Is The Bible A Failure?

[Studyman]

This never happened. It is just another windmill you tilt at.

I never preached that.
.
This is your strawman. I have never been concerned with it. My point has always been that these men are rejected by Christ because He didn't know them and not because of what they did. That is it, nothing more. That is as simple as I can get it.

You are the master of deflection, I'll give you that. but I can't let you get away with it this time.

Studyman said:

Matt. 7: 22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?

In your religion, did these men have Faith in the Bible?

You answered;

"I have a progressive revelation more than a religion, so to speak. But to answer your question. "The bible did not exist. There were no translation, no canonization, and no new testament, so the question is moot,"

I found this fascinating. You are preaching here that "In that Day" these men who called Jesus Lord, Lord, was speaking face to face with Jesus, was referring to a "DAY" before canonization.

So when was there a time when Jesus could be speaking face to face to these Men who had been Preaching in His Name, prior to the Canonization?? This can only be prior to His Ascension, because after HE returns, as Judge of the Quick and the dead, the Bible will have "EXISTED" for centuries.

You said these men who call Jesus Lord, were speaking to Jesus Face to Face, didn't have faith in the Bible because "In that Day" was a day "Before Canonization" as you Clearly Told me, in loud and no uncertain terms, as I have posted your own words for all to see.

Even insulting me as being so ignorant that I couldn't understand that Jesus was Speaking to these "Many" who called Him Lord, Lord, before the Bible even existed.

And now you are claiming I just made it up.

So GA, please climb down off the pedestal you have created for yourself, for the sake of this ignorant, stupid and unworthy nobody, and simply answer for me two simple questions.

#1. Can a man that Jesus doesn't know, truly cast out devils in Jesus Name?

#2. Where is your Scriptural support for your preaching that in Matt. 7, that "In That Day", was referring to a "DAY" before Canonization?

 

[Grace Accepted]

You are the master of deflection, I'll give you that. but I can't let you get away with it this time.

Oh no, Sir, it is you who are deflecting this entire thread, You have taken it totally off-topic with your

Studyman said:

Matt. 7: 22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?

In your religion, did these men have Faith in the Bible?

You answered;

"I have a progressive revelation more than a religion, so to speak. But to answer your question. "The bible did not exist. There were no translation, no canonization, and no new testament, so the question is moot,"

I found this fascinating. You are preaching here that "In that Day" these men who called Jesus Lord, Lord, was speaking face to face with Jesus, was referring to a "DAY" before canonization.

You are assuming too much. I was referring to the text you quoted. When Jesus made that statement there was no bible. This is what I mean when I say I need to make it simpler for you. Most people would not have been confused by this.

So when was there a time when Jesus could be speaking face to face to these Men who had been Preaching in His Name, prior to the Canonization?? This can only be prior to His Ascension, because after HE returns, as Judge of the Quick and the dead, the Bible will have "EXISTED" for centuries.

You said these men who call Jesus Lord, were speaking to Jesus Face to Face, didn't have faith in the Bible because "In that Day" was a day "Before Canonization" as you Clearly Told me, in loud and no uncertain terms, as I have posted your own words for all to see.

Even insulting me as being so ignorant that I couldn't understand that Jesus was Speaking to these "Many" who called Him Lord, Lord, before the Bible even existed.

And now you are claiming I just made it up.

You did make it up. When Jesus told spoke these words, There was no bible yet. It is a fact. The bible was not fully formed until 393 AD Jesus was speaking around 27 AD

So GA, please climb down off the pedestal you have created for yourself, for the sake of this ignorant, stupid and unworthy nobody, and simply answer for me two simple questions.

#1. Can a man that Jesus doesn't know, truly cast out devils in Jesus Name?

#2. Where is your Scriptural support for your preaching that in Matt. 7, that "In That Day", was referring to a "DAY" before Canonization?

You don't listen. You just don't listen or comprehend.

Jesus never ratified or refuted these people's claims. I have never preached anything on "In that day." Please show me the sermon I preached on it since you claim I did.

 

[Studyman]

Oh no, Sir, it is you who are deflecting this entire thread, You have taken it totally off-topic with your


You are assuming too much. I was referring to the text you quoted. When Jesus made that statement there was no bible. This is what I mean when I say I need to make it simpler for you. Most people would not have been confused by this.


You did make it up. When Jesus told spoke these words, There was no bible yet. It is a fact. The bible was not fully formed until 393 AD Jesus was speaking around 27 AD


You don't listen. You just don't listen or comprehend.

