The Messiah

[the.reverent.atheist]

I'd like to take up a point that slipped by. I won't be mentioning any names because who said it isn't important; what was said is. Here's what was said:

God does not damn anyone to hell. It is people - by their choices and actions - that people damn themselves. Damnation is the self-inflicted default human condition.

But that opinion-- that humans have personal agency in their decision to follow Jesus or not-- is the opposite of what Paul said in the following passage:

We know that all things work together for good for those who love God, who are called according to his purpose. For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn within a large family. And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified. (Romans 8:28-30, NRSVue)

Paul extended that thought in Romans 9, which I encourage you to read in it's entirety. Here's a significant excerpt:

What then are we to say? Is there injustice on God's part? By no means! For he says to Moses,

"I will have mercy on whom I have mercy,​

and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion."​

So it depends not on human will or exertion but on God who shows mercy. For the scripture says to Pharaoh, "I have raised you up for this very purpose, that I may show my power in you and that my name may be proclaimed in all the earth." So then he has mercy on whomever he chooses, and he hardens the heart of whomever he chooses.
(Romans 9:14-18, NRSVue)

So yes indeed, God does damn people to hell. Humans are mere toys for God's amusement. We have no personal agency and we can't make our own choices; God manipulates all.

There are plenty of other passages throughout the Bible-- both Old and New Testaments-- that echo this idea. This point came up in a general discussion about how the Christian notion of Salvation works. What does one have to do to be saved? Most present day Christian sects maintain that faith in Jesus is the only requirement, and one can certainly find passages in the New Testament that support that interpretation:

"For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him may not perish but may have eternal life.
"Indeed, God did not send the Son into the world to condemn the world but in order that the world might be saved through him. Those who believe in him are not condemned, but those who do not believe are condemned already because they have not believed in the name of the only Son of God."
(John 3:16-18, NRSVue)

That passage makes it sound like a person only needs to choose to believe in Jesus to be saved. But as the passages from Paul cited above show, Paul believed that God has pre-selected those who will even be able to believe in Jesus. That's tyranny.

As I mentioned in a different thread Matthew 6:14-15 specifically says that the only way to earn the forgiveness of God is by forgiving the sins of other people. Faith in Jesus is not necessary; just forgiveness. Forgiveness is specifically mentioned in the Lord's Prayer (Matthew 6:9-13), but faith in either Jesus or God is not!

The New Testament authors disagreed among themselves as to what a person must do to be saved. Some, like Matthew, believed that you have to be forgiving of and charitable to other people. But others, like John, believed that faith in Jesus is all that is required.

I asked the Christians who commented on this thread to explain how their idea of Salvation would apply to those who have never heard of Jesus or Yahweh or the Bible or Salvation ever in their entire lives. Some said, effectively, "Well, that's just too bad for them. Tough luck." That thought is perfectly in agreement with Paul's position that God pre-determines who will be saved and who will be damned. As I said before, the idea that some people cannot ever earn their own salvation by their own personal actions is pure bigotry. I see no reason to tolerate bigotry.

Others seem to want to hedge their bets. Maybe God performs a miracle behind the scenes. Maybe somehow he really does grant every human who ever has lived or ever will live the opportunity to choose to believe in the Son of God. But that idea is the exact opposite of what Paul said in the book of Romans.

The concept of Salvation is the most important concept in all of Christianity (or Islam for that matter). Christians should be able to explain both how Salvation works and how their interpretation of Salvation is consistent with what the Bible actually says-- and they should be able to do so in terms that anyone can understand. I would also expect them to describe a version of Salvation that isn't based on out-and-out bigotry. I would welcome any such explanation.

 

[the.reverent.atheist]

A. The Bible proves that Jesus was truly resurrected from the dead and therefore if you want to enjoy an eternal life in paradise you must worship Jesus, our Savior.
B. The Koran is proof that Mohammed was the greatest prophet ever and therefore if you want to enjoy an eternal life in paradise you must follow Islamic law and worship Allah, the one true God.
C. The Book of Mormon is proof that Joseph Smith was a prophet of God. So if you wish to gain salvation you'd better read the Book of Mormon.
D. The writings of Baháʼu'lláh prove that he was the manifestation of God, the Promised One whose coming was predicted by the Báb. So if you wish to gain salvation you'd better read the writings of Baháʼu'lláh.

