Post your Easter Challenge Solution here

User avatar
Dardedar
Site Admin
Posts: 8191
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:18 pm
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 0
Location: Fayetteville
Contact:

Re: Post your Easter Challenge Solution here

Post by Dardedar »

SteveMc wrote: I want to send you ten bucks toward your gas. Where do I send it?
Thanks for the generous offer. I'll send you my address via email. Ten dollars happens to be the cost of production for my book. Don't send the $10 unless you want to receive a copy of my book.
STEVE
Kesler, here is the last paragraph of your post that prompted my response:
"... [SNIP] After all, this is what John claims Mary Magdalene assumed when she encounterd the empty tomb (John 20:1-2; 13-15)."

Now it doesn't take a rocket scientist, or professor with fluent training and expertise in Greek to see that YOU brought up the account in the Gospel of John. In order for me to respond to your post I am required by the principles of exegesis and hermeneutics to study the account in John. It is NEVER enough to simply look at the verse(s) themselves, they must be studied in their contexts. The gospel accounts cannot be considered or interpreted apart from one another since they describe the same events, drawing from the same resource well.
And this is where the bear did it in the buckwheat. Yes of course, as you attempt to harmonize these separate accounts, you will need to consider the separate accounts. But when you say "they describe the same events" or that they "cannot be considered or interpreted apart from one another" you reveal once again, as you do through out this, that you are begging the question and assuming that which you are attempting to prove. And that's not scholarship, it's the opposite of that, it's evangelism, dogmatism. You start from the outset assuming they are consistent, accurate, harmonious and then use that question begging assumption as evidence to support your conclusion that you have decided upon in advance for religious reasons. Below you mention that this is how they taught you to do it at the school you went to, but this just suggests you should have went to real seminary rather than a fundie one if you wanted to learn how to do scholarship rather than just apologetics.
It would help me to know your biblical exegetical/hermeneutic training as well as Darrel and Till.
Let's clear this up too. You seem to be hypersensitive on this issue of training because I have pointed out repeatedly that you admit you don't have an understanding of Greek. This means, neither one of us have the training or expertise to know whether your musing about Greek translation are good, or all wet. It also means that any reasonable person is not going to take your opinion about translating Greek over that of trained experts. I am not requiring you or anyone else to be a Bible scholar to consider these Easter problems. Obviously if it were necessary to go with the scholarly position on this we wouldn't be having this conversation at all because the scholarship here is clear: The Easter stories cannot be reconciled.
So you can stop this hand wringing about training. Your arguments will be weighed upon their merits. Except upon matters of Greek translation, which you know nothing about and for this we must look to those who do.
Darrel has already stated he has none nor wants any.
Wrong. Darrel said he isn't interested in becoming an expert in ancient Koine Greek. When you refer to what I have stated, be careful to get it straight, because you usually don't.
I can't find any evidence that Till has any either, and Darrel has asked me not to bother Till who is ill. I have honored Darrel's request.
Wrong. I invited you to join his email list which he posts regularly on. I haven't been able to lure anyone here (other than lurkers) probably because these Easter problems have been worked to death and the fundie tricks used to fix these problems are so predicable and lame. If you would like to join Farrell Till's errancy list, simply send him a request here: jftill@comcast [dot] net

He probably has about 100 people on that list, you will probably have lots feedback on your Easter solutions, including by Farrell (although they have some Noah's Ark stuff going on right now).
Where did you attend seminary, what years, who were your professors, and what classes did you successfully complete?
Mr. Kesler has already said he is not interested in joining in the debate on this forum. I don't know what his training is but it's not relevant to the weight of his arguments on these straightforward issues. If he starts translating Greek and coming up with novel translations that go against the preponderance of scholarship, then it instantly becomes very relevant, just as it did with you.
"I'm not a skeptic because I want to believe, I'm a skeptic because I want to know." --Michael Shermer
User avatar
Dardedar
Site Admin
Posts: 8191
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:18 pm
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 0
Location: Fayetteville
Contact:

Re: Post your Easter Challenge Solution here

Post by Dardedar »

SteveMc wrote:Darrel, I just read through the Mary Magdalene Problem, and I am so grateful you posted this.
I posted it two weeks ago too.
I would appreciate it if you could amass most of the freethinker objections to the gospel accounts (and perhaps you have already posted them all) so I can make the most efficient use of my study time.
I could do that, again. I posted about 17 problems here on October 19. But perhaps you aren't seeing those problems for some reason. You did make a good faith effort but since it didn't address the problems specifically, it came across muddled and confusing. I have a better idea, why don't we use a list of problems you have already acknowledged you are aware of. Here are 16 problems you acknowledged on your blog:
So far I have considered sixteen issues I have found firm or potential resolution for so far in the harmonizing of the resurrection to ascension texts. I use the word error in this list a lot, not to signify error in the text, but error on the part of those who use these issues as reason to doubt the reliability of the accounts. Some were suggested to me by freethinkers, others I picked up on my own. Here is the list for now, which I am sure will grow as the study progresses with a brief mention of why each issue seems “irreconcilable” to those unskilled in understanding the Word of God:

Mary did or didn’t touch Jesus after the resurrection problem. Greek translation error.
The chronological witness appearance list problem between the Gospels and 1 Corinthians 15. Genre observation error.
The ascension location problem. Location detail observation error.
The event order problem within Matthew. Greek grammar/syntax error.
General sequencing problem between the Gospels. Greek translation error (above).
Information compression problem in Luke. Stylistic rendering error.
The Eleven/Twelve problem referring to the disciples. Point of View error.
Missing/additional information problem between Gospels. Misunderstanding author purpose error.
Additional name problem regarding who was with the women. False assumption errors.
Additional spice problem with the women. Misunderstanding of action and purpose error.
The women did or didn’t tell others problem. Cultural context error.
Turned and met, or ran and met Jesus problem. Spatial precision ambiguity error.
Saw men or saw angels in the tomb problem. Visual manifestation concept error.
One angel or two angels spoke problem. Excluded middle error.
First visual manifestation witness problem. Mistaken identity error.
Roman soldiers fleeing problem. Misunderstanding of delegated authority error.