Jesus never ratified or refuted these people's claims. I have never preached anything on "In that day." Please show me the sermon I preached on it since you claim I did.

Perhaps I am not making my question clear, although I did post several scriptures which I used to describe my understanding of what "That day" was and sent them to you.

When Jesus is Saying "Many will say (Has not happened yet) to me in that day (Has not happened yet)", what "Day" do you understand HE is speaking to?

Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?

Do you understand this "DAY" as being a day when these men who call Him Lord, Lord, speak to Jesus, before HE Ascended?

Or do you understand this "DAY" as being a day when these men speak to Jesus, after HE returns to Judge the Quick and the Dead?

Also, you still haven't answered the other question I asked; In your understanding, "Can a man truly cast out devils in Jesus Name, if Jesus doesn't know them?

I'm not asking if Jesus ratified anything. I am asking you a simple question. Please give me your answer.

 

[Grace Accepted]

Perhaps I am not making my question clear, although I did post several scriptures which I used to describe my understanding of what "That day" was and sent them to you.

When Jesus is Saying "Many will say (Has not happened yet) to me in that day (Has not happened yet)", what "Day" do you understand HE is speaking to?

Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?

Do you understand this "DAY" as being a day when these men who call Him Lord, Lord, speak to Jesus, before HE Ascended?

Or do you understand this "DAY" as being a day when these men speak to Jesus, after HE returns to Judge the Quick and the Dead?

Also, you still haven't answered the other question I asked; In your understanding, "Can a man truly cast out devils in Jesus Name, if Jesus doesn't know them?

I'm not asking if Jesus ratified anything. I am asking you a simple question. Please give me your answer.

We can only guess at what arrangement the devil may have with exorcists. I would say this. If the devils do not want to leave a person, only God can make them do it.

Of course, none of this changes what Jesus was saying. He contrasted two types of people those that were self-righteous thinking their works would get them into God's Kingdom and those that were saved by grace and were surprised that they had done anything worthy. "When did we...?"

If you know Jesus, you will have eternal life. Not just know about him.

 

[Studyman]

We can only guess at what arrangement the devil may have with exorcists. I would say this. If the devils do not want to leave a person, only God can make them do it.

Of course, none of this changes what Jesus was saying. He contrasted two types of people those that were self-righteous thinking their works would get them into God's Kingdom and those that were saved by grace and were surprised that they had done anything worthy. "When did we...?"

If you know Jesus, you will have eternal life. Not just know about him.

Gosh GA,

I'm not talking about exorcists or Hollywood. I simply want to know if you believe a man can cast out devils in Jesus Name, if Jesus doesn't know Him?

And again, I just want to know what your understanding of "That Day" is. But you aren't going to answer.

Never mind.

Thanks GA,

 

[The_drake_]

Gosh GA,

I'm not talking about exorcists or Hollywood. I simply want to know if you believe a man can cast out devils in Jesus Name, if Jesus doesn't know Him?

And again, I just want to know what your understanding of "That Day" is. But you aren't going to answer.

Never mind.

Thanks GA,

I don't know about "can", but obviously according to the consensus beliefs at the time, they "could" before Jesus showed up.

Mark is obviously addressing a pre-existent (must have developed in the inter-testimonial period) tradition of exorcism. His audience knows what he's talking about, this isn't something new he has to explain.

We also know from Josephus that exorcisms were going on in Rome, I think the emperors son had one performed on him even though he wasn't a Jew, something like that's in there.

Also Solomon could do it.

Idk how exactly you'd theologically work out the knowledge of Jesus into being a pre-requisite for exorcism post crucifixion exactly.

Now you could I guess argue that knowing him gives you automatic power to do such and such. But the moment he died on the cross did the heretofore exorcistic powers of the Rabbis living in Rome or Spain that hadn't even heard of Jesus and had been doing successful exorcisms suddenly dry up that instant? I guess maybe... Hard to figure.

 

[Arial]

I agree with you that his approach is wrong.

I am also in agreement with him that it is hard to figure given the traditional understanding of original sin.

However I disagree with him that his own understanding of that doctrine of OG Sin gives him ground so solid as to be able to displace what is directly stated (was without sin).

It is a reasonable question to ask, but we do not have an a good answer, that doesn't mean we start throwing out facts till everything fits with our preconceived notion/theory.

Some questions don't have answers. How he could have been without sin but born of woman is one of those questions, as is evidenced by the fact that theologians have poured out a Mediterranean Seas worth of ink and several European forests worth of animal skin used up trying to resolve the issue over the past 2000 years.

