Reckon Jesus really mean what He said about.,,,,,,,,,,,

[Cryptoad]

Praying in Public??????? Anybody feeling any Smite????????????

[stopbush]

1. I dunno. Did he mean it when he said anyone - anyone - who does not

confess him as their lord and savior is going to hell? Because he said that, too.

[Cryptoad]

2. I believe Paul said that not Jesus,,,,,,,

He had his own agenda, everything for the Glory of the Church.,,,,,

[Ferrets are Cool]

3. Ding Ding. You nailed that one.

Oh wait...don't take that out of context.

[stopbush]

4. Wrong. Jesus said it. A couple of times.

Last edited Wed May 16, 2018, 03:44 AM - Edit history (1)

Check out the gospels of Matthew and John.

[Cryptoad]

5. I have many times, even the Greek translation,,,,

sorry what u say is not there!

[stopbush]

6. Mark 16:16

And John 3:36, then get back to me.

[Cryptoad]

9. Most Biblical Scholars agree that

Mark 19 9-20 was an addition by scribes.

https://www.compellingtruth.org/Mark-16-9-20.html

and JOhn 3 36 still does not say what u say it says

[stopbush]

14. You mean like the scribes who added Jesus' words in Gethsemane?

I mean, the gospels say Jesus went off alone to pray, so who was there to record what he said? Or maybe he returned to his sleeping disciples and said, “hey guys, before I admonish you for falling asleep, I should let you know what I just prayed about. Write this down...”

[Cryptoad]

16. Hah,,,, so it says,,

He went to be alone and pray,,,,, so back to the Q of this OP,,, do the Trumpsters believe He really meant what he said abt not praying in public,,,,,??????? They sho do like to pray in public,,,,,!

[grantcart]

10. John is an interpreter of Jesus not a biographer

You are completely wrong about the book of Mark where Jesus's tries to damp down Messianic talk which has led to scholars spending the last 120 years understanding Mark's Messianic Secret.

[stopbush]

15. The "secret" to understanding Mark

is to read it as religious allegory and not as history. It all makes perfect symbolic sense then.

[stopbush]

23. Obviously, you aren't at all familiar with the writings of

Dr Richard Carrier and other scholars who propose exactly that, ie: that Mark was written as a religious allegory.

Perhaps you are the one who “doesn’t understand scholarship” and who has no idea about who the intended audience was for Mark.

But of course, you are not able to read this post as you have conveniently (for you) put me on ignore, safe in your certainty that my statement was uninformed. Whatever. I felt I had to respond to your baseless attack for the sake of other DUers who do not pick up their toys, run away and declare victory.

[stopbush]

24. How about this saying of Jesus?

“Whosoever therefore shall confess me before men, him will I confess also before my Father which is in heaven. But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven.” - Matthew 10:32-33

[leftyladyfrommo]

7. The Gospels in the canon

were rewritten, overwritten, miswritten so many times it is pretty impossible to tell what Christ actually said.

[madinmaryland]

8. I distinctly remember that Jesus said, "Not this Shit Again"!!

[DFW]

13. What some attribute to Paul

Was actually said by Ringo.

[grantcart]

11. Use of Higher Criticism tools give a pretty good idea what

He said, what he said but wasn't unique and what he almost certainly didn't say.

They also know who wrote what parts of Genesis and what part of Isaiah was written by him and what parts were written by his followers.

[Hortensis]

12. How interesting that they believe they've

accomplished that from 2000 years ago. Long ago I was going to take a Bible as literature class with a friend and have a number of times found myself regretting I didn't, but I'm guessing most new knowledge on this would have come after that.

As for the OP, I'm not a Christian, but praying in public is so widely and respectably practiced that, even knowing the gospel about keeping it private, it'd never occur to me to criticize anyone for that aspect. Except when they impose praying on me. But obviously there's more about praying in the Bible than just that line widely brayed by others who wish they'd keep it to themselves.

[hunter]

18. I took a Bible as Literature class.

There were a few loudmouthed Evangelical Christian students who made every class hell.

Unfortunately the professor was young and inexperienced and he couldn't control the discussion.

Whenever the professor pushed back even slightly they'd smugly bask in his persecution.

It was one of the worst college classes I've ever taken, second only to an organic chemistry lab where I had the worst lab partner ever. I did ALL the work, he once lit my books on fire, he caused another larger fire that messed up the experiments of everyone around us, he was chummy with the grad student teaching the class because they'd smoke pot together, and two days before we were supposed to check in our shared lab equipment he stole it all and left town, leaving me with the bill.

[Hortensis]

20. Oh, no! That sounds awful, and such a lost opportunity.

I used to know a professor here in Georgia (he got a new job in NC) who taught history and social sciences at a college here in Georgia and had real problems with some religious conservative students, but not because he couldn't quiet them, quite the contrary.

