Resolution - to read the Bible
- Thread starter Seeler
- Start date
Welcome to Wondercafe2!
A community where we discuss, share, and have some fun together. Join today and become a part of it!
@Waterfall
Some Celtic derived gods even used a double handed Excalibur to split poor souls for the sport of it ... to see if they could keep even halves!
Some Celtic derived gods even used a double handed Excalibur to split poor souls for the sport of it ... to see if they could keep even halves!
unsafe
Well-Known Member
unsafe posting this ---read all ----
The Ending of Mark (Mark 16:9-20)
Mark 16:9-20
Mark 16:9-20 has been called a later addition to the Gospel of Mark by most New Testament scholars in the past century. The main reason for doubting the authenticity of the ending is that it does not appear in some of the oldest existing witnesses, and it is reported to be absent from many others in ancient times by early writers of the Church. Moreover, the ending has some stylistic features which also suggest that it came from another hand. The Gospel is obviously incomplete without these verses, and so most scholars believe that the final leaf of the original manuscript was lost, and that the ending which appears in English versions today (verses 9-20) was supplied during the second century. Below are some excerpts from various scholarly sources that conclude that the verses are a later addition.
Nevertheless, some scholars have not been impressed with the evidence against these verses, and have maintained that they are original. These scholars have pointed out that the witnesses which bring the verses into question are few, and that the verses are quoted by church Fathers very early, even in the second century.
unsafe says ----So again it is all speculation ----some for some against ------The real truth is we don't know and so all we have is God's word as it is that says His word is truth and it was God inspired and no Prophecy was given by mans own interpretation ------ We either believe it or we don't -----If we spent as much time --doing as the word say to ensure our Eternal Home ---as we do trying to figure out what is real and what isn't in the scripture we would be better off -----Just Maybe God put it that way to see who would cause doubt in others by sharing all this controversial stuff ------Who Knows -----Maybe it's a test to see who the Faithful really are -----
unsafe posting ------read all ----
http://defendinginerrancy.com/bible-solutions/Mark_16.9-20.php
WHY IS THIS PASSAGE OF SCRIPTURE OMITTED IN SOME BIBLES?
Whether or not this piece of text belongs in the original, the truth it contains certainly accords with it. So, the bottom line is that it does not make any difference, since if it does belong here there is nothing in it contrary to the rest of Scripture. And if it does not belong, there is no truth missing in the Bible, since everything taught here is found elsewhere in Scripture. This includes tongues (see Acts 2:1ff), baptism (Acts 2:38), and God’s 1st century supernatural protection of His messengers unwittingly bitten by poisonous snakes (cf. Acts 28:3–5). So, in the final analysis, it is simply a debate about whether this particular text belongs in the Bible, not over whether any truth is missing.
The Ending of Mark (Mark 16:9-20)
Mark 16:9-20
Mark 16:9-20 has been called a later addition to the Gospel of Mark by most New Testament scholars in the past century. The main reason for doubting the authenticity of the ending is that it does not appear in some of the oldest existing witnesses, and it is reported to be absent from many others in ancient times by early writers of the Church. Moreover, the ending has some stylistic features which also suggest that it came from another hand. The Gospel is obviously incomplete without these verses, and so most scholars believe that the final leaf of the original manuscript was lost, and that the ending which appears in English versions today (verses 9-20) was supplied during the second century. Below are some excerpts from various scholarly sources that conclude that the verses are a later addition.
Nevertheless, some scholars have not been impressed with the evidence against these verses, and have maintained that they are original. These scholars have pointed out that the witnesses which bring the verses into question are few, and that the verses are quoted by church Fathers very early, even in the second century.
unsafe says ----So again it is all speculation ----some for some against ------The real truth is we don't know and so all we have is God's word as it is that says His word is truth and it was God inspired and no Prophecy was given by mans own interpretation ------ We either believe it or we don't -----If we spent as much time --doing as the word say to ensure our Eternal Home ---as we do trying to figure out what is real and what isn't in the scripture we would be better off -----Just Maybe God put it that way to see who would cause doubt in others by sharing all this controversial stuff ------Who Knows -----Maybe it's a test to see who the Faithful really are -----
unsafe posting ------read all ----
http://defendinginerrancy.com/bible-solutions/Mark_16.9-20.php
WHY IS THIS PASSAGE OF SCRIPTURE OMITTED IN SOME BIBLES?
