Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
This is the source of joy to those who are effectually dead to themselves and alive in Christ. As the apostle puts it: “It is no longer I (mortal) who live but it is Christ (immortal) who lives in me.” This not as doctrine but as lived experience.yes indeed, what i am saying is , while mortal, no one can love perfectly like the Creator,
thus we have grace
This is the source of joy to those who are effectually dead to themselves and alive in Christ. As the apostle puts it: “It is no longer I (mortal) who live but it is Christ (immortal) who lives in me.” This not as doctrine but as lived experience.
Hi,
Is this something you are prepared to examine?
George
Yes, this has come up many times on these bible study threads and in other places. Sometimes even the epistles have been used to explain puzzling things in the gospels . . .I think this is really germane to something that has come up here and elsewhere. The using of another gospel to fill in 'gaps' of the one we are reading.
Feels like petting a porcupine.
Yes, this has come up many times on these bible study threads and in other places. Sometimes even the epistles have been used to explain puzzling things in the gospels . . .
The evangelical voice around here seems to view the bible in its entirety and to feel that the perspective of one book can be used to understand any other book.
Others of us see the bible as a collection of writings which need to be examined in their own right.
True enough but I still think it is possible to conflate scriptures without considering the variables involved.They are not entirely wrong, though. Older books influence newer ones so that is obvious. But if the epistles chronologically predate or are contemporaneous with the Gospels, then they could reflect on the thought that went into those Gospels. And we know the Gospels are not independent, that Mark influenced Matthew and Luke and that all may have had access to the so-called Q. Some may overstate the degree to which the Bible has a single narrative, but I don't think that you can view the books as totally isolated from each other either.
who knows why Matthew and Luke did not include it in their gospels?
Mendalla ----let me be very cleat that all Jews back then and now who refuse to see Jesus as the Son of God and who rejected His Message back then and Now have hardened hearts and Blinded Minds
In doing a bit of on-line research, I came across the statement that there are only 24 verses in Mark which don't appear in Matthew or Luke. I haven't been able to find a list of them.
In tomorrow's reading, we will see a "certain young man" wrapped in linen who follows Jesus after the other disciples flee. The young man will lose his garment and run away naked.
Very curious story. And who knows why Matthew and Luke did not include it in their gospels?
Is this an autobiographical detail that is believed to be historical? Or is it more like the gospel writer signing his work?Some scholars believe that this certain young man was in fact Mark and so he adds this autobiographical detail in. In which case it may not have been part of the larger tradition.