Mark 6: 3 Commentary

Yeah a cloud of witnesses of those called to be saints are helping me!

By TIUCHE (wrote 3265 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 10/18/2011 16:54 pm

Nov 1 is All Saints Day! May all they help you

By Charles (wrote 1421 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 10/18/2011 16:47 pm

I was born November 1 Charles.

By TIUCHE (wrote 3265 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 10/18/2011 15:43 pm

Re post 49. You’re scaring me, Tiuche. You’re helping me get into the Halloween spirit!

By Charles (wrote 1421 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 10/18/2011 15:14 pm

Charles: You think what you do here is just for show or to show yourself as a wisecrack or something….but let me tell you what Jesus Christ warned those who might offend the least of His Brothers:

“But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.”Matthew 18:6.

Don’t tell me that I have not warned you!

By TIUCHE (wrote 3265 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 10/18/2011 14:45 pm

Harold Camping (post 47), you’re losing it. Your comments have become unintelligible.

By Charles (wrote 1421 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 10/18/2011 13:03 pm

Charles Fiott (Post #46): Just what I thought. You could not pass cross-examination.

By Roland G (wrote 1651 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 10/18/2011 12:37 pm

Dear Mr. Roland Harold Camping, you must have written post 45 when you were tired and at the end of your wits. You started screwing up in post 37 and since then you can’t even tell your angels from your soldiers. Have a good rest and read a cartoon or something so you won’t feel so depressed.

By Charles (wrote 1421 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 10/18/2011 12:01 pm

Charles Fiott (Post #44): An angel told Joseph the truth. It was the Holy Spirit (not the Roman soldier-implied). I thought you had a high IQ.

Charles, you have so much rage, here is a poem for you: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mTv1Dmu5CYc

By Roland G (wrote 1651 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 10/18/2011 05:39 am

Methinks not, Godless Violator (post 43). I read what you wrote. In post 39 you wrote “Joseph may very well have thought of turning Mary over, but an angel told him the truth (Matt. 1:20)” - clearly referring to the Holy Ghost pregnancy. Then when I said that I was talking about the Roman soldier rumor, you responded “So was I” - NOT TRUE.

By Charles (wrote 1421 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 10/18/2011 02:13 am

Charles Fiott (Post #42): Methinks you are getting used to reading what you want to read.

By Roland G (wrote 1651 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 10/18/2011 01:56 am

Not so fast, Godless Violator (41). Joseph is portrayed as taking the competition from the Holy Ghost with resignation. I don’t think he would have taken the competition from a Roman Soldier in the same manner.

AND you WEREN’T talking about the soldier when you quoted Matt. 1:20. Caught you again.

By Charles (wrote 1421 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 10/18/2011 01:43 am

Charles Fiott (Post #40): “I was talking about the Roman soldier rumor which you had brought up in post 37.” So was I. No witnesses, no case! Rumors and gossip only.

By Roland G (wrote 1651 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 10/18/2011 01:35 am

Godless Violator (post 39) Matt. 1:20 is about the Holy Ghost theory. I am sure there were no rumors about that. I was talking about the Roman soldier rumor which you had brought up in post 37.

By Charles (wrote 1421 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 10/18/2011 01:31 am

Charles (Post #38): Mary was indeed at risk as rumors circulated, but Joseph’s testimony would have been needed. Joseph may very well have thought of turning Mary over, but an angel told him the truth (Matt. 1:20). No witnesses, no case.

By Roland G (wrote 1651 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 10/18/2011 01:04 am

Godless Violator (37), such a rumor couldn’t have been too strong because it could have put Mary at risk of getting stoned.

By Charles (wrote 1421 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 10/18/2011 00:27 am

Charles Fiott (Post #36): Calling a person the son of (name of the mother) was rare in those days. There had been a rumor circulating that a Roman soldier had sex with Mary. So, “this one,” that is, “this illegitimate one” or “the “son of Mary” was a contemptuous remark. Cf. John 8:41

By Roland G (wrote 1651 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 10/17/2011 23:57 pm

I find it curious that the people referred to Jesus as the son of Mary, rather than the son of Joseph. Weren’t people commonly identified with their father back then.

