Hi Wendee. You wrote
>Jim Eisele wrote:
>> I would like to make a general comment or two. This seems to
>> be a very
>> "scholarly" list.
>>
>> This seems to be diametrically opposed to the approach that
>> Christ took.
First I will say that I was very impressed by your post! Even a bit
"overwhelmed." I'll probably only reply to the beginning. That alone
touches on a number of relevant points. Thanks.
>I would totally disagree with this.
No problem there. You go on to mention specific reasons why :-).
>The very fact that Christ taught, not only his close disciples but crowds
>of peoples,
Yes, Christ was a teacher! They called him Rabbi. But, he also said
things like "let the dead bury their own dead." And a lot of his followers
left him. But, your point is good :-), so I'll give it to you.
>indicates Jesus Christ was indeed very scholarly.
And he described the flood as a real event. Some people on this list
must think He was ignorant.
>His words and actions and even the "fights he picked"
>with the Pharisees indicate that he knew the Old Testament very well,
Agreed!
>and understood its actual "heart meaning" as well as its "intellectual
meaning."
And I must concur that the "heart meaning" is far more important.
>Some may just say, well Jesus was God so was born with the OT memorized.
But
>being 100% human it seems to me he learned it, understood it, then taught
it
>as it actually was, as opposed to the humanistic law being passed down by
>the Jewish leaders of the day.
Jesus also saw Satan fall like lightning. I think we both agree His
knowledge was not only from a book :-).
>So in response to your saying, "Why not "pulverize" people with "wondrous"
>arguments"." I would say he definitely did!! He gave arguments in the form
>of parables, and did so in order to not "Feed pearls to pigs". In other
>words, those pearls were revealed only to those with open hearts that truly
>loved God enough to understand. "Pigs" (I'm understanding as proud
religious
>people who tend toward legalism and narcissism -- and I must say I see some
>of that on this list with all the arguing!!!)
I'd add to your list discounting the historicity of Scripture. That was the
primary purpose for my post.
Thanks for your detailed response.
Jim
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jun 03 2002 - 17:38:00 EDT