Jesus, being fully man, as well as fully God, had a human nature, as we do, that could sin, could be tempted, had desires (which is what works on our will in decision making). The difference between Jesus and us in that regard, is that His desires were not towards sin as ours are, but towards obedience to God. As to how this can be so with a human mother, and since this sinful desire is inherited, who knows? Not me. There is an avenue of conception that is different and that is that His Father was not human but is God. Which leaves the possibility that it is through the male that this nature is passed. And God could do that, and He did make Adam, not Eve the federal head of all humanity, and the Bible repeatedly says that it is through one man that sin came. That of course would not leave any woman sinless or without a sin nature, because it takes a man to make a woman and a woman to make a man. It would just leave the possibility that it passes via the male. How this would be is and always will be speculation at least this side of heaven.
The Bible says Jesus was without sin. Therefore He was without sin. The Bible says He was like us, therefore He was like us. If He had had desires towards sin, my guess is He would have sinned.

 

[shroom]

Jesus, being fully man, as well as fully God, had a human nature, as we do, that could sin, could be tempted, had desires (which is what works on our will in decision making). The difference between Jesus and us in that regard, is that His desires were not towards sin as ours are, but towards obedience to God. As to how this can be so with a human mother, and since this sinful desire is inherited, who knows? Not me. There is an avenue of conception that is different and that is that His Father was not human but is God. Which leaves the possibility that it is through the male that this nature is passed. And God could do that, and He did make Adam, not Eve the federal head of all humanity, and the Bible repeatedly says that it is through one man that sin came. That of course would not leave any woman sinless or without a sin nature, because it takes a man to make a woman and a woman to make a man. It would just leave the possibility that it passes via the male. How this would be is and always will be speculation at least this side of heaven.
The Bible says Jesus was without sin. Therefore He was without sin. The Bible says He was like us, therefore He was like us. If He had had desires towards sin, my guess is He would have sinned.

Good post, Arial, except for the “as well as fully God” phrase.

 

[Studyman]

I don't know about "can", but obviously according to the consensus beliefs at the time, they "could" before Jesus showed up.

Mark is obviously addressing a pre-existent (must have developed in the inter-testimonial period) tradition of exorcism. His audience knows what he's talking about, this isn't something new he has to explain.

We also know from Josephus that exorcisms were going on in Rome, I think the emperors son had one performed on him even though he wasn't a Jew, something like that's in there.

Also Solomon could do it.

Idk how exactly you'd theologically work out the knowledge of Jesus into being a pre-requisite for exorcism post crucifixion exactly.

Now you could I guess argue that knowing him gives you automatic power to do such and such. But the moment he died on the cross did the heretofore exorcistic powers of the Rabbis living in Rome or Spain that hadn't even heard of Jesus and had been doing successful exorcisms suddenly dry up that instant? I guess maybe... Hard to figure.

Thanks for the reply. But these men were talking to Jesus "In that Day" (Whenever this Day was), claiming to cast out devils in HIS NAME, not anyone else. And my question was "Can a man cast out devils in Jesus Name, if Jesus doesn't know them?

So I'm not sure exorcism prior to His Ministry or existence, or in this case, HIS return as Judge of the quick and the dead, is relevant to my inquiry.
And a man claiming to know Jesus, isn't as important as Jesus knowing the man, as this verse surely implies.

Interesting reaction to this seemingly simple question, I am somewhat surprised.

 

[Grace Accepted]

Gosh GA,

I'm not talking about exorcists or Hollywood. I simply want to know if you believe a man can cast out devils in Jesus Name, if Jesus doesn't know Him?

And again, I just want to know what your understanding of "That Day" is. But you aren't going to answer.

Never mind.

Thanks GA,

I'm not playing your game. Jesus was highlighting the difference between works and grace. This is too important of a truth to play games with. If you do not know the answer to your own question then you do not know the power of God.

 

[Grace Accepted]

I'm not playing your game. Jesus was highlighting the difference between works and grace. This is too important of a truth to play games with. If you do not know the answer to your own question then you do not know the power of God.

Jesus had two groups of people he was highlighting that one group was depending upon their works for salvation. Like those saved by his sacrifice, they will cry, "Lord, Lord," but they do not know Jesus. They thought that they were in because they did these things.

 

[Phedup]

Jesus had two groups of people he was highlighting that one group was depending upon their works for salvation. Like those saved by his sacrifice, they will cry, "Lord, Lord," but they do not know Jesus. They thought that they were in because they did these things.

Please demonstrate that Jesus said this from the synoptic gospels.