Activity for gmcgathâ€
| Type | On... | Excerpt | Status | Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Comment | Post #291042 |
Gross inconsistencies among accounts of an event make them more doubtful, not less. For example, Matthew reports an earthquake and a mass rising of the dead at the time of Jesus's death. The others apparently weren't paying attention or didn't consider these events important. A mass resurrection woul... (more) |
— | 5 months ago |
| Comment | Post #288021 |
"Some circles" means just about all serious Biblical scholarship. A document's claim to its own authenticity, when we have no other means of knowing who wrote it, is worth nothing. (more) |
— | 5 months ago |
| Comment | Post #290610 |
Roman history isn't an area I've studied extensively, so I'll offer just a comment rather than an answer. You seem to have named the main reason yourself: deification of the emperor. The practice of bowing to the emperor was intended to confirm that the emperor was a god. This started with Augustus a... (more) |
— | 10 months ago |
| Comment | Post #289103 |
Are you asking for people's beliefs, Biblical citations, or objective evidence? Beliefs can get you all kinds of answers. Objective evidence in such matters is lacking. You seem to have said that a Bible-based answer would be "No." What does that leave? (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #288021 |
Some good points here, but the consensus among Biblical scholars is that the Gospels aren't "memoirs of the Apostles" or eyewitness accounts but were written at least a generation later. (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #286592 | Initial revision | — | over 2 years ago |
| Question | — |
Why does the Bible include three Synoptic Gospels? The Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke are called the Synoptic Gospels because they obviously draw upon common source material. John, in contrast, is less similar to any of them than they are to each other. Mark is widely considered the oldest of the three, but it isn't necessarily the ultimate sourc... (more) |
— | over 2 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285733 |
The alternatives aren't that the Bible is 100% true and accurate or it's a complete work of fiction with fictitious authors and readers. That's a straw man argument. (more) |
— | almost 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285775 |
While there are subjective factors, some translations are objectively better than others. I've run into mass-market Bibles that distort passages to support a particular sect's interpretation. (more) |
— | almost 3 years ago |
| Edit | Post #285768 | Initial revision | — | almost 3 years ago |
| Answer | — |
A: Why does Job 39:19 use 'clothed' for 'Have you clothed his neck with thunder'? The Bible often uses clothing as a metaphor. I've found a Christ Covenant Church article that goes in detail into several examples. A few more examples: Colossians 3:12: "clothe yourselves with compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness and patience." Proverbs 31:25: "She is clothed with str... (more) |
— | almost 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285733 |
The issue here is the origin of the idea, not the validity of any doctrine, and I'll try to stick to that rule.
Your examples don't establish that the writers regarded the earlier works as historical. "Even if Noah, Daniel, and Job were in it" does not refer to a literal possibility, but presents ... (more) |
— | almost 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285719 |
It's a figure of speech, that's all. This question might work better in Judaism, where someone who knows Hebrew might understand the original text, or in Languages & Linguistics. (more) |
— | almost 3 years ago |
| Edit | Post #285651 | Initial revision | — | almost 3 years ago |
| Answer | — |
A: When did the doctrine of Biblical literalism originate? Here's the best answer I've come up with: Biblical literalism originates with Luther's "sola scriptura" doctrine. Others may have tightened what parts they believe are factual vs. which are simply inspirational; as I mentioned in a comment, no one takes the 23rd Psalm as a presentation of facts, so i... (more) |
— | almost 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285591 |
I thought I was lobbing an easy one here, but no one's taken it up, and I'm no closer in my research to getting an answer. Part of it is that there's no such thing as 100% Biblical literalism. No one thinks that Psalm 23 means that God is actually a shepherd or that the author has a physically overfl... (more) |
— | almost 3 years ago |
| Edit | Post #285591 | Initial revision | — | almost 3 years ago |
| Question | — |
When did the doctrine of Biblical literalism originate? The doctrine that the Christian Bible is literally true in every respect is not as old as Christianity. If nothing else, there wasn't a settled Biblical canon until late in the 4th century. Through the Middle Ages, books weren't widely available, and most people got their doctrine from the Bible as i... (more) |
— | almost 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285497 |
The idea that the heart is the center of emotions and motivations is common to many cultures, not just Judaic ones. Before the development of modern physiology, it was common to believe that the heart was the literal locus of thoughts and emotions. Buddhism does this as much as Christianity, though t... (more) |
— | almost 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #285047 |
Could you give some examples of consecrating entities with blood in a Christian context? I started to write an answer about the history of blood sacrifice but then realized you were asking specifically about consecrating things, as opposed to seeking divine favor, and got stuck thinking of any exampl... (more) |
— | almost 3 years ago |
| Edit | Post #283902 |
Post edited: |
— | about 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #284567 |
As a historical term, "the Reformation" refers to the Protestant churches' rise following criticism of current practices in the Catholic Church. The 16th century also saw the Counter-Reformation, aka the Catholic Reformation, with the Council of Trent as a key event. It was a reaction to internal cri... (more) |
— | about 3 years ago |
| Edit | Post #284539 | Initial revision | — | about 3 years ago |
| Question | — |
What was the status of non-Christians in the Holy Roman Empire? For most of its history, the Holy Roman Empire had laws against heresy. The Peace of Augsburg in 1555 recognized only Catholicism and Lutheranism, with each state picking one or the other. Everyone else would have been a heretic, though a person who carefully kept quiet might have avoided punishment ... (more) |
— | about 3 years ago |
| Comment | Post #283902 |
If someone wants to downvote my reply, fine, but it would be helpful to the community to say exactly what errors I made. (more) |
— | about 3 years ago |
| Edit | Post #283902 | Initial revision | — | about 3 years ago |
| Answer | — |
A: The idea of two reformations instead just one reformation "The Reformation" wasn't a single shift, with or without Unitarianism. Its starting point and best-known aspect was Luther's break with the Catholic Church. Zwingli started a similar movement in Switzerland, coming into public controversy shortly after the Diet of Worms. The strict Anabaptists broke ... (more) |
— | about 3 years ago |