The main problem for me right now is not coming up with viable solutions, but getting everything written down in a formal format presenting each response. My experience so far is that if you do not have every i dotted, and every t crossed you will hear about it in no uncertain terms from those who mock the reliability of scripture.
Sixteen Candles
Why don't you light your candles, and we'll see if skeptics can blow them out.
The tremendously sad irony for me as I read the Problem tract is the realization that if Till had understood even the rudimentary principles of inductive Bible study methodology I doubt seriously that he would ever have forsaken his first love and the call of God on his life, or that I would be reading this tract with his name of authorship.
The sad irony for me is that while you claim to have read the problem, and can give us the bluster of how you could have saved Till from his life of atheism if only you could have shared your solution with him, yet, this response not only does not attempt to provide a solution or answer any of the questions he brought up, it doesn't even give me any reason to believe you have even grasped the problem he laid out.
If the things you have already posted over these past four pages comprise the bulk of your material, just let me know. I appreciate it.
Why don't you begin with the 16 problems you have already identified and provided fancy taxonomy for. "Spatial precision ambiguity error." Sounds very technical when you put it that way.
"I'm not a skeptic because I want to believe, I'm a skeptic because I want to know." --Michael Shermer
SteveMc
Posts: 37
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2012 5:38 am
antispam: human non-spammer
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 50

Re: Post your Easter Challenge Solution here

Post by SteveMc »

Can't respond today. Have to go on a rescue mission. My wife and daughter are stranded deep in Oklahoma with a car breakdown.
John 3:16: For God so loved [Steve McCormick, Darrel, Doug, Sav, kwlyon] that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believes in him would not perish, but have eternal life.
User avatar
David Franks
Posts: 198
Joined: Mon Aug 29, 2011 1:02 am
antispam: human non-spammer
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 50
Location: Outside Fayetteville, Arkansas

Re: Post your Easter Challenge Solution here

Post by David Franks »

SteveMc wrote:Can't respond today. Have to go on a rescue mission. My wife and daughter are stranded deep in Oklahoma with a car breakdown.
My sympathies. Almost anywhere in Oklahoma is at least knee-deep.
"Debating with a conservative is like cleaning up your dog's vomit: It is an inevitable consequence of your association, he isn't much help, and it makes very clear the fact that he will swallow anything."
User avatar
Dardedar
Site Admin
Posts: 8191
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:18 pm
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 0
Location: Fayetteville
Contact:

Re: Post your Easter Challenge Solution here

Post by Dardedar »

SteveMc wrote:Can't respond today.
Please Steve, take your time. There is no rush. I plan on being around until at least 2050 when I'll be 83 (with the option to revise that estimate at that time).
These Easter problems have been around for pushing two millenia, they can certainly wait a little longer.
"I'm not a skeptic because I want to believe, I'm a skeptic because I want to know." --Michael Shermer
User avatar
Doug
Posts: 3388
Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2006 10:05 pm
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 0
Location: Fayetteville, AR
Contact:

Re: Post your Easter Challenge Solution here

Post by Doug »

How To "Solve" the Easter Challenge
1. Brag about how easy it is to solve the Easter Challenge.
2. Explain at length how silly skeptics are for not seeing the obvious. They must be blinded by their bigotry.
3. Point out how the Holy Spirit helps interpret scripture.
4. Complain about a lack of time in your personal life to write out the obvious. Elaborate. Multiple times. Repeat.
5. Run away without sharing your solution to the Easter Challenge.

I have seen this 5-step process done so many times it must be posted somewhere in every fundamentalist apologetics classroom.
"We could have done something important Max. We could have fought child abuse or Republicans!" --Oona Hart (played by Victoria Foyt), in the 1995 movie "Last Summer in the Hamptons."
steve McCormick

Re: Post your Easter Challenge Solution here

Post by steve McCormick »

I'm still waiting...
User avatar
Savonarola
Mod@Large
Posts: 1475
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 10:11 pm
antispam: human non-spammer
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 50
Location: NW Arkansas

Re: Post your Easter Challenge Solution here

Post by Savonarola »

The post by Wxspin02 that was more related to the nature of freethought than to the Easter Challenge has been moved to here.

--Savonarola, Religion Moderator
SteveMc
Posts: 37
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2012 5:38 am
antispam: human non-spammer
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 50

Re: Post your Easter Challenge Solution here

Post by SteveMc »

Darrel, I'm still waiting. Did you forget to email me?
John 3:16: For God so loved [Steve McCormick, Darrel, Doug, Sav, kwlyon] that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believes in him would not perish, but have eternal life.
User avatar
Dardedar
Site Admin
Posts: 8191
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:18 pm
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 0
Location: Fayetteville
Contact:

Re: Post your Easter Challenge Solution here

Post by Dardedar »

SteveMc wrote:Darrel, I'm still waiting. Did you forget to email me?
I just don't get over to that other email account that often.

