It doesn’t matter. Even from a Biblical-literalist viewpoint, he’s pulling stuff out of his nether orifice. As nearly as I can tell, the church he goes to has only one member, and, frankly, trying to make what he is saying even be consistent with itself, let alone with [ul]
[li]the Bible,[/li][li]Jewish tradition, or[/li][li]Christian tradition,[/li][/ul]makes my head hurt.
Anybody remember nolies? Didn’t he espouse a similar theology based on his own interpretation of scripture?
He tended to be a bit more, oh let’s say, zealous, though.
I’ll let others deal with your points about the Sabbath. I’d like to address these comments.
You show concern for people listening to the teachings of men. In all my own examinations of the history of the Bible, where it came from, who decided which books would be included and which excluded, the differences in different documents discovered, etc. there is no indication that the Bible is anything but a book gathered together by men. I personally revere what Jesus taught. I have made an effort to separate religious tradition from the essential teachings.
In studying the New Testament I see nothing to indicate that it was ever God’s plan or will that we have one final compilation of writings to serve as an all inclusive guide. I see nothing to indicate that any writings, even those thought to be inspired, were inerrant in any way.
What seems obvious to me is that people decide which writings they will declare sacred. Then people interpret "sacred"writings and don’t agree on which interpretation is correct. How then does anyone decide which is the word of God and what it means? I think it’s ironic that you refer to
when the belief that the Bible is God’s word, and was intended to be the final authority on God’s will, is itself a tradition taught by man.
IIRC, there was a difference between the Pharisees and the Saducees in the calculation of Pentecost/Shavuot. The P’s started the count from the Passover festival “Sabbath”, which could fall on any day, while the S’s started the count from the Passover weekly Sabbath. Thus, as the S’s ran the Temple, the apostolic assembly was in Jerusalem for the Saducean Pentecost, which was seven weeks+one day from the weekly Sabbath, thus Sunday. So the Christian Church put its Whitsunday/Pentecost seven weeks from Easter. After the destruction of the Temple, and the authority of the Saducean priests faded while that of the Pharisaic rabbis grew, the Pharisaic tradition of using the “any-day Festival Sabbath” as the starting point for the 50-day count prevailed.
Welcome jojoschmo.
Allow me to give you some perspective. Our dirty little secret is that among the thousands of members here there are quite literally a handful (and I mean a handful; no more than 4 or 5) who have any working knowledge of the bible at all. True.
And while it is likely that my guess is you will not be around long, it will be due to the hubris, bullying, arrogance and ferocity of a gang mentality.
This ain’t no Sunday school, home boy. It’s a message board full of people who are high on “fighting ignorance” kool aid. With all due respect to DSYoungEsq, the kind of facts we’re into around here come from Google and Wiki, and often serve as necessary surrogates for a true working knowledge of the topic at hand, especially bible threads. (where 3/4 of our members are Google experts)
You may have already noticed the pall of condescension in the air with the sighing and head patting going on. (In lieu of substantive responses to your posts) Soon after, the lack of diversity here will manifest itself when you realize that 90+% of the people posting to this thread are posting at you, and, to a person, disagree. It can be dizzying, let me tell you.
Friend, you will not be eaten by an intellectual eagle. You will be felled by a thousand hummingbirds. The absolute irony is that your hasty retreat will only confirm what we already [think we]know: we’re smarter than you. (despite the scanty evidence to support it)
You’ve taken a dip in a pool of piranhas, and I can tell you that cut on your finger is gonna be a problem.
I think you’re missing his point.
Apparently*, he rejects those 2000 years of tradition as perversions of the truth.
That is valid argument. We’ve had more than a few atheists lay siege to Christianity for these “traditions.” Their arguments often highlight these deviations and characterize them as hypocritical.
If an atheist can question these post, or non biblical traditions, it is no less worthy a discussion if the argument comes from within Christianity.
- I didn’t study his post. I always appreciate anyone who uses the bible in a bible based thread, but newbies often are too ambitious. I really think he needs to narrow his focus and make his point without all the extra stuff in there.
There is no evidence to support the notion that the Bible suggests Sunday be substituted for Saturday on a weekly basis.