They'd arrive in his class forewarned by their ministers and parents, looking for signs that Satan's minions were setting traps for their souls, and when this poor guy tried to teach something that conflicted with their world views he'd lose them. Period. Their religious views extended into many topics in the social sciences; and no matter how he tried to reach them with what they needed to learn, there were always some who'd tune him out completely. He felt he could sometimes see the moment it happened, and he ultimately left teaching, with that one of the big reasons.

As for the other, ! Good grief! The closest I came, in what is striking me as very staid, boring classes about now, is an anatomy class where I relaxed against the wall and let four aggressive kids headed for medical school compete over who was going to slice up which parts of the cadaver that day and have the most scalpel time or noses deepest in which tissues. Special organs and complex whatevers drew particularly heavy competition for the scalpel, suggestive snatches at the air reminding me of basketball scrimmages, but with the players trying to somehow snatch in proper future physician style. Goodness. Those who made it should be retiring by now.

[grantcart]

19. It is extremely interesting and the people who do this are serious as a heart attack about it

Personal religious faith counts for nothing and the majority of scholars do not attend Church.

This move into serious Biblical scholarship started with one guy and one book'

Dr. Schweitzer's "Quest for the Historical Jesus" where he proves that the Christological works for the previous several hundred years were all about projecting onto Jesus the personal bias of the scholar that was working on it at that time. During years that liberalism was popular you got a liberal Jesus and so on.

This work by the great Schweitzer who gave up his rock star status (he was Europe's number one performer of Bach on Church organs in his teens and had a following that Michael Jackson would have envied) who zips through seminary and gets his PhD by the time he was twenty gives it all up to go to medical school and spends the rest of his life in Africa serving the poor.

But his book effectively stops all Biblical research and over time they develop what is known as "The Higher Criticisms" that use different tools to tear apart the ancient texts and understand them from an objective point of view. They use Textual Criticism, Literary Criticism, Redaction Criticism etc along with a very strong study of the actual languages to understand why the books were written and to whom.

A lot of research has been done and a lot has been discovered and agreed upon by scholars. You can go to the wiki page of any book of the bible and it will summarize what the peer review consensus is at this time.

I will give you one tip: Virtually none of the Bible is written as literature and cannot be understood from just reading it without background. Most of the Bible is written during deep metaphysical crises and the authors are labouring to create a new metaphysical synthesis that will provide a meaningful guide to the believers at that time.

For example the books of Genesis and Exodus are written during the time that the nation of Israel has been taken to Babylon to live in slavery. The Babylonians were smart enough to follow what we might call 'soft slavery'. They allowed their conquered tribes to have self governance, keep their religion and practices. So the Jews were allowed to observe the Sabbath and to keep their Priests.

But the question was, "if we are the chosen people why are we slaves?" So the Priests edit together parts of the oral tradition from their past from two different sources, two different tribes. So what are they going to make the main part of the story? Liberation from previous slavery. So the story of Moses becomes the central narrative of Priests who want to speak about the Babylonians but cannot so they write the narrative that is on point for their current period by editing the narrative about their past.

If you think about it writing a significant work like the Bible was like a Manhattan Project for their metaphysics. It took a huge investment to pay for the authors and the paper etc. Why would they bother when things are going well, it is only when things are in crises that they bother.

For Mark the crises is that after the terror of Good Friday and the confusion of the missing body and the euphoria of some of the disciples in a possible Resurrection confusion remains. If there was a Resurrection then why didn't it trigger the end of the world that Jesus seemed to indicate and that Paul talked about. Now the first generation Christians are dying off and Mark wants to make sure that the essential facts are retained before he, one of the last of the Christians around that actually knew Jesus is gone.

If you want to follow up on the class you missed then Bart Ehrman will be of interest to you. He followed me at PTS and instead of just leaving the Church he continued with his scholarly studies. Most of what he is writing about is considered standard scholarship.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bart_D._Ehrman

[Hortensis]

21. Fantastic, fascinating post. Thank you, Grantcart!

You can go to the wiki page of any book of the bible and it will summarize what the peer review consensus is at this time.

I didn't know this, but on those fairly rare occasions when I do look scripture up I will now.

My preferred approach to the Bible would be a history/humanities approach. With new techniques and new technology, this is a magnificent time to be a historian or in any discipline exploring the past. I love your description of those involved in higher criticism analysis; they're just the kinds one would want. "Serious as a heart attack." I bet.

Oh, I'm now forewarned about Dr. Ehrman! He's so prolific I didn't know where to start. Fortunately, he's been asked before what his best single book for lay readers would be. He launched into the question on his blog and is, mercifully, very readable and enjoyable, but several screens down he was only somewhat into his explanation of his thoughts on that question. So he promised to continue his thesis on his best single book for lay people in several other blog posts. I haven't looked for those yet.

I understand he's published essays in some good journals, like The Atlantic, so I may pull up one of those first.

Thanks again,

[grantcart]

22. I emailed him once and he responded. You could ask him the question directly.