Right Behavior Inherits Eternal Life

I believe the earth goes around the sun. Do I have to live it or can I just believe it? Jesus died for my sins, I'm going to heaven. I don't need to live it to believe it. Living it is a possible consequence of it. But belief isn't defined by it.A person may live their belief to a greater or lesser extent. Does this mean they believe to a greater or lesser extent? Patently not.And how does one know if someone is living their belief or not? A chap who steps over a tramp may not taken to be a christian - but he may be stepping over the tramp after walking away at the last minute from a schoolyard where he was planning to sell crack to kids. Living your belief is relative to where you were before. And nobody knows where a person is coming from. Arbitary actions chosen as a measure of living your belief are just that. Arbitary

You will get quite a bit of information from C.R.Stam. The website says that "Pastor Stam gives the reader an in-depth look at the major differences between Prophecy and the Mystery. Every Grace believer should read this work. This book, more than any other, has been used to bring people to an understanding of the distinctive ministry of the Apostle Paul."Consider the way that Peter (The "Rock" of the Catholic Church) and Paul (The Apostle to the Gentiles) differed. Click on the link to CR Stam and read more of the many things that differ between the Gospel of the Kingdom and the Revelation of the Mystery to the Gentiles.

When I first got saved, I had seen numerous evangelists (including Pat Robertson) on television and radio. I was unimpressed with any of them, and in fact was not even impressed with the one at church. (although I think that God used him, much as God used a donkey, to convey a message) I WAS impressed by a man named Anson McDanial. Anson had a spark about him....he had no agenda other than love for his fellow humans..and he was the one who prayed for me when I finally stepped to the altar. Anson later left that church when the place started turning weird, but before he left he told me one thing I shall never forget: "Always trust Jesus, Craig."In fact, I don't believe that I chose to become a believer. I believe that I was chosen...by God...through people used as vessels of the Holy Spirit. I also believe that this phenomenon is not limited to Protestantism or even to religious Christianity.There is deep meaning in scriptures if one takes the time to allow the message to sink in. Take as an example the verse that says Some would argue at first glance that this means that although a majority, if not all people are invited to know God, a relative few will actually know Him.Another way to look at this scripture, however, is to say that a majority are called and a minority are chosen.As a nation, Israel is a minority of people, yet they are the chosen ones.Getting even deeper, however, it could be argued that ALL are called, yet ONE was chosen. That one was and is Jesus Christ.It is said that the road to destruction is broad, while the path to salvation is narrow. Many travel the road to destruction. Few find the narrow path to salvation. As far as people go, what is the largest finite number that could describe the people? (answer: Whosoever...in other words, who so ever exists.)
What is the smallest finite number that can describe a person? (Answer: One.)And just so this also fits in with behavior, lets examine what Jesus said: In this context, the term "whoever" is addressed to only one person: The reader of that scripture.(Or...back then, the hearer of it.)Works and behavior are a part of our salvation, yet these works and behavior are not done by our will but by His will working through us."And it really is that simple."This message has been edited by Charismaniac, 11-16-2005 04:14 AM

---

Matt 10:39-40 "Whoever finds his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for my sake will find it. He who receives you receives me, and he who receives me receives the one who sent me."Jesus Christ
Heb 4:12-13-- For the word of God is living and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart. Nothing in all creation is hidden from God's sight Everything is uncovered and laid bare before the eyes of him to whom we must give account.
Holy Spirit,speaking through the Apostle Paul

Hi. I disagree. We can believe they're his actual words, as four people corroborating.I think that if the bible was God's special exclusive word, then you would be right that we could presume it is his words, aswell as the rest.But infact I am looking at it without any posited absolute. I am infact saying that the actual Gospel message shows signs of being different/contrary to later books. As with the Revelation example.What matters to Jesus, in the Gospel, is the Gospel. He doesn't confirm anything else, he merely says that he will send experts in the law of Moses, and come back again.So infact, what is likely? That if the Jesus-story is true, four people, with imperfect memory, tried to agree on the events, WITHOUT considering the rest of the bible? [Please assume the bible didn't exist when I say this, as I am simply looking at the record of the living Christ].I think it is definitely possible that four people arrived at some sort of truth, and that those four accounts are worth more because of this unique attribute. All the other bible books don't even attampt corroboration.Ofcourse, I cannot prove the premise that they did arrive at truth. All I have is belief in the credence of the Gospel, over the other biblical texts. The Gospel can be believed, without choosing scripture, but rather, it is not needed that God must ensure scripture. My own suspicion is that he simply foresaw a life-guide in the bible. WHo's to say my suspicion is incorrect?Why take bible exclusivity as valid and okay, but not my more logical position?You say I am cutting and choosing. Fair point. But the bible-compilers done a bigger job than that when choosing their scripture. I am simply taking it further and saying that infact there are contradictions, and therefore I am supplying a rational explanation for this. It's because men chose the scripture for the canon, instead of providing the Gospel message and obeying the demands of Christ. I suspect that the Revelation account is an addage, and the post-Gospel letters highly biased.This message has been edited by mike the wiz, 11-16-2005 08:18 AM

Jesus said:

quote:

---

Mat 25:40 And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.