D.
-------------------
"It is clear that the scriptural stories about this six-week period contradict one another egregiously with regard to the number and places of Jesus' appearances, the people who were on hand for such events, and even the date and the location of the ascension into heaven. Despite our best efforts above, the gospel accounts of Jesus' post mortem activities in fact cannot be harmonized into a consistent "Easter chronology." Nor need we bother to ask if the miraculous events of this Easter period could have been observed or recorded by cameras or tape recorders, had such devices been available. The reasons both for the patent inconsistencies and the physical unrecordability of these miraculous "events" come down to one thing: The gospel stories about Easter are not historical accounts but religious myths.
"I say this not at all out of disrespect for Christian faith or for the doctrines that it holds. Rather, I mean to indicate the general literary form of the Easter accounts. They are myths and legends; and it is absurd to take them literally and to create a chronology of preternatural events that supposedly occurred in Jerusalem and Galilee during the weeks after Jesus had died."
--Thomas Sheehan of the Religious Studies Department at Stanford. “The First Coming: How the Kingdom of God Became Christianity.”
LINK
"I'm not a skeptic because I want to believe, I'm a skeptic because I want to know." --Michael Shermer
SteveMc
Posts: 37
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2012 5:38 am
antispam: human non-spammer
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 50

Re: Post your Easter Challenge Solution here

Post by SteveMc »

You guys always have stuff in your signatures, so after your comment about evangelism I thought I should plug something in too. So there you go.

Thomas Sheehan, you mean THE Thomas Sheehan, the scholar who attended two Roman Catholic universities where he received all of his academic degrees, including his Ph.D.? I thought a freethinker determined his stand apart from relying on the teachings of religious academics. Mr Sheehan's work is a great example of thinking and teaching within Roman Catholic circles (in an extremely broad sense) that resulted in my no longer being Roman Catholic.

Yes, I attended Catholic indoctrination classes (though not parochial school), confirmation classes, the whole nine yards. And it had absolutely no impact on my life. I had religion, but no relationship with Christ. It wasn't until I reached the bottom of the barrel in July of 1979 that I saw my need of salvation. It was then I became a born again Christian (a walker, not just a talker). And then basically overnight everything changed.

Did you read the referenced work, or did you just copy and paste some information? Because I did read some of it and I can hardly believe you would use this as an example of scholastic excellence in refuting the gospel accounts.

I spent most of what could have been study time last night working through Sheehan credentials and his writing and again, I can't thank you enough for your input. Every time you post stuff like this it adds fuel to my fire. You are an invaluable partner in undermining the atheist agenda against the Gospel.

I will try to post some of my take on Sheehan and the work you cited by sometime late Sunday. I have to do my tax stuff for ourselves and some of our kids between now and Saturday, so I will see what I can do. But then back to dismantling the protests against homogenous interpretation of the Gospel accounts.

Steve
John 3:16: For God so loved [Steve McCormick, Darrel, Doug, Sav, kwlyon] that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believes in him would not perish, but have eternal life.
User avatar
Doug
Posts: 3388
Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2006 10:05 pm
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 0
Location: Fayetteville, AR
Contact:

Re: Post your Easter Challenge Solution here

Post by Doug »

SteveMc wrote:You guys always have stuff in your signatures, so after your comment about evangelism I thought I should plug something in too. So there you go.
DOUG
Yes, God loved people so much that he slaughtered his son. Who was identical with himself. So that no one would go to hell. But people can still go to hell, so it did nothing.

Yes, thanks for the plug. Do you have anything with common sense in it?
"We could have done something important Max. We could have fought child abuse or Republicans!" --Oona Hart (played by Victoria Foyt), in the 1995 movie "Last Summer in the Hamptons."
SteveMc
Posts: 37
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2012 5:38 am
antispam: human non-spammer
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 50

Re: Post your Easter Challenge Solution here

Post by SteveMc »

No, Doug, nothing with common sense. Common sense would have dictated that He let us all go on our merry way after trying to get through our thick heads and skins that He loves us and wants the best for us. So, no, no common sense stuff here. Just the uncommonly, incredible, wonderful news, that God the Father, accepted the self sacrifice of His Son, in our place. He who knew no sin became sin for us that we might become the righteousness of God in Him. 2Cor 5:21
John 3:16: For God so loved [Steve McCormick, Darrel, Doug, Sav, kwlyon] that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believes in him would not perish, but have eternal life.
User avatar
Dardedar
Site Admin
Posts: 8191
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:18 pm
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 0
Location: Fayetteville
Contact:

Re: Post your Easter Challenge Solution here

Post by Dardedar »

