Is it just me? [moved from Ministry]

[Zebra1552]

Tell you what kills me.
If Im wrong, Im wrong and Im man enough to admit it when someone can prove to me that I am wrong. No skin off my nose...I learned something new.
Something that I find godless and detestable tho, is when facts are lined up against a persons views and no matter how overwhelming those facts are this person simply refuses out of sheer stubborness to just admit that they may have gotten it wrong.
Its no wonder forums like this have so much disagreement...everyone here is a teacher who has nothing left to learn...even when it can be proven that they ARE wrong in a matter.

You have not shown my view to be wrong. You have introduced data which is irrelevant to Matthew 19 and Mark 10.

Ive gotten to the point where I really feel like its a waste of time with some...theyre gong to believe whatever error they want to and they will misrepresent any facts they need to in order to keep from just accepting the truth...

Making blind and unbacked accusations of willfull ignorance does not get you anywhere when you dismiss pertinent facts over and over again.

 

[HuntingMan]

Red herring and straw man argument. We're not talking about Paul's intent. We're not talking about Jesus or Paul being a liar. We're talking about whether or not Christians should divorce and remarry when it doesn't involve adultery.

I know what *I* am talking about chap...and I also know what Gods word shows overall in the matter.
Unlike some Im not stuck in one MISunderstood verse in the gospels..

And the context of Bible verses- the surrounding chapter, not the one chapter 4-5 chapters before the verse- determines their meaning, not jumping around and connecting dots that aren't meant to be connected.

FAllacious.
we are called to RIGHTLY DIVIDE the WORD of God...not just look at one small passage and misinterpret it. Tho I understand why youd want to not go beyond your pet passages.

AGAIN....Jesus said LET NOT man put asunder while Paul says to LET man do just that in the case of the unbeliever leaving the believer.
By YOUR error Id have to assume that paul was a heretic who told men to DO what Christ said NOT to do.

In harmonizing the details OUTSIDE the gospels WITH the gospels we see that Christ was condemning the frivolous divorce practices of the Jews...NOT laying out every possible reason FOR divorce.

 

[HuntingMan]

Fact: Jesus is talking to only one religious group in Mark.

Fact: Jesus is talking to two religious groups in Matthew.
Fact: Jesus treats both instances of a sign in two different ways.

Oh dear me.
By this horrid study manner ANY difference in the accounts means that its NOT the same event.
Tell me poster...are you actuallly claiming that because there a a few differences between Matthew 19s account and Mark 10s account that those are two entirely separate events ?

The accounts in Mark 10 and Matthew 19 are refering to the same event
concerning Jesus and the pharisees on divorce.
By WmTipton

Assertions/conclusions of this article
We assert here that Matt 19 and Mark 19 both record the same event with Jesus speaking to the pharisee’s about divorce

Supporting Evidence
Some claim that since Matthew was written to Jews and Mark to gentiles that the exception clause applies to the jewish betrothal period (the many greatly varied claims of the diverse doctrines on this matter are very hard to keep track of).

We will show here that both accounts are one and the same and were spoken to ALL.
Jesus did not give exception due to custom, Jesus gave exception due to sexual sin.

The details and their precision are proof that the accounts in Mark 10 and Matthew 19 are speaking of the same occurance.

Matthew 19

19:1 Jesus leaves Galilee and goes to coasts of Judea.
Pharisees tempt Him with divorce

19:13 Little children are brought to Him

19:16 ''what may I do to have eternal life''

19:24 Camel/ eye of needle

19:29 whoever has lost for the sake of the kingdom will recieve a hundredfold

Mark 9
Jesus passes thru Galilee (as above)

9:30 "And they departed thence, and passed through Galilee; and he would not that any man should know it.
(Mar 9:30 KJV)


Mark 10.
10:1 Jesus leaves Galilee (as in Matt 19) and goes to the coasts of Judea and is tempted by the pharisee’s about divorce.