---

If you step over a tramp in the doorway, you are stepping over Jesus in the doorway. Does that not suggest that your belief in Him is less than sincere?

---

People who think they have all the answers usually don't understand the questions.

It's the least of these my brethern'. What 'my brethern' is biblically, would have to be figured out. Note that when he is talking to the goats a second later he says 'the least of these'. Nothing to do with brethern.An insincere belief. What is that actually? I believe something but I do so insincerely. Surely it can only mean in fact 'don't believe'. How can you believe "the world is round" insincerely? Either you believe it or you don't

While I appreciate your effort to arrive at a level of belief based on rationale and logic, it must, I think, suffer from the exact same kind problems that occur with any subjective evaluation. Namely, it is not an absolute evalutation. The problem with that, as I see it that there is no way of telling how close to the absolute. The question then arises: what objective benefits can this subjective evaluation hold for me? Looking at one example of where this naturally leads: The Gospels corroborate under the following conditions and limitations:- imperfect memory, like you say, and probably made more so over time. No one could remember in the kind of verbatim way we take the gospels to report Jesus' words - no even by corroboration. The best we could say was that the writers reported the 'spirit' of what he was saying.-imperfect understanding of what Jesus said in the first place causing problems to the above. Committee style decision may now be accounting for whatever corroboration there may be- 2 writers weren't eyewitnesses to events. We must reduce our corrobortion from 4 writers to 2. We can't be sure that even the two are independant corroborations. Matthew influenced John to sway things to his recollection? Why not? Who knows?- lack of education, experience and skill in the field of accurate transmission means it is safe to assume that no one was taking accurate notes as Jesus talked.- we have no reason to think the writers didn't have their own axe to grind. If, as appears necessary, some kind of pre-discussion went into deciding what to leave in and what to leave out who is to know how those decisions were arrived at and whether the decision making was good, bad or indifferent. Lets assume you've had the pleasure of committees coming to decisions. Peer pressure, confusion, hazy memories. To be expectedThe trouble with a reasoned approach Mike, is that it must be founded upon an extremely large series of unknowns - some of which I've touched on here. That the gospel 'corroborates' means in no way that it can be taken as accurately recording Jesus' words. The opposite is far more likely. It could corroborate for a myriad of reasons. Which is why one must end up with the statement, as you honestly do: But 'some kind of truth' is, I think, worthless - for want of an objective way of telling which bit of it is true and which isn't. Corroboration in and of itself doesn't imply the honesty, integrity or accuracy of the recording. Your logical position would I suppose, have to admit that it can't actually point to a single sentence that Jesus said and demonstrate in an objective, absolute way: "He said that - we can take it as accurate and true". Truths are objective, not subjective.(Edited to reduce the a somewhat combative tone.)This message has been edited by iano, 16-Nov-2005 08:12 PM

I'm talking about the profession of a belief. If you claim to believe, but there is no outward manifestation of that belief in the Real World, why should anybody believe you are sincere? So, how do you decide in the Real World who is your brother? On the No-tramp-is-my-brother Principle? Or on a tramp-by-tramp basis? Are you going to let the tramp starve to death while you're figuring out whether or not he's your brother?

quote:

---

Luk 10:33 But a certain Samaritan, as he journeyed, came where he was: and when he saw him, he had compassion on him,
Luk 10:34 And went to him, and bound up his wounds, pouring in oil and wine, and set him on his own beast, and brought him to an inn, and took care of him.
Luk 10:35 And on the morrow when he departed, he took out two pence, and gave them to the host, and said unto him, Take care of him; and whatsoever thou spendest more, when I come again, I will repay thee.
Luk 10:36 Which now of these three, thinkest thou, was neighbor unto him that fell among the thieves?

---

Did the Samaritan check for ID before he decided to help? No. He assumed that the man was his brother.When Jesus says to you:

quote:

---

Mat 25:45 ... Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me.
Mat 25:46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.

---

is your best defense going to be, "But, but, but... I didn't think they were my brothers"?

---

People who think they have all the answers usually don't understand the questions.

It depends I suppose on what I profess to believe. I believe for example that Jesus is my Lord and my saviour - who has done that despite the fact that I am a sinner and cannot do as he does (never does the wrong thing, always does the right thing)I do believe that he instructs me on how to live my life in relation to others. That includes good deeds. I don't believe my salvation is affected in the least by the level to which I adhere to his instructions. The motivation for carrying out his instruction is other than to do with attaining or holding onto salvation. You'll notice that I've changed the word command to instruction here. I believe that command is law and that I, as a believer am freed from the the demands of the law. Because unlike and unbeliever, I am 'in' him. I am not, nor do I want to be, freed from the demands of his grace.I could go on but you may see my point. My belief is sincere. It is not the belief that you would try and impose on me. That's your belief about what I should believe according to your interpretation of whichever bit of the bible you happen to hold to be relevant this week Don't get to het up on the brethern/no brethern point. I mentioned out of interest. There is some reason for the exclusion of the word brethern when the goats are addressed. What it is I don't know but it can't be ignored. I don't help all the people I could possibly help Ringo. It has nothing to do with them being considered brothers. There are reason for it: chief amongst which is that I am a sinner - not Christ. And not even Christ helped everyone he could have.This message has been edited by iano, 16-Nov-2005 09:40 PM

