Jesus wasn't resurrected

[JoeEpcotRocks]

Rich::

Thanks for stopping by.

Good stuff!

 

[salmoneous]

ing the "one and only." I'm curious to know what you think about that.

First, let me be clear about one thing. I don't know. I can tell you what I think He means, but I don't know.

I believe that Jesus is the one and only way. But I don't think that saying a salvation prayer, or joining a Christian church, or believing a particular bit of doctrine is the only way. On a matter of this importance, if that is what Jesus had meant, that's what he would have said. "No man gets to the Father unless they believe in my resurrection", or "No man gets to the Father unless they say a salvation prayer." But he didn't - all he say was that he was the way.

I believe that He can be the way for Old Testament Jews, for New Testament Jews, for American Indians who were born, lived and died without ever hearing the name Jesus. I don't think a message that tells us to not be afraid and that in God's house are many mansions is a message that everybody who doesn't do things exactly right is going to Hell.

 

[salmoneous]

Ohhhh, but you know what the Bible says and "really" means.

Absolutely not. If you've understood anything I've written it would be clear I don't know.

The Bible is very clear on salvation. Jesus is the "one and only."

In terms of "one and only" the bible is very clear about who - but not clear about how.

So Joe, how did Esau walk with God?

 

[dcentity2000]

There are those that would say that to lead a good life is to accept Christ.

A hypothetical problem:

A child is born in a third world country. He never learns of Christ, or of Christianity. Is he to be lost just because he never hears of Christ?

And what of mentally handicapped people, unable to think in a straight line? Are they to be left behind simply because they lack the capacity to latch onto even the most basic of principals?



Rich::

 

[jaimee1024]

I guess I should have been clear about one more thing. I don't believe the bible is the word of God. I believe it is a book, written by men, edited by men, translated by men and used by men to convert people to Christianity so that they could become more powerful and wealthy. I believe the bible has much to offer in terms of history and also in lessons. To say that it is the word of God is something I have never understood since there are so many inconsistencies and contradictions within it. I believe it can be interpreted in so many different ways...and that often people interpret it simply to support their own prejudices and fears. For example...I know many people who think it's a sin to be gay since "it says so in the bible"...but these same people I am quite sure would not kill their children if they talked back to them even the bible says they should (Exodus 21:15...and many others)

 

[dcentity2000]

I guess I should have been clear about one more thing. I don't believe the bible is the word of God. I believe it is a book, written by men, edited by men, translated by men and used by men to convert people to Christianity so that they could become more powerful and wealthy. I believe the bible has much to offer in terms of history and also in lessons. To say that it is the word of God is something I have never understood since there are so many inconsistencies and contradictions within it. I believe it can be interpreted in so many different ways...and that often people interpret it simply to support their own prejudices and fears. For example...I know many people who think it's a sin to be gay since "it says so in the bible"...but these same people I am quite sure would not kill their children if they talked back to them even the bible says they should (Exodus 21:15...and many others)

I totally agree.

I mean, how can the ultimate truth that is God be even rudely put onto paper? Texts and manuscripts are all subject to human restraints and imperfections.



Rich::

 

[magicmato]

So I guess God told us nothing at all. The Bible is fake? What God would tell His people absolutely nothing?

Yet you say, "One would think it would not be God's wish for us to demand everyone do as we do, simply because it is the right thing for us personally." And this is based on ????? It seems you can safely make assumptions, but if anyone mentions Scriptures then forget it.

Jesus, His Son, said there was only one path to salvation. We are to share the good news of Salvation. True, we cannot "demand" that people do so, people have to make this choice on their own. God said, "I set before you life and death, choose life."

Yet Jews feel they will be in heaven if they follow their religion, Muslims, Buddhists, etc, feel the same. Sorry, but you will never get me to believe that God would condemn 67% of the world simply because of where they were born. That is not a God I care to know.

I am not making assumptions, I am merely noting that God is infinate and you think that just because some book states that this is the only way, that that has to be true.

 

[Emme]

There are those that would say that to lead a good life is to accept Christ.

A hypothetical problem:

A child is born in a third world country. He never learns of Christ, or of Christianity. Is he to be lost just because he never hears of Christ?

And what of mentally handicapped people, unable to think in a straight line? Are they to be left behind simply because they lack the capacity to latch onto even the most basic of principals?



Rich::

I am a believing Christian and shout with a resounding NO to answer your questions. If someone has never heard of Christ they can not be judged and those of limited capacity as well. God is pretty emphatical though about Christ being the way to salvation for those who have heard...

 

[jimmiej]

First, let me be clear about one thing. I don't know. I can tell you what I think He means, but I don't know.