**jojoshmo’s ** earnest position notwithstanding, Sunday’s designation is a Christian tradition. It is not referenced in the Bible. The sorts of contortions jo goes through to persuade us otherwise are fairly typical machinations of the sort which have led to thousands of other traditions that are “obvious” from reading the Bible. What jo presents is merely a compilation of various reasons it might be a neat idea to swap out Saturday for Sunday. It’s nonsense to think that makes it Biblical and in fact a number of Christian groups have themselves agreed it’s nonsense.
You are not helping his case by name-calling, innuendos and telling him that he doesn’t have to back up claims because other people are supposedly picking on him. I’d be interested in learning who the 4 or 5 are, among the thousands that post, that you consider to be “experts”, just to confirm my suspicions.
Here are some differing versions of just one of his examples from different versions of the Bible: Acts 20:17
This is all I need along with, He wrote the laws in the hearts of His people, and church is not a pointy building but a gathering of His followers in His name any time any place and God is with us and in us all the time, there is no need to travel to a temple there is no need for intercessor except for Jesus.
.
ISTM that the crux of the issue is that TPM was correct in his column. Sunday as a day of worship is a Christian tradition, probably derived from the idea of the “eighth day” celebration of the Resurrection. Furthermore, the article was a simple answer to a simple question, pithy and accurate and in no way flippant or anti-Christian.
As one who grew up in a highly educated Christian family, with two immediate family members in the clergy and with a solid and fairly detailed background in the Bible(s), I hope I’ll not be dismissed by any damp canines as a “hummingbird” when I say that the OP is waaaay out there in both interpretation and his ideas about tradition in Christian worship.
.
John (and one or two others that commented specifically on the point that the Passover does not always begin on a Saturday Sabbath). Thanks for bringing this point to the fore. And my apology to you, dtilque (and any that may have looked in), since it was to your comment that I was primarily responding at that point.
You guys are right on this particular point and I was wrong on this particular point.
No good excuse. I can only say that it was well after midnight (maybe 3 or 4am) when I wrote and posted. I had already nodded at the keyboard several times. I shouldn’t have written (that particular part and point) of the post, and I certainly should have reviewed it with a clearer mind before posting it at ~4am.
This is the cut on the finger, Raindog, actually a pretty serious gaffe. The piranha are even now feasting and I am moments from being a skeletal carcass. Most will now throw out the baby with the bathwater to their misfortune. That is in part my fault. It is human nature to think, a ha, we got him, he’s an idiot, he’s done, he has no idea what he’s talking about so ignore everything he said. But just because that is our nature doesn’t make it the right approach.
An error of this kind also, unfortunately, feeds the stereotype that Christians (and especially the fundy guys like me) are ill bred, ill read, ignorant, and just generally blemishes on society, and that too is – too bad, so sad. The sad reality is that we can never take back or take off the table words once uttered in speech, or written once circulated or published.
I’m still going to attempt a little damage control for whatever it may be worth, which given the responses thus far will not be much. Few if any were or appear that they will be persuaded, but c’est la vie. The vast majority of the argument still has merit.
I’m not sure why I wrote the part about the new year beginning . . . and the Passover always beginning on a Sabbath; I knew better. And when I woke after a couple of hours of sleep, it was the first thing I thought about. But I had things to do and couldn’t get back to it right away. Later when I checked responses, I saw that John had already picked up on the error. I chuckled and shook my head but still didn’t have time to get back, acknowledge the gaffe, and carry on until now. My bad.
That said, the first Pentecost (3400+ years ago) was on a Sunday, the first Pentecost of the NC was on a Sunday, and every one between and since should have been on a Sunday.
I’ll get back with the revised reasons when opportunity presents. My main purpose for this post was simply to acknowledge my error, make the appropriate apologies, start choking down the crow, take my beating and get that out of the way so that we could move on.
Several commented that I won’t be around long. You’re right but probably not for the reasons you surmise.
I’ve been in some pretty good dustups. I’m not easily offended (albeit I can get wound up, which is not the same thing). My shoulders are stout enough to bear responsibility for the mistakes I make (this was not my first or very likely my last). And I’m savvy enough to survive most anywhere.
Having been a reader of Straight Dope columns and boards for some time, I recognize that this is one of a pretty fair number of boards online that draws a more intellectually competent crowd on average (there are lots of good boards with pretty sharp crews, but they are relatively few), and I enjoy intellectual repartie and mental jousting as much as any man.
