TV Ministries

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by GrowingPains

EB, I wasn't trying to be esoteric or to speak with a hidden message. I was interacting with your point about Paul at Mars Hill and his use of the poets.

Paul didn't just use the poets to make fun of them and attack them, he used them to help explain to them Jesus Christ. Instead of launching into a tirade about their false gods, he used their own poets, and theology of Zeus to explain this Living Christ.

Can you show us with the Phaenomena what Paul meant? What I am saying is, I would like you to show us just how Paul used the Phaenomena to say what you are presenting above.

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

[GrowingPains]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Can you show us with the Phaenomena what Paul meant? What I am saying is, I would like you to show us just how Paul used the Phaenomena to say what you are presenting above.

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

The apostle intends to refute both the serious and the popular philosophies of the Greeks, yet he does not ridicule his listeners. Paul's warning of the imminent judgment of God has as goal the conversion of his audience by reasoned yet urgent appeal. And in order to convince his listeners the apostle must know well their beliefs and how he might lead the Athenians to the realization that their tenets are false and must change. Paul tests the spirit of the Athenians and shows them that it is not of the true God.

(http://spindleworks.com/library/rfaber/aratus.htm)

He uses the popular Phaenomena as a launching point to show he is familiar with the writings and beliefs of the Greeks, and then to prove them false even by their own authorities. He uses other language of the Stoics and Epicureans. The poem I cited was not part of the Phaenomena, but nevertheless, was used by Paul in this setting. His intent was to convert them, not to drive them away or "beat them." He persuaded a few. Not the greatest of his revivals, but effective nonetheless.

[GrowingPains]

Paul didn't quote Aratus to align himself with the Greek poet. Paul was telling those on the Areopagus that they were too superstitious, and through ignorance they worship deities. Paul quotes Aratus to show how much they were in false worship. Paul was at no time trying to quote the Phaenomena to align Jesus Christ with Zeus and how man is his physical offspring. (EB)

I agree with this statement.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by GrowingPains

The apostle intends to refute both the serious and the popular philosophies of the Greeks, yet he does not ridicule his listeners. Paul's warning of the imminent judgment of God has as goal the conversion of his audience by reasoned yet urgent appeal. And in order to convince his listeners the apostle must know well their beliefs and how he might lead the Athenians to the realization that their tenets are false and must change. Paul tests the spirit of the Athenians and shows them that it is not of the true God.

(http://spindleworks.com/library/rfaber/aratus.htm)

He uses the popular Phaenomena as a launching point to show he is familiar with the writings and beliefs of the Greeks, and then to prove them false even by their own authorities. He uses other language of the Stoics and Epicureans. The poem I cited was not part of the Phaenomena, but nevertheless, was used by Paul in this setting. His intent was to convert them, not to drive them away or "beat them." He persuaded a few. Not the greatest of his revivals, but effective nonetheless.

So, you didn't even know what the Phaenomena was? You just cut and pasted into a search engine and came up with the above? So, you think I should maybe e-mail the owner of the website and have this discussion with him? Didn't I ask you the question? So, you make accusations of my posts, and I ask you questions, but you don't answer them, you just cut and paste me the answers from somebody else? Whatever. I guess this is why I'm the bad guy.

America! You are in a lot of trouble!

[GrowingPains]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

So, you didn't even know what the Phaenomena was? You just cut and pasted into a search engine and came up with the above? So, you think I should maybe e-mail the owner of the website and have this discussion with him? Didn't I ask you the question? So, you make accusations of my posts, and I ask you questions, but you don't answer them, you just cut and paste me the answers from somebody else? Whatever. I guess this is why I'm the bad guy.

America! You are in a lot of trouble!

SIGH

It's called a citation, something all scholarly papers have, and something used when you are giving authority to your statement. I gave credit where credit was due, no crime there.
I wasn't quite clear exactly what "Phaenomena" was, but knew it was part of the Greek poets' work. I'm familiar with Mars Hill.

Why can't you just interact with the information. Why do you insist on ad hominems?

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by GrowingPains

SIGH

It's called a citation, something all scholarly papers have, and something used when you are giving authority to your statement. I gave credit where credit was due, no crime there.

What you did was go into the web site and cut and paste the Introduction, and then under the web address you supplied, you paraphrased the writer's words in the second paragraph of the introduction. The crime is called plagiarism, meaning that when you are called to produce something you take a short cut and use someone else's material and call it your own. You're right, you weren't clear on the poet or his work, and there is no crime in that. Although, when you go one step beyond, and use someone else's work and then get caught and follow that up with "I wasn't quite clear exactly what so-and-so was," sure doesn't look very good.

Originally Posted by GrowingPains

I wasn't quite clear exactly what "Phaenomena" was, but knew it was part of the Greek poets' work. I'm familiar with Mars Hill.