SteveMc wrote: ...THE Thomas Sheehan, the scholar who attended two Roman Catholic universities where he received all of his academic degrees, including his Ph.D.?
It's nice that he has obtained a Ph.D. It means he has taken the time to make himself an expert in this category we are talking about.
I thought a freethinker determined his stand apart from relying on the teachings of religious academics.
It's entirely appropriate to look to those who have expertise and training in a complex field such as Bible scholarship. It doesn't mean their claims are correct, but it does mean that their claims are worth consideration. Of course you wouldn't want to look to the the peer reviewed scholarship here because it goes completely against your dogmatic faith based beliefs which you hold for religious and emotional purposes (as you reveal above).
Did you read the referenced work, or did you just copy and paste some information?
That was a quote that was in an old religious quote which I started on a typewriter before the internet existed. If I've read the article it is from (I probably haven't) it was many years ago. As I've said from the beginning, I'm really not that interested in the Easter stories question. Even if they could be harmonized, and they can't, it wouldn't suggest that they are true. Being consistent and non-contradictory is a minimal requirement you need to support your literal interpretations of the gospels. It wouldn't change anything for me. I have no goat in this race. Well, one I suppose.
I can hardly believe you would use this as an example of scholastic excellence in refuting the gospel accounts.
Yes, what would Thomas Sheehan Ph.D. know about religious studies compared to you? What no earth was I thinking?
I spent most of what could have been study time last night working through Sheehan credentials and his writing...
More time wasting and evasion. I doubt Dr. Sheehan is interested in responding to your examination of his credentials and writing. I know I'm not. Why don't you focus on the actual problems you have on your plate?
Every time you post stuff like this it adds fuel to my fire.
I hope you like a hot fire, cause I gotta a lot of fuel.
You are an invaluable partner in undermining the atheist agenda against the Gospel.
I doubt that atheists are very interested in your Gospel. Some of us give it a poke once in a while because we came from religious backgrounds and hate to see people wasting their time with such foolishness. But it hardly matters to atheists whether the people who wrote extraordinary whoppers in the Easter stories happen to have been smart enough to make their claims consistent, or all jumbled up and contradictory. Reasonable people know they are false for other reasons.
I will try to post some of my take on Sheehan and the work you cited by sometime late Sunday.
More time wasting and evasion. Careful readers will remember that I predicted this months ago.
...then back to dismantling the protests against homogenous interpretation of the Gospel accounts.
You have 16 problems before you that you have already acknowledged. Why don't you start by solving them? I know why, but I don't want to spoil the surprise.
"I'm not a skeptic because I want to believe, I'm a skeptic because I want to know." --Michael Shermer
User avatar
Dardedar
Site Admin
Posts: 8191
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:18 pm
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 0
Location: Fayetteville
Contact:

Re: Post your Easter Challenge Solution here

Post by Dardedar »

SteveMc wrote:No, Doug, nothing with common sense.
Isn't it wonderful how the religiously confused are proud of the fact that their claims don't make sense?
...God the Father, accepted the self sacrifice of His Son, in our place. He who knew no sin became sin for us...
Jesus knew no sin? Isn't lying a sin? Yes I think so. During his hearing before the high priest, Jesus says, "I spoke openly to the world. I always taught in synagogues and in the temple, where the Jews always meet, and in secret I have said nothing" (John 18:20 (NKJ)). Here Jesus is shown making two claims:

(a) Jesus always taught in the synagogues and in the temple, and
(b) Jesus shared all of his teachings with his public audiences; he never kept important parts of his teachings a secret.

Are the claims (a) and (b), true? Of course they are not true, and everyone knows they aren't true. Jesus taught in lots of other places and he had scores of secret teachings that he taught... in secret.

So much for the "He who knew no sin" bit. Jesus, according to you own Gospel accounts, was a liar.
"I'm not a skeptic because I want to believe, I'm a skeptic because I want to know." --Michael Shermer
User avatar
Doug
Posts: 3388
Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2006 10:05 pm
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 0
Location: Fayetteville, AR
Contact:

Re: Post your Easter Challenge Solution here

Post by Doug »

SteveMc wrote:No, Doug, nothing with common sense. Common sense would have dictated that He let us all go on our merry way after trying to get through our thick heads and skins that He loves us and wants the best for us. So, no, no common sense stuff here.
Or, common sense would suggest that he would have put a fence around his little tree in the Garden of Eden so the first two people that exist wouldn't ruin the plan that is allegedly the product of divine omniscience. If God is so smart, how could the first two people destroy his plans so easily? That in itself looks like very poor planning on God's part.
SteveMc wrote:Just the uncommonly, incredible, wonderful news, that God the Father, accepted the self sacrifice of His Son, in our place. He who knew no sin became sin for us that we might become the righteousness of God in Him. 2Cor 5:21
So God doesn't care who gets punished, as long as someone suffers. So now your God is a sadistic monster who just wants to inflict pain. Interesting.

If God doesn't want people to go to hell, and God is in charge, he could presumably just say, "OK, from now on, no one goes to hell." But instead, God decided to take human form and arrange to kill himself. Why? Why would anyone have to die in order for God to refrain from sending people to hell? That makes no sense.
"We could have done something important Max. We could have fought child abuse or Republicans!" --Oona Hart (played by Victoria Foyt), in the 1995 movie "Last Summer in the Hamptons."
User avatar
Dardedar
Site Admin
Posts: 8191
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:18 pm
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 0
Location: Fayetteville
Contact:

Re: Post your Easter Challenge Solution here

Post by Dardedar »

Doug wrote:
SteveMc wrote: ...God decided to take human form and arrange to kill himself. Why? Why would anyone have to die in order for God to refrain from sending people to hell? That makes no sense.
The primitive, superstitious (and mostly lower limbic) mind creates petty gods, that like the people who invented them, must be appeased tit for tat. Most Christians don't realize they worship a God that likes human sacrifice. They think they are more sophisticated than that. Christianity is founded upon human sacrifice.

D.
----------------
"…and they hanged them in the hill before the LORD: and they fell all seven together, and were put to death in the days of harvest… And after that God was intreated for the land."
(2 Sam. 21:1-14; see also Exod. 22:29-30; Lev. 27:28-29; Ezek. 20:24-26)
"I'm not a skeptic because I want to believe, I'm a skeptic because I want to know." --Michael Shermer
SteveMc
Posts: 37
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2012 5:38 am
antispam: human non-spammer
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 50

Re: Post your Easter Challenge Solution here

Post by SteveMc »

Jesus knew no sin? Isn't lying a sin? Yes I think so. During his hearing before the high priest, Jesus says, "I spoke openly to the world. I always taught in synagogues and in the temple, where the Jews always meet, and in secret I have said nothing" (John 18:20 (NKJ)). Here Jesus is shown making two claims:

(a) Jesus always taught in the synagogues and in the temple, and
(b) Jesus shared all of his teachings with his public audiences; he never kept important parts of his teachings a secret.