10:13 Little children are brought to Him

10:17 "what shall I do to inherit eternal life"

10:25 Camel/ eye of needle

10:30 whoever has lost for the sake of the kingdom will recieve a hundredfold

In both accounts the series of events are identical.Jesus leaves Galilee and goes to the coasts of JudeaThere He is tempted by the pharisees concerning divorceLittle children are brought to HImHe is asked ''what can I do to have eternal life''whoever has lost for the sake of the kingdom will recieve a hundredfold


The EXACT details of this shows that both of these are the SAME instance in Mark 10 and Matthew 19.
Whatever Jesus said here was said to ALL that He was teaching. There was not one story for the Jews and one to the Gentiles. Jesus was speaking to the JEWs in Mark 10, just as He was in Matt 19.

Whatever Jesus was teaching in Matthew 19 was surely being said in the Mark 10 passage as the evidence proves it is the same occurance of this confrontation with the pharisees.

Mark seemingly just did not feel the need to record the exception clause for one reason or another.
The fact that whoredom has ALWAYS been a breach of the marriage covenant may have been why Mark did not think it necessary to record what Jesus clearly had said to His jewish audience . He may have just figured ''everyone knows that'' and not felt the need to record it, the fact is we dont know.
What we DO know, however, is that both of these passages ARE refering to the same incidence and unless Matthhew was a liar, Jesus DID make His exception that day to the pharisees.
When Jesus taught, He taught His teachings for ALL men to follow, not one set of rules for one set of customs and another for another. Jesus was God, He didnt need to custom tailor His teachings to fit MANS customs.

Why exactly Mark did not record the exception clause is conjecture altogether. Some like to pretend they know why Mark failed to mention the exception clause, but there are also those who pretend to have some insight into the ''seven thunders'' in Revelation.

There is not a shred of evidence anywhere in the bible that shows that it was for any particular reason....Mark simply did not record it. We know there are differences in other accounts between gospels, including the angels at the empty tomb. ...these differences arent written differently for different peoples/cultures, they are simply each mans perspective on the matter he is speaking about. He recorded the details as he knew or remembered them.

Those who teach that the exception clause was only in Matthew for the express reason of it being FOR the Jews over their betrothal customs are in truth telling YOU to accept one of two lies....either 1) Matthew INTENTIONALLY added to Jesus words for this custom; OR, 2) Mark INTENTIONALLY omitted the exception clause for the gentiles.

Now I ask, do ANY of you believe that Matthew OR Mark would INTENTIONALLY CHANGE Jesus words over Jewish customs ? Most likely it was simply like the different accounts of the angels at the empty tomb....each man was writing the details as he thought them to be...from his own perspective.

We dont hear the anti-remarriage camp going on about how Marks followers were taught one story about the angels at the empty tomb and Matthews another...they only make the exception to pull this type of stunt on this one issue.

This is just another preposterous claim by some to keep from just accepting the FACT that Jesus did indeed, agreeing with the whole of the scriptures on the marriage covenant, agree that sexual immorality by a wife is just cause for her dismissal.

 

[HuntingMan]

You have not shown my view to be wrong. You have introduced data which is irrelevant to Matthew 19 and Mark 10.

Hilarious.
Ive presented the REASON why YOUR fallacies cannot be trusted. Just as other false doctrines do you harp on one or two pet passages and reject a huge amount of other data on the matter.

 

[Zebra1552]

Oh dear me.
By this horrid study manner ANY difference in the accounts means that its NOT the same event.
Tell me poster...are you actuallly claiming that because there a a few differences between Matthew 19s account and Mark 10s account that those are two entirely separate events ?

I'm saying that certain key differences- like audience and meaning- dictate that two things are separate events. And it's usually pretty rude to laugh at those you disagree with.

 

[Zebra1552]

Hilarious.
Ive presented the REASON why YOUR fallacies cannot be trusted. Just as other false doctrines do you harp on one or two pet passages and reject a huge amount of other data on the matter.

I reject it because Herod has nothing to do with Matthew 19.