But jojo likes his anonymity. The time allotted for a guest to post here is one month. To pay for membership thereafter is not a financial burden but it peels away a layer of jojo’s anonymity. That aside, I don’t feel the need to pay for this kind of abuse when I can get it lots of other places for free should I feel the need. :smack: I’d much rather spend my money on golf where I can abuse myself, and garner a pretty fair portion from my buds, but still get a little sunshine and exercise out of the deal. 
Now…back to this crow. Anybody got any methodology or recipes to offer on how best to get crow down (head first, feet first, tail first, raw, fried, sauteed, baked, stuffed, live, dead, whole, parted, chopped, sliced, diced). Not that it’s my first time but I’m always open to a better way.
*~~~~~ This is where, I think, there is serious disagreement.*
So far so good 
*~~~~~ The bible is NOT the ultimate source*
Sorry, I beg to differ, you are simply wrong.
Without the book, we would barely know the name of Jesus or his death, burial, and resurrection, or have good reason to follow him. Most of what he and the apostles said and did and taught us is not available anywhere else. There are the aforementioned secondary documents (“church fathers” and the like) but most of what they say refers back to the book, and their opinions (right, wrong, or otherwise) were formed based on the book (and what they had learned from various men before them). The greatest, but hardly exclusive, value of the writings of the “church fathers” is that they quoted scripture, so that even if we lost everything today we could essentially restore the bible from their quotations alone.
Without the book we wouldn’t really know about the Sabbath or The Feast of Weeks or Noah or the flood (we can deal with the Sumerian/Babylonian records of that event at another time) or the parting of the sea or many other things. Sure we might still have the traditions of men as derived from the rabbinical commentaries (Midrashim, Mishnah, Gemara, Talmud), but they also refer back to and quote the book (Torah in its narrowest sense, Tanach, OC), and base their interpretations and opinions on what they got from the book (and the men that preceded and taught them).
Without the book we would have no reason to be Jews (or care why) or Christians or claim to follow Moses or Christ.
And if the book isn’t right in all of its particulars, then how could we know which ones are right.
And if the book is not right, and we can’t figure out what in it is right, then we should throw it in the garbage can and recycle it as biology books (although they have plenty of problems of their own or paper plates and cups so that we can eat, drink, and be merry and forget about the rest of the world.
If the book is not right, then we should no longer teach it or preach it or share its “false” knowledge with anyone ever again.
And I could go back to playing golf most of the time or much of the rest of the time jumping from one woman’s bed to another or sending them off to be replaced by another on a pretty regular basis from my own bed. I enjoyed those many years of my life for the most part and would return to that lifestyle in an instant if someone could show me that the book is not to be trusted. It took some powerful knowledge and understanding based on facts, evidence, and reason for me to walk away from my former worldview, and embrace the God of the book and the book through which we can now know him and hear him speak.
Sorry, Dex, the book is the ultimate source for all things Judeo-Christian.
*~~~~~ there are roughly 2000 years of tradition since the Bible was codified and closed*
You’re right, no argument here. And many more traditions that had been introduced during the 1000+ years prior as well.
But the book itself is not a tradition or a purely anthropogenic activity to gather and record what amounts to nothing more than traditions of men.
*~~~~~ You can’t look to the bible for (let’s say) Christmas trees, or Santa Claus.*
You’re wrong. I can and I do look to it for both of those things – and don’t find them.
But I take your meaning and you’re right. And it is in large part for this very reason that I don’t celebrate “Christmas” (I also don’t find “Christmas” there, and some of the same reasons apply to “Easter”). Add in the command to avoid myths (1 Tim 4.7) and several other reasons and the case becomes stronger yet.
There is nothing wrong with giving gifts. And I do. I just choose a different day of the year that has no “religious overtones.” There is nothing wrong with saying “hey guys, c’mon let’s paint some eggs and have some fun; I’ll hide them and you hunt them.” Just do it on a different day of the year and don’t bring “Easter” or the “Easter Bunny” or any of the rest of that nonsense into it.
I try to avoid doing anything on those days that might be misconstrued as association with or condoning them in any way.
*~~~~~ Those are customs that arose later.*
Right again, glad we agree.
*~~~~~ Similarly the use of Sunday as the day for religious devotion; that’s a custom that arose later.*
Sorry, you’re wrong – for reasons I’ve already put forth (my lamentable gaffe aside) and revisions and additional reasons that I will offer when I get to it.