I’d like to extend the previous thought to consider a common aspect of these various faiths: their exclusivity.

Imagine that you had somehow reached adulthood without ever having heard of Christianity, Islam, or Mormonism. Being naturally inquisitive, you decide to learn about each of these various religions-- and you find to your dismay that they all claim to have the secrets to eternal life.

What to do? If you were to pick the wrong religion to follow then, you are told, you will undoubtedly go to hell after you die. And you will spend all of eternity burning in the fiery pit of damnation. Major bummer.

You might think the safest bet would be to simply follow the guidelines of all of these religions, just to make sure you’ve covered all the bases. So you pray five times daily to Allah, facing Mecca, and daily you recite the Lord’s Prayer, and you observe all the restrictions of halal, you don’t eat meat on Friday, you go to an Islamic Mosque and a Christian Church and a Mormon temple. You wear a cross around your neck and Mormon underclothes. And you read with equal devotion the Bible, the Koran, and the Book of Mormon. Your life, I think, would become very complicated.

But it would never be good enough-- at least not for the most extreme fanatics of each of those religions-- because they believe that only their religious practices and observances, their religious writings, and their religious beliefs are the keys to Salvation. That is, heaven is only open to those who follow their religion exclusively. You can’t just mix and match.

That is little more than a thinly disguised form of bigotry. Those who follow a different religion-- any different religion-- are regarded as unworthy of the glories that followers of the true faith are certain to enjoy upon their deaths.

If someone wishes to subscribe to Christianity, or Islam, or Mormonism, or in fact any other religion, I have no problem with that so long as they are able to accept and collaborate with followers of other religions on the basis of their actions and behaviors, rather than on the basis of their beliefs. If you can’t accept someone just because they have religious beliefs that are different from your own, then you’re a bigot and bigotry should not be tolerated in any form.

4000 years ago the followers of the Osiris cult in ancient Egypt believed that after death your soul would be resurrected and would stand trial before Osiris and his council of 42 other gods and goddesses. You would be required to aver that you had not committed any of a list of 42 specific sins. And then your heart would be weighed against the feather of the goddess of truth and justice, Ma’at. (It was an ostrich feather). If your heart were lighter than her feather, then you would be granted eternal life. That is, you had to be a good person in life. Your actions and behaviors were the guarantors of eternal life, not your beliefs.

That’s a message that has been drowned out in the present day discussions of the planet’s major religions. If you don’t believe that Jesus is the Son of God, then you’ll definitely go to hell. If you don’t worship Allah five times a day then you’ll go to hell. If you don’t understand that the Book of Mormon was written by God on golden tablets, then you’re going to hell. If you claim to be a Christian but you read the Koran or the Book of Mormon or the Talmud or the Vedas and Upanishads, then you’re not a true Christian and you’ll probably go to hell. On and on it goes. It’s the forms and beliefs of the religion that determine one’s salvation in the afterlife, not your actions and behaviors.

Bigotry is the real essence of the most strident forms of these religions. That is what is most harmful about these religions to the human psyche, and that is why I feel compelled to speak out against the idea of exclusivity. If you can’t share eternity with anyone but those who believe exactly as you do, then you’re a bigot. It’s as simple as that.

 

[Ronald David Bruno]

... there have been literally billions of people who lived on this planet in the past who have shown absolutely no awareness whatsoever of the resurrection of Jesus, or the Bible, or Yahweh, or of the Cross of Christ

Specific names of the individuals you are referring to, please?
See, you are just making a off the cuff bombastic statement based on nothing but assumptions and ignorance. You did not know those people, their lives, what they knew, believed, how they lived, nor their awareness of God, and how God delt with them.
Man is without excuse. And God will judge those based on what they knew. Obviously a three year old child starving to death, knows nothing about God.

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of people who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, that is, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, being understood by what has been made, so that they are without excuse. Romans 1:18-20

God's speaks to each individual inside. His voice is not easily recognizable. We think His thoughts sometimes. All our thoughts that come into our minds aren't self generated or received from other outside sources. Sometimes He tells us to go this way, or do this, help this person, don't do this. We wrestle with our conscience, try to analyze this thought that just popped up and sometimes go with it and sometimes not and they to justify our own way. What happens when we go against this intruding message, that we know is the right thing to do? We usually mess up ... it doesn't work. And also, where does this guilt come from when we do something wrong, an abru t charge that hits us, that seems to go against our nature and our actions? Our we judging ourselves? We feel guilty be abuse we are guilty. So don't God is absent. He is everywhere and involved with everyone's life.