 

[HuntingMan]

That's called taking things out of context, which I have shown you I haven't done several times now. It has nothing to do with hypercalvinism. We're not talking about election.

You have shown nothing of the sort.
Ive shown the context from which Jesus speaks and then harmonized the data with the WHOLE word of God. You seem to be stuck inside your pet passages and unable to see beyond them.
And as proven here, that causes Paul to become a liar and a heretic when Paul says to LET man do what Jesus says LET NOT man do

I've asked people the same question more than once. Why should Jesus be any different? His ministry spanned 3 years. You're saying He can't have repeated things in that time?

Thats really nice...but Im sorry they werent living in deja vu.
The account details line up FAR too closely for it to be two different events.

I cling to all the relevant data-

Ive yet to see that this is the case.
You havent moved an inch past mark and matthew.

including the fact that Matthew and Mark are 2 different people and thusly record things differently but still include important things about who's talking to whom.

Uh...yeah...thats MY point.
That even tho Marks doesnt record at least TWO 'exceptions' that his account IS recording the SAME event as Matthew, just from a different viewpoint and with different things in mind so he may not have said 'but the sign of Jonah' even tho CHRIST DID say it.
Which is why we HAVE to take ALL FOUR gospels into account...some details ARENT recorded in some that are in others

Are you so bold as to accuse me of things without backing?

you are the one making the claim that He said something different to the two groups, poster...not me.
I believe as you just pointed out that Christ could well have repeated MUCH that isnt written down.
Id dont believe for a second that He lied to the masses...

You said the events are the same.

Initially I did not and you are bearing false witness if you say that I did.
AFTER posting about the matter I just a bit ago researched it some and found that they are the same event.

 

[HuntingMan]

Not the entirety of God's word dictates the meaning of both verses, however.

ALL of Gods word shows us who He is and what He is like so that we can understand every word that proceeds from His mouth...

 

[HuntingMan]

It's entirely relevant if you ask 'I suppose you think the disciples are dumb enough that Jesus has to repeat himself'. And you did.

Nice deflection, chap.
I am talking about details that line up precisely that prove that the event is the same in mark and matthew.

You left out a few facts that differentiate them. I merely did the same thing you did without the highlights. Are you accusing yourself of ignoring facts now?

oddly enough when YOU need for something to work in your favor you seem to ignore your own rules of interpretation.
It is irrelevant that SOME details were recorded differently.
I suppose by YOUR understanding that since the resurrection details differ between the gospels that maybe THOSE record different events

2.0
Lets look at the example of the empty tomb and see the great differences there. between these two writers.

Mat 28:2-6 And behold, a great earthquake occurred; for an angel of the Lord, having come down out of heaven, came and rolled back the stone from the door, and sat on it. (3) And His appearance was like lightning, and his clothing as white as snow. (4) And the guards were shaken for fear of him, and became like dead men. (5) But the angel answered and said to the women, "Do not be afraid, for I know that you seek Jesus who was crucified. (6) He is not here! For He is risen, just as He said. Come; see the place where the Lord was lying.

Mar 16:5-8 And entering into the tomb, they saw a young man sitting on the right clothed with a white robe , and they were alarmed. (6) But he said to them, "Do not be alarmed. You are seeking Jesus the Nazarene, who was crucified. He has arisen! He is not here! See the place where they put Him. (7) But go, say to His disciples, and Peter, that He is going before you into Galilee; there you shall see Him, just as He said to you." (8) And going out, they fled from the tomb, but trembling and amazement held them; and they said nothing to anyone, for they were afraid

.

See how Marks description of the Angel(s) is lacking greatly compared to Matthews?
Marks writing seems many times to just be recording occurances without adding a lot of detail.
Possibly why Mark is the shortest of the Gospels
Mark doesnt even mention this "Great Earthquake" that Matthew tells about.

So WHICH is right.....Mark to the Gentile, Matthew to the Jews ?
Was it One angel or two?
Did they appear like a young man in a white robe to Marks audience, or like lightening to Matthews?
Do these record TWO different events or one ?

