Family of God: Re: [Church_of_Christ] Re: Holy Spirit 3

On 4/25/09 10:59 AM, rbpesach09@att.net wrote:

> Kent,
>
> > > And Jesus speaks in absolutes. There are no such things as exceptions
> > > to what Jesus says.
> >
> > Sure there are exceptions:
> >
> > > For whoever is not against us is for us. - Mark 9:40
> >
> > vs
> >
> > > Anyone who is not with Me is against Me.... - Luke 11:23
> >
> > The one case is an exception against the other case. Neither case is an
> > absolute.
>
> Actually, Mark 9 and Luke 11 are the exact same teaching. The wording
> is different but the points are identical. In fact, this is one of the
> best examples of absolutes in all of Jesus' teachings.
>

I see these as exact opposites (and depend on the context in which he is
speaking), and am surprised that you see them as the same thing. But,
I've learned that two equally bright, honest people can look at the
exact same data and come to exactly opposite conclusions. I guess that's
what's happening here.

> > And again, just to emphasize the point: Jesus did not say that no one
> > would believe if they witnessed a resurrection from the dead; he said
> > that Abraham said that about the rich man's brothers. I'd be
> hesitant to
> > turn this into an absolute which applies to all humans.
> >
>
> Jesus is the teacher in this passage. He is using this example to
> teach his listeners how the word of God is handled. People who accept
> a teaching from the word will respond correctly when God works
> according to that word. People who reject a teaching will not respond
> correctly even if a miracle confirms that word.

It seems to me that you're putting conditions on the text which are not
in the text in order to support your position. Taking the text at
face-value, the black-and-white is not Jesus speaking, it's Abraham, and
he does not say all who reject Moses would reject a resurrection, but
merely refers to the rich man's brothers as doing so. Now we may take
that and run with it and apply it elsewhere, which is what I believe
you've done, and I'm not even opposed to that; I'm just saying that what
we've taken from the text in doing so is not actually in the text.

Really, I don't mind your conclusions; I tend to lean that way myself.
I'm just cautioning against making doctrine which is not actually in the
text.

--
Kent

__._,_.___

Messages in this topic (56) Reply (via web post) | Start a new topic

Messages | Database | Polls

Participation guidelines: List policies are posted in the files area as listpolicies.html

We don't want to see you go, but if you must, the address is Church_of_Christ-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com