BANNED from the Bible

[melon]

You will find your answer in Scripture.

Jesus refused to stone an adulterous woman to death, as prescribed by the Old Testament, and was an innocent man Himself subjected to capital punishment.

So not only does Jesus thumb His nose at capital punishment, not only does He reject Biblical authority in this instance, He also manages to be a living example of why capital punishment is flawed.

I certainly found my answers in Scripture.

Melon

 

[nbcrusader]

Jesus refused to stone an adulterous woman to death, as prescribed by the Old Testament, and was an innocent man Himself subjected to capital punishment.

So not only does Jesus thumb His nose at capital punishment, not only does He reject Biblical authority in this instance, He also manages to be a living example of why capital punishment is flawed.

I certainly found my answers in Scripture.

Melon

But he also warned Peter that if he was going to live by the sword, he would die by the sword.

Jesus stops the mob from taking justice into their own hands so they may address their own sin - and then tells the women to sin no more.

 

[Irvine511]

i Biblical discussions between NBC and Melon.

i learn so much.

i really do.

 

[stammer476]

Jesus refused to stone an adulterous woman to death, as prescribed by the Old Testament, and was an innocent man Himself subjected to capital punishment.

So not only does Jesus thumb His nose at capital punishment, not only does He reject Biblical authority in this instance, He also manages to be a living example of why capital punishment is flawed.

I certainly found my answers in Scripture.

Melon

It's a stretch, to say the least, that John 8 is mean to be understood as Jesus' stance on capital punishment. His reaction was more to the fact that the Jewish leaders were trying to trap him at the expense of the woman.

Besides the fact that this section of John 8 is the most likely piece of canonized scripture that never really happened.

 

[financeguy]

You will find your answer in Scripture.

"No man ever believes that the Bible means what it says: He is always convinced that it says what he means." - George Bernard Shaw.

 

[melon]

It's a stretch, to say the least, that John 8 is mean to be understood as Jesus' stance on capital punishment. His reaction was more to the fact that the Jewish leaders were trying to trap him at the expense of the woman.

Besides the fact that this section of John 8 is the most likely piece of canonized scripture that never really happened.

Well, you're talking to someone with a heavy interest in secular Biblical scholarship; so, with that, most of the Gospels are thought to be mythical in nature anyway. Fine details were less important than convincing non-believers. Since most of them had strict expectations for what they would expect out of a God, much of the Gospels conforms to those expectations.

The Gospel of Matthew is perfect for analysis, because you can see how Jewish and Gentile Christian sects fought over it.

Melon

 

[BVS]

But he also warned Peter that if he was going to live by the sword, he would die by the sword.

Well that kind of makes sense. One who lives the life of a gang banger will probably die living that lifestyle.

To me it doesn't really say anything about capital punishment.

 

[SomethingMissin]

On the issue of capital punishment I just can't reconcile the fact that if Jesus told his followers to love one another as they do themselves, how could anyone consider killing someone who could be brought to justice by other means a loving action? I dont think its possible.

 

[deep]

So not only does Jesus thumb His nose at capital punishment,
, He also manages to be a living example of why capital punishment is flawed.

Melon

he was guilty of sedition
so, by law - justly executed

the internment may have been flawed
cremation may have been a better way to go.

 

[deep]

To me it doesn't really say anything about capital punishment.

come on
the choice is yours


don't you want to live in fear

God 'smote" people
God is vengeful
God gets angry
God destroyed cities and all inhabitants-


find some "righteous anger"
be afraid or perish


do not choose love
unless you reject God trademark

 

[U2Scot]

The New Testament does not have any specific teachings about capital punishment. However, the Old Testament ideas of punishment became secondary to Jesus' message of love and redemption. Both reward and punishment are seen as properly taking place in eternity, rather than in this life.

Jesus said His mission was not to abolish the Law, but to fulfill it (Matthew 5:17-20). However, He and His apostles greatly modified our understanding of God's intentions. Love is the principle that must guide all our actions (Matthew 5:43-48, 22:34-40, Mark 12:28-34, Luke 10:25-28, Romans 13:9-10, Galatians 5:14). Christians are bound by Jesus' commands to "Love the Lord your God" and "Love your neighbor as yourself." We are no longer bound by the harsh Old Testament Law (John 1:16-17, Romans 8:1-3, 1 Corinthians 9:20-21).

Jesus flatly rejected the Old Testament principle of taking equal revenge for a wrong done (Matthew 5:38-41, Luke 9:52-56). He also said that we are all sinners and do not have the right to pass judgment on one another (Matthew 7:1-5). In the case of a woman caught in adultery (a capital offense), Jesus said to those who wanted to stone her to death,

"Let anyone among you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her." And once again he bent down and wrote on the ground. When they heard it, they went away, one by one, beginning with the elders; and Jesus was left alone with the woman standing before him. Jesus straightened up and said to her, "Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?" She said, "No one, sir." And Jesus said, "Neither do I condemn you. Go your way, and from now on do not sin again." (NRSV, John 8:7-11)

The apostle Paul also warned against taking revenge for a wrong done (Romans 12:17-21, 1 Thessalonians 5:15). Likewise, the apostle Peter warned us not to repay evil with evil (1 Peter 3:9).

