Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Right Behavior Inherits Eternal Life
iano
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 271 of 302 (266831)
12-08-2005 12:36 PM
Reply to: Message 265 by jar
12-08-2005 12:02 PM


Re: Purpose of the law
I'm confused. You say you're a Christian. You have said in a number of threads this last while that Christian won't be the ones to get to heaven. You suspect you won't get to heaven.
Is it because you don't think you are doing sufficient works. That you look at the standard and think "Shit...."
At what level of doing or trying do you think it is that someone will make the grade Jar

This message is a reply to:
 Message 265 by jar, posted 12-08-2005 12:02 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 272 by jar, posted 12-08-2005 12:52 PM iano has not replied

jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 272 of 302 (266837)
12-08-2005 12:52 PM
Reply to: Message 271 by iano
12-08-2005 12:36 PM


Re: Purpose of the law
I'm confused. You say you're a Christian.
Yes, I believe that is true.
You have said in a number of threads this last while that Christian won't be the ones to get to heaven.
No, that's not what I've said. I've said that it's less likely that Christians will get to heaven than an Atheist, as one example.
You suspect you won't get to heaven.
Certainly probably.
Is it because you don't think you are doing sufficient works. That you look at the standard and think "Shit...."
Nope, certainly not the later.
The goal is really simple, it's to Love GOD and love others as you love yourself. Remember, three parts; love GOD, love others, love yourself.
That's simple, but it's certainly not easy. I try, I know that I'll fail, and I can only hope that what little I've done is sufficient.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 271 by iano, posted 12-08-2005 12:36 PM iano has not replied

ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 273 of 302 (266838)
12-08-2005 12:53 PM
Reply to: Message 270 by jaywill
12-08-2005 12:33 PM


Re: The case of Sheep v. Goats
jaywill writes:
The brothers of the Lord are caring for the interests and plans of the Lord.
And the interests of the Lord include His commandment: Love they neighbour as thyself. Any body who does that is ministering to the Lord. That applies to all of us at one time or another. Therefore, we must all be brothers of the Lord.
I see no way that you can get three groups.

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 270 by jaywill, posted 12-08-2005 12:33 PM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 275 by jaywill, posted 12-08-2005 1:40 PM ringo has replied
 Message 276 by jaywill, posted 12-08-2005 1:50 PM ringo has replied

jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 274 of 302 (266842)
12-08-2005 1:12 PM
Reply to: Message 269 by jar
12-08-2005 12:25 PM


Re: Purpose of the law
Jar,
I read the Bible quite differently than you and hold a completely different view of Christianity.
I have a dim view of Christianity (depending on what you mean). I have a very high view of Christ Himself and the church.
In Matthew 25 there is still only two, not three groups. The phrase "the least of these my brothers" does not seem to imply a third group but to the members of both the sheep and goats.
Daniel, one of the more classic tales in the Bible, seems to be refering to the angels, those who minister to him, and humans, those gathered before him. So it's still but two groups, in that case, angels and humans.
"Thousands of thousands ministered to Him ..."
Similiar utterances are found in 1 Kings 22:19; Psa. 68:17; Heb. 12:22 (which would indicate both angels and humans); Rev. 5:11 (angels); Matt. 26:53 (angels)).
I might be inclined to say that the thousands and thousands ministering to the One on the throne in Daniel's vision might include angels also.
The sheep are shocked. They did not expect to be among the saved. Now that is not the reaction that you'd expect from a follower of Christ.
I see that some words are eliminated in the record of the response of the goats as compared to the response of the sheep.
If you say that the fuller inclusion of the missing words indicates "shock" I could see some ground to derive that. However, it could be that Christ simply shortened the response of the goats. I think your view is at least plausible. I don't feel to rule it out.
And the goats too are shocked, shocked that they are not included. That is the response you'd expect from a believer, one who thinks that because they are a Christian, they will get to rule over others, to be among the elect.
'Taint necessarily so though. They, like so many Christians today, simply didn't get the message, the message that it's not what you profess, but what you do. To show a modern example, they would be the folk that support the Defence of Marriage Act and other similar oppressive legislation.
I agree with you that Christians will be judged according to their works. If we get into a discussion about the judgment seat of Christ for believers strictly, you will see that such a matter is very clear.
However, I do not think that Matthew 25:31-45 is the place to see that matter.
And secondly, the judgment of Christians who are saved for eternity, is not for deciding their eternal destiny. It is for deciding their reward or discipline during the 1,000 years. And the 1,000 years is prior to the eternal age in which eternal life is a gift in grace for believing in Christ.
But if you want to underline that God is not foolish to be unconcerned about how a person redeemed by grace behaves, there are plenty of passages outside of Matthew 25:31-46 to teach that.
The judgment of "the least of these My brothers" is not spoken to in that passage at all, period.
Now, in the passages leading up to verse 31, you do have
1.) A Parable of Faithfulness (25:14-30)
2.) A Parable of Watchfulness (25:1-13)
3.) A teaching of prudence and watchfulness (24:45-51)
4.) A teaching about watchfulness and being ready for His coming (24:32-44)
All of these teachings and parables DO concern Christian believers. But when you get to verse 31 of Matthew 25, the Lord Jesus moves off of that subject and on to another. And that is His judgment upon the Gentile nations who are alive at the time He touches down again upon the earth.
The least of these His brothers, as to their judgment, has amply been dealt with BEFORE Christ speaks to the matter of the remaining nations who live through the days just before His second coming.
This message has been edited by jaywill, 12-08-2005 01:12 PM
This message has been edited by jaywill, 12-08-2005 01:14 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 269 by jar, posted 12-08-2005 12:25 PM jar has not replied

jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 275 of 302 (266855)
12-08-2005 1:40 PM
Reply to: Message 273 by ringo
12-08-2005 12:53 PM


Re: The case of Sheep v. Goats
Ringo,
And the interests of the Lord include His commandment: Love they neighbour as thyself. Any body who does that is ministering to the Lord. That applies to all of us at one time or another. Therefore, we must all be brothers of the Lord.
I see no way that you can get three groups.
Your interpretation calls for the Lord condemning some of His brothers to eternal perdition which is prepared for the Devil and his angels (25:41).
Is that the position you wish to take? That we are all Christ's brothers and some of His brothers will depart into the eternal fire prepared for the Devil and his angels?
This message has been edited by jaywill, 12-08-2005 01:41 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 273 by ringo, posted 12-08-2005 12:53 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 277 by ringo, posted 12-08-2005 2:09 PM jaywill has replied

jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 276 of 302 (266859)
12-08-2005 1:50 PM
Reply to: Message 273 by ringo
12-08-2005 12:53 PM


Re: The case of Sheep v. Goats
I see no way that you can get three groups.
I have tried to show you the logical third group. I seem to not be able to convince you.
Well, anyway, looking at the passage again I have to say that the angels would be a third group in the passage itself:
"But when the Son of Man comes in His glory and ALL THE ANGELS WITH HIM, at that time He will sit on the throne of His glory" (25:31)
The angels who come with the Son of Man are a third group.
So now I have to revize my explanation a little. There are actually FOUR groups. Three are actually mentioned in the passage. And the brothers of the Lord, the "THESE" are the implied fourth group.
Four groups:
1.) The angels who come with the Son of Man
2.) The sheep
3.) The goats
4.) "the least of THESE, My brothers"
In the Daniel passage, groups #1 and group #4 may be combined to be the thousands and thousands ministering to the Lord.
This message has been edited by jaywill, 12-08-2005 01:51 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 273 by ringo, posted 12-08-2005 12:53 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 278 by ringo, posted 12-08-2005 2:20 PM jaywill has replied

ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 277 of 302 (266862)
12-08-2005 2:09 PM
Reply to: Message 275 by jaywill
12-08-2005 1:40 PM


Re: The case of Sheep v. Goats
jaywill writes:
Is that the position you wish to take? That we are all Christ's brothers and some of His brothers will depart into the eternal fire prepared for the Devil and his angels?
I'm quoting what the Bible says:
quote:
Mat 25:32 And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats:
All nations. No exclusions. Not the "Gentile nations", not "the heathen". All nations.
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.
Nobody is excluded from the brethren. We are all the sons of man. We all minister to the Lord when we love our neighbours. You have not shown otherwise.
You claim that the brethern are an elite group? A private club? Back that up.

