Reviving Biblical Christianity (The Way) Part 2

[marks]

I see the cross as being the ultimate sanction to His right to judge (as if being the creator wasn't enough)

Jn 5:22 For the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son:

However, I won't debate the issue is anyone disagrees....it's just my opinion

I wouldn't argue with that.

Acts 17:30-31 KJV
30) And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent:
31) Because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead.

God says Jesus is the One because He raised Him from the dead. This tells us that even though Jesus died, yet He was righteous, not deserving, therefore able to judge.

How did the guy get to the feast without a garment?

Because he was a literary device, to make the point.

I know there are some who look at all the details in parables forming various doctrines from each one, sometimes ending up way off in the weeds, and seldom in agreement with others who do the same.

The easiest example of why we don't do this is "The Parable of the Unjust Judge". Jesus was not teaching that God is unjust. And how many contradictory doctrines are built on the Parable of the 10 Bridesmaids? Here again Jesus gave it away, we are to watch, because we don't know when He is coming. Go the sellers of Holy Spirit so you can buy more? You have to allow the details to tell the story, and discern the truth being taught "alongside".

The master who loaned his servant a massive fortune, said servant being unwilling to forgive another servant who owed him some pocket change . . . think about it. This master, it's his servant. He would know perfectly well that the servant would never be able to repay such a debt, so why did he loan it to him in the first place? This is what I'm talking about. I could go on to answer that question, and then build a doctrine. But I don't think that is the way.

Much love!

 

[shepherdsword]

I wouldn't argue with that.

Acts 17:30-31 KJV
30) And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent:
31) Because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead.

God says Jesus is the One because He raised Him from the dead. This tells us that even though Jesus died, yet He was righteous, not deserving, therefore able to judge.


Because he was a literary device, to make the point.

I know there are some who look at all the details in parables forming various doctrines from each one, sometimes ending up way off in the weeds, and seldom in agreement with others who do the same.

The easiest example of why we don't do this is "The Parable of the Unjust Judge". Jesus was not teaching that God is unjust. And how many contradictory doctrines are built on the Parable of the 10 Bridesmaids? Here again Jesus gave it away, we are to watch, because we don't know when He is coming. Go the sellers of Holy Spirit so you can buy more? You have to allow the details to tell the story, and discern the truth being taught "alongside".

The master who loaned his servant a massive fortune, said servant being unwilling to forgive another servant who owed him some pocket change . . . think about it. This master, it's his servant. He would know perfectly well that the servant would never be able to repay such a debt, so why did he loan it to him in the first place? This is what I'm talking about. I could go on to answer that question, and then build a doctrine. But I don't think that is the way.

Much love!

I don't think Jesus used parables based on literary devices. I think they are based on real figures and events. What's your take on this parable? Is it just a device as well?

Lk 16:19-23
There was a certain rich man, which was clothed in purple and fine linen, and fared sumptuously every day: And there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, which was laid at his gate, full of sores,And desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man's table: moreover the dogs came and licked his sores.And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried; And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom

 

[marks]

I don't think Jesus used parables based on literary devices. I think they are based on real figures and events.

I didn't say they are based on a literary device, but that parables are stories told of familiar things in order to throw a truth alongside. Though I do think Jesus at times used literary devices to make His point.

And I think that when He did this, those who try to find deeper meanings often end up in the weeds.

There are a lot of questions to ask in interpreting parables, such as who is the bride? Is it the church, Israel, both combined? Who are the guests? And how are they not these others?

Israel is the one who is specifically stated in Scripture to have been wed to God, then put away, and has been promised to be re-wed to Him.

The wedding feast has come, the bride has "made herself ready". "You shall not see me again until you say Blessed is He Who comes in the Name of the LORD." When the time for the wedding feast has come, because the bride is ready, Jesus returns, destroys her enemies, regathers her to her promised land. Many will come from the east and the west, but those not attired in righteousness are cast out, which is the Sheep/Goats judgement.

And then the wedding feast of the Lamb being wed to His bride, and the surviving gentiles, those declared righteous, attend.

I tried to pack a lot into a little, let me know if you have questions.

Much love!

 

[Lizbeth]

I don't see that at all. Jesus was certain, and He spoke with certainty. Not like the scribes and teachers of the Law, but He spoke as one having authority.

"Let this cup pass from Me" was not a plea to avoid death. "You will drink the cup that I drink, and be baptized with the baptism with which I am baptized", this was the suffering of such a brutal death.