 

[Wrangler]

I'd like to take up a point that slipped by. I won't be mentioning any names because who said it isn't important; what was said is. Here's what was said:

God does not damn anyone to hell. It is people - by their choices and actions - that people damn themselves. Damnation is the self-inflicted default human condition.

But that opinion-- that humans have personal agency in their decision to follow Jesus or not-- is the opposite of what Paul said in the following passage:

We know that all things work together for good for those who love God, who are called according to his purpose. For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn within a large family. And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified. (Romans 8:28-30, NRSVue)

You keep trying to figure out how God is wrong when he is right. God calls but it is up to us to answer.

Paul is writing to people you cannot relate to, who yearn more than anything to get the call from God.

 

[the.reverent.atheist]

Specific names of the individuals you are referring to, please?

How about every person who lived and died before the time of Jesus?
Or how about every person who lived and died in the Western Hemisphere before the arrival of the Europeans in the 15th century?

None of them could have heard about Jesus.

 

[Ronald David Bruno]

How about every person who lived and died before the time of Jesus?
Or how about every person who lived and died in the Western Hemisphere before the arrival of the Europeans in the 15th century?

None of them could have heard about Jesus.

I answered that already. Romans 1 explains that man is without excuse.
because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, that is, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, being understood by what has been made, so that they are without excuse. ROMANS 1:19-20

The Gospel has been spread to every nation by now. You should not worry about anyone else who did notnhear it - YOU DID. YOIR LIFE IS ON THE LINE. Regardless, if a person did not hear about Christ, they certainly heard about God, a creator of all things. "His invisible attributes and divine nature have been perceived, being understood by what has been made."
** This following view involves a person who never heard about Christ and is my opinion only since I don't know anything about their lives or what God revealed to them or if they had a false religion.
So if they acknowledged God above, the creator, gave thanks, listened to that voice inside, let their conscience dictate moral decisions towards good, instead of evil, then their lives would demonstrate somewhat a primitive faith.
God judges them for what they knew. Those people would likely not be in the same group described in Romans 1:18-32. They opened their heart to God, acknowledged him, talked to Him.
Jesus blood sacrifice was imputed to those Old Testament saints who lived by faith and looked forward to a Savior. Was His blood sacrifice imputed to others who did not suppress the truth revealed to them? I would like to believe that.
From the beginning, generations did pass down this belief and truth about God from generation to generation. The story got distorted into all sorts of false belief systems and religions. Much of that came out of Babylon and spread throughout the world. So truth needed to be stated correctly, absent the errors, which is why God chose a nation Israel, by which He would reveal the truth. He gave it to them, along with the Messiah, Savior and then it was released to the world.

 

[the.reverent.atheist]

I answered that already. Romans 1 explains that man is without excuse.
because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, that is, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, being understood by what has been made, so that they are without excuse. ROMANS 1:19-20

Yes yes yes, I'm quite aware of what Paul said. When Roman Catholic priests traveled to the Western Hemisphere with the early European explorers several of them wrote about their experiences. They never found any evidence at all of an awareness of either Jesus or Yahweh among the indigenous peoples. So the idea that knowledge of Jesus and Yahweh was spread throughout the world is pure baloney. Paul was a propagandist who lied.

 

[Ronald David Bruno]

Yes yes yes, I'm quite aware of what Paul said. When Roman Catholic priests traveled to the Western Hemisphere with the early European explorers several of them wrote about their experiences. They never found any evidence at all of an awareness of either Jesus or Yahweh among the indigenous peoples. So the idea that knowledge of Jesus and Yahweh was spread throughout the world is pure baloney. Paul was a propagandist who lied.

When you refer to God's WORD as pure baloney, then I guess your door is firmly shut. Oh well, can't say I'll see ya on the other side.

 

[Wrangler]

Paul was a propagandist who lied.

No. Paul was an ambassador of the divine who told the truth.

@ScottA and I have both observed you are not open explanation. I have explained all this to you but you ignore the truth.

How is that 30-day experiment coming along?

