03 Nov 07
TofOne , I'm going to try a different tack. I kinda threw this up in the air to God and asked him what he wanted me to say to you. I'm not sure about this but my sense is that he wanted to say something like " I know you have been hurt by christians or one christian in particular or let down , I know this has hardened you and made you cynical about christianity .But my spirit is bigger than your judgements . My love is greater than your suspicion , my forgiveness is greater than any sin committed against you. I am bigger than who you think I am. Let me be who I am. "
I'm taking a bit of a risk and it's a bit of a shot in the dark but hey ho that's faith for you.
03 Nov 07
Originally posted by knightmeisterThose 2 or 3 verses (actually there are more) get to the heart of the matter.
Picture your belief system as a box. It seems like you put the teachings of "Christianity" in first and fit the teachings of Jesus in as best you can instead of putting the teachings of Jesus in first and discarding what conflicts with the teachings of Jesus.
-----------think of one-----------
Jesus's teachings are in conflict anyway whether one ...[text shortened]... symbols during a passover meal is highly significant. I don't think you realise this.
Why did Jesus bother to say them if he didn't mean them? Why did he put it so strongly?
Does repentance require a change of heart as well as action? Does forgiveness come before repentance?
03 Nov 07
1 edit
Originally posted by knightmeisterI believe in the vision of humility, truth, love, compassion, justice, etc. for all of mankind. Sin must be overcome for this vision to be fulfilled.
TofOne , I'm going to try a different tack. I kinda threw this up in the air to God and asked him what he wanted me to say to you. I'm not sure about this but my sense is that he wanted to say something like " I know you have been hurt by christians or one christian in particular or let down , I know this has hardened you and made you cynical about c ing a bit of a risk and it's a bit of a shot in the dark but hey ho that's faith for you.
From what I can tell, the teachings of "Christianity" can and do hamper the fulfillment of that vision. The teachings of Jesus on the other hand support the fulfillment of that vision.
So many "Christians" take the position that it's impossible to overcome sin. Yet Jesus says quite explicitly that overcoming sin is required.
So many "Christians" take the position that it's not necessary to overcome sin. Yet Jesus says quite explicitly that overcoming sin is required.
Many equate sin with being apart from God. How about giving it up and actually joining Him?
04 Nov 07
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneFrom what I can tell, the teachings of "Christianity" can and do hamper the fulfillment of that vision. The teachings of Jesus on the other hand support the fulfillment of that vision.----think of one------
I believe in the vision of humility, truth, love, compassion, justice, etc. for all of mankind. Sin must be overcome for this vision to be fulfilled.
From what I can tell, the teachings of "Christianity" can and do hamper the fulfillment of that vision. The teachings of Jesus on the other hand support the fulfillment of that vision.
So many "Christ ...[text shortened]... y equate sin with being apart from God. How about giving it up and actually joining Him?
Surely you are not being honest and true to what Jesus himself taught us about himself . You try to play off "jesus' teachings" against "christianity's teachings" but I have already shown how jesus explicitly bought directly into the fulfillment of prophesy via scripture (Isaiah) , and the purpose of his death to create a new covenant with man via portraying himself as the passover lamb. The fulfillment of prophecy wasn't just about the fact that he would die it also concerned WHY he would die. His death was to achieve something and not just be a symbolic act so that Christians could wear nice crosses later.
Until you are able to realise that this is what Jesus actually taught about himself and stop rationalising it as "Christianity's teachings" then there will always be an impasse for you because you will always perceive that the whole communion , lamb of God , cleansing blood of christ theology as a distortion , whereas I can show that it is entirely consistent with what he taught about himself.
I can only conclude that you are only interested in some parts of what Jesus taught and not others and this makes you almost impossible to debate with because I can't hold you to anything consistent. It 's like you decide that knights can move like bishops halfway through a game when it suits. You either embrace ALL of what Jesus taught or you don't . If you don't then why quote his words and teachings with such ferocity?.
04 Nov 07
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneI believe in the vision of humility, truth, love, compassion, justice, etc. for all of mankind. Sin must be overcome for this vision to be fulfilled.
I believe in the vision of humility, truth, love, compassion, justice, etc. for all of mankind. Sin must be overcome for this vision to be fulfilled.
From what I can tell, the teachings of "Christianity" can and do hamper the fulfillment of that vision. The teachings of Jesus on the other hand support the fulfillment of that vision.
So many "Christ ...[text shortened]... y equate sin with being apart from God. How about giving it up and actually joining Him?
---think of one---------
But jesus did not teach paradise on earth did he. The final victory is to be at the end of time when creation will be turned inside out. his kingdom is not of this world.
