Modern Faiths

[Bleed S & G]

This quote was in the middle of the parable I just posted in response to the material world being a form of worship to God..

Luke 18:19 "Why do you call me good?" Jesus answered. "No one is good?except God alone."

Sounds to me that Jesus is making a clear distinction between himself and God.

 

[BayBuck]

Ok, I see where your thoughts are at here..

I guess - you've got to change your ideas from those of "socitey" to the teachings of "scripture".. by that I mean..

There is no such thing as heaven. There is no such thing as hell.

This is a pagan thought that has it foundation in controling the masses. For example: "If you don't do this, you'll burn in hell. If you pay me money, you'll get into heaven."

There is no such thing as heaven & hell.. this is paradise. Remember Adam & Eve? It's your own sins that keep you from nirvana on this planet. Living with love, Jesus' teachings essentially, will bring you back into paradise.

Once you get past the concept of heaven & hell - a lot of other teachings will fall into place.


This is the Christian/Cathlioc teaching..

Jesus came, died for your sins, and as a result we have thrown out every law from God/Moses and will do things our own way. We will come up with our traditions, sacraments, and theology that we came up with a council full of corrupt men.

We will then become the most awesome and powerful force this world has ever known, because we have you (the common man) by the balls.

We control your fear - we control the unknown. Do this, and you'll live forever. Do that, and you'll burn forever.


I'm fairly certain that Islam dosen't practice this thinking - and neither does Judaism.

"Orginal sin" dosen't exsit in text.. it's been taught over so many years in the Christian faith (very similar to heaven & hell) that its accepted as fact.

You know whats worse than not having guidance of the spirtual nature? Letting the blind lead the blind. The foundation of Modern Christianity, so far as I'm concerned at this point in my research, is corrupt. Again, and not a word to use lightly, the whore.

Not to completely dismiss your efforts at research on these matters, but a lot of what you're saying here reflects a much more emotional response than a really studied one. It seems like you're recoiling against any established Christian-religious ideas simply because of some kind of conspiracy-theorist idea that organized religion is The Matrix and any of its interpretations of scripture are actually by definition perversions of it. You may not believe in hell, for instance, but there are some reasonable readings of the Bible to suggest it is a reality.

 

[Bleed S & G]

Not to completely dismiss your efforts at research on these matters, but a lot of what you're saying here reflects a much more emotional response than a really studied one. It seems like you're recoiling against any established Christian-religious ideas simply because of some kind of conspiracy-theorist idea that organized religion is The Matrix and any of its interpretations of scripture are actually by definition perversions of it. You may not believe in hell, for instance, but there are some reasonable readings of the Bible to suggest it is a reality.

Then debate my opinions with yours.. I think as you dive into it, you'll discover I've done a lot of research and alot of what I'm saying is historically accurate.

I think most willing to go to bat against these thoughts and opinions are responding emotionally as well. They have devoted their spiritual life and well being to a completely wrong idea.

I won't say that there isn't a conspiracy theory in there - but don't dismiss my opinions based on that. I use conspiracy theory lightly here.. it's really not a theory at all.. history shows how the Catholic church came to be.

Please share with me some of the "reasonable readings" of the Bible that suggest heaven & hell are reality.. I'd be willing to bet they are all from the New Testament, more so, they are probably not from the gospels but from the writings of Paul.

Bring something to the table Bay - besides calling me LVBuck and providing no evidence

 

[fanaticbuckeye]

Because the standard that you keep addressing for a reference as to what is sin and what isn't is found in the Mosaic Law (i.e. the Torah). IF your premise is correct; then wouldn't you think that it would have been known from the dispensation of the Torah?

To me, it would be quite unjust and unreasonable of a god to give instructions to his underlings, and then change the expectations or understanding centuries after the fact. Would you not agree?

If I have indirectly stated that the sins within the Old Testament are what I am living by solely, that's an error on my part. That is not the case. To illustrate my point, Thou shall not commit adultery is one of the ten commandments. Jesus takes it a step further that the thought of adultery is the same as the act, because you have already committed adultery in your heart.

1) But if one's debt is paid at their death; then Jesus is indeed irrelevant. This once again is an addition to the initial understanding given to Jews. Why the change so many centuries later?
2) And what of people who died before Jesus' death that would grant them access to Heaven?

Once again, death is the payment for sin. Death without forgiveness is hell. Jesus was sent because we and the Jews needed a savior. I cant answer for those pre-Jesus.

