I'm trying: a stairway to heaven?

quote:

---

Which do you think best fits with the concept of Good News

---

Ah, this seems a bit different from the way the question was phrased previously. At any rate, am I really the one to interpret the "Good News"? Because if I do, I'm going to go with the Sermon on the Mount, as recorded in Matthew, which is pretty non-judgemental, if I recall.

---

"Intellectually, scientifically, even artistically, fundamentalism -- biblical literalism -- is a road to nowhere, because it insists on fidelity to revealed truths that are not true." -- Katha Pollitt

you're reading to much into the word certain.we can assume easily that the bible would follow the same trends of other mythology.my main point is that it doesn't say he was omnipotent, nor bvenevolent, nor loving, nor any of this other stuff. from the myths, we know he is represented only to have life and knowledge.don't try to be emperical... it's not a science and it never could be.

You mean the one where a person is warned that if they so much as call their brother 'fool' they are in danger of hell fire. Or if your right hand offends to cut it off...Oh dear....

If folklore then patently not. No fixed datum to get a bearing off nor to calibrate the instruments from - as it were.Now if it were the word of God. That would be a different story...

nonsense. still words. still spiritual in nature. by being supernatural in hue it is therefore not scientific ever.

Yeah, the one with the sensible fix (apologizing to the offended person).

---

"Intellectually, scientifically, even artistically, fundamentalism -- biblical literalism -- is a road to nowhere, because it insists on fidelity to revealed truths that are not true." -- Katha Pollitt

Empiricism:
2 a : the practice of relying on observation and experiment especially (but not exclusively -iano) in the natural sciencesThe Bereans in Acts eagerly listened to what Paul had to say but being the little empiricists they were, they checked all he said against scripture. Thus, is scripture measured against scripture.It just depends on which datum you chose to carry out your empirical investigation.

Then I won't keep you. Old Randman has got a bit of a toasting from you of late so you better be off doing the rounds. I'm sure, like me, you have a long list. Hope you can remember them allAbE: just to get the ball rolling for you. Consider any slight you may have thrown my way whether direct or otherwise to be taken as apologised for. I, Iano consider it forgiven Hows the Ph.D gig by the way CP. You figured out a plan of attack?This message has been edited by iano, 01-Nov-2005 06:08 PM

Hi again Iano. I don't want to get into the middle of this really but I always thought it was widely accepted that the reference to "eye of a needle" was actually a geographic reference to an extremely narrow entrance into the city of petra.

quote:

---

The common error for those who read this passage, is twofold: first, that Christ is alluding to a camel passing through a hole the size of a sewing needle’s eye; second, that wealth is in some way the arbitrary licence for damnation. With regard the first case, “the eye of a needle” is in fact a geographic location, an extremely narrow canyon entry to Petra, that caravans passed through in order to travel to this ancient and wealthy trade city and so arrive at its grand Treasury building.

---

This is from a catholic web site BTW. just the first one on the google list.Just wondered if you were aware of this.

Hey PY. I saw your name appear on the loggedins and thought I'd look up where you wus as and you were gracing my thread. I am honoured.A Catholic website... hmmm. I wonder why Jesus (allegedly) picked something that caravan after caravan of camels were patently able to do when he chose it to illustrate how difficult something else was.Besides, the following verses reveal some more about what he may have meant"Who then can be saved!!??" The disciples see getting through the eye of a needle (whatever it is) to be so difficult that it applies not only to rich (in money) men. We can't see here why they should apply it wider than rich men though. But they do which is the significant thing.Then Jesus says "with men (salvation) is impossible...it's possible for God though.."Romans 3:20 "But now a righteousness from God is revealed..."That's how it's possible. God does the saving. He has enough righteousness to go around for all who would recieve it. Whilst "all (our own, self-earned) righteousness are as filthy rags" not so the righteousness that God offers.This message has been edited by iano, 01-Nov-2005 06:03 PMThis message has been edited by iano, 01-Nov-2005 06:11 PM

I always took it to mean that it was difficult but not impossible.
That was the way it was always taught when I was young. Not sure what the general Catholic teaching is on the subject.Incidentally when I googled the subject, I came up with another reference to a very small gate in the walls of Jurusalem which was apparently known as "The eye of the needle". Camels in a caravan had to be completely unloaded before they could pass through it, then loaded up again.
That sounds pretty difficult to me. I hang around in the background reading stuff quite a bit but don't post too often. Funny how it always seems to be threads that you are involved in that attract my attention.

Okay, let's take a look at a situation about breaking the law before I go into a Scriptural discourse on the subject.We see two people racing down the highway.One driver is an assistant teacher with a background in graphic design. The other driver is a police officer who is off duty.The speed limit in the area is about 100 kph.Both drivers are doing approximately 120 kph when an on-duty police officer spots the speeding cars on the radar gun.The on-duty police officer then chases after the two drivers at a speed of 140 kph (breaking the law in order to enforce it) eventually pulling over the two drivers.The on-duty police officer first goes to the assistant teacher with a background in graphic design. He patiently explains to him that he was speeding, writes out the speeding ticket, and then allows the assistant teacher with a background in graphic design to drive off with the knowledge that he must pay his fine by a certain due date or face charges.The on-duty police officer then goes to the off-duty police officer, recognizes him and says, "Hey Joe, what the heck were you doing? C'mon, you crazy guy! Get the heck out of here." The on-duty police officer, in this instance, actually lets the off-duty police officer drive off without having to pay a fine -- because he was on the "same side".Most people would not consider this fair at all. In fact, most people would look at a situation like this and note that the force in this example was displaying signs of internal corruption.However, in your analogy, you're basically saying that we Christians are like the off-duty police officer, essentially evading punishment because we're on the "same side as God".Does this sound fair?I will note that the Scriptures do say that God is no respecter of persons. The Scriptures also indicate that God hates a dishonest judge. He also hates when people use improper scales, which is symbolic of corruption when dealing with legal matters. I've also pointed out passages which do seem to indicate that Christians can lose their salvation -- thereby opening the door to a case of damnation by works.I'm not sure where you want me to go with this?

