There is also the parable of the sheep and goats (Matthew 25). Salvation is tied to good works like visiting the sick. I never will understand why Christians always tend to ignore what their own savior says.
Judgement day reveals what our nature is. Good works are the results of true faith, the results of a changed nature – becoming a sheep. My sheep hear My voice and follow Me. (John 10:27) Good works are the pre-conditions for salvation, but good works are the necessary result of true conversion (repentance and faith in Christ). You must be changed from a goat to a sheep. (2 Cor. 5:17; John 3:1-10; Ezekiel 36:26-27)
Luke certainly teaches that repentance and trust in Christ the Messiah is based on His atonement / sacrifice on the cross and the resurrection from the dead (Luke 18:26-33; Luke 22:19-20; Luke chapters 23-24, details of trials, crucifixion, death, resurrection; Luke 24:25-27; 32; 44-49), and His Deity as the Son of God. (Luke 1:34-35)
Luke teaches Jesus was a prophet, and more than a mere human prophet. He was also sinless, Son of God, Savior, LORD (Yahweh and master)
The baby was LORD (Yahweh, kurios), Messiah, Savior from sin. (Luke 2:11)
The baby was the Son of God. Luke 1:34-35
The atonement on the cross on necessary. Luke 24:25-27; 24:44-47)
Good works are NOT the pre-conditions for salvation, but good works are the necessary result of true conversion (repentance and faith in Christ). You must be changed from a goat to a sheep. (2 Cor. 5:17; John 3:1-10; Ezekiel 36:26-27)
Blah, blah, blah. The parable does not say any of this nonsense. These are just later “add-ons”. It’s like when you buy a car and the salesman tries to get you to get more “features”, which causes the price to go up.
The parable indicates that salvation was incumbent upon good works. That’s it.
The interesting thing about the parable is that those who are described a “goats” (the sinners) are condemned to an eternity in hell, and the reason for that is not their lack of faith but because they neglected charitable deeds:
“Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.”
Now queue Kenny’s new escape route: I wish you peace in the pagan mangod savior…bye!
So, if you believe the parable in Matthew 25 is truly Jesus’ teaching, then do you believe the part about God as His Father (Matthew 25:34) (and therefore He is the Son), and that Jesus will sit on His glorious throne (at the right hand of God the Father) ? Matthew 25:31
And do you agree that His brothers are the true sheep, the true believers? (Matthew 25:40) And do you agree that “His brothers” saw Him resurrected from the dead and worshiped Him? (see Matthew 28:9-10)
And then there is the whole book of Matthew that teaches that Jesus came to be a ransom for many people, from all nations – Matthew 20:28; 26:28 – “the blood of the covenant, which is poured out for the forgiveness of sins”.
To be a true disciple of Jesus, one must repent and follow Him and do His will, which shows who the real followers/ brothers/sheep are. (Matthew 4:17; 12:48-50)
This is all fully consistent with the apostle Paul’s teaching, since good works and obedience are the results of true faith – see Ephesians 2:10, the result of verses 8-9
“We are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works . . . Ephesians 2:10
Kenny, what the gospel of Matthew teaches elsewhere is not the issue here. I don’t believe in your gospels, so I couldn’t care less what Matthew says. I am merely pointing out that your own scripture contradicts your theology, which any serious historian and theologian will tell you was developed over centuries. The parable of the sheep and goats shows that there is no blood atonement by your mangod savior.
Wrong, my first 3 points are about truths within the parable itself.
So, if you believe the parable in Matthew 25 is truly Jesus’ teaching, then do you believe the part about God as His Father (Matthew 25:34) (and therefore He is the Son), and that Jesus will sit on His glorious throne (at the right hand of God the Father) ? Matthew 25:31
And do you agree that His brothers are the true sheep, the true believers? (Matthew 25:40)
Blah, blah, blah. I am sure the only people impressed with this rubbish are brainwashed Christians like Kenny.
The theology of Paul and his cronies does not agree where it matters: with what Jesus supposedly says in the Bible. Salvation was based on good deeds according to the parable of the sheep and goats. the Bible cannot even agree with itself on the most fundamental issue: salvation.
Jesus’ teaching in Matthew is fully consistent with the theology of the apostle Paul, as I demonstrated above. (Ephesians 2:10 – good works are the result of true faith, flowing from verses 8-9)
Matthew also taught Jesus is the Savior, and His atonement on the cross and resurrection are the way of salvation. One must repent and turn to Him and follow Him.
Matthew 1:21
Matthew 19:25-26
Matthew 20:28
Matthew 26:28
The life of discipleship starts with repentance (Matthew 4:17), but continues with taking up your cross, following Jesus, doing good works and worshiping Jesus, doing His will, preaching the gospel and making disciples. (Matthew 28:9-20)
“Irrelevant because Paul contradicted Jesus on the issue of salvation. It doesn’t matter if he agreed on loving your neighbor.”
No, you are wrong. He did not contradict Jesus. Both agreed that salvation is through the law:
Rom 2:
12 For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law; 13 (For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.
“I also agree with Ken. I am just defending Paul against the accusation that he did not uphold the law.”
In many cases, he did not.
Moreover, if upholding the law is still required, then you are contradicting Paul who said it was not. See the Colossians quote above. Paul’s confusion has evidently passed onto you Christians as well. Everyone gives different answers. Your fellow Christian madman has even said in the past that homosexuals should be killed as the law requires, but other Christians say that such laws have been abolished. Why can’t you guys even agree on this?