The consequences are in the "here and now". Doesn't it seem a little extreme to expect an eternal consequence for a temporal existence?

So is there an afterlife for a Jew? No it is not extreme, at all. So I ask again. As a Jew, you are one of God's people, no matter what, even if you don't follow his commands?

The verse I showed you was Psalm 45:8. That's in the Jewish Bible; not the Christian testament. Hence, the suggestion for perspective change.

I am traveling from New York to Los Angeles and have no idea how to get there. You have given me a map that details how to get there, but say 'you can only read from New York to Oklahoma City and use that for your entire journey.

The Old Testament is a part of the Holy Bible. Not the only place where facts are.

Then I'm afraid you don't have an argument. The Jewish Bible is more than just a theological treatise. It's THE history of the Jews. IF the Jews NEEDED a savior as your claim; THEN wouldn't you expect to find the substantiation within THE HISTORY of the JEWS? Why rely on a third party interpretation of events when you have primary source material at your fingertips?

I grant you that the Old Testament is more than theological treatise, but so is the New Testament. The entire collection of books from God.

Forgive me for being blunt, but this is not a "may be" situation. It's "yes" or "no". Can you answer with either?

Yes. God (the Son) was sacrificed for the sins of mankind.

Old Testament Prophecy:
Isaiah 53:4-5, Surely our griefs He Himself bore, and our sorrows He carried; yet we ourselves esteemed Him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted. 5 But He was pierced through for our transgressions. He was crushed for our iniquities. The chastening for our well-being fell upon Him and by His scourging we are healed.

Old Testament Vicarious atonement:
Genesis 22:13, ?Then Abraham raised his eyes and looked, and behold, behind him a ram caught in the thicket by his horns; and Abraham went and took the ram, and offered him up for a burnt offering in the place of his son.?

Now, I know you are familiar with those verses. But in the research of myself reconciling it as a substitute atonement, that is what I was able to find. But to the original point, God himself was sacrificed, so my point should have initially been, Jesus' sacrifice was not just another man paying for my sins, God was.

Based on what? A text (Christian testament)

Yes

that is divorced from the very foundation (the Jewish Bible) it is supposedly based upon?

You're going to need to find someone else to debate this. You will likely be the recipient of a 'copy and paste' argument that I am not interested in having. I suspect this will take a little longer for me to understand the Jewish religion more in depth. I have suspected that Jews will have their reasons for not following Christ, but that is one facet of the faith discussion that has yet to concern me. Although, it may now.

How do you receive the instruction in order to "live your life for God"?

God, through the Bible.

 

[fanaticbuckeye]

As I don't believe in hell, I'll play "devils" advocate..

If Jesus died for mans sins - why the need for reptenance? You're forgiven anyways.

To increase our love and singular devotion to God. We must not worship other gods or idols and without repentance, we are.

What about those who reject Jesus as God, but live his message of love?

They fall short. Jesus is the way to receiving God's grace.

What about the man in the rain forest, whos never heard the name of Jesus?

Romans 2:11-12
For God does not show favoritism. All who sin apart from the law will also perish apart from the law, and all who sin under the law will be judged by the law.

Sounds like a harsh god, certainly not one who hang and with his last breath ask for forgiveness for those who nailed him to the tree.

Follow?

I follow and understand, but disagree. Perhaps even more harsh, ignorance is no excuse for the law.

The best way I ever heard the trinity taught was back at Bishop Watterson High School..

"It's like H2O.. it can be ice, gas, or water - but it's the same element"

I liked that alot at the time.

I have never heard that before, interesting.

Jesus is not God.

I disagree.

Jesus never meant to have his message preverted to claim him as God.

John 8:58 - "I tell you the truth," Jesus answered, "before Abraham was born, I am!"

 

[Buckeyeskickbuttocks]

So you just keep letting them back in and act like nothing happened? Or are there consequences for misbehaving against your family and others?

No, I let them back in and act like something happened. The consequences do not include damnation or removal from my presence for eternity. Especially not for something as silly as cursing my name (which each of my kids has already done).

 

[jwinslow]

No, I let them back in and act like something happened.

How can you justify one set of consequences, driven by your upbringing, biases and decisions (which are likely imperfect like parents are on occasion), but chastise another set of consequences?

Is that consistent?

The consequences do not include damnation or removal from my presence for eternity.

And stealing a loaf of bread doesn't end hope for salvation.

Especially not for something as silly as cursing my name (which each of my kids has already done).