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 275 by jaywill, posted 12-08-2005 1:40 PM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 279 by jaywill, posted 12-08-2005 4:26 PM ringo has replied

ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 278 of 302 (266866)
12-08-2005 2:20 PM
Reply to: Message 276 by jaywill
12-08-2005 1:50 PM


Re: The case of Sheep v. Goats
jaywill writes:
I have tried to show you the logical third group.
You are trying to inject a "third group" which simply is not there in Matthew 25. You admit yourself that you only think it logically "should" be there. The fact is, it isn't there.
Logically it makes no sense at all.
Why would the sheep and goats be judged on their treatment of a third group instead of on their treatment of each other. The law has always been about how we treat each other, not about any outside group. Jesus said "Love thy neighbour" - He didn't say "Love thy minister".
Your confusion is based on the idea that there "must" be some "third group", an elite group. Jesus didn't say that. He said all nations - all of us - will be divided into two groups - sheep and goats. He didn't mention any private club - the sole recipient of our good behaviour - because there is none.

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 276 by jaywill, posted 12-08-2005 1:50 PM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 280 by jaywill, posted 12-08-2005 4:56 PM ringo has replied

jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 279 of 302 (266909)
12-08-2005 4:26 PM
Reply to: Message 277 by ringo
12-08-2005 2:09 PM