 

[deep]

Gospel of Judas

The move to publish the alleged Gospel of Judas for the first time in English, German and French. Though not written by Judas, it is said to reflect the belief among early Christians — now gaining ground in the Vatican — that in betraying Christ Judas was fulfilling a divine mission, which led to the arrest and Crucifixion of Jesus and hence to man’s salvation.

Mgr Brandmuller said that he expected “no new historical evidence” from the supposed gospel, which had been excluded from the canon of accepted Scripture.

But it could “serve to reconstruct the events and context of Christ’s teachings as they were seen by the early Christians”. This included that Jesus had always preached “forgiveness for one’s enemies”.

Some Vatican scholars have expressed concern over the reconsideration of Judas. Monsignor Giovanni D’Ercole, a Vatican theologian, said it was “dangerous to re-evaulate Judas and muddy the Gospel accounts by reference to apocryphal writings. This can only create confusion in believers.” The Gospels tell how Judas later returned the 30 pieces of silver — his “blood money” — and h anged himself, or according to the Acts of the Apostles, “fell headlong and burst open so that all his entrails burst out”.

Some accounts suggest he acted out of disappointment that Jesus was not a revolutionary who intended to overthrow Roman occupation and establish “God’s Kingdom on Earth”.

In the Gospel accounts, Jesus reveals to the disciples at the Last Supper that one of them will betray him, but does not say which. He adds “Woe to that man by whom the Son of Man is betrayed! It would have been better for that man if he had not been born.”

But he also — according to St Matthew — acknowledged that Judas had a divine function to fulfil, saying to him during the arrest, “Friend, do what you are here to do” and adding that “the prophecies of the Scriptures must be fulfilled”.

The “Gospel of Judas”, a 62-page worn and tattered papyrus, was found in Egypt half a century ago and later sold by antiquities dealers to the Maecenas Foundation in Basle, Switzerland.

 

[nbcrusader]

Why not publish the Gospel of Deep?

Can't we all re-invent Scripture? We can make ourselves equal to God!!!

 

[Sue DeNym]

Why not publish the Gospel of Deep?

Can't we all re-invent Scripture? We can make ourselves equal to God!!!

Maybe all of these so-called "lost books of the Bible" are nothing more than early fan fiction?

 

[joyfulgirl]

that in betraying Christ Judas was fulfilling a divine mission, which led to the arrest and Crucifixion of Jesus and hence to man’s salvation.

I have no trouble believing this. If Jesus in fact was a son of God, which I believe he was, then everything about his mission here was absolute perfection, including the betrayal, the cucifixion, and any "mistakes" he made along the way. But then again, I believe in the perfection of this imperfect world anyway (and am not a Christian).

 

[deep]

Why not publish the Gospel of Deep?

are you ready to be saved?


it is easier than you think

 

[BonosSaint]

Why not publish the Gospel of Deep?

Can't we all re-invent Scripture? We can make ourselves equal to God!!!

Forgetting for a moment the lost, mislaid, or discarded books,
we are all playing god with our scripture interpretations, aren't we then? Secularists, etc, and Christians alike. Even if we were to accept the premise of the Bible being the word of God, ALL the interpretations are done by man.

 

[nbcrusader]

Forgetting for a moment the lost, mislaid, or discarded books,
we are all playing god with our scripture interpretations, aren't we then? Secularists, etc, and Christians alike. Even if we were to accept the premise of the Bible being the word of God, ALL the interpretations are done by man.

I'd say the applications are done by man. And the best way to test the application is to compare to as much Scripture as possible.

 

[BVS]

I'd say the applications are done by man. And the best way to test the application is to compare to as much Scripture as possible.

But have you read and seen all the "erased" scripture?

 

[hiphop]

But have you read and seen all the "erased" scripture?

Yes what about the Gospel of Thomas? That´s a good one, I tell ya.

 

[BonosSaint]

Crusader,

Knowing the nature of man, do you think that a book of this magnitude would get put together without machinations of men. Errant men chose what books would be included, errant man interprets it (my word), the applications (your word) are made by errant man, the translations from original Hebrew/Greek were made by errant translators.

For example, Mark allows no reason for divorce. Matthew allows it on the basis of adultery (or in some translations, for unlawful marriage, which I suppose would include fraud). Either one or the other misquoted or it was mistranslated. So either here we have inconsistency (which is it?) or we are relying on errant translation being that most of us are not able to read the texts in original language, even assuming the original documents were available to us.

Referring to another thread, God did a lot of smiting in the Old Testament, none in the new. You could make a case, as you have, that capital punishment is allowed. I could make a case that it is not allowed. You provide your scriptural rationale. I provide my scriptural rationale. I could be right or wrong, so could you. If someone says, "the way I interpret it", I can't fault them. The statement is coming with a disclaimer. If someone says definitively, this is God's intent on this issue, that is playing God, isn't it?

 

[melon]

Matthew allows it on the basis of adultery (or in some translations, for unlawful marriage, which I suppose would include fraud). Either one or the other misquoted or it was mistranslated.

