I think the majority of Christ contemporaries believe in YEC.
The name is recent but the concept is as old as the Bible is.
Because the YECists claim they don’t add anything besides the Bible.
It is clear there is ordinary and extraordinary in the gospels. It is also clear that the gospel authors are not inventing ordinary Jesus material or things that might potentially make him look bad or weak. Matthew and Luke even engage in a bit of theological damage control as they copy Mark. This against the grain material screams HISTORICAL! The rest of the material may be historical but I take it we have different views on the Gospels. In my book the Jesus in GMark is vastly preferable on historical grounds to the Jesus in GJohn.
But I think too many Christians have preconceived notions about Jesus and conform everything they read to that pattern. None of what you wrote to me implies Jesus is omniscient and not omniscient and omnipotent or not omnipotent all at the same time. He healed because of the gifts his father had given him. He was fully human and was able to do supernatural things because of His Faith and who his Father was. He also couldn’t heal people who lacked faith in one instance. Clearly not omnipotent and of limited power. One person’s faith even healed themselves by touching his clothes. We were told, hyperbolically I hope, we could toss the temple mount into the sea with a modicum of faith. How special were his healings? Didn’t the apostles and Paul do that as well? And a host of other people.
Other people have also had extraordinary knowledge and done extraordinary feats via God the Father. I see no reason to suppose Jesus’ power was any different here. And all the “ordinary Jesus” material interspersed throughout the Gospels makes this undeniable to me. Accepting the account as literally true, just because Jesus knew what one person was thinking at one time doesn’t mean he knew what everyone was thinking or when he knew what his opponents were thinking it always implies supernatural insight. He could just have been intelligent and filled with wisdom those other times. I’d also guess he was not the only Jew to suggest the temple would be destroyed within a lifetime, again, assuming the prophecy is not ex eventu and written by Mark ca, 75CE.
I am also not convinced by Jesus’s statement there is no marriage in heaven this is a certainty. I don’t know if this is his actual view from his surroundings, the “scriptures,” special knowledge from God or even him throwing a popular belief/ argument back at his opponents. I don’t read the Gospels or take the words of Jesus as if they are an inerrant theological encyclopedia.I’ve seen a lot of thoughts on this. “Marriage was never a part of God’s plan to begin with,” “People won’t die in heaven and there will be no need to ‘multiply and fill the heavens’” etc. I am not convinced this is supernatural knowledge of a place the human Jesus had never been. It could have been revealed supernatural knowledge. It also could have not been revealed supernatural knowledge. I don’t know what to make of it but I certainly won’t use it as a starting point to argue from.
Vinnie
This is a point worth not assuming. Any specific people you can name and quote? What contemporaries of Christ do we actually have writings from discussing Genesis 1-3?
Vinnie
Christ’s contemporaries believed the world was flat. Doesn’t make it correct.
Still doesn’t make it correct. There are many concepts in the Bible that are not correct.
They may claim they don’t but they do.
2 Likes
We did not evolve from the monkeys or apes.
We shared the same ancestors with them and we shared 98.8% DNA with Chimpanzee.
There are the same gene marker that if activated will grow tails for babies and the gene is the same for monkeys as it is for human.
100%. In fact, I think the biggest addition to the Bible they actually make is confusing their interpretation of scripture with Scripture.
Good, because I had no intention of claiming those attributes for Jesus.
Yet He as certainly more than human.
But if Jesus made a declaration about heaven, I would never doubt it.
You really should take an Evolution 101 course because the picture that is shown as the book cover in the caricature is fallacious.
I’m going to ask God for a million dollars right now. As a matter of fact I’ll ask him for a million dollars to give to the Children’s hospital. I won’t keep a penny.
Didn’t get it.
I guess Jesus was wrong when he said we would get anything we asked for in prayer. Imagine all those soldiers whose prayer never stopped bullets or hungry kids whose bellies were never filled by prayer. Rather than see Jesus as a fraud and liar, I’ll just not interpret his words with a wooden literalism and not view them as infallible and timeless “declarations.” Cause otherwise I have to hopelessly cope with his “declaration” about prayer.
Vinnie
Not it’s not. That is just young earth creationist propaganda. People in ancient times not knowing the actual age of the earth and having no concept of deep time as we do now is in no way equivalent to “being young earth creationist” which entails accepting a bunch of extra-biblical nonsense like “dinosaurs were in the Garden of Eden” and “marsupials got to Australia after Noah’s flood by hopping across kelp rafts.”
Did Jesus conceive of natural history differently than our modern scientific worldviews? Undoubtedly. But, we are in no way compelled to see the world exactly the way the ancients did in order to have “biblical” faith or to be Christ-like.
4 Likes
Was Jesus talking to us or the Apostles?
Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss , that ye may consume it upon your lusts.
Also, a statement that is hyperbole is different from a declaration of fact about conditions.
No thank you Fernando
I will pass
James 4:3 is a good excuse for those seeking confirmation bias. Starving kids, women being raped and people being tortured render it useless to those more attuned to reality. So many genuine prayers unanswered despite Jesus’s “anything.”
Vinnie
Kelli, which of the two creation stories, if either, do you believe is literal history?
The Gospels are talking to their audiences/community through Jesus. I find this question to be meaningless. There is no indication it applies only to a select few. Looks like an open declaration to me.
1 Like
Kelli, which of the two creation stories, if either, do you believe is literal history?
So you think anything Jesus said is a message to everyone, even if the text says that He was addressing a particular person or group?
Perhaps you should quote the passage in context.
Was this statement to Peter a promise to everyone?
I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.”
Why do you ask?
Why do you ask Cobra?
That passage wasn’t even on my radar. Try John 16:23-24, Matthew 7:7-11, Mark 11:23-24. Matthews account is addressed to the same crowd as in chapter 5 IIRC. Let that sink in, Jesus is telling that to a crowd. So was GJohn through Jesus even if he was reffing to his apolstles. John’s audience are the current followers of Jesus. So was Mark and Matthew’s audience. That mantle belonged to them.
Vinnie
1 Like