Are the claims (a) and (b), true? Of course they are not true, and everyone knows they aren't true. Jesus taught in lots of other places and he had scores of secret teachings that he taught... in secret.

So much for the "He who knew no sin" bit. Jesus, according to you own Gospel accounts, was a liar.


Oh, yes Darrel, always. You know, like "invariably", like you said about Till. Did you know the first synonym for invariable is always on Thesaurus.com. So I guess by your definition Till is a liar too? Everyone knows that is not what Jesus meant, don't be ridiculous. If you press that meaning for always in the phrase "I always taught in synagogues and in the temple..." then it will have to fit with the same exclusivity definition in the next phrase "...where the Jews always meet..." for it is the same Greek term pantoteh. Does that work, Darrel? The Jews only and exclusively met in the synagogues and the temple? They never met anywhere else?

Secondly, those who were listening understood exactly what he meant for they had a direct invitation from his lips to correct him if he had spoken incorrectly at verse 23 "Jesus answered him, "If I have spoken evil, bear witness of the evil; but if well, why do you strike Me?"

They all knew he had taught out in the open too for the Scribes and Pharisees, and representatives of the priests had heard him do so. They had a perfect opportunity to claim he had been teaching subversively in secret yet they did not.

Scores of times he spoke things secretly that he did not speak publicly.

Have you never read John 21:25 "And there are also many other things which Jesus did, which if they *were written in detail, I suppose that even the world itself would not contain the books that would be written." That includes his speaking as well as his acts.

Scores of times? Okay, a score is 20 times (look it up). Whip out at least 40 incidents where Jesus taught something privately that he did not in some form teach publicly that would not fall under the disclaimer of John 21:25. That he said things to them privately simply means he wasn't teaching didactically (Gk: didasko) in a public setting, but as a rabbi speaking with his disciples. That is not the same as teaching one thing publicly and then teaching something contrary in secret which is what you seem to be implying.

Steve
John 3:16: For God so loved [Steve McCormick, Darrel, Doug, Sav, kwlyon] that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believes in him would not perish, but have eternal life.
User avatar
Dardedar
Site Admin
Posts: 8191
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:18 pm
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 0
Location: Fayetteville
Contact:

Re: Post your Easter Challenge Solution here

Post by Dardedar »

SteveMc wrote:You know, like "invariably", like you said about Till.
No, that excuse doesn't work. I will post below a careful examination that Doug put together on this:

***
(i) Jesus' claim that his teachings were always in the synagogues and in the temple is false.
When Jesus states, "I always taught in synagogues and in the temple," does this mean that Jesus was claiming that his teaching, at all times, took place in the synagogue or he taught in the temple? It would seem so.

The word in John 18:20 being translated as "always" in the NKJ, and by almost everyone else, is the Greek word "pantoteh." This Greek word at John 18:20 it has Strong's Greek number 3842. (Strong's list is the standard, scholarly reference list of Hebrew and Greek words from the bible.) This word is a combination of "pas," meaning "all" or "every," and "hoteh," meaning "when" or "while." "All times," basically.

Here is what Strong's Greek dictionary says that this word, #3842, means in Greek:
Definition: 1) at all times, always, ever.

So in English, in Greek, and in all translations, the word here that Jesus uses in John 18:20 has the meaning of "at all times." All major translations use "always" at John 18:20 for Strong's #3842-except the King James Version, which has "ever."

King James Version (KJV)
John 18:20 "Jesus answered him, I spake openly to the world; I ever taught in the synagogue, and in the temple, whither the Jews always resort; and in secret have I said nothing."

New King James Version (NKJV)
John 18:20 Jesus answered him, "I spoke openly to the world. I always taught in synagogues and in the temple, where the Jews always meet, and in secret I have said nothing.

New International Version (NIV)
John 18:20 "I have spoken openly to the world," Jesus replied. "I always taught in synagogues or at the temple, where all the Jews come together. I said nothing in secret.

New American Standard Bible (NASB)
John 18:20 Jesus answered him, ""I have spoken openly to the world; I always taught in synagogues and in the temple, where all the Jews come together; and I spoke nothing in secret.

Revised Standard Version (RSV)
John 18:20 Jesus answered him, "I have spoken openly to the world; I have always taught in synagogues and in the temple, where all Jews come together; I have said nothing secretly.

Worldwide English (New Testament) (WE)
John 18:20 Jesus answered him, `I have talked so that anyone who wanted to could hear me. I have always taught in the meeting houses and in the temple. That is where the Jews always go. I have not said anything in a secret way.

Young's Literal Translation (YLT)
John 18:20 Jesus answered him, `I spake freely to the world, I did always teach in a synagogue, and in the temple, where the Jews do always come together; and in secret I spake nothing;

Darby Translation (DARBY)
John 18:20 Jesus answered him, I spoke openly to the world; I taught always in [the] synagogue and in the temple, where all the Jews come together, and in secret I have spoken nothing.

New English Translation (NET)
18:20 Jesus replied, "I have spoken publicly to the world. I always taught in the synagogues and in the temple courts, where all the Jewish people assemble together. I have said nothing in secret."

The Douay-Rheims Bible
John 18:20 Jesus answered him: I have spoken openly to the world. I have always taught in the synagogue and in the temple, whither all the Jews resort: and in secret I have spoken nothing.

The world's best translators agree. The meaning of the Greek word here is "always," meaning "at all times."

