Importance of Original Sin

Given your charge that the Gospel of John is not representative of the life and words of Jesus, why don't you squeeze into your "better things to do" the rationale about that?I'm not holding my breath.

So, as it stands, things written in the Gospel that don't step on poor jar's toes, maybe Jesus said those things.Things jar doesn't like though, well that's obviously some mean conspiracy of someone else. Jesus never said anything jar would have any problem with.This is the school of "Jesus didn't say anything I don't agree with." Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

I've covered that before, in this very thread IIRC.The Gospel of John has always been recognized as presenting a whole different Jesus than is found in the other three Gospels. That's certainly not new news or anything that wouldn't get covered in even the most basic Bible study.The first three Gospels, the Synoptic Gospels, are called that because they present much of the same information and a relatively common picture and caricature of Jesus, his works and his life. In John though the Jesus character is quite different, does more talking about himself, makes more claims of divinity, does miracles not as a service to others but rather more like a kid bragging and showing off.This is not something that is not taught in even a more conservative seminary.

So John has some emphasis on some things not emphasized in the synoptics.SO WHAT ?Your artificial demand is that rote repetition HAS to be across the board.
Luke says some things not found in the other Gospels.I have never been too impressed with this "We like the Synoptics! We reject John's Gospel" rationale.You'll have to end up doing that same thing as soon as you choke on something Jesus did or said in the synoptics.That the four Gospels present four slightly different angles of this One profound and wonderful Person is not surprising. Well, my experience is that when I point out to you various things spoken by Christ or the evangelists writing about Christ, you'll be stuck with having to explain them away too.Trying to kick the Gospel of John out of the canon of reliable books on Jesus will not do for you what you think it will.Anyway, its another subject along the line of textural criticism.

quote:

---

This is not something that is not taught in even a more conservative seminary.

---

I am just a lover of the Scriptures who has been reading and living by them for a while.Theological Seminary ? ?As I have said before. Some people go to theological seminary to find God.
Other people go to theological seminary to get away from God.
They figure that if they can get away from God in a theological seminary they can get away from God everywhere.My country is the US. And you can pick your theological seminary from a wide spectrum of flavors. If you want to be a card carrying anti-theist with a doctor of divinity, you can do that too.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Okay folks. So let's go run and hide in the Synoptic Gospels from the claims of Jesus in the Gospel according to John.Let's go get some relief from "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." in John.That's conspiracy to make Jesus something more than what He said about Himself. Let's go hide out in the Synoptics where Jesus is not God Himself become a man. Matthew, that's a good place for us to hide out from Christ as God incarnate.Then we come to this: Are you expecting to say " Whew !! I just feel better already ? None of this pesky John stuff about Jesus being God in the flesh. This is more like it! "The synoptic Matthew records that all authority in the universe is given to the hands of Jesus, who is with the disciples until the end of the age - commanding them to plunge people of all nations into the Father - Son - Holy Spirit God.Are you expecting to now be relieved ? Will you now say " Whew! That is more what Jesus said and that is better than John " ?Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

That's quite a claim - God has singled you out and you are already saved. I somehow doubt that you'll be the judge of that, but either way, you've just outed yourself - again - as a charlatan peddling snake oil.

When a Christian gives testimony that he has received mercy it usually means that he was not BORN a believer. I certainly was not. I remember laughing at jokes about the crucifixion. Though it bothered my conscience some to do so.I recall being quite outspoken in my senior year high school English class. I expressed my disdain for a song about being "Washed in the blood of the Lamb." You see the teacher was using the lyrics of a hymn to ridicule the Christian faith. And I took the lead among all the students to hardily agree with him."Please ! That's ENOUGH!" is like something I recall saying out loud.Then a day came when I called out "Jesus, take me home. I am tired." And that night this poor lost wandering sinner did receive mercy. The moment I called "Jesus" with the intention to contact and to be heard by Jesus, with deliberateness, even with desperation - God Almighty became real to me.Before meeting God in this way I also felt like a paranoid android. Somewhat human but not wholly so, I felt. I didn't realize that there was a whole dimension to life I was missing. But I often felt that something was missing. I knew human life just had have something more in it then I was enjoying.I found out what the missing dimension was the night that I called out to Jesus to take me as a lost sheep. But I was not always a lover of Christ. I was like a defensive and paranoid android - like Marvin the Paranoid Android saying with cynicism - "Don't tell me about divine life. I don't know any divine life."The unborn again man can be like the paranoid android.Now because I like to confirm what I say with Scripture - here's a verse -The Gospel of John - 1:4 " In Him was life, and the life was the light of men." I got to find out that that was true. Years before that verse would mean absolutely nothing to me. Then I called out to Jesus to meet Jesus. I was subdued by God. Eventually I look at the Gospel of John and that verse now becomes meaningful to me."I understand that now. I know what John is talking about now. In Him, in Jesus Christ was life. And the life was the light of men. I have experienced that. I touched Jesus and touched life - the Person of eternal life - God. And touching God the lights within went ON !! "The mercy that God had on me He will have on others too.
Just as the mercy God had on others one day He came to me.He anoints my head with oil, surely. But it is not snake oil. It is the oil of the Holy Spirit of God.

You certainly enjoy your sermons, but you actually claim to be saved; that, we are taught by the very book you misinterpret, is not a matter for you to decide.

"Whole different" ??These are generalizations run amok.The disciple John, like Peter or Paul, pioneered deep into the experience of living Christ. These pioneers wrote out from their priorities to relate to the rest of us the essence of following Jesus Christ.The Apostle John's writings are as if from downtown New Jerusalem. From the depths of his pioneering experience he drew up under inspiration that portion of the recollection of Jesus that he wants to pass on to the world. Matthew and Mark do the same. So does Luke.Matthew being one of the twelve.
Mark probably being a young attendent and associate of the Apostle Peter.
Luke, the physician and traveling companion of the Apostle Paul.John being a disciple finally writing to be an express apologist against early Gnostic attacks against the Christian Gospel.This illustration has been helpful to some.
Peter was called as a fisherman casting the nets.
Paul was called as a tent maker, setting up tents of local churches.John was called as a net mender. When Jesus saw him John and his brother were mending the nets. That is fixing the broken nets and making them stronger.Sure, John has a certain different flavor from the Synoptics. His burden is different. He is writing in a way to bring the disciples back to the beginning."Come back to the basics. Jesus Christ is God as a man. And Jesus Christ is divine life to us believers."This is repairing the damaged fishing nets. This is bringing the Christian church back to what was there in the beginning. It was to LIVE in Christ. It was to live through Christ. It was to let Jesus Christ LIVE out from the innermost being of the believers.John pioneered deep into the experience of living in oneness with the Spirit of Christ. But so also did Matthew and Paul.Please people. The four lagged stool of the Gospel has a design from the sovereignty of God. You have three somewhat similar legs plus one sturdy leg set a little apart from the other three.Do not be impressed with excuses to amputate away the Gospel of John from the New Testament. I agree with that. The Gospel of John ALSO presents a critical completing picture of this most profound Person.This is God-man. This is a profound Person. This is not so simple of a person. This is the Son of God. And not just John says so. The Synoptics say so.Some may protest - "But Jesus is more a regular man in the Gospel of Luke." Sure, and in John a chapter about how this Word Who became flesh was tired and thirsty. He was there as a man speaking with a Samaritan woman at a well - asking her for a drink.How are you going to argue that John's Gospel is THAT different ?Matthew is one of the Synoptics. Matthew records Jesus teaching that He was the God of the Old Testament now here become a man.Right here: This is the Synoptic Matthew now. Jesus is claiming to be the God of the Old Testament.

quote:

---

"It was always God Himself who cared for Jerusalem, as a bird flutters over her young (Isaiah 31:5; Deut. 32:11-12). Hence, when the Lord Jesus said, "I desired to gather your children together, the way a hen gathers her brood under her wings," He indicated that He was God Himself." [footnote 23:37(1) - Matthew 23:37, Recovery Version]

---

So you have John at one point emphasizing Jesus the tired and thirsty man resting and requesting water. And you have Synoptic Matthew retelling how Jesus proclaimed that He was the God of the Tenach now become a man.There is no profit in laboring to separate John from the Synoptics and vica versa. A kid bragging and showing off ?This is really stupid beyond belief that you would feed on such worthless junk food. Jesus performed "signs" that pointed to His ministry, His nature which are very profound. And a picture is worth many words.And what sign or miracle would you single out in John that is so much MORE "bragging and showing off"?The RESURRECTION occurs in all four Gospels. What conservative theological seminary has a text book teaching that Jesus was like a kid bragging and showing off ?Fuller ?
Gordan Cromwell ?
Dallas ?What class in what conservative seminary contained the statement that Jesus, in John's Gospel, was like a kid bragging and showing off ?Maybe you are the "kid" here bragging and showing off.
You have many supporters here because there are many unbelievers and skeptics on this Forum.I'd like to see you take this kind of stuff over to a Discussion Forum like CARM (Christian Apologetics and Researh Ministry) . http://www.carm.org and see how far you get.Jar, you still come off like a big mouth troll with lots of buddies nearby. Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Hey, Sorry if you feel that you don't have anything worth telling anyone.Point out the misinterpretation specifically, just ONE.
Put forth a better interpretation and I'll consider it.I think the word of God is infallible. I do not think my interpretations are infallible. So if you have a specific example, show me.If you're too lazy to rise to the challenge to do so, then thats your problem. Don't wait for someone else to do it. YOU do it.One bad interpreation and your better take on it - give me one.
Who knows? I might agree on some case. And if I don't I'll let you know why I don't.

Okay, I re-read this charge.Is this your example of my bad interpretation of a Bible passage ?
Well - WHICH ONE ?? I assume you mean one that I have used somewhere in this discussion.I will withhold my "sermon" until you put forth WHICH passage I abused in so saying that I was saved.Oh, SERMON - Definition on the Street = Something that you don't want to hear someone saying, basically.But you turn on the TV probably and hear "sermons" about which car to buy, which movie to see, which beer to drink.So I count your reference to "sermons" to just mean you don't want to hear anyone speak enthusiastically about the New Testament.

Your misinterpretations and misrepresentations have been more than adequately exposed by several here in this thread alone, there's no need for me to regurgitate them for you.My current point is that you claim that you are saved; I say that you have no right to say that; that judgement is reserved for someone else is it not?

Are you offended ? Is that the problem? Are you offended that I have some assurance of salvation ?First let me say this: I may be assured of my salvation. That does not mean that I am assured of reward or that some discipline doesn't await me at Christ's second coming.But let's take the assurance of salvation. Doesn't the New Testament say this -

quote:

---

"For by grace you have been saved through faith, and this not of yourselves; it is the gift of God.

​

Not of works that no one should boast. etc." (Eph. 2:8,9)

---

Paul tells the believers here "YOU ... HAVE ... BEEN ... SAVED ...".
So where is the arrogance if the condition of faith in Christ is present ?Doesn't the Apostle John inform his audience of believers that they HAVE - HAVE - eternal life ?

quote:

---

"I have written these things to you that you may know that you have eternal life, to you who believe into the name of the Son of God." (1 JOhn 5:13)

---

John didn't say here "That you may hope" or "That you may wish" or "That you may see how it turns out" or "That you may cautiously assume, but not be TOO sure there!"He said " ... that you may KNOW that you have eternal life, to you who believe into the name of the Son of God." Where's the arrogance for one who has received the witness of the Holy Spirit to confess that he knows that he is saved - that he has eternal life ?You may protest - "But everyone does not know and some may be saved who do not know."Okay, I can agree with that. But should that be the normal Christian experience? Should it not be the case that we be assured rather than ambiguous?Do not mistake ambiguity for humility.Then you may further protest - "But Paul said he did not consider himself to have obtained in Philippians. So how can YOU say that you are saved ? "Yes, Paul did say in Philippians that he did not account himself to have obtained. But that was not concerning eternal salvation. That was concerning reward for service.And at that was in the middle of his ministry. In the end of his ministry he said he fought the good fight and finished the course in the epistles to Timothy.So where is the arrogance of being assured of eternal redemption ?
Where is the pride in confession that one knows that he is saved ?Look now carefully at this passage.

quote:

---

" Much more then, having been justified in His blood, we will be saved through Him from the wrath.

​

For if we, being enemies, were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more we will be saved in His life, having been reconciled ..." (Romans 5:9-10)

---

1.) In terms of being justified it is in the past. Why can not the Christian say "I am SAVED from not being JUSTIFIED before God, by the blood of Jesus" ?2.) In terms of the future why cannot the Christian say - "Because of this justification I will be SAVED from the wrath of God" ? Much more I will be saved from the coming wrath of God which is in the future.Why can I not say that?3.) In terms of being a enemy of God, why can I not say "I am reconciled to God. I am no longer an enemy to God needing to be reconciled. I am saved from that" ?4.) Why can't I also add " Much more than that I am in the ongoing process of being SAVED in the realm of His eternal life which indwells me" ?Much more, I am currently being saved.So in this passage of Romans 5:9-10 I have full ground to say -1.) I was saved.
2.) I will be saved.
3.) I am currently being saved.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

How can I be offended by a delusion? I'm marginally amused though.As for the rest, I think you need to express a little humility; going around claiming to all and sundry that you're saved is unlikely to impress your Saviour who is, apparently, the final and only judge.

Is that the best you can do ?"Well its all a delusion anyway so why SHOULD I be offended?"Okay, you still did not show me the misinterpretation of a Bible passage did you ?"Well, it is all delusion anyway. So THERE!" is not quite good enough. I thought you were going to come back with -"Look jaywill, HERE is where you are kind of twisting the words around."Just snorting that the words of the Bible are all a delusion anyway is not impressive to me. If I am deluded then I am deluded according to what the Apostles Paul and John wrote. But of course, I don't think God's word is a delusion. Where did I say that Jesus Christ is NOT the final and only judge? WHERE did I say He was not ?You're talking a kind of stubborn nonsense, Tangle.
If the final judge says "Whoever believes in Him [the Son of God] shall not perish but have eternal life." (John 3:16) Why then can I not take the "final judge's" word to the bank ?
Why can I not take Him who has the final word, AT His word ?Why am I doing that which anyone ELSE reading this discussion CANNOT also do, if he or she believes in the only begotten Son of God ?What am I doing that you cannot do if you wished to DO so ?Your charge of arrogance or exclusivity is bogus. Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.