Are you asking Owl or anyone? Luke 22, e.g.

Post #175,431 by FuManChu 9/21/04 1:27:53 PM Reply	Are you asking Owl or anyone? Luke 22, e.g. Jesus declared new_covenant() and Paul wrote the end-user documentation. ;)
Post #175,435 by Nightowl 9/21/04 1:37:52 PM Reply	Thanks! I KNEW He declared it. :) Nightowl >8# "It's not where a person stands in time of comfort and security, but rather where they stand in times of strife and controversy that determine true friends." (Quote sent to me by a true friend, author unknown).
Post #175,438 by boxley 9/21/04 1:48:05 PM Reply	thats an interpretation :-) These miserable swine, having nothing but illusions to live on, marshmallows for the soul in place of good meat, will now stoop to any disgusting level to prevent even those miserable morsels from vanishing into thin air. The country is being destroyed by these stupid, vicious right-wing fanatics, the spiritual brothers of the brownshirts and redstars, collectivists and authoritarians all, who would not know freedom if it bit them on the ass, who spend all their time trying to stamp, bludgeon, and eviscerate the very idea of the individual's right to his own private world. DRL questions, help? [link\|mailto:pappas@catholic.org\|email pappas at catholic.org]
Post #175,442 by FuManChu 9/21/04 2:16:13 PM Reply	Yessss...... You buy "WordPerfect for Dummies" and then declare that book to be a commentary on how to understand and use WordPerfect. If you want to call that an "interpretation", go ahead, I guess. ;) I can't think of a single concept which Paul introduces in his commentary which isn't fundamentally grounded in an OT mindset. I can think of plenty of ideas and motivations which have been ascribed to both Paul and Jesus which don't have that grounding, mostly along the lines of "behavior X means Y in 21st-century white American culture; therefore when Jesus or Paul did X it means Y". Appalling anthropology, akin to writing a "WordPerfect for Dummies" which only talks about MS Word.
Post #175,449 by boxley 9/21/04 3:10:41 PM Reply	Well not to revisit our pauline discussions his commentary about the role of women and men differs from the accepted norms of the OT. Actually his point about gentiles not having to convert to judaism to be christians was reasonable and being gentiles were not bound by contract to eat kosher but I dont recall where Jesus overthrew the covenant with the Jews and gave it to the gentiles, it was christians later that "interpreted" thats what Jesus really meant. thanx, bill These miserable swine, having nothing but illusions to live on, marshmallows for the soul in place of good meat, will now stoop to any disgusting level to prevent even those miserable morsels from vanishing into thin air. The country is being destroyed by these stupid, vicious right-wing fanatics, the spiritual brothers of the brownshirts and redstars, collectivists and authoritarians all, who would not know freedom if it bit them on the ass, who spend all their time trying to stamp, bludgeon, and eviscerate the very idea of the individual's right to his own private world. DRL questions, help? [link\|mailto:pappas@catholic.org\|email pappas at catholic.org]
Post #175,501 by FuManChu 9/21/04 5:26:06 PM Reply	Well, that's a guess on your part. "Can't I have just a little bit of peril?" ;) In the absence of a document where Jesus spells it out, you choose to believe it was a late idea, and therefore an extraneous one. I will point out that Luke records some divine corroboration for Paul's ministry to the Gentiles: in Acts 9, the Lord told Ananias that Paul was to bear His Name to them. But more importantly, Peter (and the others who had been given direct authority over interpretation of the Covenant) accepted Paul's arguments (cf Acts 10). Peter attests in that passage to the "gift of the Holy Spirit" (considered a sign of the covenant) being "poured out" on the Gentiles. Not to mention Peter's own vision, which he uses as his argument in Acts 11, and which his hearers accept as authoritative. Although there continued to be a vocal minority who wished for all Christians to be circumcised, the council of Jerusalem in Acts 15 shows a leadership "having become of one mind" on the matter. All of which is to say, if you accept the visions and the apostles' consensus interpretation of prophecy as valid testimony, then there isn't much wiggle room. If you do not accept them, then you must guess what "really happened", since there is no accurate record. Again, I'm going to go with those who were actually there, witnesses to both Jesus in life and the events which transpired following his death--they had a much more complete picture of Jesus' position than you or I can have 2000 years later.

Welcome to IWETHEY!