I'm trying: a stairway to heaven?

I'm afraid your logic is off Legend. I would ask you to answer the following:Q: what must I do to jump over the moon?
A: Jump over the moon.The problem above lies in the questioner not realising his question is ridiculous. But he's asked it - on the incorrect assumption that it is a reasonable question - that man can do something to achieve his own salvation. In the face of the answer he should see how ridiculous it is (in fact the rich man turned away - he couldn't do what Jesus asked - highlighting the point. Jesus is not being dishonest. Jesus told Nicodemous "that unless a man is born again he shall not see the kingdom of heaven". Nicodemus was flabbergasted "How can a man be born again?!" It was impossible for Nicodemus to "born himself again". But was Jesus being dishonest in telling him that this is the way it is? You would have. But the M4 isn't closed no matter how many times you state it is. The problem is again with the questioner not the answerer. The blind man asked directions, he ignores the fact he is blind. And gets the answer to the question he asks precisely as he wants it. He is happy with it. "This is what I must do.." Then he goes of trying to follow the directions. The problem is he is blind. Thats the problem.The thing is Jesus knows the man is blind and offers to take him there himself. The blind man must:a) realise he is blind
b) can't follow the directions (even if he has to spends some years going around in circles and banging into things)
c) realise he needs to depend on the direction giver - the person who knows the way - to lead him there. He needs to accept the offer to be led thereThat's the gospel in a nutshell for you I know no one can follow the directions. Everyone knows that too. It's just that folk are under some illusion here that by doing their best to follow most of the directions most of the time that they will get to London. Patently they won't The OP asks those who reckon 'try' to show 'try'. Biblically. There are commands. That's the start point. They are the words we read. A command word remains a command word unless shown otherwise biblically. Look at the full story:"Harder for a rich man...than a camel to get through the eye of a needle"You think it is possible for a camel to get through the eye of a needle then Legend Patently the disciples concur with me on this particular point "exceedingly amazed they asked "who then can be saved" (note that Gods word here extrapolate the problem beyond just the rich)Listen: Jesus replies "with men this is impossible but with God all things are possible" A man may TRY to get himself to heaven. Both the disciples and Jesus say here it is impossible. Only God can do the saving. Jesus knows man cannot follow his directions. He knows the man is blind. So he offers to give him a lift to the destination himself. Jesus is the vehicle and you have got to hitch a ride in him. "But now there is no condemnation for those IN Christ Jesus. The cross is the place where Jesus was turned into a salvation vehicle "Nobody comes to the Father". The Father is the destination. Jesus the vehicle. Jesus delivers you to his Father. It is through (or "by this means" or "in") him you arrive at the destination.Q: "How do I buy a F1 racing car?" (anyone is entitled to ask)
A: "$5,000,000" (honest answer to the question asked)
Q: "But I haven't got $5,000,000"
A: "I must be lying then"Whats the problem with the above? You said Jesus would have been lying. Wheres the lie?Your version adds what isn't there. See it? The rich man didn't come saying what he had in his wallet. He only asked how much. When the cost was totted up "Give up your riches..." He walked away. He realised himself he hadn't got enough. He didn't need to be told. The price tag told him.The directions are the directions. They are what they are. It's up to us to accept that we can't follow them. Or persist in thinking that we can...This message has been edited by iano, 01-Nov-2005 03:13 PM

Sin. Mans sin. Man is the one with the problem. Take a law. Don't lust. Now you might not want to, you may try very hard not to, you may feel that it is somehow degrading the relationship you have with you wife to do so. But you will do it. And for a person who thinks following this law the best the can will suffice comes up against the fact that even if they stumble over only the tiniest piece of the law "they are guilty of breaking all of the law"The problem is sin. Our sin. And Jesus offers us a way around the problem. But it ain't by trying to do our best. Sin is in us. Trying doesn't prevent it working. The harder you try the more religious you will become. Join a monestary even - to get away from all the temptation of the world. But sin will follow you thereSin isn't destroyed by trying it is destroyed only on the cross. Only there are we freed from sin. "And if the son makes you free you will be free indeed" None of this half-measure illusionary trying/religious rubbish

If not God-breathed then nothing factual may be known with certainty about God if he exists. Who could tell which bit is accurate?