Re: The case of Sheep v. Goats
Ringo,
I'm quoting what the Bible says:
True. But you did not answer my question.
Is your position then that some of the brothers of the Lord Jesus Christ are to depart into the eternal fire?
I think a simple Yes or No would suffice.
All nations. No exclusions. Not the "Gentile nations", not "the heathen". All nations
I think that your handy lexicon should indicate that the word "nations" there is the same word elsewhere translated "Gentiles".
Nobody is excluded from the brethren. We are all the sons of man. We all minister to the Lord when we love our neighbours. You have not shown otherwise.
No one is excluded from a general brotherhood of human beings. But not all are included in the brothers who share the same divine life as Christ has. The latter brothers were born the second time into this brotherhood. The first natural birth did not constitute them members of this brotherhood.
You are saying that the so-called "Brotherhood of Man" is the meaning of the Lord's brothers.
Well, on one level, I don't deny that there is something to a concept that we are all brothers. But given the full teaching of the New Testament we cannot extend this kind of brotherhood based on creation to mean the divine brotherhood of Christ's brothers.
For a few examples:
"But as many as received Him, to them He gave authority to become children of God, to those who believe into His name,
Who were born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of men, but of God" (John 1:12,13)
This brotherhood is of "children of God" is granted "to those who received Him." It does not include those who received Him and those who did not receive Him. So any "brotherhood of man" is distinct from the brotherhood of God's children who received Christ and those people who did not and will not receive Christ.
And here to receive is to believe "into His name" which would mean to believe into His living Person.
Now these children of God form a brotherhood. Their haveing been begotten is not based on natural birth - "Who were begotten not of blood"
Neither is this begetting based on the will of the fallen and sinful man "the flesh" - "nor of the flesh."
Neither is it based even on the good part of man which God created and which we all retain some portion of - "nor of man."
This having been begotten into the divine family has its source in the imparting of the divine life of God - "but of God". God has caused them to be regenerated, born of God, born again, born from above, born of the Spirit.
Fallen man was said to not only be apart from God. He was apart from "the life of God"
"Being darkened in their understanding, alienated from the life of God ..." (Eph. 4:18)
This alienation from "the life of God" is remedied by the new birth in which God imparts something of His Holy Spirit into the believer's being. The believer believes "into His name" and in the sphere and realm of that name, that living Person, he is reborn within with the life of God.
God's life being now imparted into the believer's life, he is no longer alienated from the life of God. And he is one of the children of God. And therefore he is in a brotherhood of the children of God which is asside from a brotherhood based merely on creation. It is based on the new creation. If anyone is in Christ, there is a new creation.
Did Jesus teach that all men were His brothers?
In one passage He said that those who did His will were His brothers:
"... who are My brothers? And stretching out His hand toward His disciples, He said, Behold, My mother and My brothers! For whoever does the will of My Father who is in the heavens, he is My brother and sister and mother." (Matt. 48b-50)
Even in this general passage, the brothers are the disciples - "stretching out His hand toward His disciples ..."
No doubt, doing the will of the Father makes the disciples brothers. But there are those who do not want to be disciples of Jesus. Can they assume to be the brothers of Jesus?
Perhaps the Universalist or the Secular Humanist will answer "Yes indeed. We don't receive Jesus as the Son of God or as the Lord and Savior. But we are loving, respectful, kind, etc... Surely, we are really doing the will of God and are therefore brothers of this Jesus, who incidently was just a religious teacher who is dead and gone."
However, they are not because of there natural goodness, in the divine brotherhood of Christ's disciples. The basic work of the will of God is to believe into Christ:
"They they said to Him, What shall we do that we may work the works of God?
Jesus answered and said to them, This is the work of God, that you believe into Him whom He has sent"( John 6:28,29).
This would be the same as being His disciples who compose His brothers. No, those who reject the Son of God are not the Lord's brothers because they are in the brotherhood of all men.
In fact there were times in which Christ stressed that the opposers were children not of God but of the devil:
"You are of your father the devil, and you want to do the desires of your father ..." (John 8:44). This is the Lord Jesus reference not to the brotherhood of sons of God but the brotherhood of sons of Satan the devil.
Coming back to Matthew chapter 12 ... the disciples who do the will of His Father are the brothers. In the chapter following this we have the parable of the wheat and the tares - Matthew 13:24-30 which He Himself interprets in verses 36 through 43.
The wheat and the tares apparently look the same up to a certian point. But the wheat was sown by the Son of Man and the tares was sown by "his enemy" (v.25). The wheat and the tares grow together in the world. And though the situation of them both growing is a cause of great confusion and perplexity to the Sower's servants, they are instructed to allow both to grow together until the harvest time.
The wheat represents the sons of the kingddom. And the tares which closely resemble the wheat up to a certain point, represent "the sons of the evil one" (v.38). The wheat therefore represents one brotherhood and the tares represent another brotherhood. Any attempt to combine them into one magnanimus brotherhood of the sons of the kingdom with the sons of the evil one is pure folly.
The destinies of the two groups of "sons" is different also.
In verse 30 Christ gives the parabolic conclusion:
"Let both grow together until the harvest, and at the time of the harvest I will sau to the reapers, Collect first the tares and bind them into bundles to burn them up, but the wheat gather into my barn" (v.30)
And in verses 40 through 43 He gives the interpretation of the two different destinies of the "sons of the kingdom" and "the sons of the evil one" sown by His enemy.
"Therefore just as the tares are collected and burned up with fire, so will it be at the consummation of the age. The Son of Man will send His angels, and they will collect out of His kingdom all the stinblingblocks and those who practice lawlessness, And will cast them into the furnace of fire ... Then the righteous will shine forth like the sun in the kingdom of their Father."
Two types of sons means two types of brotherhoods. The wheat and the tares do not share one brotherhood. Sons of the kingdom are related to the King of the kingdom in life. And sons of the evil one are related in nature to the enemy of the King of the kingdom.
The enemy of the Lord Jesus the Sower, sowed tares in among the wheat in the world in order to cause confusion and to frustrate the wheat from growing. This corresponds to false Christian brothers sown by the enemy of Christ among genuine Christian brothers. Both grow together "in the world". And the Christian brothers are not to try to eliminate them from "the world". The job of separation will be carried out by the angels at the end of the church age.
The professing "brothers" claiming to be in the Christian brotherhood will be collected and burned up. "Then the righteous will shine forth like the sun in the kingdom of their Father"
Now, none of this that I have written has to do with the works of those Christian brothers after they have believed into His name to become His regenerated brothers. This is not a teaching saying that the works of Christians do not matter. That is another issue.
This is a teaching proving that the so called Brotherhood of Man is not the brotherhood of the disciples who are the brothers of the Lord Jesus.
You claim that the brethern are an elite group? A private club? Back that up.
Elite to me would mean something far above the standard.
The saved human beings are not far above God's standard. They are right AT the standard in terms of the required response to His plan of salvation. If is normal that man should believe in God's salvation and in God's Christ.
So being saved unto eternal life should not be regarded as ELITE. It should be regarded as a healthy normal response. Why should men and women NOT believe in God's love as manifested in the life, death, and resurrection of Christ?
It seems that the proud and unbelieving are the ones who want to be elite. We all realize that we need God. So as He comes in the Son Jesus Christ, why should we be among the "elite" group of those who reject such love and redemption.
So just WHO is it then who desires to be in the elite group? I would say it is those TOO PROUD to repent and believe the gospel.
This message has been edited by jaywill, 12-08-2005 04:29 PM
This message has been edited by jaywill, 12-08-2005 04:33 PM
This message has been edited by jaywill, 12-08-2005 04:40 PM
This message has been edited by jaywill, 12-08-2005 04:46 PM
This message has been edited by jaywill, 12-08-2005 04:51 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 277 by ringo, posted 12-08-2005 2:09 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 281 by ringo, posted 12-08-2005 5:25 PM jaywill has replied

jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 280 of 302 (266918)
12-08-2005 4:56 PM
Reply to: Message 278 by ringo
12-08-2005 2:20 PM


Re: The case of Sheep v. Goats
Ringo,
Why would the sheep and goats be judged on their treatment of a third group instead of on their treatment of each other. The law has always been about how we treat each other, not about any outside group. Jesus said "Love thy neighbour" - He didn't say "Love thy minister".
If you mean "Love thy minister" means love thy clergy, that is not what I meant at all.
Your confusion is based on the idea that there "must" be some "third group", an elite group. Jesus didn't say that. He said all nations - all of us - will be divided into two groups - sheep and goats. He didn't mention any private club - the sole recipient of our good behaviour - because there is none.
I think that your misunderstanding comes from a desire to make Matt. 25:31-46 the only passage in the entire New Testament.
This message has been edited by jaywill, 12-08-2005 04:57 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 278 by ringo, posted 12-08-2005 2:20 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 282 by ringo, posted 12-08-2005 5:31 PM jaywill has not replied

ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 281 of 302 (266932)
12-08-2005 5:25 PM
Reply to: Message 279 by jaywill
12-08-2005 4:26 PM


Re: The case of Sheep v. Goats
jaywill writes:
Is your position then that some of the brothers of the Lord Jesus Christ are to depart into the eternal fire?
We're not talking about "my" position here, we're talking about the Bible's position ("Bible Study", remember?). You agree that that's what the Bible says, don't you?
I think that your handy lexicon should indicate that the word "nations" there is the same word elsewhere translated "Gentiles".
Well, all the other nations would be Gentiles, wouldn't they? But that would include the Christians living in those nations, wouldn't it? So how can they be part of a "third group"?
But not all are included in the brothers who share the same divine life as Christ has. The latter brothers were born the second time into this brotherhood. The first natural birth did not constitute them members of this brotherhood.
You keep asserting that but you haven't demonstrated it. Where does Jesus say that?
This brotherhood is of "children of God" is granted "to those who received Him." It does not include those who received Him and those who did not receive Him.
Surely those that "receive" Him are those who do what He told us to do - "Love thy neighbour as thyself" - the sheep. The goats claim to have "received" Him, but their claim is empty because it is not reflected in their behaviour.
So any "brotherhood of man" is distinct from the brotherhood of God's children who received Christ and those people who did not and will not receive Christ.
"Judge not lest ye be judged." We are not capable of discerning who has really "received" Him and who has not. Only God can tell, and that is how He separates the sheep from the goats.
From our viewpoint, we have to treat everybody as if they were our brother.
Did Jesus teach that all men were His brothers?
Yes, He did. You quoted it yourself:
quote:
For whoever does the will of My Father who is in the heavens, he is My brother and sister and mother.
Whosoever does the will of God - behaviour, not belief. So the "brotherhood" is also based on behaviour. Why would the brotherhood be different from the sheep and the goats?
Even in this general passage, the brothers are the disciples
Nope. "Whoever does the will of My Father...." Never mind the hand-signals - He wasn't giving a coded message that contradicted His words. Look at the words: "Whoever does the will of My Father...."
This is a teaching proving that the so called Brotherhood of Man is not the brotherhood of the disciples who are the brothers of the Lord Jesus.
I think you've fallen far short of "proving" anything, or even demonstrating it. But who is or is not Jesus' brother is not the topic of this thread. You've already agreed that judgement is based on behaviour. Your only point of contention seems to be about an elite group that isn't judged.
Elite to me would mean something far above the standard.
No. Elitism has nothing to do with standards. It's about separation. You seem to think that those who profess a "belief" are somehow set apart, that they are exempt from the judgement according to deeds. That is elitism.