Did the great earthquake happen according to Matthews account or not?
Was the earthquake taught to Jews and not to Gentiles ?
Some would have to say as much by the way they teach that Matthew is written to Jews and Mark to Gentiles.

ALL of them are right, we take the TOGETHER in CONTEXT and find the HARMONY between them.

 

[HuntingMan]

I reject it because Herod has nothing to do with Matthew 19.

Herod has EVERYTHING to do with Jesus and John both coming at the Jews over their adultery and fornications, poster.
Herods was the epitome of Jewish depravity....Herods behavior, and Jews like him, were THE reason Jesus and John were preaching out against the Jews

for pities sake...

 

[Zebra1552]

ALL of Gods word shows us who He is and what He is like so that we can understand every word that proceeds from His mouth...

We're not talking about what Jesus is like, we're talking about what He declared adultery in Matthew 19. Red herring.

You have shown nothing of the sort.
Ive shown the context from which Jesus speaks and then harmonized the data with the WHOLE word of God. You seem to be stuck inside your pet passages and unable to see beyond them.

We're talking about passages in Matthew and Mark. Why would I not focus on Matthew and Mark?

And as proven here, that causes Paul to become a liar and a heretic when Paul says to LET man do what Jesus says LET NOT man do

You haven't proven anything, as neither Jesus or Paul is talking to everyone in their declarations.

​

Thats really nice...but Im sorry they werent living in deja vu.
The account details line up FAR too closely for it to be two different events.

Then prove it. Cite an up-to-date and reputable theologian.

I cling to all the relevant data-
​

Ive yet to see that this is the case.
You havent moved an inch past mark and matthew.

Gee, maybe because we're talking about Matthew and Mark?

​

Uh...yeah...thats MY point.
That even tho Marks doesnt record at least TWO 'exceptions' that his account IS recording the SAME event as Matthew, just from a different viewpoint and with different things in mind so he may not have said 'but the sign of Jonah' even tho CHRIST DID say it.
Which is why we HAVE to take ALL FOUR gospels into account...some details ARENT recorded in some that are in others

Either way, Jesus said remarriage is sin unless adultery is involved. Your differences don't matter, and that's MY point.

you are the one making the claim that He said something different to the two groups, poster...not me.
I believe as you just pointed out that Christ could well have repeated MUCH that isnt written down.
Id dont believe for a second that He lied to the masses...

And why does my interpretation involve Jesus being a liar? Because you say so? That's a straw man argument.

You said the events are the same.
​

Initially I did not and you are bearing false witness if you say that I did.
AFTER posting about the matter I just a bit ago researched it some and found that they are the same event.

Did I say you said it initially or that you said it? Your research- one commentary- does not prove that they are the same event when it says 'see Mark 8:3'. It means the same or a similar statement was made elsewhere in the Bible.

 

[Zebra1552]

Herod has EVERYTHING to do with Jesus and John both coming at the Jews over their adultery and fornications, poster.
Herods was the epitome of Jewish depravity....Herods behavior, and Jews like him, were THE reason Jesus and John were preaching out against the Jews

for pities sake...

We're not talking about Jesus and John's message of repentance. We're talking about Jesus' command that divorcees should not remarry except in cases of adultery. Red herring, straw man.

 

[HuntingMan]

I'm saying that certain key differences- like audience and meaning- dictate that two things are separate events. And it's usually pretty rude to laugh at those you disagree with.

Sorry but its because you are killing me here.
I very seriously doubt that youve put any time in this based on this discussion so far, GC.
The few differences do NOT show that its different events.
What shows that it IS the SAME event is the things that happen directly afterward, just as in the other account.
I cant think of a scholar who believes that these dont record the same even (mark 10 versus matthew 19)....and certainly not over some trivial differences in the texts.

 

[HuntingMan]

We're not talking about Jesus and John's message of repentance. We're talking about Jesus' command that divorcees should not remarry except in cases of adultery. Red herring, straw man.