Whether or not this piece of text belongs in the original, the truth it contains certainly accords with it. So, the bottom line is that it does not make any difference, since if it does belong here there is nothing in it contrary to the rest of Scripture. And if it does not belong, there is no truth missing in the Bible, since everything taught here is found elsewhere in Scripture. This includes tongues (see Acts 2:1ff), baptism (Acts 2:38), and God’s 1st century supernatural protection of His messengers unwittingly bitten by poisonous snakes (cf. Acts 28:3–5). So, in the final analysis, it is simply a debate about whether this particular text belongs in the Bible, not over whether any truth is missing.
Seeler
Well-Known Member
Matthew 28 – here we have Matthew's account of the resurrection.
Two women, Mary of Magdalene and another Mary, go to the tomb. Just then an earthquake occurs and the tomb is opened. And Angel appears and tells them Jesus is risen. They are to tell the disciples. Frightened but filled with joy they obey, but on their way they are meant but Jesus himself who tells them to tell the disciples to go to Galilee. There they will meet Jesus.
Next Matthew injects a paragraph telling of the guards reporting to the Govenor that Jesus body has been stolen.
The disciples go to Galilee where Jesus meets them on a mountain gives them the great commission "go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the father and of the son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And truly I am with you always, to the very end of the age."
The ends Matthew's gospel.
Two women, Mary of Magdalene and another Mary, go to the tomb. Just then an earthquake occurs and the tomb is opened. And Angel appears and tells them Jesus is risen. They are to tell the disciples. Frightened but filled with joy they obey, but on their way they are meant but Jesus himself who tells them to tell the disciples to go to Galilee. There they will meet Jesus.
Next Matthew injects a paragraph telling of the guards reporting to the Govenor that Jesus body has been stolen.
The disciples go to Galilee where Jesus meets them on a mountain gives them the great commission "go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the father and of the son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And truly I am with you always, to the very end of the age."
The ends Matthew's gospel.
BetteTheRed
Resident Heretic
- Pronouns
- She/Her/Her
I find the gradual development of the "right" ending to the story to be rather fascinating.
After that ... the rite of escape ... a corrupted reality? Some people settle their BS on it though!
Seeler
Well-Known Member
The Gospel of Luke, chapter 24.
Now the first day of the week, very early in the morning they came unto the sepulcher bringing spices which they had prepared and certain others with them. This is how I usually think of the resurrection stories is the beginning 'now on the first day...'
Stone rolled away, two men (angels?) Who tell them that he is risen. They (Mary Magdalene, Joanna, and Mary the mother of James, and other women) rush to the disciples and tell them the news but they are not believed. Peter ran to the tomb, saw the linen clothes, and wondered.
Then comes my favourite resurrection appearance story. The road to Emmaus. In it Jesus becomes known in the breaking of bread. Read it for yourselves and see if it speaks to you as it does to me.
PS – I think the second person with Cleopas was his wife.
When they returned to Jerusalem they found the disciples and others gathered together Jesus appeared to them and showed them his hands and feet inviting them to touch him. He ate a piece of broiled fish and of honeycomb. He instructs them to stay in Jerusalem until they receive power from on high.
He led them out to Bethany where they worshiped him. He was carried up, and they returned to Jerusalem with great joy.
PS – continues his story in the book of Acts.
Now the first day of the week, very early in the morning they came unto the sepulcher bringing spices which they had prepared and certain others with them. This is how I usually think of the resurrection stories is the beginning 'now on the first day...'