 

[ScottA]

Yes yes yes, I'm quite aware of what Paul said. When Roman Catholic priests traveled to the Western Hemisphere with the early European explorers several of them wrote about their experiences. They never found any evidence at all of an awareness of either Jesus or Yahweh among the indigenous peoples. So the idea that knowledge of Jesus and Yahweh was spread throughout the world is pure baloney. Paul was a propagandist who lied.

No awareness of heaven and earth? That's quite a claim, indeed an offense against both the indigenous and God. One more nail.

 

[Ronald David Bruno]

You might think the safest bet would be to simply follow the guidelines of all of these religions, just to make sure you’ve covered all the bases.

Well, in your hypothetical situation, this guy seems to be seeking God. He's not sure about any religion, so he tries several. At least he is trying, did you do that? Maybe you should follow your own imaginative scenario. Though this hypothetical fella goes through the motions, it's apparent that he doesn't really believe in any of it, just hoping to secure something ... As your story goes, he does all the religious stuff. But Christianity is not about religious performance, it is not a "works" salvation. Jesus took our sins and died for them- He did the work. There is nothing else for us to do but believe. Faith is a gift, it is not earned.

All Religions of the world have similarities and differences. The one main difference between Christianity and all other religions is the person, Jesus. All other religions require religious works to achieve whatever they claim. We are "saved by grace through faith, and this is a gift of God, not by works, so that no one can boast."

But it would never be good enough-- at least not for the most extreme fanatics of each of those religions-- because they believe that only their religious practices and observances, their religious writings, and their religious beliefs are the keys to Salvation.

No works required. We are justified by faith, not by works. Works are prepared by God for us to do after we are saved, but we are not saved by them.

If your heart were lighter than her feather, then you would be granted eternal life

Jesus took our sins, so we are spotless, pure. Sins reside in the flesh. But when we die, our pure spirits separate the body/flesh and ascend.

I feel compelled to speak out against the idea of exclusivity. If you can’t share eternity with anyone but those who believe exactly as you do, then you’re a bigot. It’s as simple as that.

All people begin with a rebelliousness towards God. They want total control of their life with no restraints, rules, higher powers above them. The unbeleiver wants to sit on his own throne and be director of his destiny. But you are not in control.
Just ask yourself these questions, no need to share: How has your life worked out for you? Good? Happy? Or did your plans fail? Did you reach a point of contentment or was life basically filled with disappointments, failures and overall discontent? When people get older, they get better or bitter.
Are you a bitter, the glass is half empty kind of guy? Do you complain about other people a lot? Lonely? What do you have to look forward to? You are 74 ... not much time left. So you feel the necessity to spend the last years of your life bashing Christians and calling them bigots. And this is your contribution to the world? LOL The reprobates all chant, bravo.
Everyone of these Christians on this thread are trying to reason with you, share the gospel because they care for your soul. They even pray for you and all along your whole intention is to smite us. I guess you are in the bitter category.

"A fool says in his heart, there is no God." Psalms 14:1

 

[Wrangler]

I feel compelled to speak out against the idea of exclusivity. If you can’t share eternity with anyone but those who believe exactly as you do, then you’re a bigot.

Right from the mouth of Satan.

You do like to throw out the word bigot AS IF you are the moral authority.

Another Appeal to Strawman. No one said you have to believe exactly as a particular denomination in order to be saved. Salvation does not depend on believing a set of doctrines but believing God's attempt to reach you. You are swatting away the hand that saves based on your own set of what you perceive to be high and mighty principles that are really foolish.

 

[Ronald David Bruno]

@the.reverent.atheist
A former atheist, Awarding Winning Investigative Journalist, with a Masters degree in Law from Yale, Lee Strobel, sought out to disprove the Biblical stories of God and Jesus and on his journey was shocked to find overwhelming evidence contrary to his beliefs.
He became a Christian. His books: "A Case For Faith" and "A Case For Christ", I would recommend. You also have this investigative mind yet got hung up on certain fairy tale concepts and false contradictions that I could take the time to unravel but you just think you are too smart for everyone - not this guy!
Other good books are "Evidence that Demands a Verdict" and "More than A Carpenter" by Josh McDowell
Sometimes people are too smart for their own good. Stephen Hawking comes to mind, what a shame. He was certainly confounded by the finely tuned universe that even Einstein _ in the end _ confessed couldn't have happened by chance. So Stephen came up with an answer to that: "There must be many universes, likely millions _ for ours to have happened by chance". (paraphrased). Chance is nothing. Chance has no mind or power to order things. Stephen got lost in his own twilight zone and became the fool. God actually judged him before he died. A lesson for all.