Um, yes he did. Paul did contradict himself on this issue, but his most emphatic opinion was that the law was no longer required because it had been replaced by Jesus’ atonement. Here are some examples:
“…having canceled the charge of our legal indebtedness, which stood against us and condemned us; he has taken it away, nailing it to the cross” (Colossians 2:14)
““Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day.”” (Col. 2:16)
““For he himself is our peace, who has made the two groups one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, by setting aside in his flesh the law with its commands and regulations.”” (Ephesians, 2:14-15)
But as I noted in my article on Paul, he seemed to switch sides in his later epistles. As Burton Mack stated:
““In his letter to the Galatians, Paul had been adamant about the freedom of Christians from any sense of being beholden to the Jewish law, and he had been forceful in his assertion that the experience of the spirit was a sufficient basis for guidance in living the Christian life. In the Corinthian correspondence that confidence is no longer obvious. In its place is a studied attempt to interject the language of sobriety, considerateness, constraint, law, loyalty, obedience, and judgment in his discourse about the spirit, the body, and the Christian life. […] He could now say that ‘obeying the commandments of God is everything’ (1 Cor. 7:19).””
I think scholars need confusion otherwise they would have nothing to do which would be probably be more beneficial for mankind or learn a useful trade.
I think it is fairly easy to harmonize Jesus, Paul and James on the law if one wishes to do so. Where there is a will there is a way.
I think you guys are afraid of objective and scholarly discussion because it exposes the holes in your religion. An objective analysis of the New Testament shows obvious signs of conflict between the teachings ascribed to Jesus and Paul. I already showed Paul’s confused views. There is no way to reasonably reconcile the differences.
That pretty much sums up your bias and subjectivity. If you want to make two pieces of a puzzle fit, even though the shapes don’t line up, you could so. Where there is a will, there is a way. Of course, even if you could force the pieces to fit, the finished product would look terrible.
I Corinthians 7:19 is talking about the results of being a new creation.
See Galatians 6:15
When you are changed by the new birth and become a new creature (2 Cor. 5:17), a true sheep (Matthew 25; John 10:27), then you will do good works and obey the commandments of God.
It is all fully consistent with each other; all 27 books of the NT are one unified whole with no contradictions.
The New Testament is a collection of books written by different people with different views. Sometimes they do not agree (cf Matthew and Paul on the place of the Law in a disciple’s life).
Some books are probably forgeries (as is now recognised by most scholars) eg 2 Peter and the Pastoral Epistles.
Some books contain predictions that did not come true (Mark 13/Matt 24).
The gospels contain contradictory accounts of the life of Jesus (see the discrepant birth narratives).
Only religious fundamentalists suppress the truth of these things and implausibly claim, ‘all 27 books of the NT are one unified whole with no contradictions.’
” Of course, even if you could force the pieces to fit, the finished product would look terrible.”
If you can prove that I am doing that fair enough. But as I see it you are just demonstrating your bias and subjectivity, not providing any evidence, in asserting that this is the case as far as Christianity is concerned.
Just a few observations from the NT, which come to mind as I write, which you would have to overturn to convince me personally that the jigsaw pieces don’t fit together as you claim.
Jesus never said he would not abrogate the law. He only said he would not destroy it. He has abrogated some of the law by fulfilling it as he said he would.
When Paul says that we are not justified by the works of the law he means our own personal works of the law cannot justify us. We cannot build a righteousness by our own works that will justify us eternally before God. At the same time we must be justified eternally by the works of the law, as I quoted Paul above Rom 2 v 13 the doers of the law shall be justified.
So this is the predicament. We must be righteous in terms of the law but we cannot do it with our own imperfect lives.
Solution, Jesus lived his perfect life and his righteousness is imputed to us and counted as our own. We are thus justified because we are the doers of the law in God’s sight but not with our own righteousness but the righteousness of Christ.
When James talks about justification he doesn’t mean a justification by which we are eternally justified before God but a justification which justifies us before men, not just before God, and vindicates our saved and sanctified condition. It vindicates and displays our sanctification as a new creature through the good works which come through the new birth.
So, if you can convince me otherwise please go ahead and make the attempt.
Christian claim: ‘So this is the predicament. We must be righteous in terms of the law but we cannot do it with our own imperfect lives.’
Gospel of Luke: ‘In the days of King Herod of Judea, there was a priest named Zechariah, who belonged to the priestly order of Abijah. His wife was a descendant of Aaron, and her name was Elizabeth. 6 Both of them were righteous before God, living blamelessly according to all the commandments and regulations of the Lord.’ Luke 1.
Sometimes, the Scriptures are describing true believers in those terms, but not meaning that they are not sinners or that they are perfect.
Job and Noah are also described that way, but later they sinned and so the overall teaching of the Bible is that we as humans cannot live perfect or sinless as to the law, and we Christ as Savior and Lord.
Zechariah and Elizabeth are true believers.
Later, Zechariah is rebuked for his lack of faith – Luke 1:18-20
Then later in the gospel according to Luke, Zechariah’s prophesy about his son John the Baptist, demonstrates the message of John the Baptist is an emphasis on the need for redemption and salvation and forgiveness of sins – Luke 1:67-80
This is all consistent with the teaching of Jesus and the apostle Paul and the rest of the NT.