Oh please....lay off your logical fallacies nonsense...Its becoming nauseating. Either have a discussion here and present your evidence or please just stop responding to me.
Your entire argument so far is based on the poorest study method Ive seen in discussions like this to date...no offense.

 

[HuntingMan]

We're not talking about what Jesus is like, we're talking about what He declared adultery in Matthew 19. green tomatoes

Hilarious.
Who Jesus is is EXACTLY what helps us determine HIS INTENT along with other relevant passages in scripture.

Mark records Jesus addressing one party, and Matthew records him addressing two.

oh brother.
I guess there were TWO resurrections then, by your understanding...

2.0
Lets look at the example of the empty tomb and see the great differences there. between these two writers.

Mat 28:2-6 And behold, a great earthquake occurred; for an angel of the Lord, having come down out of heaven, came and rolled back the stone from the door, and sat on it. (3) And His appearance was like lightning, and his clothing as white as snow. (4) And the guards were shaken for fear of him, and became like dead men. (5) But the angel answered and said to the women, "Do not be afraid, for I know that you seek Jesus who was crucified. (6) He is not here! For He is risen, just as He said. Come; see the place where the Lord was lying.

Mar 16:5-8 And entering into the tomb, they saw a young man sitting on the right clothed with a white robe , and they were alarmed. (6) But he said to them, "Do not be alarmed. You are seeking Jesus the Nazarene, who was crucified. He has arisen! He is not here! See the place where they put Him. (7) But go, say to His disciples, and Peter, that He is going before you into Galilee; there you shall see Him, just as He said to you." (8) And going out, they fled from the tomb, but trembling and amazement held them; and they said nothing to anyone, for they were afraid

.

See how Marks description of the Angel(s) is lacking greatly compared to Matthews?
Marks writing seems many times to just be recording occurances without adding a lot of detail.
Possibly why Mark is the shortest of the Gospels
Mark doesnt even mention this "Great Earthquake" that Matthew tells about.

So WHICH is right.....Mark to the Gentile, Matthew to the Jews ?
Was it One angel or two?
Did they appear like a young man in a white robe to Marks audience, or like lightening to Matthews?
Do these record TWO different events or one ?

Did the great earthquake happen according to Matthews account or not?
Was the earthquake taught to Jews and not to Gentiles ?
Some would have to say as much by the way they teach that Matthew is written to Jews and Mark to Gentiles.

ALL of them are right, we take the TOGETHER in CONTEXT and find the HARMONY between them.

Fact is fact, and you're not citing fact when you say we can remarry and not commit adultery.

The facts and context show that adultery is committed when we divorce 'for EVERY cause' TO remarry another.
THAT is the context from which Jesus speaks and precisely why He can give exception and why Paul can also give his concessions.

 

[Zebra1552]

Sorry but its because you are killing me here.

Nice false apology. Not accepted. Try again.

I very seriously doubt that youve put any time in this based on this discussion so far, GC.

Based on your own expectations? I've been discussing this with you since about 9:45 this morning, and it's now 2:29. How many hours is that?

The few differences do NOT show that its different events.

A few KEY differences DO. You can't show otherwise, else whenever something even looks similar it's the same event regardless of ANY differences.

What shows that it IS the SAME event is the things that happen directly afterward, just as in the other account.

You're saying the same sequence of events can't happen more than once in 3 years? Based on what?

I cant think of a scholar who believes that these dont record the same even (mark 10 versus matthew 19)....and certainly not over some trivial differences in the texts.

Knowledge claims aren't going to help you.

 

[Zebra1552]

Oh please....lay off your logical fallacies nonsense...Its becoming nauseating. Either have a discussion here and present your evidence or please just stop responding to me.
Your entire argument so far is based on the poorest study method Ive seen in discussions like this to date...no offense.