04 Nov 07
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneWhy did Jesus bother to say them if he didn't mean them? Why did he put it so strongly?
Those 2 or 3 verses (actually there are more) get to the heart of the matter.
Why did Jesus bother to say them if he didn't mean them? Why did he put it so strongly?
Does repentance require a change of heart as well as action? Does forgiveness come before repentance?
Does repentance require a change of heart as well as action? Does forgiveness come before repentance?----------thinkof one----------
I don't have a full answer to this . My starting point would be that he does require repentance and that this is taught in churches. I have seen and known many christians who have had a change of heart and gone from being drug addicts or violent men to men who serve others in love. I believe that we are forgiven before we repent but that repentance is required in order to recieve that forgiveness in ourselves. I think christianity clearly teaches a change of heart and repentance , infact I know it does , many churches I have been to have people in them whose lives have been changed.
However , I cannot say that these people never sin and never need to go to christ to confess their sins. They may also find a new level of sin in them that they weren't aware of before and need to repent of that. It's an on -going process.
Do you ever sin yourself? Do you live a life of total perfection , 100% true to truth , justice and compassion? Are you completely christ like in everything you do and say or think? I will be surprised to hear you say "yes". If you say no , does that mean that you are to depart from jesus at the end of time because of your iniquity? Or do you think God sees your heart and knows that you are trying hard despite sometimes failing. What do you do when you fail or make mistakes? Do you then go and re-repent?
04 Nov 07
Originally posted by knightmeisterWell put!
...My starting point would be that he does require repentance and that this is taught in churches. I have seen and known many christians who have had a change of heart and gone from being drug addicts or violent men to men who serve others in love. I believe that we are forgiven before we repent but that repentance is required in order to recieve that ...[text shortened]... ow it does , many churches I have been to have people in them whose lives have been changed.
It is not from other people we receive forgiveness...
04 Nov 07
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneWhy did Jesus bother to say them if he didn't mean them? Why did he put it so strongly? ------think of one------
Those 2 or 3 verses (actually there are more) get to the heart of the matter.
Why did Jesus bother to say them if he didn't mean them? Why did he put it so strongly?
Does repentance require a change of heart as well as action? Does forgiveness come before repentance?
He did mean them in my opinion , but we also need to see them in the context of ALL his teachings and his mission as well.
04 Nov 07
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneMany equate sin with being apart from God. How about giving it up and actually joining Him?---think of one----
I believe in the vision of humility, truth, love, compassion, justice, etc. for all of mankind. Sin must be overcome for this vision to be fulfilled.
From what I can tell, the teachings of "Christianity" can and do hamper the fulfillment of that vision. The teachings of Jesus on the other hand support the fulfillment of that vision.
So many "Christ ...[text shortened]... y equate sin with being apart from God. How about giving it up and actually joining Him?
Have you given it up and joined him then?
04 Nov 07
Originally posted by knightmeisterRight now this is a world of sin. Isn't His kingdom free of sin? If people were to become free of sin, wouldn't that be His kingdom?
I believe in the vision of humility, truth, love, compassion, justice, etc. for all of mankind. Sin must be overcome for this vision to be fulfilled.
---think of one---------
But jesus did not teach paradise on earth did he. The final victory is to be at the end of time when creation will be turned inside out. his kingdom is not of this world.
04 Nov 07
1 edit
Originally posted by knightmeisterMost if not everything you keep pointing to was inferred from what Jesus did and said. So far as I know, He never actually said any of this. There are any number of ways to infer meaning from what He did and said without contradicting what He said about sin and salvation.
From what I can tell, the teachings of "Christianity" can and do hamper the fulfillment of that vision. The teachings of Jesus on the other hand support the fulfillment of that vision.----think of one------
Surely you are not being honest and true to what Jesus himself taught us about himself . You try to play off "jesus' teachings" against "christi don't . If you don't then why quote his words and teachings with such ferocity?.
It seems sensible to give more weight to things he said than to things that were inferred.
04 Nov 07
2 edits
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneIt seems sensible to give more weight to things he said than to things that were inferred. ----think of one-----
Most if not everything you keep pointing to was inferred from what Jesus did and said. So far as I know, He never actually said any of this. There are any number of ways to infer meaning from what He did and said without contradicting what He said about sin and salvation.
It seems sensible to give more weight to things he said than to things that were inferred.
You have not thought it through properly. When Jesus says his death is the fufillment of prophecy and his blood is for the forgiveness of sins it's ludicrous to think he was not aware of scripture and nonsense to think he did not understand the significance of what he was saying.