Of His death itself,

John 12:23-32 KJV
23) And Jesus answered them, saying, The hour is come, that the Son of man should be glorified.
24) Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except a corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, it abideth alone: but if it die, it bringeth forth much fruit.
25) He that loveth his life shall lose it; and he that hateth his life in this world shall keep it unto life eternal.
26) If any man serve me, let him follow me; and where I am, there shall also my servant be: if any man serve me, him will my Father honour.
27) Now is my soul troubled; and what shall I say? Father, save me from this hour: but for this cause came I unto this hour.
28) Father, glorify thy name. Then came there a voice from heaven, saying, I have both glorified it, and will glorify it again.
29) The people therefore, that stood by, and heard it, said that it thundered: others said, An angel spake to him.
30) Jesus answered and said, This voice came not because of me, but for your sakes.
31) Now is the judgment of this world: now shall the prince of this world be cast out.
32) And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me.

Jesus said the time has come that He be glorified . . . this was how He saw His impending death. And He knew what would be the results of His death (lifted up, idiom of crucified), that Jesus Himself, again alive, would draw all men to Himself, the true light that enlightens every man, the grace of God unto salvation appearing to everyone.

Let's look at this another way.

Prophecies showed the Messiah suffering in death, then living again, that is, continuing to be alive after death.

Isaiah 53, Psalm 22, show the very same thing, that He would suffer death, and then afterword gather together His people.

Would you say that disbelieving God's Word to be not of faith, and therefore sin? It is righteous to believe God's Word? Is it righteous to not believe God's Word? To question whether God meant it or not? To presume to know better than God, or to think He's not being quite honest with us?

Jesus didn't have the corrupted mind as we do, that He would think the same as we do, grubbing about for our comfort and existence with our eyes no further than our noses.

Jesus, the Lord from Heaven, Who came from the Father, and was returning to the Father, who said, "For this cause I came into the world", who told followers over and over that they would kill Him, but He would rise again, I'll just say I take Him at face value. It's Jesus.

Much love!

I would say Jesus lived by faith more than anyone. And He had to overcome His flesh, like we also do. He set aside His deity so to speak and set an example that we should follow.

Here's a little example from my own life that comes to mind......when Covid first broke out, the Lord spoke to me and said "nothing will by any means harm you"........by faith I knew I wasn't going to die from it, but my carnal mind was still somewhat worried and cautious, and I still had to oppose it in declining the vaccine. Which, as it turned out was a good thing.

 

[Episkopos]

How did the guy get to the feast without a garment?

To me this is obvious. The man was allowed in as a guest and he presumed to take a higher place than he ought to have. Jesus warns us to take the lower place when we enter a room. IF the master of the house bids you come up higher than you receive honour. But if he tells you to go down then that is dishonour. And we know that in a great house like God's...there are both vessels of honour AND vessels of dishonour. It just so happens that vessels of dishonour are cast into outer darkness.

If more people realized that then there would be a lot more fear of the Lord and a lot more holiness. But we know that this will never be common-place,,

 

[IndianaRob]

To me this is obvious. The man was allowed in as a guest and he presumed to take a higher place than he ought to have. Jesus warns us to take the lower place when we enter a room. IF the master of the house bids you come up higher than you receive honour. But if he tells you to go down then that is dishonour. And we know that in a great house like God's...there are both vessels of honour AND vessels of dishonour. It just so happens that vessels of dishonour are cast into outer darkness.

If more people realized that then there would be a lot more fear of the Lord and a lot more holiness. But we know that this will never be common-place,,

Hi Epi. I have to disagree. The feast was the wedding feast of the lamb.The main course was the words of Jesus aka the New Testament.

People without the proper garment can’t eat at that table.

 

[ProDeo]

Me knows that any man that puts horse in cart is in dire trouble .
You wanna know what i know . Epi has a huge problem with those who remind of the dire NEED TO HAVE to BELIEVE ON JESUS .
You know what that tells me , SOMETHING WENT DEAD WRONG with that man . HE fell in love with a lie .
Now as for me , I SHALL POINT TO JESUS and remind all that WITHOUT HIM YE CAN DO NOTHING .
IT IS TRULY DIRE NECESSARY to BELIEVE ON JESUS THE CHRIST .

Alright then, Epi reminds me of a classic Reformed / Calvinistic Hell and damnation preacher. It was my first church, I went there after my conversion because my fiance (still my wife) was Reformed and notable her father was an elder, a fine person and sincere Christian. And the church had rotating preachers and one of them was favorite because he preached Hell and damnation with the focus heavily on God's wrath, human sin, and the fiery punishments of hell.

After the service it was coffee time at the home of my fiance and the sermon was rehashed and in chorus those present were excited about the harshness and the spanking they got from the pulpit, they loved Hell and damnation. They seriously believed, as Reformed theology rightly preaches BTW, nobody could be sure about salvation, they lived in fear all their life.

Later, after taking Navigators courses and learned about Christ I dared to say that the Lord saved me, pointed to passages from the Gospel of John. And I was reprimanded, nobody could say that, that was up to God to decide. But I said, no, it is in the written word, Jesus said it and I believe it. They could not rob me from the peace I found in Christ.