Luke 1:67-80 (with my emphasis)
67 And his father Zacharias was filled with the Holy Spirit, and prophesied, saying:
68 “Blessed be the Lord God of Israel,
For He has visited us and accomplished redemption for His people,
69 And has raised up a horn of salvation for us
In the house of David His servant—
70 As He spoke by the mouth of His holy prophets from of old—
71 Salvation from our enemies,
And from the hand of all who hate us;
72 To show mercy toward our fathers,
And to remember His holy covenant,
73 The oath which He swore to Abraham our father,
74 To grant us that we, being rescued from the hand of our enemies,
Might serve Him without fear,
75 In holiness and righteousness before Him all our days.
76 “And you, child, will be called the prophet of the Most High;
For you will go on before the Lord to prepare His ways;
77 To give to His people the knowledge of salvation
By the forgiveness of their sins,
78 Because of the tender mercy of our God,
With which the Sunrise from on high will visit us,
79 To shine upon those who sit in darkness and the shadow of death,
To guide our feet into the way of peace.”
80 And the child continued to grow and to become strong in spirit, and he lived in the deserts until the day of his public appearance to Israel.
“If you can prove that I am doing that fair enough. But as I see it you are just demonstrating your bias and subjectivity, not providing any evidence, in asserting that this is the case as far as Christianity is concerned.”
I already did prove it. You basically admitted that you can make the pieces fit if you really try.
“I think it is fairly easy to harmonize Jesus, Paul and James on the law if one wishes to do so.”
That’s pretty clear to me.
And I also already provided the evidence that they DO contradict each other. I provided evidence from Paul’s own mouth to show how confused he was in regards to the law. You responded with the typical Christian nonsense. You disparaged scholarly discussion but then failed to provide any evidence to refute said scholarly discussion.
“Solution, Jesus lived his perfect life and his righteousness is imputed to us and counted as our own. We are thus justified because we are the doers of the law in God’s sight but not with our own righteousness but the righteousness of Christ.”
And that’s where it all falls apart. Let me break your logic apart.
1. Jesus did NOT live a “perfect life”. He sinned on at least a couple of occasions. You know what I am talking about because we discussed this a few months ago on the original BT.
2. “Righteousness” cannot be “imputed”, because if it could then the parable of the sheep and goats would not make any sense.
Once again, you are forcing the pieces to fit even though there is no way for them to fit. You are anachronistically putting the blood atonement nonsense into the gospels. The gospels show that people were righteous in Gid’s sight before and after the coming of Jesus. Ergo, the fake justification and having your cake and eating it too contradicts what the gospels actually say.
Faiz: “2. “Righteousness” cannot be “imputed”, because if it could then the parable of the sheep and goats would not make any sense.”
Actually the parable fits well with how James defines justification from his viewpoint. It is everything but an islamic judgement where good and evil works are weighed against each other. Jesus is putting the works of the children of the kingdom on full view to vindicate their faith in him.
The parable is bad news for Muslims because Jesus rejects outright all good works that are not done with the motivation of serving him and the children of the kingdom. Muslims do good for Mohammed and Allah so according to the words of Jesus in this parable they are cursed.
“Actually the parable fits well with how James defines justification from his viewpoint. It is everything but an islamic judgement where good and evil works are weighed against each other. Jesus is putting the works of the children of the kingdom on full view to vindicate their faith in him.”
Pathetic. The parable makes it clear that salvation is tied to doing/not doing good deeds. Doing good deeds leads to paradise. Not doing good deeds leads to ETERNAL hellfire. So much for your savior’s atonement, eh?
To further demolish your atonement theology, notice what it says verse 32:
“All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats.”
If “all the nations” are gathered for judgement, and since not all nations will be Christian, then it is obvious from the parable that salvation is tied to good deeds. There is no indication of judgement based on faith. This just further demonstrates how confused the Biblical authors were.
“The parable is bad news for Muslims because Jesus rejects outright all good works that are not done with the motivation of serving him and the children of the kingdom. Muslims do good for Mohammed and Allah so according to the words of Jesus in this parable they are cursed.”
What are you smoking, Ignoramus? Are you Christians all just a bunch of self-serving heretics? Why are you contradicting your own scripture? The parable states:
“When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39 When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’”
The righteous didn’t realize that what they were doing was also being done to the king. So how could they have been doing it “with the motivation of serving him”? Grow up Ignoramus. Your self-serving heresies will be the end of you.
“Sorry but your jigsaw pieces don’t fit together.”
They fit together perfectly, as opposed to your forced fitting. The parable does not fit with the later blood atonement theology of your heretical church. Sorry…
Job (Job 1:1) and Noah (Genesis 6:9) are also described that way, but later they sinned and so the overall teaching of the Bible is that we as humans cannot live perfect or sinless as to the law, and we NEED Christ as Savior and Lord.
Except Jesus the Messiah actually did say those words. It does not matter what liberal scholarship says. The true and living God did not author the Qur’an – the author did not even know history (Surah 4:157) or what Christians believed for centuries (6:101; 5:72-78; 5:116)
Your dismissal of critical scholarship as ‘liberal’ shows how little you are familiar with the subject. It is the mainstream conservative view too. Only extreme fundies like yourself have an issue with it.
“Your dismissal of critical scholarship as ‘liberal’ shows how little you are familiar with the subject. It is the mainstream conservative view too. Only extreme fundies like yourself have an issue with it.”