The thing about common sense is that it isn't all that common. Your version of salvation would differ from anothers depending on which reasoning you come up with. Which means there would be dozens of personalized possibilities for salvation. Subjective salvation as it were. If you have a view then, for the reason given, you would do will to set aside your subjective reasoning (and all the weaknesses that subjective argument brings) and use the scripture to back up your case. Let the book do the talking.At the moment there is a command. That's all we have biblically so far

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...

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

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

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

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

Note that the rich man asked "What must I do?" I.There are two options: Attempt to do it yourself and start a serious slimming campaign for that eye of a needle trick you need to pull off. Add a few more verses just to get the fuller picture:"Unless your righteousness exceeds that of the Pharisees"
"All your righteousness are as filthy rags"
"By the deeds of the law shall no man be seen as righteous in his sight"
"Unless a man is born of the spirit (try that DIY) he shall not see the kingdom of heaven
"All who call on the name of the Lord shall be saved" (Presumably the converse is also true)
"It is by faith you are saved - not by works lest any man should boast"
"Abraham believed God and it was credited to him as righteousness"
"...but if he stumbles on even the smallest piece of the law he is guilty of breaking ALL of it"So:Clue 1: Commands: do/follow/obey or else....no trying impliedClue 2: Works dismissed as being a part of the means of salvationClue 3: "The law is a school teacher to lead you to ChristIf you don't do all of the law then you are damned
You can't do all of the law
You are thus damned - eek!!
But I don't want to be damned...
You do the only thing left to do. Cry out for mercy.
Gods plan of salvation has worked. Man back where he belongs - dependant on God.
Paradise Lost through man choosing independance becomes Paradise regained by man choosing for dependance. In Adam (independant, under law) In Christ (man dependant, under Grace)
You find out you are saved and that whilst the law couldn't save you in itself - it pointed you to the way of salvation (or dragged you by the neck in my case)
You are thankful. Very thankful. You receive the Holy Spirit.
The Holy Spirit enables you to follow the law. Not for salvation though. God wants you to follow the law for much better reasons than that.. But the disciples and Jesus subsequently universalise it. Who then can be saved? Says who? In the same way as a room full of chimps typing away will produce the bible then yeah..Maybe... Your desire to argue your point makes you miss the patently obvious thing any decent person would do if faced with giving a blind man a bewildering set of direction. They would offer to bring them there themselves. To lead the way.Which Jesus of course did.. "I am the way..." Produce one which doesn't appear in command form. If a command word it used then it is a command until shown otherwise. It's you interpreting trying when no trying or implication of trying is there.The implication is only in your head. Its not in the pages. And thats where we're looking Legend. Biblical backup for the first point? And what is the second point saying if not perfection. Where can you insert into "follow the commandment" the word try. How does trying to do something eqaute to doing something. Biblically Legend, Biblically.If it ain't in the bible then you can't claim it to be so based on your own subjective thinking. CommandThis message has been edited by iano, 01-Nov-2005 07:10 PM

If you can tell me why Matthew, Mark and Luke somehow stand above Paul then I might entertain this. Is it not all the word of God or just bits of it. And if bits, could you tell me on what basis the bits you choose are the right bits? Ditto above Ditto above Reverting at this juncture, Ringo-like, to the old Pauline Theology vs The Synoptic card is clutching at thin air. Give me straw any day This one has a snowflakes chance in Hell of standing... And which point is born again illustrating?There's little point in continuing when the Matt/Mark/Luke Synoptic escape hatch has been deployed. But do delve a little into it if you like. I am curious as to how this trick is performed

I agree completely. To know that Jesus was talking to a largely agricultural community hence his use of sheep and shepherd parables would have struck a particular resonance. Also the comparison of his way with the way of the law would have hit home at a time when people were a lot more familar with the written law than they are now.We can learn more from Jesus if we understand the settings of these things.But Jesus prime role was not that we be learn from him but that we be saved in him. And for that there is no need to know anything about the setting in which he spoke."For the gospel is the power unto salvation for all who believe" Conversion is done by God and he transmits his message, by his word, into our hearts. No time lapse or apparent archaic use language can impede that. It is God working through the gospel message that does the converting - for all who would believe.Learn from him by all means. Do the theology, look up the Greek. There is no harm in it (so long as one doesn't reside there - a theologian is not saved by his critical understanding of the text). It is very enjoyable I find. But salvation doesn't depend on it. Jesus came "to seek and save the lost" - not the smart.