I'm not going to lay off the logical fallacies, we're in Philosophy and Ethics. If you don't like it, then leave. You don't have to respond to me. And you don't have to like my method. My method, I'd wager, is more consistent than yours.

 

[Zebra1552]

Hilarious.
Who Jesus is is EXACTLY what helps us determine HIS INTENT along with other relevant passages in scripture.

oh brother.
I guess there were TWO resurrections then, by your understanding...

Based on what?

The facts and context show that adultery is committed when we divorce 'for EVERY cause' TO remarry another.
THAT is the context from which Jesus speaks and precisely why He can give exception and why Paul can also give his concessions.

That's not in Scripture. Anywhere. It says 'divorces and remarries' not 'divorces to remarry'.

 

[HuntingMan]

Either way, Jesus said remarriage is sin unless adultery is involved. Your differences don't matter, and that's MY point.

And either way Jesus said 'LET NOT MAN PUT ASUNDER" while PAUL turns right around and says to LET MAN do precisely THAT !

Jesus was dealing with the frivolous divorces of the Jews and exposing their sins..His intent was NOT to lay out all the possible reasons for divorce, poster...and if it were the Paul was a lying heretic.

And why does my interpretation involve Jesus being a liar? Because you say so?

You are the one who presente that He gave one story to one group and another story to the other. I had nothing to do with that in any way.

Did I say you said it initially or that you said it? Your research- one commentary- does not prove that they are the same event when it says 'see Mark 8:3'. It means the same or a similar statement was made elsewhere in the Bible.

pretty funny seeing that I actually went to the scriptures first to see if they lined up...and they do...and then simply quoted a commentary so you couldnt pretend like Im the only person on earth who concluded what I did

 

[HuntingMan]

Nice false apology. Not accepted. Try again.

Not interested.

Based on your own expectations? I've been discussing this with you since about 9:45 this morning, and it's now 2:29. How many hours is that?

based on thousands of hours of study on this matter and comparing your error to Gods whole word.

A few KEY differences DO. You can't show otherwise, else whenever something even looks similar it's the same event regardless of ANY differences.

Again you must then claim that there was more than one resurrection of our Lord then as those accounts differ....must I keep repeating myself here ?

2.0
Lets look at the example of the empty tomb and see the great differences there. between these two writers.

Mat 28:2-6 And behold, a great earthquake occurred; for an angel of the Lord, having come down out of heaven, came and rolled back the stone from the door, and sat on it. (3) And His appearance was like lightning, and his clothing as white as snow. (4) And the guards were shaken for fear of him, and became like dead men. (5) But the angel answered and said to the women, "Do not be afraid, for I know that you seek Jesus who was crucified. (6) He is not here! For He is risen, just as He said. Come; see the place where the Lord was lying.

Mar 16:5-8 And entering into the tomb, they saw a young man sitting on the right clothed with a white robe , and they were alarmed. (6) But he said to them, "Do not be alarmed. You are seeking Jesus the Nazarene, who was crucified. He has arisen! He is not here! See the place where they put Him. (7) But go, say to His disciples, and Peter, that He is going before you into Galilee; there you shall see Him, just as He said to you." (8) And going out, they fled from the tomb, but trembling and amazement held them; and they said nothing to anyone, for they were afraid

.

See how Marks description of the Angel(s) is lacking greatly compared to Matthews?
Marks writing seems many times to just be recording occurances without adding a lot of detail.
Possibly why Mark is the shortest of the Gospels
Mark doesnt even mention this "Great Earthquake" that Matthew tells about.

So WHICH is right.....Mark to the Gentile, Matthew to the Jews ?
Was it One angel or two?
Did they appear like a young man in a white robe to Marks audience, or like lightening to Matthews?
Do these record TWO different events or one ?

Did the great earthquake happen according to Matthews account or not?
Was the earthquake taught to Jews and not to Gentiles ?
Some would have to say as much by the way they teach that Matthew is written to Jews and Mark to Gentiles.

ALL of them are right, we take the TOGETHER in CONTEXT and find the HARMONY between them.