And so it feels reading Epi, and he is not going to rob me from the His Grace and inner peace and nobody should.

John 3:16 - For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in INTO him should not perish but have eternal life.

Yes Epi, you were right about INTO, I will give you that.

 

[Episkopos]

Alright then, Epi reminds me of a classic Reformed / Calvinistic Hell and damnation preacher. It was my first church, I went there after my conversion because my fiance (still my wife) was Reformed and notable her father was an elder, a fine person and sincere Christian. And the church had rotating preachers and one of them was favorite because he preached Hell and damnation with the focus heavily on God's wrath, human sin, and the fiery punishments of hell.

After the service it was coffee time at the home of my fiance and the sermon was rehashed and in chorus those present were excited about the harshness and the spanking they got from the pulpit, they loved Hell and damnation. They seriously believed, as Reformed theology rightly preaches BTW, nobody could be sure about salvation, they lived in fear all their life.

Later, after taking Navigators courses and learned about Christ I dared to say that the Lord saved me, pointed to passages from the Gospel of John. And I was reprimanded, nobody could say that, that was up to God to decide. But I said, no, it is in the written word, Jesus said it and I believe it. They could not rob me from the peace I found in Christ.

And so it feels reading Epi, and he is not going to rob me from the His Grace and inner peace and nobody should.

John 3:16 - For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in INTO him should not perish but have eternal life.

Yes Epi, you were right about INTO, I will give you that.

Actually I teach both sides of the coin. I urge my fellow believers to seek humility and maintain the fear of the Lord...to learn righteousness. Of course I also urge people to seek God for translation into the kingdom realm and Christ's perfection. Jesus did say that many will try to enter in and be unable. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't try.

If we are unable to enter into the kingdom realm of the Spirit (If we are not chosen) then we can still be under God's mercy. I don't preach hell fire (that's for the wicked and unbelieving)...no I teach about outer darkness which is reserved for those who don't know their place before God and persecute the righteous.

I don't push holiness on people since God has to accept us into the Beloved. But I do push righteousness on people as a means to obtain God's mercy on that day.

Peace <><

 

[ProDeo]

No, 3 saved and 1 lost.

Rev. 16:19
"And the great city was divided into three parts, ..."

Matt. 13:33
"The kingdom of heaven is like unto leaven, which a woman took, and hid in three measures of meal, till the whole was leavened."

Remember the context

Rev 22:11 Let the evildoer still do evil, and the filthy still be filthy, and the righteous still do right, and the holy still be holy.”

2 lost
2 saved

 

[MostlyConfused]

Remember the context

Rev 22:11 Let the evildoer still do evil, and the filthy still be filthy, and the righteous still do right, and the holy still be holy.”

2 lost
2 saved

That’s why I said it depends on how you define “saved.” Most people seem to think it means living forever. But the outer darkness doesn’t seem like saved to me, even though it seems to say it’s forever. I earlier had the thought that maybe those who satan gathers for a last war could BE those in outer darkness. That’s just speculation on my part. I also wonder if some come out of it at some point and that it could possibly be linked to the parable about being thrown into prison and you won’t come out until you pay the last farthing.

 

[ProDeo]

I don't think Jesus used parables based on literary devices. I think they are based on real figures and events. What's your take on this parable? Is it just a device as well?

Lk 16:19-23
There was a certain rich man, which was clothed in purple and fine linen, and fared sumptuously every day: And there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, which was laid at his gate, full of sores,And desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man's table: moreover the dogs came and licked his sores.And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried; And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom

There is no Abraham's bosom in Scripture, thus parable. Something religious that slipped in during the absent of prophets. If it were real you must believe we all end up into Abraham's bosom when we die, that does not sound Scriptural.

Secondly, what is described about hell in the parable comes straight from Greek mythology.

To understand context see v14

Luke 16:14 The Pharisees, who were lovers of money, heard all these things, and they ridiculed him.

And so Jesus ridiculed them back, telling a parable about the rich man (the Pharisees lovers of money) ending up in there own made vision of afterlife, Greek mythology.

Just brilliant.

 

[Episkopos]

There is no Abraham's bosom in Scripture, thus parable. Something religious that slipped in during the absent of prophets. If it were real you must believe we all end up into Abraham's bosom when we die, that does not sound Scriptural.

Secondly, what is described about hell in the parable comes straight from Greek mythology.

To understand context see v14

Luke 16:14 The Pharisees, who were lovers of money, heard all these things, and they ridiculed him.

And so Jesus ridiculed them back, telling a parable about the rich man (the Pharisees lovers of money) ending up in there own made vision of afterlife, Greek mythology.

Just brilliant.

Actually Abraham's bosom is a term meaning the nations of them that are saved. Abraham is the father of many nations...and the meek inherit the earth. It is comparative imagery that shows us that it is better to be poor and suffer than be rich and spoiled. Jesus often speaks of us hating our lives now to get a better one later. Those who enjoy their lives now....already have their reward. Of course this is referring to those who have no good works or fear of God.

