The Interpretation of Scripture

[Cam42]

Ok, now we see that Littleles is ascribing to a heresy that was put down 1800 years before he was born. We really don't need to converse in this. He can't prove this one correct. It is obvious that since he cannot prove our contemporary points, so he is resorting to arguing the Arian Heresy....once that is denounced, I would suspect Donatism will be next.

Don't feed his fire.

CAm

[LittleLes]

Yes, indeed. Arius lost an election at Nicea; Pope Pius IX won one in Rome( on papal infallibility). But didn't Eusebius get Constantine to order Athanasius to recall Arius in 321? Fortunately, Arius died before his teachings had to be revisited by the western church.

Perhaps the early Christians were closer to the truth.

Although obviously it had to be claimed that it had been " forged and mutilated" by later Christians who opposed it, the first Gospel of Matthew is written in Hebrew or Aramic, called the Hebrew Gospel, and quoted by Epiphanius, see Panarion , 30 (can be found at a number of websites including Early Christian Writings, Gospel of the Ebionites).

The Ebionites were an early Jewish ( Messianic ) Community in Jerusalem.

"And they (the Ebionites) receive the Gospel according to Matthew. For this, they too, like the followers of Cerinthus and Merunthus, use to the exclusion of others. And they call it according to the Hebrews, as the truth is, that Matthew alone of the New Testament writers made his exposition and preaching of the Gospel in Hebrew and in Hebrew letters."

"And on this account they say that Jesus was begotten of the seed of a man and was chosen, and so by the choice of God he was called the Son of God from the Christ that came into him from above in the likeness of a dove."

In short, they agree with Paul's Romans 1:1-3 and Galatians 4:4.

LittleLes

Sorry for the long post. CAM must be a bad influence on me!

[Archangel]

Do you deny that Jesus is God?

[LittleLes]

Hi Archangel,

Jesus was originally the Messiah, later "the Son of God" and only finally divine himself. Trace the evolution of these concepts through early scripture (such as Matthew's alleged Hebrew Gospel to the Ebionites), early Mark, later Mark, then the remaining evangelists, and finally the Council of Nicea, 325 A.D.

LittleLes

Edited March 18, 2005 by LittleLes

[Jaime]

I'm sorry Littleles

Was that a yes or a no to Archangel's question?

Do [b]you[/b] deny that Jesus is God?

[Cam42]

You do realize that if he answers the question, the conversation is over. He doesn't want that, he wants to continue to make the same fatal error over and over, then pretend it is truth.

Cam

N.B. I asked the same question and he hasn't answered it either.

[jasJis]

[quote name='Archangel' date='Mar 17 2005, 04:44 PM']Do you deny that Jesus is God?[/quote]
][quote name='LittleLes' date='Mar 18 2005, 08:29 AM']Hi Archangel,

Jesus was originally the Messiah, later "the Son of God" and only finally  divine himself.  Trace the evolution of these concepts through early scripture (such as Matthew's alleged Hebrew Gospel to the Ebionites), early Mark, later Mark, then the remaining evangelists, and finally the Council of Nicea, 325 A.D.

LittleLes[/quote]As you can see, Les does not believe that Jesus is God. The “concepts” throughout his posts, deny the reality of the Holy Spirit, deny the reality of Jesus as God, etc. With his complete denial of Divine interaction, he judges all with only temporal measure. That’s why it pointless to engage him in debating theology with him. He’s discussing history and literature and will not agree with any theological principles.

[Cam42]

[quote]Do [b]you[/b] deny that Jesus is God?[/quote]

That would be three people asking now.

Cam

[LittleLes]

Asked and answered. Read my previous answer, same subject.

Little Les

[littleflower+JMJ]

[quote name='jasJis' date='Mar 18 2005, 01:49 PM'] ]As you can see, Les does not believe that Jesus is God.  The “concepts” throughout his posts, deny the reality of the Holy Spirit, deny the reality of Jesus as God, etc.  With his complete denial of Divine interaction, he judges all with only temporal measure.  That’s why it pointless to engage him in debating theology with him.  He’s discussing history and literature and will not agree with any theological principles. [/quote]

that explains alot.... no wonder i never understand his threads...

[LittleLes]

Yes. I insist on separating fact from fiction. That, of course, troubles some Catholic apologists who must defend the party line against all evidence.

You've just got to be a "true believer" or you're going to hell. Do you realize how easy it is to control the laity if they buy into that?

LittleLes

[littleflower+JMJ]

[quote name='LittleLes' date='Mar 18 2005, 06:50 PM'] Yes. I insist on separating fact from fiction. That, of course, troubles some Catholic apologists who must defend the party  line against all evidence.

You've just got to be a "true believer" or you're going to hell. Do you realize how easy it is to control the laity if they buy into that?

LittleLes [/quote]
if thats the way you see things then im not surprised

clearly...just to let you know--from someone in the "inside".... ... that is not the case

i think its sad that you think that though

have an open heart always though....cuz alot of the times when we do find Truth, the thing that holds us from it......is ourselves.

[Archangel]

[quote name='LittleLes' date='Mar 18 2005, 04:29 AM']Hi Archangel,

Jesus was originally the Messiah, later "the Son of God" and only finally  divine himself.  Trace the evolution of these concepts through early scripture (such as Matthew's alleged Hebrew Gospel to the Ebionites), early Mark, later Mark, then the remaining evangelists, and finally the Council of Nicea, 325 A.D.

LittleLes[/quote]
That's what Scripture says about Him, but what about you, LittleLes?

Do you, LittleLes, believe that Jesus is God?

[Cam42]

[QUOTE]Jesus was originally the Messiah, later "the Son of God" and only finally divine himself. Trace the evolution of these concepts through early scripture (such as Matthew's alleged Hebrew Gospel to the Ebionites), early Mark, later Mark, then the remaining evangelists, and finally the Council of Nicea, 325 A.D.[QUOTE]

Hmmmm....that is one heck of a non-answer. Yes, you answered the question. But you did not say whether you think that Jesus is God. You say that he participates in the divine. You say that he was the Messiah. You say he was the "Son of God."

I could make an assumption, but I won't. I will wait for you to answer this question.

Is Jesus God?

It is a simple question, requires one of two words, either yes or no.

Cam

[LittleLes]

Jesus was believed to be a Messiah but not necessarily divine by his original disciples.

The Ebionite/Nazarene movement was made up mostly of Jewish Israelites who had been followers of John the Baptist, and later Jesus. They were concentrated in Palestine and the surrounding regions and led by James the Just, the oldest brother of Jesus.

Although predictably disparaged and minimized by Catholic apologists who, for doctrinal reasosn, don't want to acknowledge their existence, even the Catholic Encyclopedia admits the following:

[url="http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/o5242.htm"]http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/o5242.htm[/url] (CE - Ebionites)

"Recent scholars have plausibly maintained that the term (Ebionite) did not originally designate any heretical sect, but merely the orthodox Jewish Christians of Palestine who continued to observe Mosaic Law."

"They denied the Divinity and virginal birth of Christ, and clung to the observance of Jewish Law, they regarded St. Paul as an apostate, and used only a Gospel according to St. Matthew."

The divinity of Christ continued to be debated up until the Council of Nicea in 325 at which it received the majority vote of the bishops.

I more or less agree, then, with the original Christian view of Jesus.

Little Les