Christian Denominations - Heaven and Hell

quote:

---

but as 2 Timothy 3:16 says, "All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting, and training in righteousness."

---

If scripture is refering to that which is cannonized or considered holy at the time of Paul, then none of the NT would qualify. Would Paul consider his own letters to be holy scripture?IMO, Paul is not pre-approving the writings of future authors.What do those books that were considered holy during Paul's time say about how to get to Heaven or Hell?

---

A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.

Supposedly if you believe that Jesus lived a perfect life and died on the cross to pay the penalty for all our sins, then supposedly Christ has met your requirements for entrance into heaven, depending on which preacher you listen to of course.The synoptics claim: When the young man asked Jesus what he must do to inherit eternal life, Jesus listed the commandments dealing with people and added sell all and give to the poor.The author of John has Jesus say that we are to believe in/on him (Jesus) for everlasting life.Paul preaches grace/faith.

quote:

---

The key thing to remember here is that Scripture is God-breathed and that these people are inspired by the Holy Spirit.

---

Interesting that translation and interpretation aren't God-breathed? Unfortunately we are at the mercy of the messengers.So if II Timothy wasn't written until about 100AD, how does that impact the authority of that statement?

---

A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.

quote:

---

Jesus was raising the standard for people who wanted to get into heaven by good works.

---

Now see IMO this is another one of those interpretations that doesn't fit what is written in the story. Giving to the poor was not new. When I read the OT (which is also inspired by God) and then read the story of the man wanting to know what he needs to do to inherit (not earn) eternal life, I don't see that the bar was raised to inherit eternal life, but I do see an additional action added to see if the young man would give up everything to follow the physical Jesus. So what I read is that Jesus listed the minimum necessary for inheriting eternal life, none of which included the commandments dealing with God, giving to the poor, following Jesus, believing that Jesus was the Messiah, believing that Jesus died for the sins of mankind, believing Paul's message of grace/faith, or being baptised. If anyone gave up everything to follow the physical Jesus they received a bonus so to speak.To fulfill the law in Jewish tradition is to interpret it correctly. Jesus was Jewish and taught the Jews, therefore he would use language traditions the Jews understood.

quote:

---

Theopneustos, which means inspired by God, to indicate the special act by which God inspired the Scriptures"

---

So you feel that according to 2Tim all scripture is inspired by God no matter who wrote it (known or unknown), when it was written, what it says, when it was added to the canon or who added it to the canon. If it has been deemed holy scripture, then it is inspired by God, which would also mean that when it is removed from the canon it is not holy scripture anymore. Tanakh
Catholic
Protestant
New TestamentNow how does this cover the Book of Mormon which is considered to be another testament of Jesus Christ and scripture by their group. Can I accept that this book is also inspired by God and useful for training etc.?

---

A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.

quote:

---

The man who asked Jesus how to get into heaven certainly didn't consider giving to the poor, and he still wasn't considering it after his question was answered.

---

Now you don't know that for a fact. The man was unwilling to sell everything he possessed and give it to the poor and then follow the physical Jesus, but odds are that if he was following the other commandments realistically he probably gave something to the poor. Maybe a little, maybe alot, and maybe nothing. Not an assumption we can make.Remember Jesus said that this was the one thing he lacked to gain treasure in heaven, not that he lacked anything for eternal life. Taken at face value, the story does not show that the man can't get eternal life by following the commandments.

quote:

---

I wrote:
So what I read is that Jesus listed the minimum necessary for inheriting eternal life.

​

commike37 writes:

​

But why would they do that? Would they leave everything and follow Jesus? Did their actions earn them salvation, or were there actions a result of their salvation in Jesus? Look to my explanation of James 2:14-26 in Message 60 to find the answer.