Taking G-d's name in vain and rejecting him altogether are very different things. I have a hard time believing your children have lived their lives that way towards you (not isolated incidents, their life approach to you), but feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[Bleed S & G]

To increase our love and singular devotion to God. We must not worship other gods or idols and without repentance, we are.

They fall short. Jesus is the way to receiving God's grace.


Romans 2:11-12
For God does not show favoritism. All who sin apart from the law will also perish apart from the law, and all who sin under the law will be judged by the law.

These are not the words of God through any prophet. Another great example of perverting the Word for power.

Matt 17:15

15"Beware of the (L)false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly are (M)ravenous wolves.

Paul wrote:
1 Cor 9:19

19For though I am (AK)free from all men, I have made myself (AL)a slave to all, so that I may (AM)win more.

20(AN)To the Jews I became as a Jew, so that I might win Jews; to those who are under the Law, as under the Law though (AO)not being myself under the Law, so that I might win those who are under the Law;
21to those who are (AP)without law, (AQ)as without law, though not being without the law of God but (AR)under the law of Christ, so that I might win those who are without law. 22To the (AS)weak I became weak, that I might win the weak; I have become (AT)all things to all men, (AU)so that I may by all means save some.

Sounds like a wolf dressed in sheep clothing to me..

Matthew 5:22

22"But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother shall be guilty before (A)the court; and whoever says to his brother, '[a]You good-for-nothing,' shall be guilty before [b](B)the supreme court; and whoever says, 'You fool,' shall be guilty enough to go into the [c](C)fiery hell.

And Paul went on to write:

1 Cor 15:36

36(L)You fool! That which you (M)sow does not come to life unless it dies;

Hmm.. now we are starting to get to my real beef with Christianity..

My beef with Christianity is.. it's throws out Jesus' teachings in favor of Pauls..

Pay attention here..

Matthew 5:19

Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven

Jesus says follow the Law.. don't break the commandments. If you do, you will be last in the kingdom of heaven.

Galatians 2:16

know that a man is not justified by observing the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ. So we, too, have put our faith in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by observing the law, because by observing the law no one will be justified.

Paul says, you don't need to observe the Law.. you just need to put faith in Christ Jesus.

Everytime I hear, 'if you don't accept Jesus as your savior you will burn in hell' I've got to chuckle.. most people don't understand that Jesus said to please God you must follow the Law.... but Paul said "ehh, [censored] the Law.. just believe in Jesus"

Who do you trust more.. Jesus or Paul?

Matthew 24:23

23 At that time if anyone says to you, 'Look, here is the Christ!' or, 'There he is!' do not believe it.
24 For false Christs and false prophets will appear and perform great signs and miracles to deceive even the elect?if that were possible.
25 See, I have told you ahead of time.
26 "So if anyone tells you, 'There he is, out in the desert,' do not go out; or, 'Here he is, in the inner rooms,' do not believe it.
27 For as lightning that comes from the east is visible even in the west, so will be the coming of the Son of Man.

Paul found Christ in both the desert & in an inner room..

He was converted in the desert by Christ..
Acts 9:3

3 As he neared Damascus on his journey, suddenly a light from heaven flashed around him. 4 He fell to the ground and heard a voice say to him, "Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?"

He was inspired by Christ to write the books of the Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, Philemon, and the Hebrews while locked away in an inner-room in Rome.

Jesus has called out what signs to avoid being decieved by the false phrophet of satan. Unfortuantley, most people don?t read scripture.

I follow and understand, but disagree. Perhaps even more harsh, ignorance is no excuse for the law.

But Christians ignore the law of God and practice the law of Man. Does that mean they are bad people? No, the soul is the judge. If they are doing right by their own conscious, then they are not sinners.

John 8:58 - "I tell you the truth," Jesus answered, "before Abraham was born, I am!"

This passage was already discussed.

Try this one, which I posted and was ignored:

Luke 18:19
"Why do you call me good?" Jesus answered. "No one is good?except God alone."

He is not a descendant from King David due to the Virgin Birth.

Quite a delimmia.

 

[fanaticbuckeye]

Try this one, which I posted and was ignored:

Luke 18:19
"Why do you call me good?" Jesus answered. "No one is good?except God alone."

He is not a descendant from King David due to the Virgin Birth.

Quite a delimmia.

Taken in its full context, also Mark 10:18. The same story is told and in Jesus advice is simply give away your riches and follow me. Jesus teaching was always, only listen and follow God and consistently said 'follow me'.