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 279 by jaywill, posted 12-08-2005 4:26 PM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 283 by jaywill, posted 12-08-2005 6:30 PM ringo has replied

ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 282 of 302 (266936)
12-08-2005 5:31 PM
Reply to: Message 280 by jaywill
12-08-2005 4:56 PM


Re: The case of Sheep v. Goats
jaywill writes:
If you mean "Love thy minister" means love thy clergy, that is not what I meant at all.
I know you didn't mean that. I just don't think you understand what "minister" does mean.
You said yourself that those ministering to God were doing His will. Well, He doesn't need us to shine His shoes for Him. Ministering to Him obviously means ministering to His children.
I think that your misunderstanding comes from a desire to make Matt. 25:31-46 the only passage in the entire New Testament.
No. I just take it as a central passage. You seem to want to explain it away by making up phantom "brotherhoods" and so on. Why can't you just take it as written?

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 280 by jaywill, posted 12-08-2005 4:56 PM jaywill has not replied

jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 283 of 302 (266953)
12-08-2005 6:30 PM
Reply to: Message 281 by ringo
12-08-2005 5:25 PM


Re: The case of Sheep v. Goats
We're not talking about "my" position here, we're talking about the Bible's position ("Bible Study", remember?). You agree that that's what the Bible says, don't you?
You're evading a simple question. I wonder why.
You apparently don't want to draw a logical conclusion from your interpretation of the passage.
And, uh Ringo, this is not the first Bible Study I ever had, Okay?
Well, all the other nations would be Gentiles, wouldn't they? But that would include the Christians living in those nations, wouldn't it? So how can they be part of a "third group"?
I think at this point, I would only want to ask you how seriously do you take the book of Revelation?
I believe that Matthew has something to do with Revelation and Daniel has something to do with the other two books.
Do you want to isolate Matthew 25:31-46 from all other prophetic passages? I think the "Bible Study" should consider other portions of the Bible and how they relate together.
You keep asserting that but you haven't demonstrated it. Where does Jesus say that?
Along with the question of do you want to isolate the passage from all other prophecies, I would like to also ask this:
Are only the direct quotations of Jesus meaningful to you? Do you feel that the surrounding comments of the gospel writers are error prone, faulty, full of mistakes, and generally messed up what Jesus taught?
Is that the school of thought you're coming from? For example, 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?
Surely those that "receive" Him are those who do what He told us to do - "Love thy neighbour as thyself" - the sheep. The goats claim to have "received" Him, but their claim is empty because it is not reflected in their behaviour.
Could you please show me the exact words by which you derive that the goats claimed to have received Him?
Where in the passage do they give "lip service" to the plan of God? And where in the passage to they claimed to have received Him?
You were stressing to me what is written?
"Judge not lest ye be judged." We are not capable of discerning who has really "received" Him and who has not. Only God can tell, and that is how He separates the sheep from the goats.
From our viewpoint, we have to treat everybody as if they were our brother.
That God only knows the deepest thoughts and intentions of people's hearts, I would agree.
But if you try to develop a teaching that the disciples are never to discern anything about the motives of people, I don't think you will get far.
Jesus told the disciples to be wise as serpents and innocent as doves. He told them that He was sending them forth as sheep in the midst of wolves.
Neither of these sayings implies that the disciples of Jesus should be foolishly oblivious about the nature of people they move among. So to not have a judging attitude is one thing. To be foolishly blind as to the intentions and motives is another thing. The latter would not be being wise as serpents. And it would not be discerning when a wolf is about to chomp into you.
In the epistles there are plenty of exhortation to be discerning and wise as to our own behavior and that of others.
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. In other words there is no ekklesia. Or the whole world is the ekklesia.
I have been a disciple of Jesus for many years. One can be not judgmental and yet not be foolishly blind to be led astray by teaching, example, or behavior.
So your Bible Study could be called "No Justification By Faith."
You're restrictive and selective, carefully choosing only those passages in Matthew which seem to refute justification by faith.
"If I turn the other cheek, if I love my enemy, if I am perfect as My heavenly Father is perfect, if I don't look at a woman to lust after her in my heart, if I don't be a hypocrit, if I give the undergarment to the one who demands my cloak, if I walk three miles with the one who asks me to go one mile, if I leave my gift at the altar and reconcile to my brother, if I don't swear by Jerusalem or by God's throne or by one hair on my head, if I cut out my sinning eye, if I cut off my sinning hand, if I cut off my sinning foot, if I don't drop one tittle from the law, if I don't sound the trumpet when I give alms, if I don't pray out loud for a show, if I love my enemies, if I don't call my brother Moreh or knuckle head or you fool, if I do all these things in Matthew's gospel and if I cloth the naked, visit the imprisioned, and care for the sick who are my brothers in the brotherhood of man, if I do all these things that Jesus taught His disciples in Matthew, then .... I will have eternal life. Bible says so. Don't have to be concerned about faith. Don't have to listen to Romans, Galatians, John's gospel, Don't need Acts, or anything Peter preached, Don't need Luke. Everything right here in Matthew tells me I can be justified by being a good fella, which I have always been anyway. "
I think I have the jest of your Bible Study. Been through it before.
This message has been edited by jaywill, 12-08-2005 06:32 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 281 by ringo, posted 12-08-2005 5:25 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 284 by jar, posted 12-08-2005 6:33 PM jaywill has replied
 Message 285 by purpledawn, posted 12-08-2005 7:53 PM jaywill has not replied
 Message 286 by ringo, posted 12-08-2005 8:02 PM jaywill has replied

jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 284 of 302 (266954)
12-08-2005 6:33 PM
Reply to: Message 283 by jaywill
12-08-2005 6:30 PM


Re: The case of Sheep v. Goats
I think at this point, I would only want to ask you how seriously do you take the book of Revelation?
Revelations was very important, but refers to stuff that happened over a 1000 years ago, IMHO.
This message has been edited by jar, 12-08-2005 05:34 PM

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 283 by jaywill, posted 12-08-2005 6:30 PM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 291 by jaywill, posted 12-08-2005 8:32 PM jar has replied

purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3457 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 285 of 302 (266979)
12-08-2005 7:53 PM
Reply to: Message 283 by jaywill
12-08-2005 6:30 PM


Re: The case of Sheep v. Goats
quote:
if I do all these things that Jesus taught His disciples in Matthew, then .... I will have eternal life. Bible says so. Don't have to be concerned about faith. Don't have to listen to Romans, Galatians, John's gospel, Don't need Acts, or anything Peter preached, Don't need Luke. Everything right here in Matthew tells me I can be justified by being a good fella, which I have always been anyway.
No that is not what this Bible study is about and I don't believe Ringo was saying that either.
If you read the OP, the point is that right behavior is clearly part of the equation.
My goal with this thread is to share and learn. To really look at what the authors are writing and examine, if together, they truly support the faith-only doctrine or if obedience and good behavior are also required.
It is not saying that right behavior is the only thing required.
Since you have been a Christian for awhile, then you understand the importance of repentance.
This is not about justification for salvation. This is about final judgment day.
Do you truly feel that on final judgment day, those who supposedly have faith in Christ will be exempt from being judged by God?

There are two ways of spreading light: to be the candle or the mirror that reflects it. -Edith Wharton

This message is a reply to:
 Message 283 by jaywill, posted 12-08-2005 6:30 PM jaywill has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024