---

Who is they and why would they do what? The disciples did leave everything to follow the physical Jesus, but Jesus did not require all Jews to leave everything and follow him on his circuit of spreading the good news. He supposedly said that those who did so would be rewarded in the present age and in the age to come.This story discusses eternal life not salvation. Do you consider salvation (deliverance, preservation, safety) and eternal life to be interchangeable?The author of James was not writing about what to do to receive salvation or inherit eternal life. He was instructing the people how to behave in temporal life. The part you shared was discussing faith without deeds, not deeds without faith. "Faith without deeds is dead." Abraham was counted as righteous (just, lawful) because he believed, but would God have continued to count him as righteous if he hadn't done what God told him to do? As the author of James said: His (Abraham) faith was made complete by what he did.I don't know of a place in the Bible, yet, that shows an upright/lawful individual being condemned by Jesus or God because they didn't believe in Jesus or God. Upright/lawful meaning a person who honors his parents; does not murder, steal, or give false testimony; does not defraud; and does not commit adultery.

quote:

---

In Message 55 you stated:
It's not exactly God-breathed, but it still fits my point on how an author could pre-date approval because his writing is inspired by God.

---

Concerning inspired scripture, you missed my point. Let me try again.Do you feel that according to 2Tim all scripture is inspired by God no matter who wrote it (known or unknown), when it was written, what it says, when or who added the writing to the canon or to what group the canon belongs?If yes, how does this cover the Book of Mormon which is considered to be another testament of Jesus Christ and scripture by their group. Can I accept that this book is also inspired by God and useful for training etc.?If no, how does one discern which canon is correct?The various links to the canons showed that our own canon went through changes over a period of time by different people and other canons do exist and are considered scripture by the respective groups.

---

A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.

I'm using the text in Mark 10:17-31In Message 68 you made the assumption that the man asking Jesus how to inherit eternal life "certainly didn't consider giving to the poor."I wrote in Message 70 "Now you don't know that for a fact. The man was unwilling to sell everything he possessed and give it to the poor and then follow the physical Jesus, but odds are that if he was following the other commandments realistically he probably gave something to the poor. Maybe a little, maybe alot, and maybe nothing. Not an assumption we can make."

quote:

---

That "if" is a big one there.

---

Not really. I guess I should have written "since" he was following the other commandments.

quote:

---

You are out of context. Let's go back to the original question.

---

Not sure how you figure I have read the story incorrectly.Original question: The answer: End of answer. Then the man declares that he has kept these commandments since he was a boy.Then Jesus states: Jesus specifically says that by doing this the man will gain treasure in heaven, not eternal life. Giving up everything is extra. As I explained in Message 61 Jesus supposedly promised that those who gave up everything to follow him would receive a hundred times as much in their present age and in the age to come. Unfortunately neither that verse nor the conversation it was a part of is an example of an upright/lawful individual being condemned by Jesus or God because they didn't believe in Jesus or God.When an author writes a work, he/she has a purpose, theme, plot, goal etc., however you want to say it, they are inspired for a reason. The finished work has a purpose. As I mentioned earlier the author of James was dealing with temporal life.As I'm sure you know, the books of the Bible, old and new, were written over a period of time to different audiences. When you pull a verse from a conversation written in the book of John to support, prove, confirm, etc., a statement in another book; you run into problems. The author of John did not set out to support or explain the Book of Mark. The author of John gave several prerequisites for eternal life. Do any of these support what Jesus said to the man? No.
To understand what the author of John was trying to promote, you would need to go to the Book of John thread and continue discussion there.My point for this thread and the story we are discussing is that the man asked straight out what he needed to do to inherit eternal life. Jesus gave a straight answer, which did not mention belief that Jesus was the messiah.As I stated before, Jesus gave the man the minimum necessary for eternal life, the rest is icing on the cake. Do you advocate that Jesus was wrong in what he told the man?

---

A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.

quote:

---

The standard for what is or is not Scripture is established by God, and humans merely try to find out what does or does not fit this standard. Any book wrongfully included in the canon is not Scripture. Likewise, the Bible in it's original text (Hebrew and Greek) is God-inspired, but any human error in translation is not God-inspired.

