Persecuted Religions

muhammad_isa said:
By dismissing other people's opinions with a hand-wave, only causes ourselves loss.
Click to expand...
I dismiss very little until I try to research. I have spent the last 39 years researching about all religions, as I have said before, reading their books and what they believe, talking personally with them. Don't sell me short. I have even doubted Christianity at times. But I always ask myself, who has the answer, who has the truth. it's like Peter when Jesus asked Peter, "do you want to leave also" and Peter replies; "where do I go, you only have the truth". Where does truth lie. Who will I believe. There are answers for those will to seek them.
 
Thinking required said:
That's interesting since they were not robots taking dictation.
Click to expand...
Yep.

Thinking required said:
that why some of the stories have slight differences.
Click to expand...
No two experiences are the same.

Thinking required said:
Matthew was with Jesus ...
Click to expand...
But whether he wrote the Gospel is another matter. It's anonymous.

The Tradition says he did. That Matthew might not have been the disciple Matthew, because the Gospel of Matthew borrows heavily from Mark, who was not a follower of Jesus.

Papias speaks of a Hebrew text, a 'sayings document' which might have been penned by the disciple Matthew and used by the author in composing his gospel – so attributed to Matthew as the source material – but they were sayings and maybe nothing else, and the author used Mark to provide context.

Thinking required said:
... Luke asked people what happened
Click to expand...
Yes, Luke's is from Mark, too, and the oral traditions.

Thinking required said:
and Mark might have been standing to far in the back of the crowd.
Click to expand...
Quite probably never saw Jesus. We have just that one tantalising comment ... but certainly he was not close enough to write what he did from first-hand experience.

I side with the idea that Mark is based on the testimony of Peter, but I know not all scholars agree with that.

Thinking required said:
John's Gospel is so different in context.
Click to expand...
I think John was written – in its first draft at least – by John who accompanied Jesus ... but again, not all scholars agree.
 
Thomas said:
Matthew borrows heavily from Mark, who was not a follower of Jesus.
Click to expand...
"not a follower"? Mark was not a apostle, but could certain have heard Jesus speak. Mark is more connected to Paul in his travels.
Only about half the book of Matthew contains what is said by Mark. Do you have any idea why they are referred to the synoptic Gospels.
 
Thomas said:
Yes, Luke's is from Mark, too, and the oral traditions.
Click to expand...
NOT! Why not let Luke speak for himself:

Luke 1:1 Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile an account of the things accomplished among us,
2 just as they were handed down to us by those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and cservants of the word,
3 it seemed fitting for me as well, having investigated everything carefully from the beginning, to write it out for you in consecutive order, most excellent Theophilus;
4 so that you may know the exact truth about the things you have been ataught.


New American Standard Bible: 1995 Update (La Habra, CA: The Lockman Foundation, 1995), Lk 1:1–4.
 
Thinking required said:
Do you have any idea why they are referred to the synoptic Gospels.
Click to expand...

To quote you: "LOL" 🤣 Thomas is a scholar, in case you haven't noticed. You can be sure that he's familiar with the term.

(putting on the mod hat)

Tone it down, will you?

(mod hat off)
 
Cino said:
To quote you: "LOL" 🤣 Thomas is a scholar, in case you haven't noticed. You can be sure that he's familiar with the term.
Click to expand...
A "scholar", well I don't hold scholars any different than anyone else. Certainly might mean that they have read and studied, but it doesn't mean that they know the truth. Oh no, Jesus says the same thing about scholars who thought they they understood the OT. How many Priests are in the Catholic church who are a "scholar" and don't know God. Just a minute, "they will be judged by their fruit" you should know what I mean here since I am not going to spell it out.
 
Cino said:
Good, then you'll be polite towards anyone, even scholars.
Click to expand...
Are you saying I am not polite? And just how am I to know if someone here is considered a "scholar". And just who decides that they are a scholar? Does someone else tell them that they are? Polite is when I open a door for my wife. Dialogues are when opinions are disagreed on and friction is going to happen.

Thanks for the reply, I was thinking about you when I was on my walk a few minutes ago and I was listening to a book by G K Chesterton. It's called "The Everlasting Man". I know this site is about Religion, but I have really been more inquisitive about humanity. Religion is a by product of how and why people think the way they do. Yes, you will probably tell me there are sites for that. But really the foundational belief for a person's religion is based on so much about their life. To understand Religion, I believe that it is important to understand humanity. This is one area that the Bible does so when. It lays out humanity. That is why I have pushed truth so hard on this site. Nobody lives strictly in truth, we are all full of bias that we have accumulated in our life. And that bias affects everything that we believe. To have a good and open dialogue, sometimes there has to be confrontation. 🥸

I will not use the word "sorry" again since I was chided for that.
 
Cino said:
Good, then you'll be polite towards anyone, even scholars.
Click to expand...
I was out back cutting the grass and thinking more about this when I had an epiphany. All of our Religion preferences come from what we believe, even before we choose a Religion. If someone believes that they will come back after death, then reincarnation becomes there Religion of choice, if someone thinks they can be good enough to get to God, then it's all the works based Religions. The one Religion that no one can simply choose is Christianity. Many think that they can, maybe by joining a church. But the true Christianity only comes by God choosing the person, not the other way around.
 
Thinking required said:
I was out back cutting the grass and thinking more about this when I had an epiphany. All of our Religion preferences come from what we believe, even before we choose a Religion. If someone believes that they will come back after death, then reincarnation becomes there Religion of choice, if someone thinks they can be good enough to get to God, then it's all the works based Religions. The one Religion that no one can simply choose is Christianity. Many think that they can, maybe by joining a church. But the true Christianity only comes by God choosing the person, not the other way around.
Click to expand...
That last statement is valid for every God given faith. I quote from the Baha'i Writings.

God is merciful and compassionate! His bounty is great and great! He appropriateth by His mercy those whom He liketh and chooseth for His love those of whom He approveth. This is in accordance with what Christ said: "Many are called, but few chosen."
‘Abdu’l-Bahá, Tablets of ‘Abdu’l-Bahá v2, p. 347

God chooses for His favors whomsoever He willeth. He is the Merciful, the Generous!
‘Abdu’l-Bahá, Tablets of ‘Abdu’l-Bahá v1, p. 83

As to you -- O ye who are attracted to the fragrances of God! -- kneel down and thank God for choosing you to enter His wonderful Kingdom.
‘Abdu’l-Bahá, Tablets of ‘Abdu’l-Bahá v1, p. 135

Regards Tony
 
Thinking required said:
I will not use the word "sorry" again since I was chided for that.
Click to expand...
I don't know if most people would resent the word sorry as a genuine apology.
But if the word "sorry" is used in a context that seems contentious or sarcastic.... chiding can follow.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top