So he is not denying his divinity, simply questioning the rich man.

 

[muffler dragon]

If I have indirectly stated that the sins within the Old Testament are what I am living by solely, that's an error on my part. That is not the case. To illustrate my point, Thou shall not commit adultery is one of the ten commandments. Jesus takes it a step further that the thought of adultery is the same as the act, because you have already committed adultery in your heart.

I'm not following. According to your example, all Jesus did was interpret to what extent the "adultery" commandment reaches. It's still the same commandment from the Torah. Thus, you're dealing with the Torah; not a new commandment.

Once again, death is the payment for sin. Death without forgiveness is hell.

If death IS the payment for sin; then how is that dead person not forgiven?

Jesus was sent because we and the Jews needed a savior. I cant answer for those pre-Jesus.

I appreciate the honesty. I'll address the first sentence later.

So is there an afterlife for a Jew?

I would say that the common belief is that there is an afterlife.

No it is not extreme, at all.

I must ask for clarification: do you really believe that? Do you believe that IF you are not forgiven for a single sin in the here and now, that you would deserve eternal damnation and pain?

So I ask again. As a Jew, you are one of God's people, no matter what, even if you don't follow his commands?

I don't recall you asking me this. I'm not a Jew nor Jewish. However, I do believe that Jews are G-d's chosen people regardless of observance.

I am traveling from New York to Los Angeles and have no idea how to get there. You have given me a map that details how to get there, but say 'you can only read from New York to Oklahoma City and use that for your entire journey.

The Old Testament is a part of the Holy Bible. Not the only place where facts are.

The problem with this analogy is that you are under the ASSUMPTION that you don't/can't get all the directions you need. Whereas, I can tell you from my experience that you can. It's a matter of effort.

I should make something clear here: I don't care in the slightest if you are of the mindset that Christianity and Judaism are completely divergent and unrelated. In fact, it would probably make these sorts of discussions all that much easier. It's the picking and choosing that tends to send me screaming up the walls. And I'm not saying that you do this, because you haven't yet. But for me, it comes down to this: either Judaism and the Jewish Bible is foundational for Christianity and the Christian testament OR it isn't. Which way would you go on that?

I grant you that the Old Testament is more than theological treatise, but so is the New Testament. The entire collection of books from God.

Which is an unprovable belief. I believe that the Jewish Bible is the only portion; whereas, you take the whole kit and kaboodle of your 66 books. That's fine. However, this is a red herring from what I asked you since the Christian testament is NOT a book of Jewish history. Therefore, I will ask you the same question again. If you don't want to answer it or if you can't then that's fine. But please address it directly.

Yes. God (the Son) was sacrificed for the sins of mankind.

Okay. So going back, you would now agree that Jesus operates in the role of mediator. Correct?

Old Testament Prophecy:
Isaiah 53:4-5, Surely our griefs He Himself bore, and our sorrows He carried; yet we ourselves esteemed Him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted. 5 But He was pierced through for our transgressions. He was crushed for our iniquities. The chastening for our well-being fell upon Him and by His scourging we are healed.

I should note that I don't consider this passage Messianic; thus, I don't believe it deals with Jesus in the slightest. However, in order to keep us moving ahead...I ask, "Do you take this passage as literal or metaphorical?"

Old Testament Vicarious atonement:
Genesis 22:13, ?Then Abraham raised his eyes and looked, and behold, behind him a ram caught in the thicket by his horns; and Abraham went and took the ram, and offered him up for a burnt offering in the place of his son.?

Now, I know you are familiar with those verses. But in the research of myself reconciling it as a substitute atonement, that is what I was able to find.

I addressed the Isaiah passage above, but regarding the Genesis passage; how is this a vicarious atonement? The offering was not made to forgive sin.

But to the original point, God himself was sacrificed, so my point should have initially been, Jesus' sacrifice was not just another man paying for my sins, God was.

So you believe in a God that can die?

You're going to need to find someone else to debate this. You will likely be the recipient of a 'copy and paste' argument that I am not interested in having. I suspect this will take a little longer for me to understand the Jewish religion more in depth. I have suspected that Jews will have their reasons for not following Christ, but that is one facet of the faith discussion that has yet to concern me. Although, it may now.

I'm sorry. I wasn't looking to debate you on this. I was simply wanting to dialogue on it. And you're more than welcome to not discuss anything you don't want. I'm fully supportive of it.

