Whose lying?

[H. Richard]

did you not read my post fully, if you did then you would have see my answer, to your questions. read it again.

see Richard most people are just blind, let me make it as clear as possible. 1 Timothy 2:1-4 "I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men; For kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty. For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour; Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth".

peace in Christ Jesus.

***

If a person can not say that Jesus, James, and Paul said the truth in their writings then they are saying they lied. I see you quoted what Paul said. Do you also say Paul lied when he said his gospel was hidden in God and revealed to him????? You go all around the subject of the thread so that you don't have to answer the questions. ---- Did Jesus, James and Paul say the truth or did they lie??????????????? And if they said the truth why don't you believe them??????????

 

[101G]

2 Timothy 2:15 "Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness".

gooday.

 

[H. Richard]

It is such a shame that people can not actually say Jesus, James and Paul did not lie because of the effect it will have on their Christian theology.

Main stream theology has all that Jesus said, James said, and Paul said mixed up together as being said to those under grace but to do so they will not answer the questions in the OP.

 

[bbyrd009]

It is such a shame that people can not actually say Jesus, James and Paul did not lie because of the effect it will have on their Christian theology.

you lost me here, did you mean to say "did not lie," or "did lie," because it seems to me that most say that they did not lie right now. So maybe rephrase if you could, or clarify that, ty.

 

[bbyrd009]

Main stream theology has all that Jesus said, James said, and Paul said mixed up together as being said to those under grace but to do so they will not answer the questions in the OP.

If you do not accept that the Church is now considered Israel by God, by the same method that Jesus used to deny his family in favor of a different perspective of family, then i'm not sure how that might be overcome. Maybe a thread on the matter might clarify some of this? The op questions might be seen to be moot, at least in an important sense.

 

[mjrhealth]

I dont really understand, Jesus came as He said, to the lost Sheep of Israel, that was His purpose to fulfill all the requirements of the law, of which us gentiles had nothing to do with, so He did as He said He would do. His ministry never changed, to say that would be to say God had no idea what He was doing, Gods plan was always to reach out to us gentiles, but that was to come after not during, they had the law, religion, the feasts, animal sacrifices, and so on, but us greeks, gentiles for us He saved His best, teh best was saved till last and we got it. teh new wine teh Holy Spirit, we got His best. So was Jesus lying no, as for teh rest, well I wasnt there so it is sometimes hard to discern who they where talking to, I am not a learned man, but they where religious men coming out of a religion that had being instilled in them all there lives, to something new, it is hard to unlearn stuff that had being a part of you for so long, it is no wonder Jesus constantly rebuked them.

 

[H. Richard]

you lost me here, did you mean to say "did not lie," or "did lie," because it seems to me that most say that they did not lie right now. So maybe rephrase if you could, or clarify that, ty.

***

Show me your reply that said Jesus, James and Paul DID NOT LIE.

In order to keep a theology based on what Jesus said to the Jews under the law, what James said about obeying the law, and saying Paul preached the same as they did, you have to mix it all together and ignore anything that says otherwise. That is the gospel of the church today.

But you can't do that if you truly believe their message was to different groups """as they are"". A person must """RIGHTLY DIVIDE THE WORD OF TRUTH NOT MIX IT ALL UP. Jesus came to the Jews not the Gentles. James was writing to the Jews not the Gentiles. Paul's message was to the whole world but was called the Apostle to the Gentiles. Paul's message was one of God's grace in that He Jesus, paid for all the sins of the world but the mixed up theology of the church says you must ask for forgiveness of sins. Sins that have already been forgiven. But the theology of the main stream Christian religion does not want people to know that. All they preach is sin sin sin so a person has to go to church, practice the law and repent all the time. This fact alone shows that they do not believe Jesus paid for all the sins of the world.

If a person does not believe (have faith) in what Jesus did on the cross they are not saved. To believe that sins have not been paid for is to not believe in what Jesus did on the cross.

For the record, Jesus did not lie, James did not lie, Paul did not lie. But in order to have the religious theology of the church you have to ignore these facts.

 

[bbyrd009]

Show me your reply that said Jesus, James and Paul DID NOT LIE.

ah, dunno if i ever explicitly stated that, but i will now anyway. You prolly have a better perspective there, are a lot of posters stating that they believe someone lied?

 

[bbyrd009]

That is the gospel of the church today.

But you can't do that if you truly believe their message was to different groups """as they are"".

i agree with the first, but not with your conclusion, as there is no "slave/free, male/female, Jew/Gentile" in the kingdom. So then a letter written to some Jews applies to me as well, especially if it is in Scripture. Good advice is good advice, doesn't matter who it is directed at. Your insistence that God respects people is not supported in any way that i can see, and i can quote to you where Christ plainly tells you that your works will be judged.

 

[bbyrd009]

If a person does not believe (have faith) in what Jesus did on the cross they are not saved.

i agree, but we are given the hidden lesson of Nehushtan for a good reason, and you do not hear it preached in churches for a good reason also. And so i would like to see some acknowledgement of this lesson in your posts, because we are assured that many will cry "Lord, Lord," and so imo you have to point out how these believers are excluded, who surely would have loudly proclaimed their "faith."