I comfort my own fragile-conscience that my gospel-faith (not behavior) alone is evidence for my Salvation; provided:
1) I am a bankrupt-sin-wretch (Rom 7.24) that was "born again" into Christ's Spirit of Life (Rom 8.2):
2) ...am assimilated into Christ’s death burial and resurrection
3) ...and bear the marks of His Cross in me (Galatians 6)Rom 6:4-6 Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection: Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.As a bankrupt-sin-wretch, at least 8 or 10 unique *spiritual laws* (below) "war in my members" so that my *free will* (if there be such a thing) seems completely obselete.Rom 3:27 By what LAW? of WORKS? Nay: but by the LAW of FAITH.
Rom 7:2 For the woman ...the LAW of HER HUSBAND.
Rom 7:22 I delight in the LAW of GOD after the inward man:
Rom 7:23 I see ANOTHER LAW in my members (LAW of SATAN?? LAW of PRIDE??), warring against the LAW of MY MIND, and bringing me into captivity to the LAW of SIN which is in my members.
Rom 7:25 ...with the mind I myself serve the LAW of GOD.
Rom 8:2 For the LAW of the SPIRIT OF LIFE in CHRIST JESUS hath made me free from the LAW of SIN and (*LAW OF*) DEATH.
Rom 9:31 But Israel, which followed after the LAW of RIGHTEOUSNESS, hath not attainedAlso,
LAW of Moses/Jews (Rom 10.5):,
LAW of the Gentiles (Rom 2.14-15)
LAW of Love (inferred by Rom 13.10)Technically, I view being able to exclaim: "I couldn't go to hell if I wanted to!" If Christ's spirit were saying that within me and not my sin.Thus for my "right-behavior(s)" somehow EARNING me Eternal Salvation, NO WAY! Its the cross-atoning-resurrection-gospel alone that I hope will save me.

has no one posted this yet? clearly it's the philosophy present here...

quote:

---

James 2:17-26
Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone. Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works. Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble. But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead? Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar? Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect? And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God. Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only. Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot justified by works, when she had received the messengers, and had sent them out another way? For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.

---

faith shows itself through one's actions. if it's not showing, it's dead. one brings the other.

---

אָרַח

Quite a number of the verses you quoted are from Romans 7 which deal with a man struggling under the weight of Law on him. He is a man who realises a) that the law is good and b) he can't keep it c)he is in need of deliverence from it.The man in Romans 7 is not a Christian. The man in Romans 7 is a man on whom the law is carrying out it's work - to be a schoolteacher to lead the man to Christ. Which is precisely where the chapter ends up.Paul is describing the process which brings a man to Christ. He has earlier in that same chapter (with the wedding analogy) spoken of how the Christian is freed from the law (of sin and death - the rules and regs law) I agree completely that it is by faith not by works that a man is saved. Yet Paul and others exhort us to flee from sin, put to death the deeds of the flesh, let not sin reign in your mortal flesh etc etc. One cannot be exhorted to do something if one plays no part in so doing. Free will therefore, I would argue, is anything but obsolete. Whereas before, free will was dead unto God (as witnessed by the second half of Romans 7, unable to resist sin) it is now alive unto God and HAS the ability to resist sin. Not that it will always succeed but it can succeed. Otherwise the exhortations as to how we should live are pointless

In regards to free will.....if I went and joined the Army tomorrow, (not that they would take a 46 year old phat guy) I would be surrendering my free will at that point. I would be a bondservant to the U.S. Army. When Paul mentions that a war rages within him, he realizes that it is not he that is involved. He could be arguably said to freely choose Christ on a moment by moment basis, thus allowing Christ in him to win the battle, but I liken it more to the Army analogy. Once you give your life to God, you don't continue to freely choose any more...you are signed up!

This is terrible! Is this what you get from Romans?The one who can't keep the Law needs deliverance from himself, not the Law!Rom 7:24 "O, wretched man that I am, who shall deliver me from this body of death!"Rom 7:14 "For we know that the Law is spiritual, but I am carnal, sold under sin."Rom 7: 12 "Therefore the Law is holy, and the commandment holy, just, and good."Again "O, wretched man that I am, who shall deliver me from this body of death!" Not "Who shall deliver me from the Law!"Christ sure didn't determine to deliver from the Law. Christ determined, according to Paul, to deliver us from ourselves so that..."...so that the righteous requirement of the Law might be fulfilled in us, who do not walk according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit" (Rom 8:4). ...edited for punctuationThis message has been edited by truthlover, 11-17-2005 08:27 AM

An automaton in other words? Which to me seemed to be the precise thing God ensuring he would avoid when he gave us free will in the first place??Why are we exhorted so often not to let sin reign if we have no choice in the matter. Surely exhortation can be only addressed to an exhortable person.