Peter's denial and its meaning

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: NOTurTypical

Love my name eh

We're friends, we're on a first name basis. That's how I see it.

a reply to: NOTurTypical

Im off tm... er

Today...

I got room for one more

a reply to: Wombocracy

Yet you're the one who can't even get basic Greek definitions of words correct. You're trying to sell "wept bitterly" in the text as weeping for joy when it says the exact opposite, that he wept with poignant sorrow.

You're just making crap up to fit your preconceived ideas. That's ludicrous.

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: NOTurTypical

Im off tm... er

Today...

I got room for one more

It's national Treason Day here in the US, it's time for BBQ and fireworks. We're celebrating the fact we're a bunch of ungrateful colonialists.

originally posted by: NOTurTypical

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: NOTurTypical

Love my name eh

We're friends, we're on a first name basis. That's how I see it.

ok but i prefer animosity...

*blinks*

no wait...




animoninity... ish...

hang on...



anonymity!

Thats the w0rd...

originally posted by: NOTurTypical

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: NOTurTypical

Im off tm... er

Today...

I got room for one more

It's national Treason Day here in the US, it's time for BBQ and fireworks. We're celebrating the fact we're a bunch of ungrateful colonialists.

what the hell does that mean..lol

a reply to: Akragon

Ok then, if you think I am condemning you I must be. I could have sworn I was just explaining how I was thinking about this but I will stop 'condemning' you and applaud you for dismissing things that I say with little consideration of the validity.

Honestly I have never cared about being agreed with and care more about accurately speaking what I believe to be correct. Disagreements are inevitable when you are me and not a concern, just something I make into a fun activity. I don't condemn anyone though. I just don't, not that I am the most polite person, I just don't condemn.

originally posted by: Wombocracy
a reply to: Raggedyman

You are of no consequence to me and only a source of occasional humor. There is nothing you could say that would make me think you are more than a follower of followers of the devil who just doesn't know it.

No consequence to you but worthy of replys anger and rebuttals
Sounds like I am of consequence to you
Also seems like I my points are valid and justify the harshest of treatments from you.

I really don't like to sit idly by and let fundamentalists twist scripture, I can't, me and you gnosisfaith, we are a team, Tom and Jerry, road runner and cayote

Let's go

originally posted by: Akragon

originally posted by: NOTurTypical

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: NOTurTypical

Im off tm... er

Today...

I got room for one more

It's national Treason Day here in the US, it's time for BBQ and fireworks. We're celebrating the fact we're a bunch of ungrateful colonialists.

what the hell does that mean..lol

It's a joke, 4th of July is Independence Day here in the United States, the day we celebrate telling King Charles of England to piss off and we were going solo. "Treason Day" is merely a joke, lol.

a reply to: Akragon

Whatever you say Aaron.

Err, I mean Akragon. (Whatever the hell that is, sounds like a laundry detergent)

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: Wombocracy

Peter was a fisherman...

Likely not a skilled swordsman... at the very least not compared to the roman solders who came to take him in the garden

No, the Romans didn't give a damn until Pilate sent Jesus to the Praetorium. Those were the temple guards of the High Priest.

Details, sorry.

originally posted by: Wombocracy

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: Wombocracy

Peter was a fisherman...

Likely not a skilled swordsman... at the very least not compared to the roman solders who came to take him in the garden

I guess you didn't notice I was being humorous when I said that. I find it unlikely myself but he was able to slice off an ear.

That takes a sharp sword and serious skill.

Or Peter was swinging for his neck and the guy tried to dodge to the left of right to miss the sword and it took the ear off.

Pure conjecture of course.

While I don't condemn I also don't have a problem with being abrasive if provoked by the ever present Fundamentalist, Literalist and arrogantly superior acting members of the Christian sect of the modern era.

I absolutely love it when members of a religion that preach humility act like complete fools and proudly flaunt it.

But I like understanding scripture more, and I am willing to look for the meaning of certain things that I feel are misunderstood. Peter's denial is a perfect example of a misunderstood passage i.m.o.

originally posted by: NOTurTypical
a reply to: Akragon

Whatever you say Aaron.

Err, I mean Akragon. (Whatever the hell that is, sounds like a laundry detergent)

LMAO!!!

kitty cleaner?

originally posted by: NOTurTypical

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: Wombocracy

Peter was a fisherman...

Likely not a skilled swordsman... at the very least not compared to the roman solders who came to take him in the garden

No, the Romans didn't give a damn until Pilate sent Jesus to the Praetorium. Those were the temple guards of the High Priest.

Details, sorry.

Untrained as Guards?

originally posted by: Wombocracy

While I don't condemn I also don't have a problem with being abrasive if provoked by the ever present Fundamentalist, Literalist and arrogantly superior acting members of the Christian sect of the modern era.

I absolutely love it when members of a religion that preach humility act like complete fools and proudly flaunt it.

But I like understanding scripture more, and I am willing to look for the meaning of certain things that I feel are misunderstood. Peter's denial is a perfect example of a misunderstood passage i.m.o.

It's not misunderstood if you go by what Luke said. It's cut and dry, it's only misunderstood if you ignore what Luke said and shoehorn your own feelings into the text that are the exact opposite of what the writer said. Pikos in the Greek and has only 1 definition, a bitter or poignant sorrow.

You're ignoring that and trying to sell everyone the opposite, that's deceit. Well. It wasn't deceit the first time, you admitted you never looked at the original language. But one you were told what pikos means you didn't change your understanding of the narrative and doubled down on error. So believe whatever you want, you're free to do it, but something you cannot do is re-write 2000 year old Greek to justify your ideas.

Furthermore, you attack anyone personally who disagrees with you, nobody here has attacked you personally or mocked you. That's a telltale sign that your way too emotionally invested in what you're saying, that's your pride being dented. Not any of ours, I pray you come to your senses on this matter and come back with an attitude of scholarship and meeting us all here at the round table of ideas. It's not some fault on your part that you weren't aware of the Greek, it's not that big of a deal to lash out in anger over.

a reply to: Akragon

What do you mean untrained? I have no idea what level the guard was, or anything like that, but the Romans weren't concerned with Jesus at all until Pilate sent Him to the Praetorium. The guards that came to arrest him were the temple guards of the high priest Ciaphas.

Just pointing that out, that's all.

a reply to: NOTurTypical

Said religion was supposed to be non violent lol...

Thus... the guards which came to get Jesus were likely roman

the High priest was a pawn in the roman empire...

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: NOTurTypical

Said religion was supposed to be non violent lol...

Thus... the guards which came to get Jesus were likely roman

the High priest was a pawn in the roman empire...

Dude, Pilate didn't even know who Jesus was when he was initially brought to him, and the Romans didn't answer to the Jewish high priest. The Praetorian guards were the guards of Pilate. They were his personal bodyguards, the high priest had his own guards, the temple guards.

It's an irrelevant point, but just realize the Romans didn't give a damn about Jesus until Pilate sent him to be beaten in the Praetorium the next day.

a reply to: Akragon

Read verse 10 of John chapter 18, the guard who Peter struck was a "servant of the High Priest", they were temple guards.

Source

Bada Bing! You own me a coke, or maybe some tasty moose jerky.