As for whether you should be concerned with why Jews reject Jesus, I would probably steer you clear of it. Christians typically investigate that topic in order to find out how they can evangelize to the Jews. I would recommend that you not go down that path. If you're ever interested, then I'll be glad to enumerate a number of the points that I am aware.

God, through the Bible.

I ask this in all seriousness: in what language do you read the Bible? I only read it in English FWIW, but it's a pertinent question that I ask. I'll let you know why upon the answer I receive.

 

[fanaticbuckeye]

I'm not following. According to your example, all Jesus did was interpret to what extent the "adultery" commandment reaches. It's still the same commandment from the Torah. Thus, you're dealing with the Torah; not a new commandment.

I simply was making a point to expand upon the concept that Jesus' teachings were expanding upon the laws of the Old Testament.

If death IS the payment for sin; then how is that dead person not forgiven?

If you sin, the payment is death. If you die without forgiveness you go to hell. So if I were to sin without receiving God's forgiveness and then die, I would go to hell. There is destination after death, heaven or hell. Whether you have been saved determines your eternal lifes destination.

I must ask for clarification: do you really believe that? Do you believe that IF you are not forgiven for a single sin in the here and now, that you would deserve eternal damnation and pain?

Yes, back to the original statement of the consequences for sin.

I don't recall you asking me this. I'm not a Jew nor Jewish. However, I do believe that Jews are G-d's chosen people regardless of observance.

My intention wasnt that I asked you and you avoided, merely stating my question again regarding the afterlife for Jews that I had asked previously in that post.

So what are the consequences for not upholding the laws?

The problem with this analogy is that you are under the ASSUMPTION that you don't/can't get all the directions you need. Whereas, I can tell you from my experience that you can. It's a matter of effort.

This is obviously a point of differentiation in our beliefs. No efforts, no matter how great, are worthy of God's glory. Trying to earn my way into heaven is placing greater glory on myself and my actions, not God's grace.

Which way would you go on that?

In my limited understanding, I would say absolutely it is the foundation. Assuming that the Old Testament is the Torah, no additions or subtractions.

Which is an unprovable belief. I believe that the Jewish Bible is the only portion; whereas, you take the whole kit and kaboodle of your 66 books. That's fine. However, this is a red herring from what I asked you since the Christian testament is NOT a book of Jewish history. Therefore, I will ask you the same question again. If you don't want to answer it or if you can't then that's fine. But please address it directly.

What have I not addressed directly? How is this an attempt to change the discussion?

Okay. So going back, you would now agree that Jesus operates in the role of mediator. Correct?

No, God (the Son) sacrificed his flesh for our sins. Since God (Trinity) is all one, Jesus is direct, not a mediary.

I should note that I don't consider this passage Messianic; thus, I don't believe it deals with Jesus in the slightest. However, in order to keep us moving ahead...I ask, "Do you take this passage as literal or metaphorical?"

What relevance would that hold?

I addressed the Isaiah passage above, but regarding the Genesis passage; how is this a vicarious atonement? The offering was not made to forgive sin.

Was the point of sacrifice to the Jews for forgiveness: Leviticus 4:35? Abraham was to sacrifice his son to God before being told to stop. He then sacrificed the ram instead.

So you believe in a God that can die?

Physically, He did and then was resurrected.

I ask this in all seriousness: in what language do you read the Bible? I only read it in English FWIW, but it's a pertinent question that I ask. I'll let you know why upon the answer I receive.

English. I get the translation issues, so my only way to combat this short of learning Aramaic, Greek and Hebrew is viewing the different english versions. I realize that is even short of direct translation.

 

[BayBuck]

Please share with me some of the "reasonable readings" of the Bible that suggest heaven & hell are reality.. I'd be willing to bet they are all from the New Testament, more so, they are probably not from the gospels but from the writings of Paul.

Bring something to the table Bay - besides calling me LVBuck and providing no evidence

Yes, these various references to heaven/hell are from the New Testament as my perspective on the Bible is a Christian one, but since you object they are not from Paul. You can deny being LVBuck, but you are getting into some serious deep-thought territory on this forum that makes me think it might be basement-harvest time in the BS&G household, and tossing out some incendiary and unattributed claims of your own in the post I responded to.