Mistranslation? That would be Matthew. It's a mistranslation of the Greek word, "porneia," which refers to Jewish "blood mixing" purity codes--basically incest. An incestuous marriage, according to the spirit of Matthew, would be "unlawful." Since the first draft of Matthew was written by Jewish Christians (kind of like "Jews for Jesus" today), the intended audience would have cared about full adherence to Mosaic Law. I doubt Jesus would have said that.

Since Jewish Christianity was wiped out in the second century A.D., such an archaic concept is ripe for mistranslation and modern bias.

Melon

 

[Eliv8]

Saw parts of it last night - very cool - TiVo'd for the weekend

 

[BrownEyedBoy]

Jesus refused to stone an adulterous woman to death, as prescribed by the Old Testament, and was an innocent man Himself subjected to capital punishment.

So not only does Jesus thumb His nose at capital punishment, not only does He reject Biblical authority in this instance, He also manages to be a living example of why capital punishment is flawed.

I certainly found my answers in Scripture.

Melon

Manipulating scripture to fit your own beliefs.

 

[nbcrusader]

Crusader,

Knowing the nature of man, do you think that a book of this magnitude would get put together without machinations of men. Errant men chose what books would be included, errant man interprets it (my word), the applications (your word) are made by errant man, the translations from original Hebrew/Greek were made by errant translators.

For example, Mark allows no reason for divorce. Matthew allows it on the basis of adultery (or in some translations, for unlawful marriage, which I suppose would include fraud). Either one or the other misquoted or it was mistranslated. So either here we have inconsistency (which is it?) or we are relying on errant translation being that most of us are not able to read the texts in original language, even assuming the original documents were available to us.

Referring to another thread, God did a lot of smiting in the Old Testament, none in the new. You could make a case, as you have, that capital punishment is allowed. I could make a case that it is not allowed. You provide your scriptural rationale. I provide my scriptural rationale. I could be right or wrong, so could you. If someone says, "the way I interpret it", I can't fault them. The statement is coming with a disclaimer. If someone says definitively, this is God's intent on this issue, that is playing God, isn't it?

Your example regarding Mark/Matthew has one fatal flaw. You have read Mark to say "no divorce, and no exceptions". Now obviously, when you add that additional thought, you will find a conflict with Matthew.

The Gospels are written as mosaics. Four different recordings of one act. Pieces of one are not found in the others. There is a certain beauty to this and I'm sure God had a purpose in writing it this way instead of giving us one clear rule book.

As for capital punishment, you have simply created a different application. Both Old and New Testament tell us not to murder. And the OT also gives express command for capital punishment. Also, I would note that the book of Romans tells us that the OT law is not tossed away.

 

[nbcrusader]

Mistranslation? That would be Matthew. It's a mistranslation of the Greek word, "porneia," which refers to Jewish "blood mixing" purity codes--basically incest. An incestuous marriage, according to the spirit of Matthew, would be "unlawful." Since the first draft of Matthew was written by Jewish Christians (kind of like "Jews for Jesus" today), the intended audience would have cared about full adherence to Mosaic Law. I doubt Jesus would have said that.

Since Jewish Christianity was wiped out in the second century A.D., such an archaic concept is ripe for mistranslation and modern bias.

Melon

That is a horrendously narrow translation of pornia - and one that is inconsistent with the body of Scripture. Pornia is widely translated as "sex outside of marriage" - a translation that does fit the body of Scripture.

 

[nathan1977]

As for capital punishment, you have simply created a different application. Both Old and New Testament tell us not to murder. And the OT also gives express command for capital punishment. Also, I would note that the book of Romans tells us that the OT law is not tossed away.

In Romans 13 Paul seems to make quite a case for the enforcement of laws against wrongdoers, specifically mentioning the sword. He goes into this right after Romans 12, which is a chapter on love.

It seems that the early Christians didn't have a problem separating social justice (i.e., how we as private citizens treat one another -- love, forgiveness) from corporate law (the necessary enforcement of laws for a just society).

 

[BVS]

In Romans 13 Paul seems to make quite a case for the enforcement of laws against wrongdoers, specifically mentioning the sword. He goes into this right after Romans 12, which is a chapter on love.

The biggest problem with that is

The authorities that exist have been established by God.

has to stand true for all governments. And if that's true, that would mean such goverments such as that of Saddams were established by God.

It's faulty logic. Paul had a tendency to inject his own beliefs quite a bit...

 

[nbcrusader]

The biggest problem with that is has to stand true for all governments. And if that's true, that would mean such goverments such as that of Saddams were established by God.

It's faulty logic. Paul had a tendency to inject his own beliefs quite a bit...

Why is this faulty logic?

Look at the example of Pharaoh during the time of Moses.

Definitely a “bad” leader. But one used by God. God specifically said the Hebrews would suffer 400 some years in captivity. At the end of the day, everyone knew who was the One True God.

I’d suggest that people like Saddam, or even GWB, play a part in God’s larger picture for this world.

 

[deep]

Why is this faulty logic?




I’d suggest that people like Saddam, or even GWB, play a part in God’s larger picture for this world.

people are free to think what they like




this world view is very dangerous if it is held by one in a position of power