When Jesus said preach the gospel to every creature that implies to me that every creature is in need of it, no exceptions.
James 3 v 2 “In many things we offend all”,
5 v 19 Brethren, if any of you do err from the truth, and one convert him; 20 Let him know, that he which converteth the sinner from the error of his way shall save a soul from death, and shall hide a multitude of sins.
“shall hide a multitude of sins”.
Everyone who errs from the truth and converts to Jesus has a multitude of sins according to James, no exceptions.
Faiz: “Pathetic. The parable makes it clear that salvation is tied to doing/not doing good deeds. Doing good deeds leads to paradise. Not doing good deeds leads to ETERNAL hellfire. So much for your savior’s atonement, eh? ”
Nobody is denying that salvation and good deeds are related. You keep parroting this strawman. The point is how.
In the parable both the righteous and the unrighteous have good deeds. In fact they are the same. So it can’t be the case that good deeds merit paradise because both groups are claiming the same good deeds. The one group is righteous and the other is not even though the unrighteous are claiming the same good deeds as the righteous and expecting the same reward.
It must be grace that makes the difference and Jesus highlights this fact by pointing out that they are chosen from the foundation of the world.
The parable contradicts the claims of Islam and all other legalists.
“Nobody is denying that salvation and good deeds are related. You keep parroting this strawman. The point is how.”
How? It clearly states: do good deeds, go to heaven. Nothing there about your blood atonement or justification through Jesus nonsense. You have done a horrible job of defending your heretical theology. The name Ignoramus fits you really well!
“In the parable both the righteous and the unrighteous have good deeds. In fact they are the same. So it can’t be the case that good deeds merit paradise because both groups are claiming the same good deeds. The one group is righteous and the other is not even though the unrighteous are claiming the same good deeds as the righteous and expecting the same reward.”
Again with the lies? The parable specifically separates those who do good deeds from those who don’t. Why do you keep lying against your scripture?
“Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.”
“It must be grace that makes the difference and Jesus highlights this fact by pointing out that they are chosen from the foundation of the world.”
No, it must be that you are a brainwashed pagan trinitarian who can’t come to terms with the fact that his Bible does not endorse his heretical beliefs.
“The parable contradicts the claims of Islam and all other legalists.”
As a matter of fact, it actually confirms Islam and destroys Christianity. LOL!!
“Again with the lies? The parable specifically separates those who do good deeds from those who don’t. Why do you keep lying against your scripture?”
Why do you accuse me of lying?
Jesus says in the parable that both groups have the same good deeds:
” 44 Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee? 45 Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me. ”
Jesus says twice to the unrighteous “ye did it….” acknowledging that they did the same works as the righteous.
The only difference being that the unrighteous did not minister to Jesus by their good deeds, which were exactly the same as the good deeds of the righteous. Thus they were lost in spite of those deeds.
The clear teaching of the NT is that good works of the believer are the effects of grace and are not meritorious for eternal justification.
Oh Lord, Ignoramus is getting delirious or just doesn’t know how to read:
“Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me. ””
In other words, they DID NOT feed the hungry or visit the sick. That is what separates them from the righteous who DID feed the hungry and visit the sick.
“Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee? ”
If they didn’t actually do any of these things to anyone their question would be irrational, much like your comments.
They were asking with regard to what they did for Jesus. They were confused, much like you are. Then your savior clarified that they didn’t do those things to him because they didn’t do it fo those who needed it, i.e. the poor and sick. Come on now. Try to use your intelligence, whatever is left of it. I know the Christian virus has left it’s Mark.
There is no evidence that they were confused. They knew what they had done and not done. It is obvious from their response that they had not left these things undone as you claim.
There is evidence that they were confused and that you are an idiot. They specifically asked when Jesus needed to be fed and yet they didn’t feed him. He answered that they didn’t feed the poor. Why can’t you get that through your pagan head? Has Christianity completely destroyed your brain?
There is also the parable of the sheep and goats (Matthew 25). Salvation is tied to good works like visiting the sick. I never will understand why Christians always tend to ignore what their own savior says.
Judgement day reveals what our nature is. Good works are the results of true faith, the results of a changed nature – becoming a sheep. My sheep hear My voice and follow Me. (John 10:27) Good works are the pre-conditions for salvation, but good works are the necessary result of true conversion (repentance and faith in Christ). You must be changed from a goat to a sheep. (2 Cor. 5:17; John 3:1-10; Ezekiel 36:26-27)
Luke certainly teaches that repentance and trust in Christ the Messiah is based on His atonement / sacrifice on the cross and the resurrection from the dead (Luke 18:26-33; Luke 22:19-20; Luke chapters 23-24, details of trials, crucifixion, death, resurrection; Luke 24:25-27; 32; 44-49), and His Deity as the Son of God. (Luke 1:34-35)
Luke teaches Jesus was a prophet, and more than a mere human prophet. He was also sinless, Son of God, Savior, LORD (Yahweh and master)
The baby was LORD (Yahweh, kurios), Messiah, Savior from sin. (Luke 2:11)
The baby was the Son of God. Luke 1:34-35
The atonement on the cross on necessary. Luke 24:25-27; 24:44-47)
Oops; typo:
Good works are NOT the pre-conditions for salvation, but good works are the necessary result of true conversion (repentance and faith in Christ). You must be changed from a goat to a sheep. (2 Cor. 5:17; John 3:1-10; Ezekiel 36:26-27)
Blah, blah, blah. The parable does not say any of this nonsense. These are just later “add-ons”. It’s like when you buy a car and the salesman tries to get you to get more “features”, which causes the price to go up.