Well, which one is it? You weren't quite clear exactly what "Phaenomena," was, but you knew "it" was a part the Greek poet's work? So, if I understand you correctly, you had very little idea what Paul was quoting from, or how Paul was trying to use Aratus' Phaenomena. Also, you didn't know what the contents of that portion of Aratus' work meant. You see I knew that already, because of the way you answered my post to Brother Ed.
You had

Originally Posted by GrowingPains

he used their own poets, and theology of Zeus to explain this Living Christ.

I then asked you to explain how you got that from Aratus' work.
Instead of doing that, you found the first website that came up in your search. You cut and pasted, took the second paragraph and expounded directly from what you found in it. You see, Paul is quoting from a portion of Aratus' work that speaks about how Zeus provides and controls the weather, for planting and harvesting. Yet, the apostle's main point is that his God is unlike Zeus, because the God of Paul needs no physical temples or idols. If you read the website you posted to us, the writer even goes on to say that Paul is trying to show the Athenians that the God of Paul is unlike the god Zeus. Reason being, the god Zeus requires physical temples, and altars. The God of the apostle doesn't dwell in temples made by men. Therefore the apostle tells the Athenians that they are too religious, because of their need of idolatry.

Originally Posted by GrowingPains

Why can't you just interact with the information. Why do you insist on ad hominems?

Well, then, to do that I would first have to e-mail the writer of the website.

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

[GrowingPains]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

What you did was go into the web site and cut and paste the Introduction, and then under the web address you supplied, you paraphrased the writer's words in the second paragraph of the introduction. The crime is called plagiarism, meaning that when you are called to produce something you take a short cut and use someone else's material and call it your own. You're right, you weren't clear on the poet or his work, and there is no crime in that. Although, when you go one step beyond, and use someone else's work and then get caught and follow that up with "I wasn't quite clear exactly what so-and-so was," sure doesn't look very good.

Get caught? I had the citation immediately under the information that I quoted. The rest of your inferences are categorically untrue and you are just making them up -- talk about projection. What is your deal?

Well, which one is it? You weren't quite clear exactly what "Phaenomena," was, but you knew "it" was a part the Greek poet's work? So, if I understand you correctly, you had very little idea what Paul was quoting from, or how Paul was trying to use Aratus' Phaenomena. Also, you didn't know what the contents of that portion of Aratus' work meant. You see I knew that already, because of the way you answered my post to Brother Ed.
You had I then asked you to explain how you got that from Aratus' work.
Instead of doing that, you found the first website that came up in your search. You cut and pasted, took the second paragraph and expounded directly from what you found in it. You see, Paul is quoting from a portion of Aratus' work that speaks about how Zeus provides and controls the weather, for planting and harvesting. Yet, the apostle's main point is that his God is unlike Zeus, because the God of Paul needs no physical temples or idols. If you read the website you posted to us, the writer even goes on to say that Paul is trying to show the Athenians that the God of Paul is unlike the god Zeus. Reason being, the god Zeus requires physical temples, and altars. The God of the apostle doesn't dwell in temples made by men. Therefore the apostle tells the Athenians that they are too religious, because of their need of idolatry.
It's exactly as I stated. I'm familiar with the use of Greek poetry in Acts at Mars Hill, I figured this was related, but didn't have exact information. Read what I said again, his entire use of their works is multi-layered, and a good reason why we should take notes in our preaching today to always make sure our goal is understanding. They would best understand by using familiar subjects to them.


Well, then, to do that I would first have to e-mail the writer of the website.

Email the writer, please do. No crime here. I've done enough scholarly research papers to know how to use a citation, even on an informal forum like AFF.

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

You can't put down the axe, can you? Ad hominem after ad hominem.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by GrowingPains

You can't put down the axe, can you? Ad hominem after ad hominem.

I guess you either sleep with your computer or were you just being disingenuous again?

Good night.

[edjen01]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Sri Ramakrishna, the guru of the swami Vivekanada, preached Jesus, and when the swami Vivekanada came to America in 1893 to attend the Parliament of World religions in Chicago, the swami Vivekanada spoke about Jesus Christ. Sri Ramakrishna taught that God was one yet as a big body of water is one, but had different tributaries from which people drew water, so was the One God. People draw water from one source, yet call the water by different names, so it is with God. The Apostle Paul warned of another Jesus, another spirit, and another Gospel. Mohammad, spoke about a Jesus that the Muslims hold in high regard, and yet he is not "the" Jesus.
Jehovah Witnesses, teach a Jesus who is an archangel who was sacrificed, and the LDS, teaches a Jesus who was born from a god who was once a man like you and I. All go by the name of Jesus, but have different messages, which lead to different outcomes for those who follow them. Clothe and feed the poor? Everyone from Muslims, to Buddhists, and Rabbinical Jews do good deeds, but their messages lead to eternal punishment.