But the KJV has "ever"? That, too, means "always." From Webster's New World Dictionary, 2nd College Edition, we find the following primary definition of "ever": "At all times; always." So even where the KJV has "ever," it still means "at all times; always." So Jesus was saying, "At all times I taught in the synagogue, and in the temple."

If someone disputes the use of "pantoteh" to mean "always" or "at all times," let's see the case for that. What does that word "pantoteh" mean, if not what has just been shown? Why should anyone think it means otherwise?

The issue is especially clear when we consider the context of Jesus' statement in John 18:20. The High Priest wanted to know whether Jesus taught in secret; whether he had secret teachings. Thus it would make the most sense to understand Jesus' reply as suggesting that he at all times he was teaching in places where his teachings were available to anyone who wanted to hear them. In other words, he had no secrets. That he follows this up with the statement, "and in secret I have said nothing" supports this reading of the text.

My understanding of John 18:20 is further supported by the verse that immediately follows John 18:20. Here Jesus tells his inquisitors that they may question those who have heard him teach. They know what was said, says Jesus. This reinforces the assertion by Jesus that at all times his teaching took place in public places. Those who heard his public lectures can say what his teachings are; there is no need to question Jesus to find out what he teaches.

NIV Jn. 18:21
"Why question me? Ask those who heard me. Surely they know what I said."

KJV Jn. 18:21:
"Why askest thou me? ask them which heard me, what I have said unto them:
behold, they know what I said."

So the story is that Jesus is called in for questioning. They want to know whether he has secret teachings. The High Priest is probably worried that Jesus may be telling the people to believe things contrary to the teachings of the High Priest. Jesus says, "Hey, I don't have any secret teachings. I've always spoken openly, where everyone can hear me. I was always in the synagogues or in the temple when I taught; I never said anything in secret. Why are you even asking me what I believe? Anyone who's heard me speak can tell you what I believe." This strikes me as the most reasonable reading of the verses in question.

So is it true that Jesus always taught in synagogue and in the temple? What does the biblical evidence show? It shows that this is false.

Jesus taught on a mountain (Matthew 5:1-2):
"Now when he saw the crowds, he went up on a mountainside and sat down. His disciples came to him, and he began to teach them, saying..."

On a boat (Matthew 13:1-2):
"That same day Jesus went out of the house and sat by the lake. Such large crowds gathered around him that he got into a boat and sat in it, while all the people stood on the shore. Then he told them many things in parables, saying..."

On a plain (Luke 6:17-18):
"He went down with them and stood on a level place. A large crowd of his disciples was there and a great number of people from all over Judea, from Jerusalem, and from the coast of Tyre and Sidon, who had come to hear him and to be healed of their diseases."

And in houses too (Luke 5:18-19):
"Some men came carrying a paralytic on a mat and tried to take him into the house to lay him before Jesus. When they could not find a way to do this because of the crowd, they went up on the roof and lowered him on his mat through the tiles into the middle of the crowd, right in front of Jesus."

Beside a lake:
Mark 2:13 "Once again Jesus went out beside the lake. A large crowd came to him, and he began to teach them."

Mark 4:1-2:
"Again Jesus began to teach by the lake. The crowd that gathered around him was so large that he got into a boat and sat in it out on the lake, while all the people were along the shore at the water's edge. He taught them many things by parables, and in his teaching said..."

Mark 6:32-35:
So they went away by themselves in a boat to a solitary place. But many who saw them leaving recognized them and ran on foot from all the towns and got there ahead of them. When Jesus landed and saw a large crowd, he had compassion on them, because they were like sheep without a shepherd. So he began teaching them many things. By this time it was late in the day, so his disciples came to him. 'This is a remote place,' they said, 'and it's already very late.'"

So Jesus lied about where he had been teaching. Jesus wants the High Priest to think that he didn't teach anywhere but in the synagogues and in the temple, and this is a lie." --Doug K.

***
STEVE
Did you know the first synonym for invariable is always on Thesaurus.com
Actually I did. And I also think Till didn't use the right word there. But then again, Till isn't trying to pass himself off as a God that has never sinned.
So I guess by your definition Till is a liar too?
Absolutely he has lied (at some point in his life, as he has admitted). But we aren't talking about Till, we are talking about your God who you claim has never sinned. Jesus said "in secret I have said nothing." That's a lie, he had secret teachings and said lots of things in secret, and he even told others to keep his secret teachings a secret.
Everyone knows that is not what Jesus meant, don't be ridiculous.
Then what did he mean? What part of "in secret I have said nothing" am I not getting?
Secondly, those who were listening understood exactly what he meant for they had a direct invitation from his lips to correct him if he had spoken incorrectly at verse 23
Why wouldn't those liars back him up? As that sinner Farrell Till once put it:

"Let's keep in mind too that Matthew 26:72 says that Peter "denied WITH AN OATH, I know not the man." In other words, Peter denied under oath that he knew Jesus, so all the talk we hear from biblicists about the "reliability" of the testimony that Jesus rose from the dead doesn't take into consideration that they are calling "reliable" the testimony of a man who, by the admission of the NT,lied under oath."