The Son of Man will send his angels, and they will collect out of his kingdom all causes of sin and all evildoers, and they will throw them into the furnace of fire, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. Then the righteous will shine like the sun in the kingdom of their Father " (Matthew 13:41-43)

"When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit on the throne of his glory. All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats... Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you accursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels'... And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life." (Matthew 25:31-46)

"Not everyone who says to me 'Lord, Lord' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father in heaven." ( Matthew 7:21)

"Truly I tell you, unless you change and become like children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. Whoever becomes humble like this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven." ( Matthew 18:3-4)

"It is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye than to have two eyes and be thrown into hell, where 'their worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched." (Mark 9: 47-48)

 

[Buckeyeskickbuttocks]

How can you justify one set of consequences, driven by your upbringing, biases and decisions (which are likely imperfect like parents are on occasion), but chastise another set of consequences?

Is that consistent?

I don't understand. I haven't justified or chastised any otherwise like set of consequences. I have simply said to you that there is no evil my kids could do which would make me forever ban them from my presence. The reason being unconditional love.

Now, on this it seems to me you have a consistency problem. G-d, as you understand him (and I don't mean to put words in your mouth, so correct me if I'm wrong), is perfectly willing to damn eternally his children for misdeeds (and setting aside concepts of "fair" judgment or not) - even while you also believe this G-d has unconditional love.

I think this warrants more analysis than Socratic remarks, Jwins. How can G-d be an unconditional lover when you also believe their are conditions where G-d will punish you eternally? Please be aware - in phrasing your answer - I'm not asking for justification of the punishment in and of itself. Instead, I am asking you to fashion an answer to the limited question of consistency between A) loving unconditionally while also B) punishing eternally.

As a parent, I feel qualified to say what I have said - that because I love unconditionally - there is NO set of actions which would make me remove my children from my house forever. Your version of G-d seems perfectly willing to do so despite this "love" In short, is your G-d an unconditional lover of his children or is he not? I don't believe you can have it both ways.

And stealing a loaf of bread doesn't end hope for salvation.

I agree. You and I differ on whether Jesus must be involved in the situation. I do not require his presence to atone for my sins, while you believe you do.

Taking G-d's name in vain and rejecting him altogether are very different things. I have a hard time believing your children have lived their lives that way towards you (not isolated incidents, their life approach to you), but feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

True enough. Hypothetically, however, even if my children rejected me altogether, they would still always be welcome in my house. I'm not sure this makes me the 'bigger person' in such a situation, but plain fact is this - my ego is not so large that I would forever lose my children based on their rejection of me. In other words, they'd always be welcomed back with open arms. Because I love them that much. As above, it seems your concept of G-d holds grudges. Long (eternal), painful (Hell) grudges...

 

[Bleed S & G]

getting into some serious deep-thought territory on this forum that makes me think it might be basement-harvest time in the BS&G household

I wish.. I don't smoke anymore though..

The Son of Man will send his angels, and they will collect out of his kingdom all causes of sin and all evildoers, and they will throw them into the furnace of fire, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. Then the righteous will shine like the sun in the kingdom of their Father " (Matthew 13:41-43)

"When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit on the throne of his glory. All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats... Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you accursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels'... And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life." (Matthew 25:31-46)

"Not everyone who says to me 'Lord, Lord' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father in heaven." ( Matthew 7:21)

"Truly I tell you, unless you change and become like children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. Whoever becomes humble like this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven." ( Matthew 18:3-4)

"It is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye than to have two eyes and be thrown into hell, where 'their worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched." (Mark 9: 47-48)

All excellent examples, and from the Gospels - bravo.

Here is where I'm at - we have a diffrent understanding of these Gospels and these passages. We could break each one down if you desire too.. and I can show you my perspective on them is.

These are all phrophcies of the end of this age. The 'lake of fire' has its featured roll after the 2nd coming of Jesus - where most of the above passages can be cross-refrenced to.

Again, this is the Kingdom of heaven.. this is paradise. It's your sins that prevent you from seeing it. Just as Adam & Eve were locked out after their sin, we too have been locked out. Those who are ignorant and/or innocent, like a child, are blessed.

 

[Bleed S & G]

Taken in its full context, also Mark 10:18. The same story is told and in Jesus advice is simply give away your riches and follow me. Jesus teaching was always, only listen and follow God and consistently said 'follow me'.

So he is not denying his divinity, simply questioning the rich man.

You're really, really reaching.

Taken in it's full context.. it's the first thing Jesus says the rich man. 'Don't call me good, because only God can be called good.'

According to you, Jesus is God. So what gives?

"come follow me." This does not mean accept Jesus as God. It means live in the way Christ did. Be fishers of men, live with love.