And none of this has to do with saints.

 

[shepherdsword]

There is no Abraham's bosom in Scripture, thus parable. Something religious that slipped in during the absent of prophets. If it were real you must believe we all end up into Abraham's bosom when we die, that does not sound Scriptural.

Jesus used the term, how much more scriptural can you get? I always thought it referred to "paradise" where the righteous dead were preserved until Jesus liberated them. After the resurrection paradise was relocated to heaven. Once again just opinion

Secondly, what is described about hell in the parable comes straight from Greek mythology.

I don't see Jesus preaching Greek myths. I see it as a literal place where the evil will be confined until the final judgement

To understand context see v14

Luke 16:14 The Pharisees, who were lovers of money, heard all these things, and they ridiculed him.

And so Jesus ridiculed them back, telling a parable about the rich man (the Pharisees lovers of money) ending up in there own made vision of afterlife, Greek mythology.

Just brilliant.

You see Jesus as a propagator of Greek myths? I don't see it that way.

 

[Lizbeth]

How did the guy get to the feast without a garment?

Not to be taken too literally since it's not a literal wedding.........but I think it is a lesson against thinking we can go to the wedding in our own right without being clothed with Christ, otherwise be found naked. Having our feet shod with the preparation of the gospel of peace, which seems to also allude to allowing Jesus to wash our feet as part of our preparation for the wedding.

 

[Lizbeth]

There is no Abraham's bosom in Scripture, thus parable. Something religious that slipped in during the absent of prophets. If it were real you must believe we all end up into Abraham's bosom when we die, that does not sound Scriptural.

Secondly, what is described about hell in the parable comes straight from Greek mythology.

To understand context see v14

Luke 16:14 The Pharisees, who were lovers of money, heard all these things, and they ridiculed him.

And so Jesus ridiculed them back, telling a parable about the rich man (the Pharisees lovers of money) ending up in there own made vision of afterlife, Greek mythology.

Just brilliant.

Makes sense to me. Jesus was conveying a lesson to them in their own language so to speak.

 

[Lizbeth]

Jesus used the term, how much more scriptural can you get? I always thought it referred to "paradise" where the righteous dead were preserved until Jesus liberated them. After the resurrection paradise was relocated to heaven. Once again just opinion

I don't see Jesus preaching Greek myths. I see it as a literal place where the evil will be confined until the final judgement

You see Jesus as a propagator of Greek myths? I don't see it that way.

What is most important is the lesson being taught, not the language in which it is couched. Jesus wasn't propagating mythology, but I see no reason why He couldn't have just been speaking to the hypocritical Pharisees in language they understood, in turning the table on them so to speak. (And in the OT it was very common to use the term "gathered to the fathers" when referring to death.....that wouldn't be out of line with the idea of being gathered to Abraham's bosom.)

 

[Lizbeth]

no I teach about outer darkness which is reserved for those who don't know their place before God and persecute the righteous.

Oh dear. Please. You're making a hash of things. That is not what the bible says about outer darkness, not even a hint of that. And in the first place simply believing and understanding what God says about our own and anyone's righteousness does not mean one is persecuting the righteous otherwise we would be persecuting our own selves as well.

I don't push holiness on people since God has to accept us into the Beloved. But I do push righteousness on people as a means to obtain God's mercy on that day.

We are accepted in the beloved who have accepted Him. And we are not saved by our works but by faith. What kind of gospel are you preaching? Not the one Jesus preached.

 

[Episkopos]

Remember the context

Rev 22:11 Let the evildoer still do evil, and the filthy still be filthy, and the righteous still do right, and the holy still be holy.”

2 lost
2 saved

Only a pre-conditioned reasoning based on indoctrination can miss the meaning of the verse. So you fail the 5 year old reading skills test.

 

[ProDeo]

Only a pre-conditioned reasoning based on indoctrination can miss the meaning of the verse. So you fail the 5 year old reading skills test.

Aside of the simple math the verse implies on salvation there is another meaning, the measurement in punishment for the lost and rewards for the saved.

Better now ?

 

[Lizbeth]

Actually Abraham's bosom is a term meaning the nations of them that are saved. Abraham is the father of many nations...and the meek inherit the earth. It is comparative imagery that shows us that it is better to be poor and suffer than be rich and spoiled. Jesus often speaks of us hating our lives now to get a better one later. Those who enjoy their lives now....already have their reward. Of course this is referring to those who have no good works or fear of God.

And none of this has to do with saints.

You're forgetting that Abraham having faith and having received the risen Christ in a figure (Isaac) became the father of those of all nations who likewise have faith and receive Christ ..........he is not the father of those who don't. We mustn't take a parable to be teaching more than the specific lesson it is teaching.