---

Where does God establish this standard?How would we know if something is wrongfully included in the canon?Unfortunately for us the original texts supposedly don't exist anymore. So all we are left with are copies not inspired by God and translations not inspired by God.Your definition leaves us with nothing inspired.My understanding of 2 Timothy 3:16 is that the Scripture in question is at a minimum the Law and the Prophets and at the most the Hebrew Bible of the time.I base this on verse 14-15 If 2 Timothy was written by Paul, as I said before, the Hebrew scriptures would have been the holy scripture in mind. Paul was supposedly writing to Timothy and advising him that the hebrew scripture was inspired by God and useful for teaching, training, etc., righteousness (just, lawful behavior).Now if later authors wish to state that what became the NT scripture is inspired by God and useful for training, they can, but putting Paul's approval on anything canonized after his time is opening the door to difficulty.

---

A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.

The relevance is, pay attention to what you are writing.In Message 23 you stated:

quote:

---

but as 2 Timothy 3:16 says, "All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting, and training in righteousness." Meaning I can refute your argument with other parts of John, but I can also do it with other books of the Bible.

---

Understand what the author truly has Paul support and use the verse accordingly.Don't put yourself in an untenable situation, such as only errors are not inspired by God.

---

A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.

Shouldn’t look a gift horse in the mouth.The Bible is a collection of writings by various authors. To the best of my knowledge, the traditional authors did not help to canonize their own writings.Webster’s Dictionary
Err — 1. to be wrong or mistaken, 2. to deviate from established moral code.
Errant — 2. erring or straying from what is right Inerrant - wholly true or without mistake (Christian definition)

quote:

---

So, are you trying to say that the Scripture is not inerrant? That's a tall order. 2 Timothy 3:16 clearly establishes this, but so does John 10:35.

---

What I have tried to impress upon you is to read each book as a whole, understand what the author is saying. If you believe that God inspired the authors, then read the authors work as a whole, not as inspired one-liners.The verses you shared above do not say that Scripture is inerrant as Christianity defines it. 2 Timothy 3:16 — Is one of the Pastorals, which are not considered to be written by Paul. Paul was an evangelist and the writer of the Pastorals dealt with organization. If you read the link, you will find that the Pastorals had their purpose. The writer was speaking of the OT not NT writings.John 10:35 — Again read the whole answer and you’ll find the author is still speaking of the OT. The statement is actually in Psalm 82:6, which isn’t considered the Law. 2 Peter 1:21 is dealing with prophecy and not Scripture. Prophecy isn’t always written down.

quote:

---

You can't really say from a Christian perspective that the Bible is not inerrant because
A: The Bible clearly establishes its inerrancy
B: It would be silly to think that an all-powerful God would allow his Scripture to be inconsistent.

---

The authors of the writings within the Bible compilation do not establish the Christian definition of inerrancy for the Bible as a compiled work.What’s silly is for people to distort God’s inspired purpose of the writings.How can you understand or know God if you don’t understand the purpose of the writings you believe he inspired?Societies change over time. I would expect an all powerful god to inspire his people to deal with their current situation, not a past one.Bottom line: The authors of your verses did not give their stamp of approval on writings that are deemed scripture after their time. They do not claim that all scripture is without mistakes.No, I do not believe in Bible inerrancy as defined by Christianity.

---

A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.

With great disappointment Purpledawn reads the "General Reply" post from commike37. Sighing she leans back in her chair and ponders their discussion. Her white cat, Lady, jumps into her open lap. As Purpledawn thoughtfully strokes the soft white fur and listens to Lady's soothing purr, she wonders, where did I go wrong? Why didn't he comprehend?"That's it!" she exclaimed outloud. The startled cat leaped from her lap and hid under the desk. Purpledawn quickly clicks back to the opening post and reads the changes. I don't believe I didn't see this before. I must be getting dense in my old age.Quickly she formulates a reply and checks the earlier posts for confirmation. Excitedly she types her reply post. Clicking the preview button, Purpledawn leans back in her chair to read her post. After making a few minor word changes, she reads a final preview.Now maybe he can concentrate on dealing with message 73 which does deal with the thread topic.Finally satisfied with the wording, she clicks the "Submit Reply" button.This message has been edited by purpledawn, 01-04-2005 13:48 AM

---

A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.