The parable indicates that salvation was incumbent upon good works. That’s it.
The interesting thing about the parable is that those who are described a “goats” (the sinners) are condemned to an eternity in hell, and the reason for that is not their lack of faith but because they neglected charitable deeds:
“Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.”
Now queue Kenny’s new escape route: I wish you peace in the pagan mangod savior…bye!
So, if you believe the parable in Matthew 25 is truly Jesus’ teaching, then do you believe the part about God as His Father (Matthew 25:34) (and therefore He is the Son), and that Jesus will sit on His glorious throne (at the right hand of God the Father) ? Matthew 25:31
And do you agree that His brothers are the true sheep, the true believers? (Matthew 25:40) And do you agree that “His brothers” saw Him resurrected from the dead and worshiped Him? (see Matthew 28:9-10)
And then there is the whole book of Matthew that teaches that Jesus came to be a ransom for many people, from all nations – Matthew 20:28; 26:28 – “the blood of the covenant, which is poured out for the forgiveness of sins”.
To be a true disciple of Jesus, one must repent and follow Him and do His will, which shows who the real followers/ brothers/sheep are. (Matthew 4:17; 12:48-50)
This is all fully consistent with the apostle Paul’s teaching, since good works and obedience are the results of true faith – see Ephesians 2:10, the result of verses 8-9
“We are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works . . . Ephesians 2:10
LOL, notice Kenny’s attempt to move the goalpost.
Kenny, what the gospel of Matthew teaches elsewhere is not the issue here. I don’t believe in your gospels, so I couldn’t care less what Matthew says. I am merely pointing out that your own scripture contradicts your theology, which any serious historian and theologian will tell you was developed over centuries. The parable of the sheep and goats shows that there is no blood atonement by your mangod savior.
Wrong, my first 3 points are about truths within the parable itself.
So, if you believe the parable in Matthew 25 is truly Jesus’ teaching, then do you believe the part about God as His Father (Matthew 25:34) (and therefore He is the Son), and that Jesus will sit on His glorious throne (at the right hand of God the Father) ? Matthew 25:31
And do you agree that His brothers are the true sheep, the true believers? (Matthew 25:40)
Loving your enemy also counts as a good work according to Jesus.
Which only further obliterates Paul’s corruption of Jesus’ message. So what’s your point?
Loving your enemy is also what Paul taught:
Rom 13 v 10: Love worketh no ill to his neighbour: therefore love is the fulfilling of the law.
Galatians 5:14:
For the entire law is fulfilled in keeping this one
command: “Love your neighbor as yourself.” …
Irrelevant because Paul contradicted Jesus on the issue of salvation. It doesn’t matter if he agreed on loving your neighbor.
Luke the physician was the traveling missionary doctor with the apostle Paul’s missionary team, so his theology fully agrees with the apostle Paul.
All 27 books of the NT are fully consistent and one message with each other.
Good works are the result of true faith. True faith, trust in Christ to save from sin always has real repentance from sin within it.
True repentance is based on the redemption at the cross. Luke 22:19-20; 24:46-47
Blah, blah, blah. I am sure the only people impressed with this rubbish are brainwashed Christians like Kenny.
The theology of Paul and his cronies does not agree where it matters: with what Jesus supposedly says in the Bible. Salvation was based on good deeds according to the parable of the sheep and goats. the Bible cannot even agree with itself on the most fundamental issue: salvation.
Jesus’ teaching in Matthew is fully consistent with the theology of the apostle Paul, as I demonstrated above. (Ephesians 2:10 – good works are the result of true faith, flowing from verses 8-9)
Matthew also taught Jesus is the Savior, and His atonement on the cross and resurrection are the way of salvation. One must repent and turn to Him and follow Him.
Matthew 1:21
Matthew 19:25-26
Matthew 20:28
Matthew 26:28
The life of discipleship starts with repentance (Matthew 4:17), but continues with taking up your cross, following Jesus, doing good works and worshiping Jesus, doing His will, preaching the gospel and making disciples. (Matthew 28:9-20)
Once again, the parable of the sheep and goats completely refutes your rubbish.
Faiz:
December 27, 2018 • 9:01 pm
“Irrelevant because Paul contradicted Jesus on the issue of salvation. It doesn’t matter if he agreed on loving your neighbor.”
No, you are wrong. He did not contradict Jesus. Both agreed that salvation is through the law:
Rom 2:
12 For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law; 13 (For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.
I also agree with Ken. I am just defending Paul against the accusation that he did not uphold the law.
“I also agree with Ken. I am just defending Paul against the accusation that he did not uphold the law.”
In many cases, he did not.
Moreover, if upholding the law is still required, then you are contradicting Paul who said it was not. See the Colossians quote above. Paul’s confusion has evidently passed onto you Christians as well. Everyone gives different answers. Your fellow Christian madman has even said in the past that homosexuals should be killed as the law requires, but other Christians say that such laws have been abolished. Why can’t you guys even agree on this?