 

[the.reverent.atheist]

All Religions of the world have similarities and differences. The one main difference between Christianity and all other religions is the person, Jesus. All other religions require religious works to achieve whatever they claim. We are "saved by grace through faith, and this is a gift of God, not by works, so that no one can boast."

No works required. We are justified by faith, not by works. Works are prepared by God for us to do after we are saved, but we are not saved by them.

Jesus took our sins, so we are spotless, pure. Sins reside in the flesh. But when we die, our pure spirits separate the body/flesh and ascend.

"For if you forgive others their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you, but if you do not forgive others, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses."
(Matthew 6:14-15, NRSVue)

According to this passage the only way to earn the forgiveness of God is by forgiving the sins of other people. Forgiveness of others = works. The above passage is from the mouth of Jesus. So Jesus believed the exact opposite of what you believe.

 

[Ronald David Bruno]

According to this passage the only way to earn the forgiveness of God is by forgiving the sins of other people. Forgiveness of others = works. The above passage is from the mouth of Jesus. So Jesus believed the exact opposite of what you believe.

There are many warnings that in reality are true for unbelievers. In your perspective and with your human nature, bent towards greed, selfishness, pride and holding grudges, this is true. Yet once you are transformed, you become a new creature, bent towards love and forgiveness and God has already forgiven you - this passage is not applicable to believers, it is not in their new nature to be unforgiving.
God enables us to be forgiving. So the warning is just a fact. If you are a reprobate, an unbeliever for your entire life, likely you won't be a forgiving person, you'll be bitter and therefore not enter into the Light, God's forgiveness. He sees the future and knows.
This concept is supported by this verse: God causes all things to work for good, for those who love the Lord, for those who are called to His purpose." Rom. 8:28
Now if you are a forgiving person and if you show signs of love, kindness, gentleness, self control, hope, peace, joy ... IF those are areas in your life that have grown, then you are on His list to be saved. Unbeknownst to you, He is already working in your life and setting up a divine appointment. Could happen soon or next year ... or just before death? He will orchestrate events and people that come into your life and one day will lift that veil of blindness and you will see ... unless you are a reprobate?

 

[the.reverent.atheist]

Now if you are a forgiving person and if you show signs of love, kindness, gentleness, self control, hope, peace, joy ... IF those are areas in your life that have grown, then you are on His list to be saved. Unbeknownst to you, He is already working in your life and setting up a divine appointment.

So you agree that forgiveness comes first, and from it flows God’s salvation. Therefore you agree with Jesus, not with Paul.

Here’s another quote from the mouth of Jesus:

“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, and he will put the sheep at his right hand and the goats at the left. Then the king will say to those at his right hand, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world, for I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, I was naked and you gave me clothing, I was sick and you took care of me, I was in prison and you visited me.’ Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when was it that we saw you hungry and gave you food or thirsty and gave you something to drink? And when was it that we saw you a stranger and welcomed you or naked and gave you clothing? And when was it that we saw you sick or in prison and visited you?’ And the king will answer them, ‘Truly I tell you, just as you did it to one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did it to me.’ Then he will say to those at his left hand, ‘You who are accursed, depart from me into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels, for I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, I was a stranger and you did not welcome me, naked and you did not give me clothing, sick and in prison and you did not visit me.’”​

(Matthew 25:31-43, NRSVue)​

This passage clearly shows that the Jesus of the book of Matthew believed that one's actions and deeds in life determine one’s destiny in the afterlife. Not faith, but actions. That's the opposite of what Paul said.

Ignore Paul and listen to Jesus. In the passage above Jesus said that if you are not charitable to others of your fellow human beings, you will be cast down into “the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.” The Jesus of the book of John never once mentioned the need for his followers to forgive the sins of other humans, or to perform acts of charity. That viewpoint is an outlier among the gospels. John was the last of the gospels to be written, and it’s the one that is furthest from the actual teachings of Jesus. And as for Paul, he was a propagandist who lied.