By Charles (wrote 1421 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 10/17/2011 19:53 pm

charles:
Yeah i am a bad man, a liar,& a killer too…i am no christian…..am a sinner who needs the mercy of Jesus Christ!But i am here to follow Christ no matter how hopeless it seems for me…am glad that you are quite righteous, and a good example of what a Christian should be…but i won’t follow you…i will follow Christ and His Pure Words!

By TIUCHE (wrote 3265 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 6/4/2011 18:11 pm

TIUCHE, this is supposed to be a serious debate about the Bible and you’ve turned it into a boneheaded squabble. Your words were: “Let us leave alone the nicene creed or any mumbo jumbo of men…let us stick to the Authority-the Bible.” This clearly indicates that the Nicene Creed is no authority because it is one of those things made by men. My point is that the Christian Bible was ALSO put together by the same type of men that created the Nicene Creed and the Trinity and such. You are dishonest when you imply that I came up with this mumbo-jumbo thing. It’s YOUR phrase! I am not twisting your words. You are twisting your own words because you are not humble enough to admit a mistake. You keep using offensive words and lies. You are no Christian.

By Charles (wrote 1421 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 6/4/2011 18:01 pm

Charles (Post No.30):
Joseph was not the father of Jesus…do you not see the words:
AS WAS SUPPOSED! Meaning the people thought Joseph was the real father but he was not as being pointed out by the author who knows better since he was a disciple of Jesus.

Am i scoffing at scoffer of the bible? Who are the scoffers? Are you not the one scoffing at me because I believe the Bible rather than your opinions? Are you not scoffing against the Word of God? Yet you pretend to learn and evaluate the opinions of believers in it. Tell me, by the end of your visit here..would you be convince of the bible as Holy scriptures, or would you STILL BE searching for the long MISSING WORDS OF WISDOM of your god?

By TIUCHE (wrote 3265 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 6/4/2011 17:21 pm

Charles:
The conjunction “or” between the “nicene creed and mumbo jumbo of men” is used to link between two alternatives. It does not signify the the two alternatives are the same. it does not signify that the nicene creed is a mumbo jumbo of men …you are twisting my words to suit your purpose.You are the one saying that the bible is a mumbo jumbo of men.

I do not believe you to be a fool since I believe that the Bible is no mumbo jumbo…you are the one classifying yourself to be a fool by studying to learn the opinion of men with regards to the book you consider as mumbo jumbo.Mumbo jumbo means worthless and hard to understand…

I am not in authority to call you a fool…but the son of Man call someone even His disciples as fools and slow of heart to believe..and He is not childish nor is He a loser nor did He insult them!

I thought the bible is mumbo jumbo now you quote to me that I should humble myself because that is what the book teach?The bible say that the scriptures cannot be broken yet you say it is mumbo jumbo. Are you running around in circles with the Word of God?

You are in this site to hear and evaluate different view points? So go on and i am glad you are here…this site would be quite lonely without your presence or others…

By TIUCHE (wrote 3265 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 6/4/2011 17:05 pm

Re Post 29 by TIUCHE:

1. TIUCHE said: “I did not say the Nicene creed is a mumbo jumbo of men. Read my post well!”

Yes, TIUCHE, that is what you said. I read your post well. You said “Let us leave alone the nicene creed or any mumbo jumbo of men”

2. TIUCHE said: “If the Bible is a mumbo jumbo of men you are a fool for wasting your time in this Bible site!”

You are insulting me. Throwing insults is childish. It is the behavior of losers.

3. TIUCHE said: “For the majority here, the Bible is the Holy Word of God, why else study it?”

To hear and evaluate different viewpoints – THAT’S why we study it. We certainly do NOT study it to call people names!

Let me remind you once again that this website is for EVERBODY. Agnostics and atheists are among the people who are specifically welcome to comment. I have told you this three times already and yet you keep trying to kick me off this website as if owned it. You are very confrontational, very offensive, very arrogant. Why don’t you reread the Bible and concentrate on the lessons in humility that Jesus teaches us?

By Charles (wrote 1421 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 6/4/2011 12:18 pm