OT - Where is the outcry?

No kidding? The Beatitudes are not the Gospel? Is that why my New Testament has all those other pages? Am I going to have to read them *all*? Really?

I find that passage particularly important, as it's a clear example of Christ's teaching, direct to the people, with direct speech and limited analogy but it's certainly not the whole Gospel, so I used the phrase "from sources like..."

The fact is, many Liberals I know are also very religious people and the idea that a "Christian" could get up in front of people and preach FOR war is something they find appalling.

And the question remains, what about Mac Hammond? Where's the outcry there? Where's the ACTION to revoke his T-E status? He was clearly out-of-bounds and had been previously warned.

Reverend Bacon, (Episcoplian, Pasadena, thanks, FH, for locating that), was discussing Christian perspective on the issues, which is permitted, not endorsing candidates and did not step over but the IRS investigated, promptly and then lingeringly, before finally issuing a confusing message that means, "We've got our orders from above but we can't make this one stick." Where's the outcry over the IRS' clearly political agenda? The Bush Administration favors only a select view of Christianity.

It's a sad day in the US when people can't trust government agencies to treat them fairly because they hold political views in opposition to the Administration's. This is like reviving Nixon's "Enemies List," except Nixon surrounded himself, mostly, with principled people.

Reply to
DH
Loading thread data ...

"Guidance", and your condescension aside, the Beatitudes are not at all part of the Gospel. They are how we should conduct our lives in response to and in gratitude to God.

That may be simplistic. I know of extremists views among some Christians that say you should never fight back under any circumstances.

It matters not if I agree or disagree with any of the above. I asked a simple question, which has yet to be answered. No more smoke and mirrors.

What, in your words and USING your words, is the "True Gospel"?

Reply to
witfal

I doubt it since "Gospel" means truth. It is used to refer to the words in the Bible that were said to have been spoken by Jesus ;)

mike

Reply to
Mike Hunter

Bzzzzt. Wrong answer.

Thanks for playing.

Reply to
witfal

My understanding is that it means "Good News."

Reply to
dh

Both of you are correct.

formatting link
Like many words, it has more than one meaning, even when referring to the Bible.

Jeff

Reply to
Jeff

You are correct in the translation of the word.

What defines the Gospel has yet to be posted.

Reply to
witfal

Nope. The Gospels contain the truth about Jesus, but the word can only be correctly translated as "Good News".

Even your cited web link correctly states that, despite it being wikipedia.

Reply to
witfal

True, but as words are used, they take on meanings that are different the strict translation.

Reply to
Jeff

The Gospels are the first four books of the New Testament. They are Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. Those are the books of the Gospel because they have direct quotations from Jesus regarding how our behavior should be and what the afterlife is like. Now Acts has direct quotations from Jesus also but for some reason it is not included as a book of the Gospels.

Reply to
badgolferman

Which may be an axiom, at best, but does not define the Gospel.

Reply to
witfal

Bzzzt. Wrong answer. While the Gospels are those four books, the definition has not yet been posted.

It's so simple, yet hardly known for some reason.

Reply to
witfal

How can so many people be wrong and only you be right? Maybe you are looking for a simple definition such as "gospel means the truth" or such. Why don't you post what you think is the answer?

Reply to
badgolferman

I'm not the only one who's right, nor did I define the Gospel. Nearly twenty centuries of church history define it as follows:

The death, burial and Resurrection of Jesus Christ.

Reply to
witfal

I have not read those books so I am not in position to comment on their contents. My understanding as to why they have not been included in the New Testament is that much of their content cannot be verified with other accepted books. The four main Gospels all compliment each other in one way or another and have a message that benefits one's spirituality and ultimate immortality. I do not know if the other books follow that prescription or not. At least they are still available in different textbooks for the use of those interested and not completely banned.

Reply to
badgolferman

You may be right but is there some way I can verify this claim? Do you have a reference for me to peruse?

Reply to
badgolferman

Absolutely:

I Corinthians 15:1-4

If Paul defines the Gospel within, and the Christian Church has accepted this for nearly 2000 years, who am I to argue?

Reply to
witfal

And contain errors, along with the inability to be dated earlier than 140 A.D.

And were written by individuals who actually met Jesus, or as is the case with Luke, was given acceptance by those who did.

Reply to
witfal

Where *would* we be without mythology?

Reply to
F.H.

Paul defines *A* gospel, not *THE* gospels. But I do not need to argue semantics with a fellow believer. The message is still the same regardless of who said it.

Reply to
badgolferman

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.