Stone rolled away, two men (angels?) Who tell them that he is risen. They (Mary Magdalene, Joanna, and Mary the mother of James, and other women) rush to the disciples and tell them the news but they are not believed. Peter ran to the tomb, saw the linen clothes, and wondered.
Then comes my favourite resurrection appearance story. The road to Emmaus. In it Jesus becomes known in the breaking of bread. Read it for yourselves and see if it speaks to you as it does to me.
PS – I think the second person with Cleopas was his wife.
When they returned to Jerusalem they found the disciples and others gathered together Jesus appeared to them and showed them his hands and feet inviting them to touch him. He ate a piece of broiled fish and of honeycomb. He instructs them to stay in Jerusalem until they receive power from on high.
He led them out to Bethany where they worshiped him. He was carried up, and they returned to Jerusalem with great joy.
PS – continues his story in the book of Acts.
unsafe
Well-Known Member
Seelers Quote ------Matthew 28 – here we have Matthew's account of the resurrection.
Two women, Mary of Magdalene and another Mary, go to the tomb.
unsafe says ----Why were women the first to witness at the tomb ---- interesting article for anyone interested
Why it Matters That Women Discovered the Empty Tomb
Why it Matters That Women Discovered the Empty Tomb
Two women, Mary of Magdalene and another Mary, go to the tomb.
unsafe says ----Why were women the first to witness at the tomb ---- interesting article for anyone interested
Why it Matters That Women Discovered the Empty Tomb
Why it Matters That Women Discovered the Empty Tomb
It made them Masters of the Death ... an escape in mind if you consider those dead to psyche events like thought, knowledge and extraneous wisdom as scattered about ... it stands up poorly to emotions and blind rans in this dimension.
However it is something for eternal creatures to experience ... thus logical fallacy!
Do not turn your back on an unrequited love ... shell drive a wooden peg through your Jaerd skull ... that's allegory in a poke ...
Some believe the female essence is toxic and can kill parts of a mans opinions ... these may transfer and substitute .. depending on condition of relecution ... it does go round ... supporting vert Egos! Close to Etics in some etudes!
Something moor to be looked into with A C Doyle ... mystery on the Moors ... pure dogma ...
Last edited:
Seeler
Well-Known Member
It is very important to me that women were the first to visit the empty tomb, encountered the risen Christ, and be instructed to spread the news.
That is why in my very brief summaries I mentioned them, even including their names when possible. I saw also expressed my belief that a woman was the unnamed person who met the risen Christ on the road to Emmaus.
That is why in my very brief summaries I mentioned them, even including their names when possible. I saw also expressed my belief that a woman was the unnamed person who met the risen Christ on the road to Emmaus.
Thus the mystique in the depths of Psyche and Sophia ... despised by brutes ... they may reveal them selve sin Christian one-way terms give a path of Caduceus ... entablement of snakes to off set the thoughts of s'etx ... unknown paring of the apple? Tis a chef thing in the kitchen making crumbles ... quartered fruits?
Really breaks up some situations ... cosmological *chuckles* that appear to be beyond the paradigm ... average Joes? Joe can vary as well ... the font from which he popped ... the brotherhood discarded him due to peculiarities regarding aspirations, thoughts and fears ... careful of the bottom card in the hole!
Really breaks up some situations ... cosmological *chuckles* that appear to be beyond the paradigm ... average Joes? Joe can vary as well ... the font from which he popped ... the brotherhood discarded him due to peculiarities regarding aspirations, thoughts and fears ... careful of the bottom card in the hole!
Seeler
Well-Known Member
John 20 – the fourth Gospel.
John only mentioned one woman, Mary Magdalene, going to the tomb in the early morning, finding it empty and running to tell Peter and the other disciples. Then Peter and another disciple ran to the tomb, entered and found it empty. Not understanding, they went back home.
