Jump to content

TMBH

Members
  • Content count

    10
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by TMBH

  1. TMBH

    I'd love an opinion

    So I help out with this show on YouTube about the Bible, and we're just getting it off the ground. It's something we hope will be good for young people who seriously want to learn more about the Bible but might appreciate a little more relaxed approach. I'd be grateful if you'd take a look and tell me what you think. Gracias! Here's the link: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC3vIOVJiXigzVDA2TYqaa0Q
  2. TMBH

    I'd love an opinion

    Wow! Thanks for your thoughts, I thought this thread was probably dead and hadn't checked in for a while. You said a lot that I resonate with and appreciate, so it's probably kind of nitpicky for me to jump in on just one point, but hey, it's a discussion forum and that's what we do Luke wasn't a sexist. At all. He went out of his way to demonstrate the parts women played in the story. We don't read Luke fairly if we apply recent 21st century Western gender ideals to his work which was more in keeping with modern values than just about anything being written at the time. Luke was opening himself up to tremendous criticism by treating women with charity and inclusiveness in his writing.
  3. TMBH

    I'd love an opinion

    Patience isn't needed because you're being cool and saying good stuff/asking smart questions. I think one place where we have a miscommunication is on the idea that the Bible advances that phrase or intolerance toward Jews. In the first century Jews were eager to overthrow the Romans as they'd overthrown the Greeks before them. Everyone thought that God would send a political/military leader to get rid of Rome, so when the disciples asked if it was time to "Restore Israel" they probably imagined that Jesus would depose the leaders, judge them for their injustice toward him, and establish himself as king of a new and eternal independent state. That's what I think they were intoning in Acts 1. Jesus directs them toward something completely different. They quickly come to understand what Jesus' eternal spiritual kingdom was really about, and they went on to devote their lives to that. They never raised up in violence or anger against the Jews at any point. The Bible never calls Christians to violence with Jews or anyone. It just doesn't. I think it's easy to conflate religiously motivated actions with politically/socially motivated actions. The Holocaust wasn't a Christian aggression against Jews, it was a political purge powered by an out of control totalitarian state. Surely some of the people involved were Christians, but the church was openly opposed to what was happening and Christians were the ones who put an end to the slaughter. During the crusades there were instances of soldiers attacking Jewish settlements that were pretty horrible and some of that may have been religiously motivated, but it also had a lot to do with sending uninformed, undersupplied monolingual criminals marching across eastern Europe to fight in the Holy Land. My point is that while I'm sure some of history's anti-semitism has been driven by people doing things they believed to be Christian, I think the historical record shows much more has been driven by statism and by Islam.
  4. TMBH

    I'd love an opinion

    I probably won't, because no part of the Bible gives Christians permission to hate Jews, and I don't personally know any who do. Muslim disdain for Judaism is on a whole other global level than any tension felt between Jews and Christians.
  5. TMBH

    I'd love an opinion

    Thanks for another thoughtful reply. When I say that Christians were suppressed by the state, I'm talking about two things. At the very beginning of the Christian era they were suppressed by Jewish establishment only. This wasn't the Roman state, but the Jews had their own king and their own leadership with considerable power up until 70 AD. Persecution against Christians only came from the Jewish religious and political establishment for the first several years of Christianity and the Romans didn't initially see the difference between the two. Roman persecution began under Claudius around 52 AD, although it was most likely not a huge deal. Persecution picked up dramatically under Nero in the 50s and 60s AD and continued intermittently until 314 AD when Constantine legalized Christianity. Josephus certainly would have known about Jesus and the early church (though I agree that some of his account of those things look like it was added on to after the fact). He was a Jew who changed allegiances during Titus' crushing of the Jewish rebellion. We even know that Josephus spent considerable time in Galilee where he would have had to have lived under a rock to avoid hearing about Jesus and the church. Jesus is very well documented in the 1st century for a non-political figure. Here's a link that details some non-Christian sources, and if you count the Christian sources he's among the most documented non-emperor historical characters in the classical world. https://www.probe.org/ancient-evidence-for-jesus-from-non-christian-sources-2/
  6. TMBH

    I'd love an opinion

    In the larger context of the disciple's thinking in the second half of Luke and in Acts, it looks like they were expecting Jesus to settle the score because of the injustices he suffered at the hands of the Jews and Romans. They had been feisty at times in the past over such things. As followers of Jesus who clearly weren't fully getting what Jesus was going for yet, they imagined that Jesus would defeat his enemies and establish himself as king. This couldn't have been accomplished without a reckoning since there were already people in charge and Jesus coming to power would have required those people being removed from power. The key point here is that they were wrong, and shortly thereafter they figured out they were wrong and didn't pursue such ends. No Christians read that passage as though it teaches that Christians should harm or even be harsh towards Jews; instead this is understood as an historical account of what the disciples were guessing would happen next at that single moment in history.
  7. TMBH

    I'd love an opinion

    I would say and Luke was a Greek (or at least Greek-minded) who surely would have read and been familiar with Euclid.
  8. TMBH

    I'd love an opinion

    Here's my thought on that Ghid. I think evidence matters because otherwise we're all just guessing. If there is a God and he wanted us to understand some things about him and what he's doing, he'd have to either reveal that to each individual personally or seize moments to make big points about himself and then have the rest of us consider what happened. It appears that he's chosen the latter option for the most part, so he went ahead and had what happened recorded so we could consider it's credibility for ourselves. Thanks for your thoughts on this.
  9. TMBH

    I'd love an opinion

    I appreciate you taking the time Noel. We've got eight episodes posted, so we're still pretty early in the game. Did you have anything you liked or thought could be better?
  10. TMBH

    I'd love an opinion

    Thanks for taking a look Ghid!
×