Um, yes he did. Paul did contradict himself on this issue, but his most emphatic opinion was that the law was no longer required because it had been replaced by Jesus’ atonement. Here are some examples:
“…having canceled the charge of our legal indebtedness, which stood against us and condemned us; he has taken it away, nailing it to the cross” (Colossians 2:14)
““Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day.”” (Col. 2:16)
““For he himself is our peace, who has made the two groups one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, by setting aside in his flesh the law with its commands and regulations.”” (Ephesians, 2:14-15)
But as I noted in my article on Paul, he seemed to switch sides in his later epistles. As Burton Mack stated:
““In his letter to the Galatians, Paul had been adamant about the freedom of Christians from any sense of being beholden to the Jewish law, and he had been forceful in his assertion that the experience of the spirit was a sufficient basis for guidance in living the Christian life. In the Corinthian correspondence that confidence is no longer obvious. In its place is a studied attempt to interject the language of sobriety, considerateness, constraint, law, loyalty, obedience, and judgment in his discourse about the spirit, the body, and the Christian life. […] He could now say that ‘obeying the commandments of God is everything’ (1 Cor. 7:19).””
https://quranandbibleblog.wordpress.com/2015/03/12/paul-and-the-evolution-of-christianity/
I think scholars need confusion otherwise they would have nothing to do which would be probably be more beneficial for mankind or learn a useful trade.
I think it is fairly easy to harmonize Jesus, Paul and James on the law if one wishes to do so. Where there is a will there is a way.
I think you guys are afraid of objective and scholarly discussion because it exposes the holes in your religion. An objective analysis of the New Testament shows obvious signs of conflict between the teachings ascribed to Jesus and Paul. I already showed Paul’s confused views. There is no way to reasonably reconcile the differences.
“Where there is a will there is a way.”
That pretty much sums up your bias and subjectivity. If you want to make two pieces of a puzzle fit, even though the shapes don’t line up, you could so. Where there is a will, there is a way. Of course, even if you could force the pieces to fit, the finished product would look terrible.
I Corinthians 7:19 is talking about the results of being a new creation.
See Galatians 6:15
When you are changed by the new birth and become a new creature (2 Cor. 5:17), a true sheep (Matthew 25; John 10:27), then you will do good works and obey the commandments of God.
It is all fully consistent with each other; all 27 books of the NT are one unified whole with no contradictions.
The New Testament is a collection of books written by different people with different views. Sometimes they do not agree (cf Matthew and Paul on the place of the Law in a disciple’s life).
Some books are probably forgeries (as is now recognised by most scholars) eg 2 Peter and the Pastoral Epistles.
Some books contain predictions that did not come true (Mark 13/Matt 24).
The gospels contain contradictory accounts of the life of Jesus (see the discrepant birth narratives).
Only religious fundamentalists suppress the truth of these things and implausibly claim, ‘all 27 books of the NT are one unified whole with no contradictions.’
very interesting topic, thank you for sharing.
” Of course, even if you could force the pieces to fit, the finished product would look terrible.”
If you can prove that I am doing that fair enough. But as I see it you are just demonstrating your bias and subjectivity, not providing any evidence, in asserting that this is the case as far as Christianity is concerned.
Just a few observations from the NT, which come to mind as I write, which you would have to overturn to convince me personally that the jigsaw pieces don’t fit together as you claim.
Jesus never said he would not abrogate the law. He only said he would not destroy it. He has abrogated some of the law by fulfilling it as he said he would.
When Paul says that we are not justified by the works of the law he means our own personal works of the law cannot justify us. We cannot build a righteousness by our own works that will justify us eternally before God. At the same time we must be justified eternally by the works of the law, as I quoted Paul above Rom 2 v 13 the doers of the law shall be justified.
So this is the predicament. We must be righteous in terms of the law but we cannot do it with our own imperfect lives.
Solution, Jesus lived his perfect life and his righteousness is imputed to us and counted as our own. We are thus justified because we are the doers of the law in God’s sight but not with our own righteousness but the righteousness of Christ.
When James talks about justification he doesn’t mean a justification by which we are eternally justified before God but a justification which justifies us before men, not just before God, and vindicates our saved and sanctified condition. It vindicates and displays our sanctification as a new creature through the good works which come through the new birth.
So, if you can convince me otherwise please go ahead and make the attempt.
Christian claim: ‘So this is the predicament. We must be righteous in terms of the law but we cannot do it with our own imperfect lives.’
Gospel of Luke: ‘In the days of King Herod of Judea, there was a priest named Zechariah, who belonged to the priestly order of Abijah. His wife was a descendant of Aaron, and her name was Elizabeth. 6 Both of them were righteous before God, living blamelessly according to all the commandments and regulations of the Lord.’ Luke 1.
Sometimes, the Scriptures are describing true believers in those terms, but not meaning that they are not sinners or that they are perfect.
Job and Noah are also described that way, but later they sinned and so the overall teaching of the Bible is that we as humans cannot live perfect or sinless as to the law, and we Christ as Savior and Lord.
Zechariah and Elizabeth are true believers.
Later, Zechariah is rebuked for his lack of faith – Luke 1:18-20
Then later in the gospel according to Luke, Zechariah’s prophesy about his son John the Baptist, demonstrates the message of John the Baptist is an emphasis on the need for redemption and salvation and forgiveness of sins – Luke 1:67-80
This is all consistent with the teaching of Jesus and the apostle Paul and the rest of the NT.