Thanks for your thoughts, wish we could agree more.
As long as I keep getting both days off work, call them whatever the hell you want.
OK, Bry, go on wi’ yo’ bad se’f; you go, guy 
To each his own.
Raindog
Thanks for the welcome – and for the support (moral a/o otherwise) as far as it goes.
Feel free to remove the asterisk from your mind (and those of others).
And thanks for the heads up. I’ve been reading here off and on for years, so I had a pretty good idea of what was coming and ventured in anyway. Silly me, eh. :smack:
I referred to your “cut finger/piranha” comment someplace above (I think the apology to John & all). I also chuckled, literally, at your “high on “fighting ignorance” kool aid” remark, and again at your “intellectual eagle/1K hummingbirds” contribution.
Watch out for the blood, don’t get any on ya (any of mine anyway).
Thanks for the grins
Not sure where this will get us so I’ll agree to disagree.
I’m not a damp canine, but all I hear here is a buzz and a whir. If you would like to share some of the wealth of your pedigree (relevant to the topic), feel free to put it on the table. If not, feel free to be dismissed.
This is the dilemma for those who argue for the inerrancy of the Bible, isn’t it?
But it’s clearly wrong about all sorts of stuff, beginning with the very first chapter.
Not only is it factually wrong, it’s loaded with self-contradiction.
Not only is it loaded with self-contradiction, there is no agreement on what “The Bible” is. There are not even original manuscripts over which to argue about translation accuracy. Moreover the entire process of canonization was obviously an artificial process…
One has only to look at Christendom through the years to realize the Bible is neither specific enough nor consistent enough to convey much of anything accurately, whether it’s science (Creation, the Flood…) or dogma “By grace are you saved, through faith…not of works…”. There is precious little agreement in Christendom about anything the Bible says, which makes it nonsensical to promote its accuracy.
Here’s a tip: An Almighty who wanted to communicate clearly would write something like “Remember the Sabbath Day to keep it holy but be aware that this is the Old Covenant and I’ll be creating a new one once Jesus of Nazareth is done with his work–at that point we’ll swap over to Sunday” or “The earth is about 4.5 billion years old, and DNA-based life has grown increasingly complex over the last few billion years.”
The Bible has a lot in it. I don’t advocate throwing it in the garbage. But it is clearly the collected works of human authors.
Obviously many others who are also Christians don’t agree which particulars are right.
I strongly disagree. The search for what is right takes place in the inner person. For centuries, beginning before Jesus walked the earth man has sought truth and written about his thoughts, insights and experiences. Mankind’s desire to explore his own potential, and the mysteries of our universe expresses itself in every culture.
It’s great that we have the Bible and the words of Jesus like the Sermon on the mount. The fact is we have the particular books that men of the church decided we should be allowed to have while they actively persecuted anyone who held other writings in high esteem and destroyed writings that didn’t agree with their particular doctrine. Should we also value the Gospel of Thomas which is said to contain the words of Jesus, or should we only value the books that those men of an earlier church declared were correct.
Sacred writings from various sources as well as other things may move the inner person. The outer source, whatever it is, moves the inner spirit and that is where we discover meaning and truth. I value the Bible but I think it only inhibits our growth to place it on a pedestal it was never intended for. We can clearly see that even people who believe the book is right don’t agree with each other. That fact should teach us something.
You might have included live it.
If the Bible has moved you to live a better life that’s great. It is not the only source for people who seek meaning and moral discipline.
Many people have found truth, communed with God, and revered Jesus, without needing to believe that the book is right. It’s excellent for people to believe in loving their fellow man, and striving to be better human beings. Believing the book was intended to be the final authoritative guide to live by is embracing a man made myth that has no foundation. Not even in that very book.
I am unaware of any evidence for the first or the third. As to the second, you are simply wrong. The Gospels indicate that the Crucifixion was either on the first day of Passover or the day before, and the original Christian Pentecost therefore had to come on a Friday or Saturday. The Christian Pentecost did not become fixed on Sunday until Easter was fixed on Sunday, and that took several hundred years to achieve. Quartodecimanism was one of the issues debated at the First Council of Nicea in AD 315, and was not settled in England until the Synod of Whitby in 664.