Which is why it pays to read around a little. I've been having trouble getting folk to provide a biblical basis for 'trying a stairway to heaven'. It always seems to pick a verse and immediately exit the bible and delve into "what makes sense to me" whereas you would imagine that if trying was it, such an important thing would be made abundantly evident.On this small piece it is (to me) evident that Jesus is pointing out an extreme difficulty, which extends beyond money riches and that that extreme difficulty has to do with man gaining his own salvation. If it is necessary to go googling and understanding the original greek and having a theology degree then patently only the smart will get to heaven...It makes sense (to me) that what is needed to know is contained in the bible. It makes sense too that it must be possible for everyone to access what is needed to know. If "the gospel (itself) is the power of God unto salvation" then the power is in the words. God is the best person to interpret for us. I've been around a while and must say there is a bewildering variety of paths to the summit argued here. It may be (I believe it is) that one is the truth. What is certain is that all of them can't be trueStick with it PY...one day the light may go on. And if your feeling at all partial to a bit of light reading then Romans Chapters 1-8 do it in the best nutshell I know. He won't mind in the least if you ask him to help illuminate. Why.. He jis toll ma dis, diz verrrrry minute: PRAISE DU LOAAAUUUDDD I'm here if you got any questions. Don't be shy

...??..err... how can I answer the pre-answered question ?? So, in your view, asking Jesus how to gain eternal life is a ridiculous question ?! The man turned away because he had to give away his (significant) possessions. This is why Jesus goes on to say that it's much more difficult for rich men to be saved. If faith was all that was needed to get saved then it wouldn't be any more difficult for a rich man than it would be for a poor man. Somehow that makes you think that the answer Jesus gave was impossible to achieve. Jesus doesn't say it's impossible to achieve, just much harder if you're rich. The implication being that it's easier if you're not rich. It's therefore, achievable. another FALSE analogy. Here Jesus is using a metaphor. Nicodemus doesn't understand it. That's all.
In the synoptics, Jesus is directly asked what to do to gain eternal life. And Jesus tells him. No metaphors there. It's clear and it's simple. But if the M4 isn't closed there's a chance the driver can get to London, right ?
If someone can 'love God and love their neighbour'as themselves' they can gain eternal life, no ? But Jesus knows that the man is blind. He knows that the man cannot follow these directions. Yet he still gives them. What does that make Jesus ?If a blind man stops you in the street and asks you for directions do you give him written directions ? do you tell him to read the signs ? Only if you're dishonest or don't care about whether the man gets to his destination. If you're honest you either admit that you can't help him or you give him directions he can follow.Do you agree with this, yes or no ? Agreed. And Biblically there are a number of passages where Jesus says that doing good and loving God and your fellow man will gain you salvation. You choose to interpret these 'commands' to be absolute, continuous and total.You interpret 'good' to mean 'perfectly good all the time'. But Jesus says that only God is perfectly good (Matt 19:17).And guess what - you don't have to be perfectly good to be saved - just follow the commandments. (Matt 19:17)He says that within Matthew, where he also says that the greatest commandments are loving God and your fellow man (Matt 22:38) and that will gain you salvation.So, to recap : Jesus knows that noone's perfect; he also acknowledges that you don't have to be perfect to be saved and he proceeds to tell us exactly what to do to get saved.There's your biblical 'proof' right there!

---

"In life, you have to face that some days you'll be the pigeon and some days you'll be the statue."

Good analogy to build on. It is precisely like you say except for that the bible points out a God of justice. A God of justice can't let off the off-duty cop. The cop is pulled, the ticket must be issued. It's just that the on-duty cop on writing it, sticks it in his pocket and pays the fine himself. Justice: the ticket must be issued, is served and Wrath: the ticket must be paid is served. But Grace - that other attribute of God - is also served. It is Grace that pays the fine for another.And it is Love which had the motivation to figure it all out...God paid the price. That's what forgiveness means. Paying the price, suffering the consequences of anothers offence against you - without them having to pay anything.It's appallingly graceful. So appallingly so that folk won't believe it. It can't be helped. Sin is appallingly awful - it required an eqaully appallingly gracful and loving solution to counter itAnd if anyone ever gets just what God did for them - they will want to follow his commandments. Grace results in GratitudeHe is "Abba" "Abba" means 'Daddy'This is the kind of thing Daddies do. "Our Father, who art in heaven. Hallowed be thy name...indeedDamnation by works? Biblically.By all means Mr. XAbE: not clear on the last 2 sentences. I agree a person is damned because of their works. Their sin. It is the default - the way we were born. But not saved by default or otherwise - then damned because of works. ie: we cannot lose salvation if we have gained it.Out of Adam (in whom we were born) - born again - into Christ (in whom we are saved) But thats it. No born again again for exampleThis message has been edited by iano, 01-Nov-2005 07:32 PM