But the cop IS part of a group. He is a Christian. And a Christian has all his sins forgiven. Every single one. Past, present, future. The Christian is no longer under the law. He is freed from law. He cannot come under judgement by the law. He is going to heaven. Period. Everytime he gets stopped speeding, Christ pays his ticketThe graphic artist on the other hand is not free from the law. He is not, as it were, in the club. Thus he must pay his own fines. ForeverAnd if that sounds exclusive and unreasonable then I can't help it. I'll wager that the reason it sounds unreasonable is that we have nothing to do with it. We all want to feel that we can earn it. Its natural. Like, who trusts anything that arrives with the word FREE written on it. But that is the way it is. That's what Good News is.It might help to know that my membership of the club has nothing to do with me having been a good person. Far from it Membership is open to all...who believe. The passage you quoted (which I'll re-quote latter) is in Romans 2. Romans, that most complete mechanical exposition of the gospel and how it works, can be seen as something of a workshop manual. And your quoting but a portion of the workings. Lets us look at some of it in context to see about what he is writing about.Paul opens the book with saluations to the Christians in Rome finishing up with verses 15-18 giving them the reason for writing his letter to them. He is going to be preaching the gospel to them. Even Christians need the gospel preached at them. We 'leak' it so need topping up That's his opening rational. He now goes on in the rest of Chapter 1 talking about Gods judgement upon the ungodly. Not the final Judgement but judgment that occurs all the time. A judgment on the class of people who completely ignore anything to do with God (the gentiles in those days), who live as they want with complete abandon. Unbelievers past and present.In chapter two he turns to the religious or the self-righteous; past (the Jews in those days) - and present. To the person who looks at those ungodly people and their behaviour and says "it is right those wicked people should be punished - ignoring God and his law in such a vile way". See what Paul says to them.. Anybody recognise the characteristics of Religion here? Anybody see that this Religious way, the way of following the law, will produce these characteristics? A self-righteousness? If not, read about the Pharisees of Jesus day: their judgementalism, their ludicrous and un-Christ-like adherance to law and the willingness to condemn others who weren't like they were: false piety, saying their prayers in public, fasting and letting all know about it."White washed tombs" Jesus called them. Paul is pointing out that God will judge all men who are under the law: the Gentile (unbeliever) who ignores it (but is born under it) and the Jew (or Religious person) who are too born under it and try to adhere to it. Here again we see the futility of "salvation by trying" Only those who "by persistance in good .... get eternal life" No indication that anything less that 100% will be enough. This thread asked for biblical evidence of 'trying' being enough. There is no biblical evidence for it. Only 'do it'. There is never any lowering of the standard if it is by following the law you want to be saved. Never.The only imparitality here is that the same applies both to Jew(Religious) and Gentile (heathen) alike. AbE: both are born under the law: whether you don't try at all to follow it or try to follow it and fail makes no difference. Judgement under law comes to all who are under law.
Contrast this with verse 1:16 above where the gospel is available to Jew(Religious) and Greek (Gentile or Heathen) alike. (aside: this came as something of a shock to early Christians - who were Jews - they resisted at first but then praised God that his method of salvation was open to all - Gentiles were (and still are by strict (religious = judgemental) Jews) considered as low as dogsAll Paul is doing in this section is explaining to whoever you may be that Gods wrath will be upon you. For no-one keeps the law. We are only in chapter 2. Paul is, like any good orator, setting the scene. He is showing all: gentile and jew, that they are in need of the gospel. Paul hasn't even started presenting the gospel yet. We have to wait until 3:21 before it begins. Exciting heh??!!Chapters 1 and 2? Opening scenes....This message has been edited by iano, 02-Nov-2005 02:56 PMThis message has been edited by iano, 02-Nov-2005 03:03 PM