But that Jesus, (as the story goes) didn't get called on his bluff hardly matters (or maybe he did and it wasn't recorded). We know what he said, and we know it was a lie. And Jesus knew it too. He had secret teachings and said lots of things in secret, on purpose.
They had a perfect opportunity to claim he had been teaching subversively in secret yet they did not.
Are you admitting then that Jesus "had been teaching subversively in secret?" Yes, I think you are. And of course he was. And when he said he hadn't done that, he was lying.
Have you never read John 21:25 "And there are also many other things which Jesus did, which if they *were written in detail, I suppose that even the world itself would not contain the books that would be written." That includes his speaking as well as his acts.
This dodge is lame. All of these Jesus stories were written decades later. That lots of his life and actions wasn't recorded has nothing to do with Jesus having secret teachings that taught in secret, flatly contradicting what he said.
Scores of times? Okay, a score is 20 times (look it up).
I did. The 12th definition is: "scores, a great many: Scores of people were at the dance."
Whip out at least 40 incidents where Jesus taught something privately that he did not in some form teach publicly that would not fall under the disclaimer of John 21:25.
This is good stuff indeed. Steve so lowers the bar, in the hope that Jesus' honesty quotient will be able to jump over it, that he requires Jesus to have lied 40 times over before it even counts! And this based upon a strained, antique literal interpretation of "scores!"

If Jesus had any secret teachings, or taught anything in secret, his claim that "in secret I have said nothing," is shown to be a lie.

Here is the second part of Doug's article where he gives chapter and verse for several of these examples (if Steve needs every single one, this can be arranged):

***
(ii) Jesus' claim that he shared all of his teachings with his public audiences, that he never kept important parts of his teachings a secret, is also false.

Let's now look at some specific examples of the secretive aspect. Jesus denied that he said things in secret. Jesus claimed, "In secret I have said nothing." Of course, we must grant that this is not to be understood literally. Surely this is intended to mean that Jesus claimed that he did not have important teachings that were secret. The High Priest is concerned with the nature of Jesus' teachings, and Jesus assures him that there are no hidden or secret teachings. But what does the bible show? It shows that this claim is false too.

Going to his lectures would not have let his general audiences know his important aspects of his true teachings.

Mark 4:
2 He taught them many things by parables, and in his teaching said:
3 "Listen! A farmer went out to sow his seed.
4 As he was scattering the seed, some fell along the path, and the birds came
and ate it up.
5 Some fell on rocky places, where it did not have much soil. It sprang up quickly, because the soil was shallow.
6 But when the sun came up, the plants were scorched, and they withered because they had no root.
7 Other seed fell among thorns, which grew up and choked the plants, so that they did not bear grain.
8 Still other seed fell on good soil. It came up, grew and produced a crop, multiplying thirty, sixty, or even a hundred times."
9 Then Jesus said, "He who has ears to hear, let him hear."
10 When he was alone, the Twelve and the others around him asked him about the parables.
11 He told them, "The secret of the kingdom of God has been given to you. But to those on the outside everything is said in parables
12 so that, "`they may be ever seeing but never perceiving, and ever hearing but never understanding; otherwise they might turn and be forgiven!'"
[Here Jesus quotes parts of Isaiah 6:9-10]

Matthew 13:3-15 has the same story and quotation. Jesus intentionally talks in parables specifically to keep some people from understanding, and he does this so that they will not turn and be forgiven. (Obviously, Jesus does not want everyone to be saved, but that's another issue.)

Mark 4:33-34:
With many similar parables Jesus spoke the word to them, as much as they
could understand. He did not say anything to them without using a parable. But when he was
alone with his own disciples, he explained everything.

That is teaching in secret. There's more.

Matthew 13:34-52:
34 Jesus spoke all these things to the crowd in parables; he did not say anything to them without using a parable.
35 So was fulfilled what was spoken through the prophet: "I will open my mouth in parables, I will utter things hidden since the creation of the world."[Psalm 78:2]
36 Then he left the crowd and went into the house. His disciples came to him and said, "Explain to us the parable of the weeds in the field."
37 He answered, "The one who sowed the good seed is the Son of Man.
38 The field is the world, and the good seed stands for the sons of the kingdom. The weeds are the sons of the evil one,
39 and the enemy who sows them is the devil. The harvest is the end of the age, and the harvesters are angels.
40 "As the weeds are pulled up and burned in the fire, so it will be at the end of the age.
41 The Son of Man will send out his angels, and they will weed out of his kingdom everything that causes sin and all who do evil.
42 They will throw them into the fiery furnace, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.
43 Then the righteous will shine like the sun in the kingdom of their Father. He who has ears, let him hear.
44 "The kingdom of heaven is like treasure hidden in a field. When a man found it, he hid it again, and then in his joy went and sold all he had and bought that field.
45 "Again, the kingdom of heaven is like a merchant looking for fine pearls.
46 When he found one of great value, he went away and sold everything he had and bought it.
47 "Once again, the kingdom of heaven is like a net that was let down into the lake and caught all kinds of fish.
48 When it was full, the fishermen pulled it up on the shore. Then they sat down and collected the good fish in baskets, but threw the bad away.
49 This is how it will be at the end of the age. The angels will come and separate the wicked from the righteous
50 and throw them into the fiery furnace, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.
51 "Have you understood all these things?" Jesus asked. "Yes," they replied.
52 He said to them, "Therefore every teacher of the law who has been instructed about the kingdom of heaven is like the owner of a house who brings out of his storeroom new treasures as well as old."

So Jesus is clearly shown using parables, and he's explained that the does so in order to keep those not in his "inner circle" from understanding the real meaning of his teachings. Then his disciples ask for an explanation when they are alone with him, and Jesus gives the explanation. That is teaching in secret. The most important aspect of the parable, its meaning, was told in secret.

