Send a Message
to Chess Jurist

Comments

11,564

Joined

Jul 19, 2008

Chess Jurist Profile

Recent Posts

Top Stories

Roman Catholic church only true church, says Vatican

A Chess Re-post from a few minutes ago on Prove there is a God Hope this takes. Topix tends to ignore re-posts of late. (And me restating that is merely me trying to overcome that new limitation. We'll see if it works.) The Calling II But what about the Gospel of John? John's primary author never plagiarizes from Mark, as does Matthew's and Luke's authors. John seems dependent on some of Mark's sources, but not Mark directly -- absent the late additions to John -- it second ending, John 21, and the pericope of the adulteress, which seem to come from redacted portions of Mark. John 1 has a completely different take Jesus hooking up with his first disciples. In John, on seeing Jesus, the Baptist tells two of his disciples that Jesus is the lamb of god. One of those disciples is Andrew, brother of Peter. Andrew asks Jesus where he is staying and Jesus tells him to come along to see. Andrew later tells Peter he has seen the promised messiah. Enter the apologists. Luther claimed John recounts merely an introduction, not a calling as in the synoptics.1 Of course that ignores the discrepancy between the synoptics themselves -- was it a single as in Luke calling or two as in Mark and Matthew? Enter more apologists. According to some of them, there was an introduction as per John and two different callings at different times as per Mark and Luke.2 Such apologies caused Morton Smith, deceased history professor at Columbia, ThD, Harvard, PhD, Hebrew University, Jerusalem, to suggest tongue in cheek that, given the similar discrepancies in the four Passion Narratives, maybe Jesus was crucified twice.3 1. See, Eric Lyons, "When Did Jesus Call the First Apostles?", Apologetics Press at http://espanol.apo logeticspress.org/ articles/3344. 2. See, http://kmenno.org/ teachings/calling_ of_simon_peter.htm l, where the advantages and disadvantages of such an apology are discussed. 3. Smith, Jesus the Magician.  (Tuesday Sep 16 | post #561160)

Top Stories

Roman Catholic church only true church, says Vatican

A Chess Re-post from a few minutes ago on Prove there is a God Hope this takes. Topix tends to ignore re-posts of late. The Calling I The first gospel extant, the Gospel of Mark, was written anonymously a few years after the fall of Jerusalem and destruction of the 2nd temple. It tells a wonderful story of Jesus calling his first disciples. In that pericope, Jesus first meets Peter and his brother Andrew casting their nets into the Galilee and calls them to be "fishers of men". A little further down the road, Jesus runs into John and James the Lesser, also brothers and fishers, and calls them away from their father, Zebedee, who remains behind with some hired hands and a fishing boat. Why is that a wonderful story? In a minute. Fast forward to Matthew. Matthew, also one of the anonymous synoptic gospels -- dependent on Mark -- tells the same story almost word for word. Copying from Mark, Matthew's author changes only a few things. For example, there is no mention of hired hands. Because of the close similarly, Matthew can be ignored for our purposes. It's only value here is its evidence of the copying that went on in the later synoptics, Matthew and Luke. Fast forward a little more to Luke. Luke's author admits reliance on other sources, and we know one of those sources is Mark. But unlike Matthew, Luke greatly changes up Mark's pericope regarding the calling of the first of Jesus' disciples. No longer is Luke's story about two separate callings of two sets of two brothers to be fishers of men. In Luke Jesus calls the four at the same time. And while Mark reads as though Peter and Andrew are fishing from the shore, in Luke both sets of brothers have boats and they are operating as partners. And while James and John are mentioned to be the sons of Zebedee, Luke nowhere indicates Zebedee is present at the calling. What's going on? And where does the Gospel of John fit into this confusion? With the pericope of the calling of the first disciples in Mark 1, the author is introducing his readers to two motifs that will run throughout that gospel -- three, really. Piscean imagery fills the Gospel of Mark. Jesus controls the sea. He even walks on it. When he feeds the masses, he uses two fish -- the sign of Pisces -- to do so. And when it is time for Jesus' life to end, Mark's author has his disciples follow a man carrying a pitcher of water -- the sign of Aquarius, the sign in the zodiac that follows the Piscean age -- to find the house where Jesus' last meal will be had before his execution. Another motif in Mark is faith over family, especially Jesus' family. In Mark, Jesus' family does not follow him and does not believe in him. In fact, in Mark 3, they think he's nuts, causing Jesus to famously say in the KJV of Mark 6, "A prophet is not without honour, but in his own country, and among his own kin, and in his own house." Luke's author is uncomfortable with these motifs. Two sets of two brother fishers being called on two separate occasions to be fishers of men is too Piscean for him. So too Mark's polemic against Jesus' family. These themes need to be softened. And they are in Luke.  (Tuesday Sep 16 | post #561159)

Top Stories

Prove there's a god.

