See What I Mean?(JEFF)

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]

MATT
Either I am missing something or I am not being clear enough on what I am
saying. There are no indifferent persons, only those who appear to be so.
There are two clear groups set out in the Scriptures, not three. The only
way you guys can make a contradiction is by inventing a statement which
does not exist in the Scriptures. No indifferent = no problem = no
contradiction.

JEFF
But depending which of the two passages you read, those under your
supposed "passive" category would seem to either be lumped with the
"for" or the "against".  You've arbitrarily decided it's "against", but
it could just as well be that the "passive" are really "for" if one has
read only one of the two passages.

MATT
I have not arbitrarily decided it's against. The Scriptural teaching of
original sin puts everyone in the against position from the start. Some of
the 'against' will become 'for' through conversion, the others remain
against, whatever their outward position may be, i.e. actively hostile,
indifferent etc.

JEFF
Can you (honestly) tell me that if you were familiar with only Mark
9:40 you would not believe that the bible taught that the "passive" or
"indifferent" people were in fact "for" Jesus?  I know I could not
honestly say I believed this.  At the best, it is unclear and needs
another passage to "interpret" it. (which looks to the unbeliever like
the Christian just arbitrarily chose whichever of the two passages he
preferred, but that's not my point here)

MATT
If I only had Mark then my conclusion would be the same through
understanding the doctrine of original sin.

JEFF
So, here's the setup.  Today, the bible contains two statements S1 and
S2 which are on the surface contradictory, but I will grant for the
sake of the argument that something in the combination of the
statements makes it clear which statement (let's say it's S1) is literally
true and which is "not literally true" but is perhaps figurative in
some way.

MATT
Both are literally true, with no contradiction until a non-existent third
party is introduced.

JEFF
Now, either statement S1 was written first, or statement S2 was written
first.  So there were times when the bible contained neither S1 nor S2,
and a time when it contained only one of S1 and S2.  Suppose S1 (the
"literally true" passage) was there first.  Why would the Holy Spirit
inspire a writer to write passage S2?  What other effect could adding
S2 to the bible have but to cause confusion?  The "right" statement was
already there and the only effect could have been to muddy the waters.
It seems that when S2 was added, the bible became more difficult to
understand, and it should be expected that more people would reject
Christianity than would have given a bible without S2.

Suppose S2 was written first.  This means that from then until the Holy
Spirit also inspired some other writer to write S1 that all who read
the manuscripts---_all_ the manuscripts---that the holy spirit had
inspired would come away with the wrong conclusion.  How long was the
bible errant for, then?  Is 5 years too long?  A year?  A month?


So far all you've done is maintain that the actual situation conforms
to what the passage in Matthew says, and that the passage in Mark is at
best misleading about the seemingly indifferent people.  You've cited
but not supported the doctrine of original sin to make this choice seem
less than arbitrary.  But even once you've made a convincing case that
there are really good reasons to belive Matthew literally and interpret
Mark in some way figuratively/less than literally, you've still got to
show how it made sense for the HS to inspire two seemingly
contradictory statements at different times.  Did HS make a mistake
when it inspired S2, and needed to fix things up later with S1?  Or
does HS want more souls in hell and so he added S2 into the mix to
fulfill satanic soul quotas?

MATT
I have not stated, not believe that any of the two passages are misleading.
There is no contradiction and no mistake by the Holy Spirit. 


Thanks

Matt

• Previous message: See What I Mean?(Till)
• Next message: See What I Mean?(Matt)
• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]