|
Understanding through Discussion |
|
|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
| Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
| Author | Topic: Right Behavior Inherits Eternal Life | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
ringo Member (Idle past 442 days)  Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
ringo Member (Idle past 442 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
jaywill writes: You apparently don't want to draw a logical conclusion from your interpretation of the passage. Let's look at the logic:
... this is not the first Bible Study I ever had, Okay? It's your first Bible Study here, which is why I've been trying to tell you that almost everything you have posted is off-topic. Please un-bunch your panties. There are people around here who aren't nearly as gentle as I am. 
I think at this point, I would only want to ask you how seriously do you take the book of Revelation? Start a new topic.
I believe that Matthew has something to do with Revelation and Daniel has something to do with the other two books. Maybe so, but it looks to me like you're using a pet interpretation of Revelation and Daniel to contradict what Matthew says. Be very careful about going too far afield to find your context.
Do you want to isolate Matthew 25:31-46 from all other prophetic passages? I don't look at Matthew 25 primarily as a prophetic passage. It's a passage that shows the difference between professing a belief and living a Christian life. You noted the preceding parables yourself. It's primarily a teaching passage. The fact that Jesus mentioned judgement doesn't make it central to the lesson.
I think the "Bible Study" should consider other portions of the Bible and how they relate together. Only within the prescribed topic. You are pushing a pet interpretation about prophecy, which you will find some around here don't accept. A premise that your co-debaters don't accept is not going to contribute much to the discussion.
Are only the direct quotations of Jesus meaningful to you? Certainly they are more meaningful. That whole Son of God thing, and all? He ought to have known what He was talking about, don't you think?
Do you feel that the surrounding comments of the gospel writers are error prone, faulty, full of mistakes.... Of course they are. Anything written by humans is bound to be imperfect. We have lots of threads about that. Feel free to browse.
... and generally messed up what Jesus taught? Now, that's a different question. Sure, it's possible that Jesus might not have been quoted accurately. But His teachings have to be looked at on their own, aside from the recoreded words. Do they make sense? Does loving your neighbour sound like a good idea? How would our lives be improved if we were at constant warfare with our neighbours? If the teachings make sense, if they work for us, then we can conclude that the teacher knew what He was talking about. We don't go at it backwards. We don't assume that the Bible is 100% true and what it says must be true, even if it doesn't work.
... what I quoted to you about "As many as received Him ..." in John's gospel. Does that comment of the Apostle John have no significance for you? As I said before, those who truly "receive" Him will do His will - they will behave as He wants them to. If there is no outward manifestation of the "reception", then it is a sham.
Could you please show me the exact words by which you derive that the goats claimed to have received Him? I did. Here they are again:
quote: They claimed that because they had not mistreated Him in person, they had done nothing wrong. They clearly had heard the teaching because they quoted it word for word. They must have thought they had complied with His wishes, else why would they think they didn't deserve punishment?
Where in the passage do they give "lip service" to the plan of God? They believed that they had complied with God's plan and didn't deserve punishment. They believed that they only had to say "Lord, Lord" and He would be impressed. That is lip service. They believed that they only had to take care of Him if He came to thier door in person. But He made it plain that they were responsible for all of His brothers, all of their neighbours.
... if you try to develop a teaching that the disciples are never to discern anything about the motives of people.... We are all welcome to discern what we can about the motives of people. And one of the ways we do that is by how they behave, as opposed to what they profess. "By their fruits ye shall know them." We are not allowed to judge who is in compliance with God's will and who is not. Therefore, we have to treat everybody as if they were Jesus Himself. That's practically the definition of the "brotherhood of man".
You seem to want to use "Judge not that you be not judged" as a means of destroying the boundary between those called out and those not called out. I'm sorry if I haven't been clear. That is absolutely what I'm saying: We are not allowed to judge who is "called out" and who is not. For all practical purposes, ther is no boundary. We have to treat everybody as if they were Jesus Himself. No elitism. No special treatment for professing Christians. No separate "third group". Total equality under God.
So your Bible Study could be called "No Justification By Faith." It isn't "my" Bible study, it's purpledawn's (and I expect a slap from her every time I post in it ). If it was my Bible study, I'd call it "No Justification by Phony Profession of Faith - Only By Visible Deeds". Catchy, no? People who think they have all the answers usually don't understand the questions.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
ringo Member (Idle past 442 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
jar writes: love yourself. I don't forget, I just leave it out for brevity. I suppose I should learn to put it in, for the sake of others.  People who think they have all the answers usually don't understand the questions.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
ringo Member (Idle past 442 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
ringo Member (Idle past 442 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
jaywill writes: Before you break your arm patting yourself on the back  Look again. That ain't my arm.
I did say that there was more than one judgment. And that would be, guess what... another topic. We're only talking about one judgement in this topic.
As far as you being a gentlier kinder type? I can play hardball if you want. Throw 'em as hard as you like. Shall I roll up my sleeves?
But for the record, whatever others wrote here, I never said that the works of those justified by faith either do not matter or are not judged. So your favorite strawman won't work as far as I'm concerned. It's not a strawman. I'm saying that as far as judgement goes, there is no difference between "those justified by faith" and anybody else. One group, to be divided into two at the judgement.
I said that the judgment of the works of believes has nothing to do with their eternal redemption. It has to do with their reward or discipline during the 1,000 year millennial kingdom. Yet another topic.
One error that you have is that you are applying a judgment of the living before the Millennial Age (#2) and interpreting it as the final judgment before the eternal age (#3). Start a topic and back that up. (I have to warn you though, I'm bored to tears with all that "millenium" stuff, so I likely wouldn't participate.)
Where are the dead mentioned in Matthew 25:31-46? Do you assume that "all the nations" includes those resurrected from the dead too? I don't know of any nations where the dead are granted citizenship. Do you?
Why? Does it ever occur to you that you might be taking the term "Judgement Day" a little too literally? It seems to me if I was God (though as far as you know I'm not ), I'd judge everybody as soon as they die instead of letting them rot in the ground for some arbitrary period of time. But that's just me.
Now, where would you like to be slapped? Purpledawn can slap me. You haven't demonstrated that ability yet. People who think they have all the answers usually don't understand the questions.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
ringo Member (Idle past 442 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Whatever brings out a weakness in your interpretation is "another topic." No. Another topic is another topic. And this one is about over. Any weaknesses you see in my interpretations, you're welcome to "expose" in another topic. People who think they have all the answers usually don't understand the questions.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024
