Who Wrote The Gospels?

[headinhands]

"Matthew contains 606 of Markâ??s 661 verses. Luke contains 320 of Markâ??s 661 verses. Of the 55 verses of Mark which Matthew does not reproduce, Luke reproduces 31; therefore there are only 24 verses in all of Mark not reproduced somewhere in Matthew or Luke."

A good diagram here

Deal with it?

It's horrible and upsetting. It motivates me to do stuff, not much compared to some, not as much as it should, I should do more, I could do more.

So do you feel horrible and upset everyday?

everyday

Probably not everyday if i'm honest but frequent enough to know the UK has it good in terms of child welfare/health and so on. (That said, I know it wouldn't matter anything if it was my child. Don't get me wrong, we've had our nightmares, but still, I'm grateful to be in the UK)

I am relieved to hear that you do not feel horrible and upset all day everyday, despite the atrocities we know occur on a 24 hour basis. To do so would have a negative impact on day to day functioning.

It is normal and natural to feel more deeply about losses that occur in our proximity. The closer the loss the more deeply it is felt. You describe the poster who said that "worst things happen"etc. as "astute" I would describe them as lacking in empathy for that OP and lacking in knowledge of how individuals and communities work.

Why do you think that such a response was "astute" as opposed to stating the obvious and displaying a lack of understanding?

Understanding of what though, Dione?

I think the point is that someone is questioning their faith in god because of something bad that happened to someone 'close to home'.

Obviously this is an (understandable and natural) emotional questioning.

But it is illogical, and some might say self-centred, to question god over 'things that happen close to home' if you don't ALSO question his motives/nature/existence with regard to 'things that happen far away in another land'.

No BigDorrit. My theology degree was from a secular university.

I continue to read widely from varying sources, Christian and non. I would prefer to be challenged in my faith and seek a robust position, rather than take a cognitive dissonance kind of stance through only looking at Christian sources.

Must to bed - but enjoying the discussion. Happy Easter :)

So madhair, you're saying that Abraham was only pretending to go along with it to please god. That he had no intention of killing his son?

But god rewarded him for being willing to to do it. Are you really saying that Abraham was being dishonest and god was too stupid to realise it?

Regardless of what happened (and I see no ambiguity) that story is told again and again as an example of what true faith is. To illustrate that Christians should be willing to do anything that god asks of them.

Understanding of human nature Shipping. Understanding of a person recounting a close to home loss and it's impact upon them, personally, at that time. You say that it's illogical and even self centred to question at such times. I say that it's natural and human nature to do so.

Regarding questioning god, IME it is something that believers do constantly. I have not seen the Blind Faith that some talk of. Not even in children.

BOB I am not sure you are understanding what a test is? It was a test. It wasnt real. Like parents teaching their children not to touch something hot. But teaching them when it isnt actually hot iyswim?

Yes we should be willing BOB. Doesnt at all mean that he actually makes us do it though.

Do you see the difference?

rabbitrisen - are you seriously saying that all good Christians should be willing to commit crimes for god if 'called' to do so?

The 'hot' analogy doesn't work - deliberate child sacrifice isn't really quite the same as a kitchen accident.

Dione - if you read my post you will see that I'm agreeing with you re it being natural and understandable.

But if you're going for asking big existential questions about the nature of god, then it does make sense to apply a bit of objectivity.

So if god was never going to actually make Abraham kill Isaac (because god thinks it's abhorrent) then shouldn't god have been offended that Abraham started to follow his orders? God should have said 'how could you even think I'd want you to do something that you know I despise' and Abraham would reply 'but you asked me to?' It just smacks of the sort of sick mind games that a sociopath would employ.

No, back and head , I'm not saying anything of the sort.

I was pondering a bit. I think of these threads as a fairly safe place to explore stuff. I actually really don't know. I see how it reads, and I see how you see it. I don't exercise cognitive dissonance to the extent that I try to twist it all to make it OK. But I do think it's fine to bat it all around a bit.

In the end, words will never 'win' this 'argument.' Faith is about so much more. For this Easter morning, there is a hymn which contains the words 'the Spirit clothes faith with certainty' and it comes down to that, actually. And I know, I know that's simply not enough for you, and not even an answer approaching anything like logic, good, or anything of value. But it is what it is. There is a certainty in faith which goes deeper than the most well thought out logic and the most eloquent of speeches. A deep, heartfelt knowledge of this amazing God. It's all I can offer today.

Happy Easter to you all.

madhair you have to bat ideas about inside Christianity though. Like I said, you always have the conclusion wrapped up when you approach something that seems depraved, you're duty bound to spin cruelty into love and vice versa.

How would you know it was god telling you to kill your child rabbit

Back

That discomfort you are feeling is caused by cognitive dissonance. It's very bad for you in the long term.

IMO cognitive dissonance is not something to be feared when we encounter it. Cognitive dissonance is what can push us forward in our learning.

When we encounter something that conflicts with our view of the world we experience cognitive dissonance. We have a choice, we can decide to either accept the new information and reject our own view, reject the new information and keep our own view or seek further information with which to reconcile the new information into our own view, progressing our own view at the same time. For this reason the game 'Peepo' is popular with babies. They find it fascinating that something can apparently disappear and appear at will until they then learn it has not really disappeared.

One of the reasons I have referred to the Pirahã on a number of occasion is that they see anything outside the present / within immediate experience as Taboo. Anything outside of immediate experience is said to have gone outside of existence.This has had far reaching implications on their language and the way they learn number concepts.

As a Christian I take in Faith the aspects of the Bible that I do not fully understand, in the Hope of more fully understanding at a later date. We expect to grow in understanding. Just rejecting everything new, that I do not understand, would not progress my understanding.

I think you misunderstand me BigDorrit. Faith is not merely accepting the cognitive dissonance, it is accepting you will encounter it in life, as we learn, because not all information is received at once. Faith involves accepting that there is more to know, more to find out, stuff that has not been experienced or seen.

Rejecting information because of cognitive dissonance, is as short sighted, as blindly accepting it, this prevents us from learning.

However people need to find peace, be patient, to stop the cognitive dissonance from doing them harm, stopping them resting, until the new information, along with it new understanding, is available. We need to learn to live with mystery. This peace is what Faith in God provides.

^That is there is a need for a balanced approach towards cognitive dissonance.

Have you never experienced the unrest that comes from not knowing, continually seeking, BigDorrit? Or do you just reject what you do not understand in order to find peace? I cannot reject that easily, it is why I depend on my Faith.

'Testing of faith', 'surrender to faith' - ie being willing to commit to doing anything (including committing crimes) for your particular god hasn't historically been a force for good through the ages, has it? Any responsible religion would be fiercely opposing such a daft notion.