul, or Mohammad? Do the prophets know the difference between a billion years, a thousand years and a day? I don't think they do.
But those who fulfill prophesy decide to fulfill prophesy. Mary and Joseph moved around to lots of different places, so the Messiah could come from different places prophesied. If enough people decide they want to take part in the fulfillment of the book of Revelations, then everything in Revelations will come true.
I, personally, think that it is best to make a well-informed decision, before jumping in to fulfill prophecies. I choose not, for instance, to be part of the group asking for "Mountains to fall on us, rocks to hide us, to save us from the wrath of the Lamb."
I choose, instead, the "other" wise... To see with my eyes, hear with my ears, turn, and be healed."