Luke 1:67-80 (with my emphasis)
67 And his father Zacharias was filled with the Holy Spirit, and prophesied, saying:
68 “Blessed be the Lord God of Israel,
For He has visited us and accomplished redemption for His people,
69 And has raised up a horn of salvation for us
In the house of David His servant—
70 As He spoke by the mouth of His holy prophets from of old—
71 Salvation from our enemies,
And from the hand of all who hate us;
72 To show mercy toward our fathers,
And to remember His holy covenant,
73 The oath which He swore to Abraham our father,
74 To grant us that we, being rescued from the hand of our enemies,
Might serve Him without fear,
75 In holiness and righteousness before Him all our days.
76 “And you, child, will be called the prophet of the Most High;
For you will go on before the Lord to prepare His ways;
77 To give to His people the knowledge of salvation
By the forgiveness of their sins,
78 Because of the tender mercy of our God,
With which the Sunrise from on high will visit us,
79 To shine upon those who sit in darkness and the shadow of death,
To guide our feet into the way of peace.”
80 And the child continued to grow and to become strong in spirit, and he lived in the deserts until the day of his public appearance to Israel.
‘Sometimes, the Scriptures are describing true believers in those terms, but not meaning that they are not sinners or that they are perfect.’
I agree. But God calls them “righteous” nonetheless.
The proves false Paul’s claim that saving righteousness under the law is impossible.
“If you can prove that I am doing that fair enough. But as I see it you are just demonstrating your bias and subjectivity, not providing any evidence, in asserting that this is the case as far as Christianity is concerned.”
I already did prove it. You basically admitted that you can make the pieces fit if you really try.
“I think it is fairly easy to harmonize Jesus, Paul and James on the law if one wishes to do so.”
That’s pretty clear to me.
And I also already provided the evidence that they DO contradict each other. I provided evidence from Paul’s own mouth to show how confused he was in regards to the law. You responded with the typical Christian nonsense. You disparaged scholarly discussion but then failed to provide any evidence to refute said scholarly discussion.
“Solution, Jesus lived his perfect life and his righteousness is imputed to us and counted as our own. We are thus justified because we are the doers of the law in God’s sight but not with our own righteousness but the righteousness of Christ.”
And that’s where it all falls apart. Let me break your logic apart.
1. Jesus did NOT live a “perfect life”. He sinned on at least a couple of occasions. You know what I am talking about because we discussed this a few months ago on the original BT.
2. “Righteousness” cannot be “imputed”, because if it could then the parable of the sheep and goats would not make any sense.
Once again, you are forcing the pieces to fit even though there is no way for them to fit. You are anachronistically putting the blood atonement nonsense into the gospels. The gospels show that people were righteous in Gid’s sight before and after the coming of Jesus. Ergo, the fake justification and having your cake and eating it too contradicts what the gospels actually say.
Faiz: “2. “Righteousness” cannot be “imputed”, because if it could then the parable of the sheep and goats would not make any sense.”
Actually the parable fits well with how James defines justification from his viewpoint. It is everything but an islamic judgement where good and evil works are weighed against each other. Jesus is putting the works of the children of the kingdom on full view to vindicate their faith in him.
The parable is bad news for Muslims because Jesus rejects outright all good works that are not done with the motivation of serving him and the children of the kingdom. Muslims do good for Mohammed and Allah so according to the words of Jesus in this parable they are cursed.
Sorry but your jigsaw pieces don’t fit together.
“Actually the parable fits well with how James defines justification from his viewpoint. It is everything but an islamic judgement where good and evil works are weighed against each other. Jesus is putting the works of the children of the kingdom on full view to vindicate their faith in him.”
Pathetic. The parable makes it clear that salvation is tied to doing/not doing good deeds. Doing good deeds leads to paradise. Not doing good deeds leads to ETERNAL hellfire. So much for your savior’s atonement, eh?
To further demolish your atonement theology, notice what it says verse 32:
“All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats.”
If “all the nations” are gathered for judgement, and since not all nations will be Christian, then it is obvious from the parable that salvation is tied to good deeds. There is no indication of judgement based on faith. This just further demonstrates how confused the Biblical authors were.
“The parable is bad news for Muslims because Jesus rejects outright all good works that are not done with the motivation of serving him and the children of the kingdom. Muslims do good for Mohammed and Allah so according to the words of Jesus in this parable they are cursed.”
What are you smoking, Ignoramus? Are you Christians all just a bunch of self-serving heretics? Why are you contradicting your own scripture? The parable states:
“When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39 When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’”
The righteous didn’t realize that what they were doing was also being done to the king. So how could they have been doing it “with the motivation of serving him”? Grow up Ignoramus. Your self-serving heresies will be the end of you.
“Sorry but your jigsaw pieces don’t fit together.”
They fit together perfectly, as opposed to your forced fitting. The parable does not fit with the later blood atonement theology of your heretical church. Sorry…
Job (Job 1:1) and Noah (Genesis 6:9) are also described that way, but later they sinned and so the overall teaching of the Bible is that we as humans cannot live perfect or sinless as to the law, and we NEED Christ as Savior and Lord.
that is false to the Jewish scriptures that describe many people as “righteous before God” without ever hearing of Jesus. So mega fail Ken.
Kenny bites the dust. Again.
They were looking forward to the Messiah, just like Abraham and David.
Genesis 15:1-6
John 8:56-58
no mention of messiah. Pure fantasy.