Meanwhile, nearby Mary Magdalene encounters the risen Christ but does not recognize him until he speaks to her. She is directed to go and tell the disciples and she does 'I have seen the Lord.'
That evening the disciples were gathered together behind locked doors; Jesus came and stood among them and said 'peace be with you.' and breathed the Holy Spirit upon them.
We have the story of doubting Thomas, and Jesus repeating his appearance for Thomas's sake.
John concludes this chapter by telling the purpose of this gospel.
"Jesus performed many other signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book. But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name."
John only mentioned one woman, Mary Magdalene, going to the tomb in the early morning, finding it empty and running to tell Peter and the other disciples. Then Peter and another disciple ran to the tomb, entered and found it empty. Not understanding, they went back home.
Meanwhile, nearby Mary Magdalene encounters the risen Christ but does not recognize him until he speaks to her. She is directed to go and tell the disciples and she does 'I have seen the Lord.'
That evening the disciples were gathered together behind locked doors; Jesus came and stood among them and said 'peace be with you.' and breathed the Holy Spirit upon them.
We have the story of doubting Thomas, and Jesus repeating his appearance for Thomas's sake.
John concludes this chapter by telling the purpose of this gospel.
"Jesus performed many other signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book. But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name."
Was Mary Magdalene a multifaceted character ... essence of attributes unseen?
Some can't see the use of doing anything for those other than entitled ...
Consider nameless idealisms ... but don't mention it in the entitled crowd as they'll say you're whining ... whining offends those just dunked!
Some can't see the use of doing anything for those other than entitled ...
Consider nameless idealisms ... but don't mention it in the entitled crowd as they'll say you're whining ... whining offends those just dunked!
Seeler
Well-Known Member
Seemingly finishing his gospel at the end of the previous chapter, we turn the page and find chapter 21. To me it reads like it is something that is added on at a later date. The location is now in Galilee rather than in Jerusalem. The style of writing is different. And it is one of my favourite resurrection stories.
We find Peter, formerly a fisherman, by his boat on shores of the Sea of Galilee. He and seven others go out fishing in the early morning. Fishing is poor, they see someone I'm sure and have a brief conversation with him although they do not recognize him. Their luck changes in the catch lots of fish. The person onshore invites them to come and have breakfast. I love this; the simple invitation, 'come and have breakfast'. It seems so ordinary that I still wonder why it was included in the story. Couldn't they just have said that he offered them fish and bread. Anyway, it is then they realized 'it is the Lord'. This was the third time Jesus appeared to his disciples after he was raised from the dead.
Next we have Jesus engaging in conversation with Peter, and three times telling him to 'feed my lambs.' Thus Peter is reinstated as a follower and give an idea of his manner of death to come.
As they walk along Peter notices another disciple following along. He asks what the fate of the disciple will be and is told that this is not his concern.
Who was other disciple? For many years I had the impression that it was John himself. Now I'm not sure.
The other thing that could be a puzzle is that John reports that on his first appearance to the disciples, Christ.breathed the Holy Spirit upon them and gave them their commission. This happened in Jerusalem. But in Matthew disciples travelled to Galilee and received their commission on the side of a mountain. And in Luke the disciples remained in Jerusalem for 40 days after the resurrection and received the Holy Spirit at Pentecost.
The story is told in the next reading which was from Acts.
We find Peter, formerly a fisherman, by his boat on shores of the Sea of Galilee. He and seven others go out fishing in the early morning. Fishing is poor, they see someone I'm sure and have a brief conversation with him although they do not recognize him. Their luck changes in the catch lots of fish. The person onshore invites them to come and have breakfast. I love this; the simple invitation, 'come and have breakfast'. It seems so ordinary that I still wonder why it was included in the story. Couldn't they just have said that he offered them fish and bread. Anyway, it is then they realized 'it is the Lord'. This was the third time Jesus appeared to his disciples after he was raised from the dead.
Next we have Jesus engaging in conversation with Peter, and three times telling him to 'feed my lambs.' Thus Peter is reinstated as a follower and give an idea of his manner of death to come.