The inference is entirely logical. He knew about Isaiah. Isaiah 53 is the clearest prophecy. Jesus quoted Isaiah 53:12 when he said: “It is written: ‘And he was numbered with the transgressors’; and I tell you that this must be fulfilled in me. Yes, what is written about me is reaching its fulfillment” (Luke 22:37)
“Why then is it written that the Son of Man must suffer much and be rejected?” (Mark 9:12; 9:31; 10:33-34). “Beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he explained to them what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself…. ‘This is what is written: The Christ will suffer and rise from the dead on the third day’” (Luke 24:26-27, 46).
Jesus said, “The Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many” (Matthew 20:28).
Notice what else is written in Isaiah 53:
"Surely he took up our infirmities and carried our sorrows, yet we considered him stricken by God, smitten by him, and afflicted. But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are healed. We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to his own way; and the Lord has laid on him the iniquity of us all.
For the transgression of my people he was stricken.... Though he had done no violence ... it was the Lord’s will to crush him and cause him to suffer ... the Lord makes his life a guilt offering.... He will bear their iniquities.... He bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors (verses 4-12)."
Isaiah describes a man who suffers not for his own sins, but for the sins of others.
Jesus also commands us to remember his sacrifice via communion , but not any old communion, a communion synchronised exactly with the meaning of passover and being the lamb of God (which he of course was absolutely aware of). Even the timing of the last supper and his entrance to jerusalem matched the passover. This is all entirely consistent with his other teachings about him living in us (bread) and the Son setting us free.
This "inference" you think has been performed by the "lens of Christianity" turns out to be the only logical inference one can make.
The key to it all is to realise how deeply Jesus knew scripture and how well versed he was. He understood it better than the elders , they could not catch him out. It's mind bogglingly inconsistent with his character to then think that he would be so careless and reckless with this imagery and theology. He was a Jew afterall. For him to compare his very blood with the passover lamb and to place himself as the messiah who must suffer for our transgressions is completely non-ambiguous and absolutely explicit. He knew what he was saying. It would be like a new Yorker not knowing what 9/11 was.
Now , you can either bumble around this point or accept that it was an "inference" that jesus started knowingly. I will not allow you to delude yourself on this. If you don't believe me then ask him yourself , of maybe you don't think he was ressurected and is alive today? Or don't you think he taught that either?
04 Nov 07
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneMaybe , maybe not . However , it's not relevant. What's relevant is what Jesus taught. From the moment you started placing so much store by his words and teaching you created a problem for yourself because you either follow it through and respect all of his teachings or you start having to retract your own point. It's basic stuff. You can't have it both ways. Jesus taught that his kingdom was not of this world. It's part of the deal. You can start chipping away at it and suggest that "Jesus didn't say that" or that it was just "infered"
Right now this is a world of sin. Isn't His kingdom free of sin? If people were to become free of sin, wouldn't that be His kingdom?
Notice that I have not done the same thing with your quoting of Jesus. I am playing by the rules , can you? We either agree to respect consistently Jesus's words and teachings or we don't . Jesus didn't say we could pick and choose from his teachings , we are in for a penny in for a pound.
The problem I have hear is that on one hand you use Jesus's words with such force and conviction when you want to but then when it gets tricky you then question whether he "really said that" . As I said before, you play with loaded dice.
04 Nov 07
Originally posted by knightmeisterLike I keep telling you: there are any number of inferences that one can draw. This is true of any situation where the intent is unknown. I understand that you want to believe that there is salvation at some point before sin is actually overcome. The problem is that Jesus clearly states otherwise. That alone renders the inference illogical.
It seems sensible to give more weight to things he said than to things that were inferred. ----think of one-----
You have not thought it through properly. When Jesus says his death is the fufillment of prophecy and his blood is for the forgiveness of sins it's ludicrous to think he was not aware of scripture and nonsense to think he did not under ...[text shortened]... nk he was ressurected and is alive today? Or don't you think he taught that either?
Nowhere in what you've presented here is there anything that necessarily points to salvation being granted at some point before sin is actually overcome. Could his blood be for forgiveness of all the sins one committed before actually overcoming sin?
If salvation is granted at some point before sin is actually overcome, what is that point? There's nothing that you've presented here that states what that point is.
04 Nov 07
2 edits
Originally posted by knightmeisterMy point was that your statement that "his kingdom is not of this world" does not necessarily mean that Jesus was against "the vision of humility, truth, love, compassion, justice, etc. for all of mankind. Sin must be overcome for this vision to be fulfilled." In fact, much of his teaching points in this direction.
Maybe , maybe not . However , it's not relevant. What's relevant is what Jesus taught. From the moment you started placing so much store by his words and teaching you created a problem for yourself because you either follow it through and respect all of his teachings or you start having to retract your own point. It's basic stuff. You can't have it bot on whether he "really said that" . As I said before, you play with loaded dice.