Jesus, in John 8:56-58, said that is the meaning of Genesis 15:1-6 and 22:1-18, and Jesus’ apostle, Paul, said this also with Galatians 3:6-8; 3:16
LOL Virtually NO New Testament scholar believes Jesus actually said those words. It’s the creation of a late first century writer. Get real.
Except Jesus the Messiah actually did say those words. It does not matter what liberal scholarship says. The true and living God did not author the Qur’an – the author did not even know history (Surah 4:157) or what Christians believed for centuries (6:101; 5:72-78; 5:116)
Your dismissal of critical scholarship as ‘liberal’ shows how little you are familiar with the subject. It is the mainstream conservative view too. Only extreme fundies like yourself have an issue with it.
Kenny has been burned on this already. He just repeats the same garbage over and over again. I think he must have the memory span of a gold fish.
A gold fish with memory problems.
“Your dismissal of critical scholarship as ‘liberal’ shows how little you are familiar with the subject. It is the mainstream conservative view too. Only extreme fundies like yourself have an issue with it.”
OUCH!!
Little Kenny gets burned again!
When Jesus said preach the gospel to every creature that implies to me that every creature is in need of it, no exceptions.
James 3 v 2 “In many things we offend all”,
5 v 19 Brethren, if any of you do err from the truth, and one convert him; 20 Let him know, that he which converteth the sinner from the error of his way shall save a soul from death, and shall hide a multitude of sins.
“shall hide a multitude of sins”.
Everyone who errs from the truth and converts to Jesus has a multitude of sins according to James, no exceptions.
Faiz: “Pathetic. The parable makes it clear that salvation is tied to doing/not doing good deeds. Doing good deeds leads to paradise. Not doing good deeds leads to ETERNAL hellfire. So much for your savior’s atonement, eh? ”
Nobody is denying that salvation and good deeds are related. You keep parroting this strawman. The point is how.
In the parable both the righteous and the unrighteous have good deeds. In fact they are the same. So it can’t be the case that good deeds merit paradise because both groups are claiming the same good deeds. The one group is righteous and the other is not even though the unrighteous are claiming the same good deeds as the righteous and expecting the same reward.
It must be grace that makes the difference and Jesus highlights this fact by pointing out that they are chosen from the foundation of the world.
The parable contradicts the claims of Islam and all other legalists.
“Nobody is denying that salvation and good deeds are related. You keep parroting this strawman. The point is how.”
How? It clearly states: do good deeds, go to heaven. Nothing there about your blood atonement or justification through Jesus nonsense. You have done a horrible job of defending your heretical theology. The name Ignoramus fits you really well!
“In the parable both the righteous and the unrighteous have good deeds. In fact they are the same. So it can’t be the case that good deeds merit paradise because both groups are claiming the same good deeds. The one group is righteous and the other is not even though the unrighteous are claiming the same good deeds as the righteous and expecting the same reward.”
Again with the lies? The parable specifically separates those who do good deeds from those who don’t. Why do you keep lying against your scripture?
“Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.”
“It must be grace that makes the difference and Jesus highlights this fact by pointing out that they are chosen from the foundation of the world.”
No, it must be that you are a brainwashed pagan trinitarian who can’t come to terms with the fact that his Bible does not endorse his heretical beliefs.
“The parable contradicts the claims of Islam and all other legalists.”
As a matter of fact, it actually confirms Islam and destroys Christianity. LOL!!
“Again with the lies? The parable specifically separates those who do good deeds from those who don’t. Why do you keep lying against your scripture?”
Why do you accuse me of lying?
Jesus says in the parable that both groups have the same good deeds:
” 44 Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee? 45 Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me. ”
Jesus says twice to the unrighteous “ye did it….” acknowledging that they did the same works as the righteous.
The only difference being that the unrighteous did not minister to Jesus by their good deeds, which were exactly the same as the good deeds of the righteous. Thus they were lost in spite of those deeds.
The clear teaching of the NT is that good works of the believer are the effects of grace and are not meritorious for eternal justification.
Jesus taught salvation by works in the gospels
Oh Lord, Ignoramus is getting delirious or just doesn’t know how to read:
“Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me. ””
In other words, they DID NOT feed the hungry or visit the sick. That is what separates them from the righteous who DID feed the hungry and visit the sick.
““Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me. ”
Seems like a beginners course in logic would do you good.
He is obviously not saying that they did not do things at all but that they did not do these things to him.
Too much recital is affecting your brain obviously.
Looks like logic waved goodbye to you long ago.
He is obviously saying that by not doing good deeds to the sick or the poor, they also did not do it to him.
Too much pagan manworship is affecting your brain obviously. The Christian virus has destroyed what little reason you had left.
“Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee? ”
If they didn’t actually do any of these things to anyone their question would be irrational, much like your comments.
They were asking with regard to what they did for Jesus. They were confused, much like you are. Then your savior clarified that they didn’t do those things to him because they didn’t do it fo those who needed it, i.e. the poor and sick. Come on now. Try to use your intelligence, whatever is left of it. I know the Christian virus has left it’s Mark.
it’s left its Mark, Matthew, Luke and John with a stench of Paul on Ignoramus LOL
There is no evidence that they were confused. They knew what they had done and not done. It is obvious from their response that they had not left these things undone as you claim.
There is evidence that they were confused and that you are an idiot. They specifically asked when Jesus needed to be fed and yet they didn’t feed him. He answered that they didn’t feed the poor. Why can’t you get that through your pagan head? Has Christianity completely destroyed your brain?