As they walk along Peter notices another disciple following along. He asks what the fate of the disciple will be and is told that this is not his concern.
Who was other disciple? For many years I had the impression that it was John himself. Now I'm not sure.
The other thing that could be a puzzle is that John reports that on his first appearance to the disciples, Christ.breathed the Holy Spirit upon them and gave them their commission. This happened in Jerusalem. But in Matthew disciples travelled to Galilee and received their commission on the side of a mountain. And in Luke the disciples remained in Jerusalem for 40 days after the resurrection and received the Holy Spirit at Pentecost.
The story is told in the next reading which was from Acts.
Last edited:
Seeler
Well-Known Member
When I started this reading near the beginning of the year, it was my intention to read it as though I was reading it through for the first time. I found this impossible. I am a part of all that I have been. Many of the stories were familiar to me from Sunday school; reading and discussion of the Bible in youth group; courses I have taken at University or through my church; books I have read and seminars I have attended; as well as discussions on WC and WC2.
30 years ago, while studying for my LLWL designation, I devoted a term to studying Paul – as reported in the book of Acts, and the epistles he wrote or that were attributed to him. During that time, in addition to the Bible, I read five books and wrote a term paper on Paul.
I remember reading the book of Acts and commenting on it quite some time ago, probably on the original Wonder Café. Therefore, and because I'm trying to finish the Bible before Advent, I will not be going into great deal of detail but will try to touch on the story and comment if something strikes me.
I will now turn to the book of Acts and read the first seven chapters. Although Paul is a major character in this book, we first hear of him near the end of chapter 7.
30 years ago, while studying for my LLWL designation, I devoted a term to studying Paul – as reported in the book of Acts, and the epistles he wrote or that were attributed to him. During that time, in addition to the Bible, I read five books and wrote a term paper on Paul.
I remember reading the book of Acts and commenting on it quite some time ago, probably on the original Wonder Café. Therefore, and because I'm trying to finish the Bible before Advent, I will not be going into great deal of detail but will try to touch on the story and comment if something strikes me.
I will now turn to the book of Acts and read the first seven chapters. Although Paul is a major character in this book, we first hear of him near the end of chapter 7.
BetteTheRed
Resident Heretic
- Pronouns
- She/Her/Her
This will be interesting, as this is probably the book of the New Testament with which I am the least familiar...maybe I should read it.
Seeler
Well-Known Member
The book of Acts –
this is a continuation of Luke's Gospel, beginning with the 40 days after resurrection of Jesus. During that time Jesus appeared to the disciples and taught them many times until his ascension. Matthias is chosen to replace Judas (who has committed suicide), and as far as I remember is never mentioned again.
Next comes the report of the coming of Pentecost followed by Peter addressing the crowds. (Perhaps someone might like to open the thread about the first time the cost and the speaking in tongues.)
We are told about how the followers met together to break bread and pray, and how they shared everything in common. And of how they quickly increased in number.
this is a continuation of Luke's Gospel, beginning with the 40 days after resurrection of Jesus. During that time Jesus appeared to the disciples and taught them many times until his ascension. Matthias is chosen to replace Judas (who has committed suicide), and as far as I remember is never mentioned again.
Next comes the report of the coming of Pentecost followed by Peter addressing the crowds. (Perhaps someone might like to open the thread about the first time the cost and the speaking in tongues.)
We are told about how the followers met together to break bread and pray, and how they shared everything in common. And of how they quickly increased in number.
Seeler
Well-Known Member
Next we hear of Peter and John getting in trouble when Peter heals a crippled man. Peter offers another sermon to the crowds, quickly reviewing the Hebrew history from the time of Abraham to the coming of Jesus.The priests and Temple guards Peter and John arrested and held overnight.They are chilled overnight. The next morning Peter addresses their accusers and speaks about Jesus. Because the crowds they are flogged and released.
Last edited: