Importance of Original Sin

No you cannot either, reasonably. That's an excusing cope out.There are obviously interpretations which are more valid and those which are less likely.The problem is that some of you readers want to so isolate the section from everything else in the Bible that your Bible consists of only one thing - Matthew 25:31-46. You can't responsibly do that.Who is "the Son of Man" ?
What is the throne of His glory ?
Has this event already happened in history or is it to happen in the future?Some context has to be considered.
And the context is quite involved with Christ's whole discourse starting from chapter 24 on the events of the last days. Pride or no pride, saying "You can make Scripture say anything at all" is an excuse to not consider interpretations more likely than those not.If I were to derive a general interpretation of "Justification By Charitable Works" being the summary of all the teachings of Jesus, much of the rest of the Gospel would not make any sense.He has told the disciples that they will be hated by all nations for His name's sake (24:9). But everyone practically admires a charitable group of people, giving material benefits to those less well off. Why would all the nations desire to persecute and hate those feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, visiting the sick and imprisoned ?Are you telling us that this behavior of the true followers of Christ in Matthew 25's sheep people, will be a cause of hatred from nations ?

quote:

---

" Then they will deliver you up to tribulation and will kill you, and you will be hated by all nations because of My name." (24:9)

---

Which do these hated ones sound like - the ones so destitute and needing charitable actions of sympathy from some in the nations or the ones administering the charitable assistance?I think it is a more reasonable interpretation of the sheep and goat teaching that the hated ones are the ones in such poverty stricken and harassed need.I do not say that all through history this would be the case. I do say that towards the end of the age, given Christ's predictions, this would be the case. The interpretation I put forward, I think, is not infallible. But it is more logical given the context of the last things and the close of the age before Christ's second coming.I think the difficulty of some readers is that they simply don't take the New Testament seriously about the events spoken of from chapter 24. Whatever labels and stereotypes you'd like to banter around ... Yea, well the fact of the matter is, whether you like it or not, we already are told that Saul's persecution of the Christians was his persecution of Jesus Himself. "Saul, Saul, why do you persecute ME?" Christ's persecuted people were absolutely joined to Him by their faith. They were His extension on the earth. And to touch His people was to touch Him. So it is quite logical that at the end of the church age "When the Son of Man comes ..." He reminds the world that to mistreat His people was to mistreat Him.As they did it or did not do it to one of these, the least of His brothers, they acted or did not act upon Himself.Now if you do not like this central New Testament truth, your scenario of "Justification By Charitable Works" on fellow men in general, I would not say it totally without some merit. But it is less likely an accurate interpretation of the discussed passage.If the summary of Jesus' teaching is that men will be justified by charitable deeds, why did [not] Jesus agree with His indignant disciples in Matthew 26:6-13 ?

quote:

---

"A woman came to Him, having an alabaster flask of ointment of great value, and she poured it on His head as He reclined at table .

​

But when the disciples saw it, they were indignant, saying, Why this waste?

​

For this could have been sold for much and given to the poor.

​

But Jesus, knowing it, said to them, Why do you trouble the woman? She has done a noble deed to Me.

​

For the poor you have with you always, but you do not always have Me.

​

For in pouring out this ointment on My body, she has done it for My burial.

​

Truly I say to you, Wherever this gospel is proclaimed in the whole world, what this woman has done shall also be told as a memorial of her."

---

Why didn't [edited] Jesus rebuke the woman and say "If you want to love Me you should have taken this expensive ointment, sold it, and given the money to those in poverty. Don't you remember I said that you have to feed the hungry, cloth the naked, visit the sick, give a drink to the thirsty, etc. if you want to show your love for Me ?"Jesus said her devotion would be retold as a memorial to her. Why did He not agree with the indignant disciples that she WASTED funds which could have better served His purpose by being distributed to the poor?If "Justification By Charitable Works" anyone wants to make the grand summary of the teaching of Jesus, according to Matthew 25:31-46 then Christ should have said that her giving alms to the needy would have been her historic memorial.This is not me arguing that a Christian disciple should be stingy and uncaring. This is me explaining the context of His prophecy in chapter 25:31-46. Please do not exploit that exegesis as an attitude of apathy towards those in need.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.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.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Hmm. Think you can stay awake ? Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

That is imaginative. And I am sure ringo would like that. But they do not say anything like "We helped you."Now you can be concerned about inserting unlikely meanings.The rebuke is about what they did NOT do. It is not about what they THOUGHT they DID do and DIDN'T.The rebuke is about what they DIDN'T do and didn't realize WHO they were NOT doing it to.Inaction.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Jesus SAID no one knows the day or hour.
He didn't say we could not discern the general season.Besides, did I not add that it could be another many number of years before He returns ? ( I think I said either 50 or 100 years).He said the budding fig tree was an indication. I think He meant the nation of Israel reforming in 1948.Prophecy students sat up and began to pay attention after this event.
Anyway, I did not say I knew day or hour.And the "this generation" matter I have spoken to before as a moral generation rather than a chronological one.It should be obvious that much of Christ's words seem to be preparing the disciples for the long distance run and not a sprint.The Gospel of the kingdom first had to go to all the world - "and then the end will come." But if anyone wants to argue that He did say He'd return before all the villages were preached to (Matt. 10:23), I would concede that that verse may argue for that view. Maybe.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

I see the point - the addition of verses 19 - 21. But I think it is not strong enough to counter balance verse 18.

quote:

---

"He who believes into Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe has been condemned already, because he has not believed into the name of the only begotten Son of God."

---

That is extremely strong. Just by remaining in a state of UNBELIEF in the Son of God, the person is under condemnation.John, the writer, of course has his style. And we believers give the evangelists some freedom, recognizing that this was not written by Jesus Himself.And John wants to convey something and records the words of John the Baptist which pretty much say the same things as in verse 18.

quote:

---

"He who believes into the Son has eternal life; but he who disobeys the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides upon him." (v.36)

---

Now, you have the option of saying "Well, I don't trust the Apostle John. I think he's kind of spinning things and inserting his own opinion."Personally, I don't think that is a wise attitude to take. Yes, I recognize John's flavor and John's editing, selecting, and deciding on material to include in his Gospel.Why should I assume that John is MISREPRESENTING His Lord?
Why should I not assume that one of His twelve disciples could be trustworthy to communicate to the world the teaching of Jesus of Nazareth ?Who are you going to assume had a better inside story of what REALLY happened and was said ? Are you going to assume some textural critic 2000 some years latter, and skeptically unbelieving at that, is to be trusted to tell you the inside story of what Jesus really did and said ?The work of God in John is to believe in Him Whom the Father has sent (John 6:28,29).In John 15 He says that without abiding in Him we can do nothing. WE can do a lot of things apart from abiding in Him. But in terms of God's will and God's kingdom they will turn out to be nothing.

quote:

---

"I am the vine, you are the branches. He who abides in Me and I in him, he bears much fruit; for apart from Me you can do nothing." (v.5)

---

quote:

---

"Abide in Me and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself unless it abides in the vine, so neither can you unless you abide in Me.

​

I am the vine; you are the branches...." (15:4,5a)

---

First you must believe into the resurrected, living and available Lord Jesus. He is available today to abide in in a divine and mystical way.Then you must SEE that He is the true vine and the believer is just the abiding branch. All the nutrients and health and water and sustenance for the branch to do anything is derived from the True Vine in which the branch abides.My experience is that the way to Abide in Jesus Christ is first to SEE that He is the true Vine and I am a branch. I am not struggling to get in. By believing in Him one day, I got into Him already. I just need to abide in Him as my realm, my living sphere.Paul and John and others pioneered in this reality.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

That is not a reality, that is word salad.It is not the writers, redactors and editors of the Gospel of John I have a problem with, it is folk like you that pervert what is actually written by taking single verses out of context.The only way to know belief in by actions, it is what someone does, not what they acclaim that counts.

No it is not a "word salad" Mr. Unbeliever. It is my way of expressing what I have experienced of Christ. And that drawing closely, at least, on the words of Christ.You won't be the first nor the last to stand by grumpy and judgmental about the truth of the Bible which you do not believe.It is not only what you do but Who's the source of your doing.If you want to say that you simply do not understand what I am saying, Okay. That I can sympathize with. You simply do not understand what the Gospel of John in chapter 15 is saying or my allusions to it.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

I may have missed something, but are you by any chance a Jehovah's Witness

Not sure you actually understand what allusion means.But i think you are actually making elusions.

Well, if you mean I don't believe the vacuous version of Christianity you try to market, then of course I don't believe it. I actually have read the Bible. More humor I imagine.So far you have not offered any "truth", truth of the Bible or anything else. As has been pointed out to you repeatedly yo in fact misrepresent what the Bible actually says. More utter nonsense. When you resort to crap like claiming some "source" I know you are just pulling shit out your ass.The source of what I post is what is actually written in the Bible, not some imagined "who". It is content that counts, not source. It's easy to make a claim that I don't understand something but it's pretty hard for anyone to take you seriously when you yourself cannot support anything and when it has been shown repeatedly that you are simply quote mining and taking passages out of context.

Matthew 24:40-43.

quote:

---

" At that time two men will be in the field, one is taken and one is left.
To women will be grinding at the mill; one is taken and one is left. Watch therefore, for you do not know on what day your Lord comes. "

---

Furthermore, in the sister passage in the Gospel of Luke He tells us where they are taken - Where the body is the birds of prey will be gathered together. See Luke 17:34-37.The best interpretation is that they are taken with Him to the battle of Armegeddon as vultures or birds of prey to deal with the corpse of Antichrist. This meaning that the final Antichrist is just a stinking climax of death, to be defeated by those who are with Christ the Victor and share His divine life.This of course strengthens that when Christ descends He is accompanied by some overcoming saints who are rewarded to fight and reign with Him - His brothers in Matthew 25:31-46.. Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

I am not a Jehovah's Witness or Watchtower student of any kind.My God is the man Jesus Christ. Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

No. Elusion is an evading. I don't mean that.
But consulting a Thesaurus would be helpful to me.

Jar's complaint is about some all too brief words which I wrote about John 15 approximately verses 4 and 5. But the much of the whole chapter is really involved.This would be a very large subject and I was not wise to think many would understand what I wrote.

quote:

---

Abide in Me and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself unless it abides in the vine, so neither can you unless you abide in Me.

​

I am the vine; you are the branches. He who abides in Me and I in him, he bears much fruit for apart from Me you can do nothing."

---

Fallen man not only requires Jesus the Son of God for redemption.
We also need Him to live unto God.Fallen man not only requires Christ's death to cleanse us of our sins.
We also need His resurrection to indwell us as the Holy Spirit for our living.The fallen Adamic life is rejected by God completely as a means to fulfill His enterprise. This goes back to the indwelling sin nature which so many in this discussion argue against. "Apart from me you can do nothing" in the whole New Testament means that what we are in our fallen Adamic nature cannot please God. Without Christ as our new life we can do nothing unto God's eternal purpose.Put another way - In the Son of God God has included ALL the supply that humanity needs to live for the eternal purpose of God. There is ONE biography in human history which is all-inclusive and adequate to furnish everyone with the necessary life power to live unto God. This is the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ. Without abiding in this grace we can do nothing profitable unto God's kingdom.Put another way - Christ, the unique Man, the One human life on earth which pleases God, and which He wants is DISTRIBUTABLE. Through the first man - Adam - a sinful and defective fallen parent was in a real sense distributed into all of us.Through the resurrection of Jesus Christ God is able to distribute to us a new source of life, a new "parent" so to speak - a new head of humanity whose life can mingle and blend with our life. This Person has everything we need. And God will only receive for His eternal purpose that which is infused with this "Father pleasing" living.This is why I spoke of the admittedly confusing terms of "nutrients". What I mean is that by being placed in Christ all that man needs is available to us to live God.I do not mean just live for God or live unto God. I mean to live God or allow God to live in us. This is a matter of growth and development and not instantaneous success in one day. This is a matter perfecting and being matured and perfected.The "nutrients" and the "vitamins" and everything and all else that man needs to live in oneness with God is found in Jesus Christ. And apart from Him we can do nothing unto the meaning of our human existence or the kingdom of God.The word picture that Jesus used was that He is the True Vine and that the saved, the believers in Christ, are the abiding branches. What defects the branches may have are swallowed up by the health that is in the main Vine. The branches derive all of their benefit from being attached to the healthy Vine - the Son of God.One man, one human life on this has succeeded in living for the Father - God. And this one man is now miraculously able to impart Himself into millions of other people.For this reason Jesus Christ is called "the second man" meaning the second Head of a new humanity, as it were. He is also called "the last Adam". He concludes one race and initiates a new race.The last Adam became a distributable life giving Spirit (1 Cor. 15:45) that can be imparted into other men and women.

You do not believe that Christ in His state of resurrection is knowable.The apostle Paul pioneered in the experience of knowing the indwelling life of the resurrected Christ.If you say that in this I misrepresent the teaching of the New Testament I say you are dead wrong. Here is one of many teachings out of the mouth of Jesus that a man like Paul or Luke could and even MUST know Jesus Christ. [quote] "Judas, not Iscariot, said to Him, Lord, and what has happened that You are to manifest Yourself to us and not to the world?

​

Jesus answered and said to him, If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word, and My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make an abode with him." (John 14:22,23) The Father and the Son as the Divine "WE" will come to the lover of Jesus Christ and make an abode with that lover. In this way Jesus Christ as the embodiment of the Triune God and by means of the Holy Spirit will manifest Himself to His followers.Paul and Luke were partakers of this reality as I am also and as anyone who receives the Son of God can also. Jesus and His Father as the divine "WE" came to make His abode within Luke and within Paul.How can you say that Paul did not know Jesus's life ? You say this probably because of your imagining that Jesus never rose from the dead and is knowable.Paul did not know Jesus in His earthly ministry. But you assume that the earthly ministry is all that consists in the life of Jesus. After His resurrection and ascension He embarked on His heavenly ministry. And Paul was one who pioneered into this reality.God reserved this pioneer to author some 13 of the 27 New Testament books.There is no perversion of the Gospel teaching here except the perversion of your implication that Christ cannot be known after His death and resurrection. That is simply your unbelief speaking at best.Paul knew the life of the resurrected and ascended Christ and kept on keeping on to KNOW Him more and more. He endeavored and pioneered into living one with Christ - as the Holy Spirit.Here He tells us of his desire to ever deepen his life in Christ and to KNOW Christ. He spoke of wanting to GAIN Christ more and more. Paul knew Christ in His resurrection state. And the experience was so precious to him that he counted all benefits of his previous Christless life as refuse in comparison. Nothing he ever experienced was as valuable as his life knowing Christ.