 

[bbyrd009]

To believe that sins have not been paid for is to not believe in what Jesus did on the cross.

in a sense this is correct, and i agree, and in another sense i have seen that it does not matter how forgiven you are, if you still have unrepented sin, you are going to separate yourself from God, Who has already forgiven you, but you are still separated. See, Adam and Eve were still separated from God, even after they received their skins, not because they were not forgiven, but because they were ashamed and felt guilty in God's presence, when all God did was ask "Who told you that you were naked?"

See, satan did not accuse them of being naked, and God did not, either. By the same token, you can "believe in Jesus" til the cows come home, it will not avail you if you do not repent of your sins.
That you have already been forgiven for.
Doesn't matter, if you cannot stand the light, see.

 

[bbyrd009]

If a person does not believe (have faith) in what Jesus did on the cross they are not saved. To believe that sins have not been paid for is to not believe in what Jesus did on the cross.

i'm personally way less interested these days in what a person believes, and way more interested in what they have faith in, myself.

 

[bbyrd009]

For the record, Jesus did not lie, James did not lie, Paul did not lie. But in order to have the religious theology of the church you have to ignore these facts.

i've yet to hear anyone say that any of them were lying, except you tbh @ "James," so you would have to put this differently for me to see i guess.

 

[H. Richard]

i've yet to hear anyone say that any of them were lying, except you tbh @ "James," so you would have to put this differently for me to see i guess.

***

Where is understanding??? If Jesus did not lie (and He didn't) If James did not lie in James 1:1, (and he didn't). Paul did not lie when he said his gospel was hidden in God (and he did not lie).

Since all the above is true then it is the theology of the religious church that lies. Why????? Because they teach that Jesus came to everyone teaching the law so we have to keep it (but He didn't). James taught the law to everyone so we have to keep it (but he didn't).

Jesus said He ONLY CAME TO THE LOST SHEEP OF ISRAEL If you don't believe Him you are saying He lied. Why can't people see this fact???

James wrote to the Jews who were under the law, James 1:1 Why does the religious theology say otherwise????

Paul was the apostle to the Gentiles and the world. But the religious teach he just taught the same gospel as Jesus and James and it wasn't hidden in God. Why???

 

[bbyrd009]

Why can't people see this fact???

dunno, i would relate it to the fact that you cannot see how you are Israel tbh

Paul was the apostle to the Gentiles and the world. But the religious teach he just taught the same gospel as Jesus and James and it wasn't hidden in God. Why?

hmm, your Q here is kind of...over-complex to me, as you reference "the religious" specifically teaching...something or other that you disagree with, not quite sure what, "gospel not hidden" i guess, but if you would rephrase this with your opinion rather than theirs, which surely some of the "religious" would object to, right, then i might get you better.

For instance i am not considered a religious person, but i would agree that they all taught the same gospel myself--so use me instead of some third party, so that i am not putting words in any religious mouths when i answer "why," if you would, ty

 

[H. Richard]

dunno, i would relate it to the fact that you cannot see how you are Israel tbh

hmm, your Q here is kind of...over-complex to me, as you reference "the religious" specifically teaching...something or other that you disagree with, not quite sure what, "gospel not hidden" i guess, but if you would rephrase this with your opinion rather than theirs, which surely some of the "religious" would object to, right, then i might get you better.

For instance i am not considered a religious person, but i would agree that they all taught the same gospel myself--so use me instead of some third party, so that i am not putting words in any religious mouths when i answer "why," if you would, ty

***
Since you believe those under grace become Jews I don't think we will ever agree on anything. My efforts to show that the religious theology based on Jesus teachings under the law, James teaching under he law and the religious trying to get everyone under the law is based on the ideas that Jesus lied, James lied and Paul lied. The teaching that those under grace are also under the law is a bald face lie.

I am getting tired of your smoke screens that you hide behind. I don't think I will reply to you in the future. It is a waste of my time. You reply with some off the wall accusation and then expect me to address it. That is being deceptive.

 

[bbyrd009]

The teaching that those under grace are also under the law is a bald face lie.

i agree, they are now under a covenant much more stringent than law, there is no law that says "die for your friends."

I am getting tired of your smoke screens that you hide behind. I don't think I will reply to you in the future. It is a waste of my time. You reply with some off the wall accusation and then expect me to address it. That is being deceptive.

ah, now this is more like it, good example imo, wherein the difference in courts, which courts we are in, is revealed, and i do not have to put words in other peoples' mouths. Asking for clarification = deception then, ok.

and truly, i wish you the best of luck on your perspective/problem here, ok, hope you get it worked out to your edification at some point, keep seeking and surely you will, yes?

 

[bbyrd009]

The teaching that those under grace are also under the law is a bald face lie.

ya, i agree, "under the law" has unfortunate connotations for a believer, and might be misconstrued. But at the same time, if you kill someone, you are still going to be arrested by the law, so i guess another term or an explanation is in order in those cases. And we can't use "above the law" because that is taken, and unfortunately means the opposite of what it intends, being facetious--iow a law-breaker who we might say is "above the law" is really someone who cannot even come up to the standards of law, let alone grace.

and since i'm here i'd also like to say that you could very well be seeing something in James that i just cannot see, ok? I do not know, and do not mean to imply that i do. Putting a concept such as yours through the fire is how we examine it, i hope you understand, and i am aware that i can be quite annoying or too pointed sometimes in that pursuit, so i apologize if you felt offended.

i'm looking for that "accusation" in my post up there, but of course being as how i wrote it i cannot find it lol even trying, so you might quote it or perhaps a witness who can also see where i am blind might point it out.