Another aspect of the gospels that lends support to my claim that Jesus had secret teachings is the issue known to scholars as "The Messianic Secret." This thesis was first explained and defended by Wilhelm Wrede in his 1901 book _Das Messiasgeheimnis in den Evangelien_. It was published in English by Cambridge U. Press in 1971 as _The Messianic Secret_. Wrede's thesis is that Jesus did not claim to be the Messiah, but that after his crucifixion his followers wanted him to be the Messiah and the gospels reflected that. Since earlier, pre-crucifixion verses don't have the populace thinking that Jesus is the Messiah, Wrede postulated that verses were inserted showing Jesus telling people not to tell anyone that he is the Messiah. Perhaps the clearest of these is Mark 9:9: "He ordered them to tell no one what they had seen, until the Son of Man had risen from the dead. So they kept the matter to themselves." If it is an important part of Jesus' teachings that he is the Messiah, and he wanted this a secret at the time he was before the High Priest (since this is before Jesus rose from the dead), then Jesus definitely had a secret teaching when he told the High Priest that he did not. Wrede's thesis has come under some severe criticism, and it may not be defensible as originally stated. I don't intend to defend the thesis. The reason I mention Wrede's thesis is that Wrede brought out a number of related passages as an important issue, namely the passages where Jesus asks people not to say who he is and to keep his activities a secret. Investigation into Wrede's claim has uncovered many instances of the "Messianic Secret." If Jesus specifically tells people to keep his true nature a secret, this surely would come under the category of keeping some of his teachings a secret. Here are a few examples of Jesus asking others to keep his activities or his nature a secret.

Jesus wants demons to refrain from telling who he really is. Mark 1:23-26, 32-34:
23 Just then a man in their synagogue who was possessed by an evil spirit cried out,
24 "What do you want with us, Jesus of Nazareth? Have you come to destroy us? I know who you are--the Holy One of God!"
25 "Be quiet!" said Jesus sternly. "Come out of him!"
26 The evil spirit shook the man violently and came out of him with a shriek.
32 That evening after sunset the people brought to Jesus all the sick and demon-possessed.
33 The whole town gathered at the door,
34 and Jesus healed many who had various diseases. He also drove out many demons, but he would not let the demons speak because they knew who he was.

When Jesus heals someone, he asks the man to keep quiet. Mark 1:41-44:
41 Filled with compassion, Jesus reached out his hand and touched the man. "I am willing," he said. "Be clean!"
42 Immediately the leprosy left him and he was cured.
43 Jesus sent him away at once with a strong warning:
44 "See that you don't tell this to anyone. But go, show yourself to the priest and offer the sacrifices that Moses commanded for your cleansing, as a testimony to them."

Jesus asks people to keep quiet about healing a little girl. Mark 5:41-43:
41 He took her by the hand and said to her, <"Talitha koum!"> (which means, "Little girl, I say to you, get up!").
42 Immediately the girl stood up and walked around (she was twelve years old). At this they were completely astonished.
43 He gave strict orders not to let anyone know about this, and told them to give her something to eat.

Again after healing another man. Mark 7:34-36:
34 He looked up to heaven and with a deep sigh said to him, <"Ephphatha!"> (which means, "Be opened!").
35 At this, the man's ears were opened, his tongue was loosened and he began to speak plainly.
36 Jesus commanded them not to tell anyone. But the more he did so, the more they kept talking about it.

After healing a blind man, Jesus tells his own disciples to keep quiet. Mark 8:26-30.
26 Jesus sent him home, saying, "Don't go into the village."
27 Jesus and his disciples went on to the villages around Caesarea Philippi. On the way he asked them, "Who do people say I am?"
28 They replied, "Some say John the Baptist; others say Elijah; and still others, one of the prophets."
29 "But what about you?" he asked. "Who do you say I am?" Peter answered, "You are the Christ."
30 Jesus warned them not to tell anyone about him.

There are other examples, but the point has been made. Jesus is portrayed as telling people to keep a secret about his true nature and about his activities. To the extent that this could be interpreted as saying something in secret, Jesus lied when he was before the High Priest and said "in secret I have said nothing" (Jn. 18:20). Obviously at least one thing he said in relation to the healings and his true nature was a secret, and that is that he told people not to say anything. He was secretly telling some people to keep a secret. And he wanted them to keep a secret in relation to some important aspects of his teachings and activities, including the fact that he was (supposedly) the messiah. Jesus wanted to keep his true identity a secret. So he not only told things in secret, as when he explained parables, he asked others to join in the conspiracy of keeping his identity a secret. Jesus gives strict orders, stern warnings, not to tell people about some of his activities or his identity. Even to the point of having demons in on the conspiracy!

To sum up: John 18:20 shows Jesus making two claims: (a) that when he taught it was always either in the synagogue or in the temple, and (b) that he never kept secret important parts of his teachings. Verses from the other gospels show that this is incorrect. Those who believe that the John 18:20 account of what Jesus said is accurate are committed then to either admitting that the many verses that conflict with (a) and (b) are incorrect or that Jesus lied. Those who cling to biblical inerrancy are stuck with the fact that the bible depicts Jesus lying." --Doug K.
"I'm not a skeptic because I want to believe, I'm a skeptic because I want to know." --Michael Shermer
SteveMc
Posts: 37
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2012 5:38 am
antispam: human non-spammer
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 50

Re: Post your Easter Challenge Solution here

Post by SteveMc »

I plan on being around until at least 2050 when I'll be 83 (with the option to revise that estimate at that time).

Amazing, none of the people that I have been aware of who passed away recently, planned on when they would die. But I am encouraged that you at least hope to be around that long. I figure I have maybe 20 good years for this conversation, Lord willing. So at our current rate of filling pages (about 4 in a month since I actually started posting in January) this thread will be about 960 pages long, give or take a couple dozen, or hundred. Will that crash your server?

But time does fly, so I am off to get ready for work.

Steve
John 3:16: For God so loved [Steve McCormick, Darrel, Doug, Sav, kwlyon] that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believes in him would not perish, but have eternal life.
Post Reply