 

[Ronald David Bruno]

So you agree that forgiveness comes first, and from it flows God’s salvation. Therefore you agree with Jesus, not with Paul.

For by grace you have been saved athrough faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast.
Eph. 2:8-9

We are justified by faith, believing in Christ. That's it. God plans for each to do works. But He gets the credit, He works through us. HE IS LOVE and that love permeates the world.

The Four Gospels do not contradict themselves. They present different facets of Christ, themes.
Matthew ministered to the Christian Jews and so presents Jesus as their KING, Messiah, the descendant of David. He references the Old Testament Messianic scriptures. The Greeks and Romans were not delivered the same message it was not in their knowledge or history.
Mark presents Jesus as the Suffering Servant. He is the Healer, His deeds and miracles are many in this book. Mark addresses the Romans.
Luke presents Jesus as the Savior of the world who seeks the lost. His compassion for humanity is accented. Luke addresses the Greeks.
John presents Jesus (to the world) as the Son of God, and Lamb of God who brings eternal life. His deity is accentuated here. The Book of John is likely the most valuable. The words “believe” and “life,” and the titles, “Son” and “Son of God,” are used many more times than in the other Gospels.
It is often suggested to be the book to hand to an unbeliever first.

Back to Matthew, The "Lord, Lord when did we see you naked and not feed you" passage is spoken by a Jew, who never considered Christians or helped them. Though they realize who is He is at that moment, it is too late. You see the Jews lived by the LAW and so will he judged by the LAW.

For all who have sinned without the Law will also perish without the Law, and all who have sinned under the Law will be judged by the Law; for it is not the hearers of the Law who are just before God, but the doers of the Law will be justified. Romans 2:12-16

For sin shall no longer be your master, because you are not under the law, but under grace” Romans 6:14

Jesus response (in Matthew) is all they can comprehend. But Christians are not under the Law, we are under Grace. He fulfilled the requirements if the LAW > Death, then He rose on the third day.
Paul does not contradict Jesus. ALL SCRIPTURE IS GOD BREATHED. So Paul is speaking words given to him by Christ( THE WORD) by the Holy Spirit.
And if you want to squabble about that the Matthew message is for all, it is a statement of fact for all Christians. GOD WORKS THROUGH ALL CHRISTIANS TO INFLUENCE THEM AND GUIDE THEM TO LOVE ALL CHRISTIANS. If anyone does not have that transformed nature, obviously they will not be charitable towards the Body of Christ.
So either way you look at it, a message to the Jews and a message to the world is applicable.
One important fundamental of good hermeneutics is to understand who the message is being spoken to.
More importantly is that ALL SCRIPTURE IS SPIRITUALLY DISCERNED. Christians are given spiritual insights that unbelievers are blind to. So you are trying to navigate through scriptures on a superficial level. You'll gain much; but the deeper meanings you'll miss ... until God opens your eyes.


Btw, that Matthew 25:31-43 passage is soon to become a reaity, it is on the horizon (within a few years); it's called the Second Coming of Christ. And He will come in judgment.

 

[the.reverent.atheist]

For by grace you have been saved athrough faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast.
Eph. 2:8-9


For all who have sinned without the Law will also perish without the Law, and all who have sinned under the Law will be judged by the Law; for it is not the hearers of the Law who are just before God, but the doers of the Law will be justified. Romans 2:12-16

For sin shall no longer be your master, because you are not under the law, but under grace” Romans 6:14

The passages you cited, from Ephesians 2 and Romans 2 and 6, were written by Paul. The passages I cited, from Matthew 6 and Matthew 25, were spoken by Jesus. Why do you prefer Paul to Jesus?

You:

The Four Gospels do not contradict themselves.

Hogwash. If you compare the two different genealogies given for Jesus in Matthew 1 and Luke 3 with the genealogies given in the Old Testament you will discover the following:

• According to Matthew, Joseph’s father was Jacob while Luke says his father was Heli
• Matthew says the father of Salathiel was Jechoniah, while Luke says his father was Neri
• Matthew says there were 27 generations between King David and Jesus, but Luke ways there were 42 generations-- a difference of 36%
• The only two persons between King David and Joseph who match up in the Matthew and Luke genealogies are Salathiel/Shealtiel and Zerubbabel
• Both of the genealogies diverge from the genealogies of the Old Testament
• And most amusingly both Matthew and Luke trace the lineage of Jesus through Joseph, who wasn’t even a blood relative!!!

