Don't hate the word "church"

Originally posted by @sonship
What you are NOT telling the readers is that you consider Jesus' ministry "while he was on earth" to mean the resurrection of Jesus is a lying myth.

In the Gospel of John, Jesus referred to [b]"His brothers" only AFTER His resurrection. Before then (in John) the most intimate term He had for them was that they were His "friends." (John ...[text shortened]... ed after He rose from the dead.

You think you're doing the will of Jesus to teach this way?

Seems you've opted to side-step the point of my post by deflecting.

Any chance that you'll actually address it?

Who is and is not a part of the assembly of which Jesus spoke?

Luke 8
19And His mother and brothers came to Him, and they were unable to get to Him because of the crowd. 20And it was reported to Him, “Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside, wishing to see You.” 21But He answered and said to them, “My mother and My brothers are these who hear the word of God and do it.”

This is the dividing line according to Jesus. It is clear the many Christians believe otherwise.

The only thing even tangentially related is your take on the gospel of John. But that wouldn't make any sense given that the passage I cited from Luke took place prior to the "resurrection" as did a similar reference from Matthew for that matter.

Each gospel writer had something of a different emphasis.

I already acknowledged that the family relationship Jesus used in the synoptic gospels. But in John the Divine life of Jesus is imparted into His followers because of His resurrection.

" Yet a little while and the world beholds Me no longer, but you behold Me,

because I live you also shall live." (John 14:19)

The natural mind would reply - "Well Jesus, we'll live regardless of what happens to You."

But the saying means that the divine LIFE, the true ZOE LIFE is God Himself will be dispensed into you who receive the available resurrected Lord Jesus. And this Jesus accomplished through His redeeming death and life imparting resurrection.

I reserve the right to take BOTH the emphasis of Luke and that of John though they may differ.

Peter says the believers were begotten again through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead. And they could not be true brothers of Christ until they were BEGOTTEN of God.

" Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to His great mercy has regenerated us unto a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead." ( 1 Peter 1:3)

For a little while Jesus left His disciples to go to the cross.
Then He rose from the dead and because of this THEY who receive Him will also LIVE ... Really live ... live out God.

Originally posted by @sonship
I reserve the right to take BOTH the emphasis of Luke and that of John though they may differ.

Peter says the believers were begotten again through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead. And they could not be true brothers of Christ until they were BEGOTTEN of God.

[quote] [b] " Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who ac ...[text shortened]... e dead and because of this THEY who receive Him will also LIVE ... Really live ... live out God.

Seems you've once again opted to side-step the point of my post by deflecting. Only this time your really way out in the weeds.

Any chance that you'll actually address it?

Who is and is not a part of the assembly of which Jesus spoke?

Luke 8
19And His mother and brothers came to Him, and they were unable to get to Him because of the crowd. 20And it was reported to Him, “Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside, wishing to see You.” 21But He answered and said to them, “My mother and My brothers are these who hear the word of God and do it.”

This is the dividing line according to Jesus. It is clear the many Christians believe otherwise.

Originally posted by @thinkofone

This is the dividing line according to Jesus. It is clear the many Christians believe otherwise.

Let's test out your interpretation.

To just SAY you will do the Father's will is not enough.
To actually DO the Father's will is what He wants.

The people asked Jesus what was the work of God.
Jesus said that the work of God was to believe in Him Whom He has sent.

" Then they said to Him, what shall we do that we may work the works of God?

Jesus answered and said to them, This is the work of God, that you believe into Him whom He has sent." (John 6:28,29)

According to ToO's favored analysis of the two men - one who said he would do God's will verses the one who refused but latter repented, WHICH ones here are doing God's will.

1.) The ones who will not believe into the Jesus Christ Whom the Father has sent ?

2.) The ones who believe into Jesus Christ Whom the Father has sent.

The answer is not who SAYS what but who actually believes into Christ. That one is doing the work of God and the will of God.

"This is the work of God, that you believe into Him whom He has sent."

ToO teaching here for years that Jesus is not God's Son and did not die a redemptive death and rise in resurrection obviously is not doing the work of God, regardless of what he says.

Others of us who believe into the One Whom the Father sent and His work and words, are doing the work of God in BELIEVING.

Originally posted by @rajk999
No Christian can challenge the truth. Mr Philokalia attempted to rebutt what Paul says in Romans 2 about those who have no law, by citing Romans 3 about those who are under the law of Grace. Sometimes you really have to wonder what is the level of education and understanding of these people.

I don't have time to handle everything you produced just now but let me say that this is an utterly silly tone to take in this discussion.

Historically, there isn't a single major denomination of Christianity that disagrees with me. St. Augustine, St. John Chrysostom, Martin Luther, Huldrych Zwingli, and John Calvin all agree with my position, and all of them represent major Christian denominations that have literally gone to war with each other.