The Calling II But what about the Gospel of John? John's primary author never plagiarizes from Mark, as does Matthew's and Luke's authors. John seems dependent on some of Mark's sources, but not Mark directly -- absent the late additions to John -- it second ending, John 21, and the pericope of the adulteress, which seem to come from redacted portions of Mark. John 1 has a completely different take Jesus hooking up with his first disciples. In John, on seeing Jesus, the Baptist tells two of his disciples that Jesus is the lamb of god. One of those disciples is Andrew, brother of Peter. Andrew asks Jesus where he is staying and Jesus tells him to come along to see. Andrew later tells Peter he has seen the promised messiah. Enter the apologists. Luther claimed John recounts merely an introduction, not a calling as in the synoptics.1 Of course that ignores the discrepancy between the synoptics themselves -- was it a single as in Luke calling or two as in Mark and Matthew? Enter more apologists. According to some of them, there was an introduction as per John and two different callings at different times as per Mark and Luke.2 Such apologies caused Morton Smith, deceased history professor at Columbia, ThD, Harvard, PhD, Hebrew University, Jerusalem, to suggest tongue in cheek that, given the similar discrepancies in the four Passion Narratives, maybe Jesus was crucified twice.3 1. See, Eric Lyons, "When Did Jesus Call the First Apostles?", Apologetics Press at http://espanol.apo logeticspress.org/ articles/3344. 2. See, http://kmenno.org/ teachings/calling_ of_simon_peter.htm l, where the advantages and disadvantages of such an apology are discussed. 3. Smith, Jesus the Magician.  (Tuesday Sep 16 | post #781147)

Top Stories

Prove there's a god.

The Calling I The first gospel extant, the Gospel of Mark, was written anonymously a few years after the fall of Jerusalem and destruction of the 2nd temple. It tells a wonderful story of Jesus calling his first disciples. In that pericope, Jesus first meets Peter and his brother Andrew casting their nets into the Galilee and calls them to be "fishers of men". A little further down the road, Jesus runs into John and James the Lesser, also brothers and fishers, and calls them away from their father, Zebedee, who remains behind with some hired hands and a fishing boat. Why is that a wonderful story? In a minute. Fast forward to Matthew. Matthew, also one of the anonymous synoptic gospels -- dependent on Mark -- tells the same story almost word for word. Copying from Mark, Matthew's author changes only a few things. For example, there is no mention of hired hands. Because of the close similarly, Matthew can be ignored for our purposes. It's only value here is its evidence of the copying that went on in the later synoptics, Matthew and Luke. Fast forward a little more to Luke. Luke's author admits reliance on other sources, and we know one of those sources is Mark. But unlike Matthew, Luke greatly changes up Mark's pericope regarding the calling of the first of Jesus' disciples. No longer is Luke's story about two separate callings of two sets of two brothers to be fishers of men. In Luke Jesus calls the four at the same time. And while Mark reads as though Peter and Andrew are fishing from the shore, in Luke both sets of brothers have boats and they are operating as partners. And while James and John are mentioned to be the sons of Zebedee, Luke nowhere indicates Zebedee is present at the calling. What's going on? And where does the Gospel of John fit into this confusion? With the pericope of the calling of the first disciples in Mark 1, the author is introducing his readers to two motifs that will run throughout that gospel -- three, really. Piscean imagery fills the Gospel of Mark. Jesus controls the sea. He even walks on it. When he feeds the masses, he uses two fish -- the sign of Pisces -- to do so. And when it is time for Jesus' life to end, Mark's author has his disciples follow a man carrying a pitcher of water -- the sign of Aquarius, the sign in the zodiac that follows the Piscean age -- to find the house where Jesus' last meal will be had before his execution. Another motif in Mark is faith over family, especially Jesus' family. In Mark, Jesus' family does not follow him and does not believe in him. In fact, in Mark 3, they think he's nuts, causing Jesus to famously say in the KJV of Mark 6, "A prophet is not without honour, but in his own country, and among his own kin, and in his own house." Luke's author is uncomfortable with these motifs. Two sets of two brother fishers being called on two separate occasions to be fishers of men is too Piscean for him. So too Mark's polemic against Jesus' family. These themes need to be softened. And they are in Luke.  (Tuesday Sep 16 | post #781146)

Top Stories

Roman Catholic church only true church, says Vatican

I have no doubt you've had many encounters with mental health professionals, goofy.  (Tuesday Sep 16 | post #561132)

Top Stories

Roman Catholic church only true church, says Vatican

See what I mean about delusions, goofy?  (Monday Sep 15 | post #561023)

Top Stories

Roman Catholic church only true church, says Vatican

Well, technically, she tries to make everyone feel bad. Just saying....  (Monday Sep 15 | post #561022)

Top Stories

Roman Catholic church only true church, says Vatican

Delusions are wonder things, eh.  (Monday Sep 15 | post #561021)

Top Stories

Roman Catholic church only true church, says Vatican

Given you are god's spokesman, you'd think god would have mentioned that silly hat to you before you embarrassed him in public with it, eh?  (Sunday Sep 14 | post #560831)

Top Stories

Roman Catholic church only true church, says Vatican

For those interested in an introduction to the creation of the NT, Hulu Free now has a film available that is worthy: http://www.hulu.co m/watch/450438 Far from perfect. Merely worthy.  (Sunday Sep 14 | post #560828)

Top Stories

Prove there's a god.

For an introduction to the creation of the NT, Hulu Free now has a documentary available that is worthy: http://www.hulu.co m/watch/450438 Not perfect, merely worthy.  (Sunday Sep 14 | post #780236)

Top Stories

Prove there's a god.

Seems to me, goofy, if roughly 70% have a religious affiliation, then it is pretty much a given that roughly 30% don't. Why the intellectual confusion? Wait. No need to answer that.  (Saturday Sep 13 | post #779839)

Top Stories

Roman Catholic church only true church, says Vatican

I don't blame them for your religion, goofy; I blame them for you.  (Monday Sep 1 | post #558430)

Top Stories

Prove there's a god.

It took two, dummy. How many posts did it take you to figure out there were no copper scrolls from James about Jesus?  (Monday Sep 1 | post #775827)

Top Stories

Roman Catholic church only true church, says Vatican

They brought you into the world. I wouldn't give them a pass.  (Monday Sep 1 | post #558419)