The fact is that the Bible is chock full of contradictions, both Old and New Testaments. If you don't understand that then you'll never understand the Bible. I started this whole thread with an extensive posting about the massive discrepancies between the Old and New Testament. The Old Testament authors (except for Daniel) didn't agree with Jesus on anything of substance. Why would the Old Testament authors have predicted the coming of someone whose views were virtually the opposite of their own? Answer: They wouldn't have. And therefore Jesus could not possibly have been the person whose coming they predicted. Jesus was not the Messiah.

You:

Btw, that Matthew 25:31-43 passage is soon to become a reaity, it is on the horizon (within a few years); it's called the Second Coming of Christ. And He will come in judgment.

Christians have been claiming that the Second Coming of Jesus is going to happen in "just a few years" for the last 2000 years. Here's what John had to say about it:

"For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him may not perish but may have eternal life."(John 3:16, NRSVue)

John didn't believe that the followers of Jesus of his time would die and would then be resurrected thousands of years later. He believed they would never die-- because the resurrection would happen before his generation passed away! Christians throughout Europe believed that the year 1000 would be the year of the resurrection, since (they assumed) it was 1000 years after the birth of Jesus. When that turned out to be wrong they thought it must be the year 1033, since that would have been (they assumed) 1000 years after the death of Jesus. But Christians have been wrong again and again and again. Hmmmmm, why would millions of God-fearing people who were inspired by the Bible's evident truths be so consistently wrong over such a loooooooong period of time? Maybe it's because what they assumed to be true about the Bible actually isn't.

 

[Ronald David Bruno]

The passages you cited, from Ephesians 2 and Romans 2 and 6, were written by Paul. The passages I cited, from Matthew 6 and Matthew 25, were spoken by Jesus. Why do you prefer Paul to Jesus?

You:


Hogwash. If you compare the two different genealogies given for Jesus in Matthew 1 and Luke 3 with the genealogies given in the Old Testament you will discover the following:

• According to Matthew, Joseph’s father was Jacob while Luke says his father was Heli
• Matthew says the father of Salathiel was Jechoniah, while Luke says his father was Neri
• Matthew says there were 27 generations between King David and Jesus, but Luke ways there were 42 generations-- a difference of 36%
• The only two persons between King David and Joseph who match up in the Matthew and Luke genealogies are Salathiel/Shealtiel and Zerubbabel
• Both of the genealogies diverge from the genealogies of the Old Testament
• And most amusingly both Matthew and Luke trace the lineage of Jesus through Joseph, who wasn’t even a blood relative!!!

The fact is that the Bible is chock full of contradictions, both Old and New Testaments. If you don't understand that then you'll never understand the Bible. I started this whole thread with an extensive posting about the massive discrepancies between the Old and New Testament. The Old Testament authors (except for Daniel) didn't agree with Jesus on anything of substance. Why would the Old Testament authors have predicted the coming of someone whose views were virtually the opposite of their own? Answer: They wouldn't have. And therefore Jesus could not possibly have been the person whose coming they predicted. Jesus was not the Messiah.

You:



Christians have been claiming that the Second Coming of Jesus is going to happen in "just a few years" for the last 2000 years. Here's what John had to say about it:



John didn't believe that the followers of Jesus of his time would die and would then be resurrected thousands of years later. He believed they would never die-- because the resurrection would happen before his generation passed away! Christians throughout Europe believed that the year 1000 would be the year of the resurrection, since (they assumed) it was 1000 years after the birth of Jesus. When that turned out to be wrong they thought it must be the year 1033, since that would have been (they assumed) 1000 years after the death of Jesus. But Christians have been wrong again and again and again. Hmmmmm, why would millions of God-fearing people who were inspired by the Bible's evident truths be so consistently wrong over such a loooooooong period of time? Maybe it's because what they assumed to be true about the Bible actually isn't.

Disagree and I think I have had enough ... should have exited long ago. Bye

 

[Mikey-for-sure]

Atheism is essentially a religion of the walking dead, so consider this

And when they shall say unto you, Seek unto them that have familiar spirits, and unto wizards that peep, and that mutter: should not a people seek unto their God? for the living to the dead?