Every teacher, preacher or rabbi has fallen into some sort of stupidity, from the Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh, to the Rabbis arrested in N.J. sting. Yet, Osho, and the Rabbis don't corner the market on being thought of as perverts and crooks. Reason being, they didn't have their own television shows. There are Rabbis who have been arrested for all manner of crimes as the same with the gurus and swamis. Yet, you as the man on the street never really hear about them. In other words, since we had given these televangelists a license to kill on the airwaves we reap the harvest of mockery. You see Ed, John Q Citizen didn't grow up in a United Pentecostal Church, and therefore can't tell the difference from the two fornicating Jimmies, from a One God Pentecostal on the blue screen. They have no idea what is right or wrong. If it wasn't such a Biblical issue scripturally, then Paul wasted his time writing out 2nd Corinthians 11:1-33. The apostle defended his churches against those who preached another Jesus and another Gospel. Paul wasn't trying to make the Body of Christ user friendly and a grotesque postmodern monster. He was trying to show the strait and narrow way.




Down here we have full blown sinners who want me to get them "Kill Your Television" bumper stickers. They fall out when I tell them that Christians fight me like wolves to defend television, and not cutting the hair of my daughters. The transvestites, and transgenders down here see the symbol of a dress and long hair, yet the ones I have spoken with are amazed that we Christians fight over these truths. You see Ed, these people weren't raised United Pentecostal, most weren't even raised in a religious home. They come from the most populated places in America, the inner cities. The inner cities where people need a real change from the televangelist garbage on the screen. You see, what they deal with every day is different from colgate smiles and baby soft hands of Joel Olsteen. Joel, and the rest of the t.v. preachers don't know what the people are going through or dealing with. Most of the people in the cities are dealing with new age, eastern philosophy, and microwavable mega church. For the most part the young people want militant faith. We are experiencing a lot of young men and women going into Islam, if you gave them your list of dos and don’ts, they would turn around and ask you what is your problem. We have a large group of Rastafarians down here who don't cut their hair, shave, and the women never have their dreads exposed or wear pants. They wear long sleeves, and no jewelry.
Our Hasidic Jews follow also the same pattern, of outer dress, long sleeves, no jewelry, women cover their heads, and wear ankle length dresses. In their homes they have no televisions. Ed, sinners and people of the world expect religious people to look and act spiritual. What shocks them is when you act and look they do.



The difference is Ed, John Q, expects godly looking sisters, and men. But it was Tammy's hysterical antics, and her colgate smiling husband's flamboyant spendings that blew John Q Public away. By the time they got to see Jimbo, crying and being dragged away in cuffs, old John Q was really flipping and tripping.

I have traveled all over America, and spent time talking to the man in the street. They want something real, and if they were to dedicate their lives to a religion, they wouldn't be spending most their time trying to figure out how to find loopholes, to adapt to their secular life.

I guess that job is for those disgruntles who were raised in the religion?



I'm more than happy for you to show us how the Vedic writings of the Gita, compare to the teachings of the Gospel.

Paul didn't quote Aratus to align himself with the Greek poet. Paul was telling those on the Areopagus that they were too superstitious, and through ignorance they worship deities. Paul quotes Aratus to show how much they were in false worship. Paul was at no time trying to quote the Phaenomena to align Jesus Christ with Zeus and how man is his physical offspring.

Ed, I'm very interested to see how Krishna and Arjuna in the Gita were plagiarized by Jesus and His apostles.

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

dear sir.

i'll try to keep my answer short...in part because of the hi-jacking warning.

Anyone who helps ease the suffering of children, feed the hungry, help those who cannot help themselves, and bring the Kingdom from simply being words to being real life actions...I'm FOR...not against.

as for the "other Jesus" paragraphs...i have no idea what your point was. I do not believe that EM teaches any other Jesus...other than the one found in the Gospels.

As for who St.Paul quoted and why...my comment was simply to show that St.Paul did read and was aware of these writers...and since he read & studied them...then he could have been influenced them. To state that this could not happen is bad logic.

As for your travels and experiences...they are yours and i would never speak against them...i can only speak from mine. I find that most I speak with want little or nothing to do with religion...they do want something real...and find that all religions are lacking. I tend to agree with them. I do find that they are open to a real experience, with a real God, who really loves them.

In my personal journey...i have grown up in a religious organization that puts performance first...so my journey has not led me to look for loopholes...but rather a quest to really know a real God...IMHO...i find that religion is actually the search to reshape God in a image that is different then He really is.

anyway..I have enjoyed the discussion.