Off hand, I can't think of anyone who has interpreted Paul the way that you have.

Yet... I lack some fundamental level of education and understanding?

That would literally mean that every major theological mind since Christ (can you name an exception?) likewise lacks basic understanding and education of Christianity.

This hubris makes zero sense and has come totally out of left field.

Originally posted by @philokalia
I don't have time to handle everything you produced just now but let me say that this is an utterly silly tone to take in this discussion.

Historically, there isn't a single major denomination of Christianity that disagrees with me. St. Augustine, St. John Chrysostom, Martin Luther, Huldrych Zwingli, and John Calvin all agree with my position, and al ...[text shortened]... cation of Christianity.

This hubris makes zero sense and has come totally out of left field.

Dignifying Rajk999's "discussion" with well reasoned responses is an exercise in futility. I've tried.

It is futile. I'm telling you.

Originally posted by @sonship
Dignifying Rajk999's "discussion" with well reasoned responses is an exercise in futility. I've tried.

It is futile. I'm telling you.

Do you think Rajk999 should just shut up - or keep his perspectives secret - and so get out of the way and let you teach the people who are interested in you?

Originally posted by @fmf
Do you think Rajk999 should just shut up - or keep his perspectives secret - and so get out of the way and let you teach the people who are interested in you?

Do you consider yourself the unannounced but official referee or moderator of this Forum ?

Originally posted by @sonship
Do you consider yourself the unannounced but official referee of this Forum ?

I consider myself to be talking to you about the things you say in public, in some cases to me. Did you not like me asking you what I asked you?

Originally posted by @fmf
I consider myself to be talking to you about the things you say in public, in some cases to me. Did you not like me asking you what I asked you?

Did you ever read the Aesop's fable about the Flea sitting on the horn of the Ox?

The flea said "Please excuse me sir. But I won't be sitting here on your horn too long."

The ox says. "Oh I can hardly feel you whether you're sitting there or not."

Your last post reminded me of that fable.
Sometime the tiniest people have the biggest egos.

Expected response:

"So you consider yourself a big ox then ?"

Originally posted by @sonship
Did you ever read the Aesop's fable about the Flea sitting on the horn of the Ox?

The flea said "Please excuse me sir. But I won't be sitting here on your horn too long."

The ox says. Oh I can hardly feel you whether you're sitting there or not."

Your last post reminded me of that fable.
Sometime the tiniest people have the biggest egos.

Expected response:

"So you consider yourself a big ox then ?"

Your ego-related evasions are one of the most interesting things about you. Do you think Rajk999 should "shut up" about his beliefs and perspectives or perhaps keep them "secret"? You talking about Aesop's Fables is a deflection.

Originally posted by @thinkofone

Luke 8
19And His mother and brothers came to Him, and they were unable to get to Him because of the crowd. 20And it was reported to Him, “Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside, wishing to see You.” 21But He answered and said to them, “My mother and My brothers are these who hear the word of God and do it.”

ToO,

Hear the word of God and do it.
Its a good verse.

It does not say "Hear the word of God and twist it, all the while denying that God exists." Hence it is beyond the ability of the atheist.

Originally posted by @sonship

This is the dividing line according to Jesus. It is clear the many Christians believe otherwise.

Let's test out your interpretation.

To just SAY you will do the Father's will is not enough.
To actually DO the Father's will is what He wants.

The people asked Jesus what was the work of God.
Jesus said that the work of God was to bel ...[text shortened]... nto the One Whom the Father sent and His work and words, are doing the work of God in BELIEVING.

It's extremely disingenuous of you to ignore all the commandments preached by Jesus during His ministry: "seek first His kingdom and His righteousness", "'Love your neighbor as yourself", "love one another, just as I have loved you", "treat people the same way you want them to treat you", etc. The list just goes on and on.

"The word of God" preached by Jesus during His ministry INCLUDES all of the commandments listed above and so many more. They ALL need to be "heard and done". It's extremely disingenuous of you to pretend that that's not true.

Originally posted by @philokalia
I don't have time to handle everything you produced just now but let me say that this is an utterly silly tone to take in this discussion.

Historically, there isn't a single major denomination of Christianity that disagrees with me. St. Augustine, St. John Chrysostom, Martin Luther, Huldrych Zwingli, and John Calvin all agree with my position, and al ...[text shortened]... cation of Christianity.

This hubris makes zero sense and has come totally out of left field.

My tone is the result of you continually referring to people who have agreed with you in the past. What does that have to do with a discussion? Have these socalled experts removed your ability to discuss and to reason?

You keep calling the names of these people and then you say my doctrine is not in line with accepted church doctrine .. ok I got that .. move along and discuss the points.

Romans 2 makes a statement. Romans 3 cannot nullify what Paul said in Romans 2.

Is this the first time you come across someone with doctrines contrary to that of the church?