I believe that Jesus is the one and only way. But I don't think that saying a salvation prayer, or joining a Christian church, or believing a particular bit of doctrine is the only way. On a matter of this importance, if that is what Jesus had meant, that's what he would have said. "No man gets to the Father unless they believe in my resurrection", or "No man gets to the Father unless they say a salvation prayer." But he didn't - all he say was that he was the way.

I believe that He can be the way for Old Testament Jews, for New Testament Jews, for American Indians who were born, lived and died without ever hearing the name Jesus. I don't think a message that tells us to not be afraid and that in God's house are many mansions is a message that everybody who doesn't do things exactly right is going to Hell.

Do you think Jesus' death & resurrection served a purpose? Did Jesus know ahead of time He would have to endure this? Or do you not believe Jesus rose again?

Secondly, what do you believe a person must do (or not do), if anything, to gain eternal life?

Just curious.

 

[jimmiej]

I believe it can be interpreted in so many different ways...and that often people interpret it simply to support their own prejudices and fears. For example...I know many people who think it's a sin to be gay since "it says so in the bible"...but these same people I am quite sure would not kill their children if they talked back to them even the bible says they should (Exodus 21:15...and many others)

I won't argue with you about your beliefs, but you misrepresent Christianity in the last part of your post. The rules you refer to in Exodus were for the Jews, not Christians.

 

[JennyMominRI]

I won't argue with you about your beliefs, but you misrepresent Christianity in the last part of your post. The rules you refer to in Exodus were for the Jews, not Christians.

Yes, that's true. The law is for Jews ,and believe me it wasn't as simple as killing a smart mouthed kid as punishment..Not at all.. The death penalty was rarely applied in Isreal and a court that killed more that 1 person in 70 years was considered a bloody court

 

[salmoneous]

Do you think Jesus' death & resurrection served a purpose?

Of course.

Secondly, what do you believe a person must do (or not do), if anything, to gain eternal life?

I don't know all the routes. Infants? Children? People who dienever hearing Jesus' name? Jews? Muslims?

What I find interesting is that Jesus didn't talk about it much (as a general theme, I think many Christian churches today spend most of their time talking about things Jesus didn't spend much time on - and spend very little time talking about the thing Jesus talked about most)

When he did, it was usually because he was asked. When Jesus was asked, he gave a very different answer than you (or I) would give. Just something to think about - why did Jesus give the answer he did, and why didn't he give the answer Christians today would give?

18 An official asked him this question, "Good teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?" 19 Jesus answered him, "Why do you call me good? No one is good but God alone. 20 You know the commandments, 'You shall not commit adultery; you shall not kill; you shall not steal; you shall not bear false witness; honor your father and your mother.'" 21 And he replied, "All of these I have observed from my youth." 22 When Jesus heard this he said to him, "There is still one thing left for you: sell all that you have and distribute it to the poor, and you will have a treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me."
23 But when he heard this he became quite sad, for he was very rich.
24 Jesus looked at him (now sad) and said, "How hard it is for those who have wealth to enter the kingdom of God!
25 For it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the kingdom of God."
26 Those who heard this said, "Then who can be saved?"
27 And he said, "What is impossible for human beings is possible for God."

Many Christians will be happy to tell you what Christ is trying to say with this story. But that just begs the question - why didn't Christ just say what you think he was trying to say, rather than what he did?

 

[Buckalew11]

Of course.

I don't know all the routes. Infants? Children? People who dienever hearing Jesus' name? Jews? Muslims?

What I find interesting is that Jesus didn't talk about it much (as a general theme, I think many Christian churches today spend most of their time talking about things Jesus didn't spend much time on - and spend very little time talking about the thing Jesus talked about most)

When he did, it was usually because he was asked. When Jesus was asked, he gave a very different answer than you (or I) would give. Just something to think about - why did Jesus give the answer he did, and why didn't he give the answer Christians today would give?

18 An official asked him this question, "Good teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?" 19 Jesus answered him, "Why do you call me good? No one is good but God alone. 20 You know the commandments, 'You shall not commit adultery; you shall not kill; you shall not steal; you shall not bear false witness; honor your father and your mother.'" 21 And he replied, "All of these I have observed from my youth." 22 When Jesus heard this he said to him, "There is still one thing left for you: sell all that you have and distribute it to the poor, and you will have a treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me."
23 But when he heard this he became quite sad, for he was very rich.
24 Jesus looked at him (now sad) and said, "How hard it is for those who have wealth to enter the kingdom of God!
25 For it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the kingdom of God."
26 Those who heard this said, "Then who can be saved?"
27 And he said, "What is impossible for human beings is possible for God."

Many Christians will be happy to tell you what Christ is trying to say with this story. But that just begs the question - why didn't Christ just say what you think he was trying to say, rather than what he did?

Well, gosh, I am thinking He did say what He meant to say. What do you think He meant by that? I think He was saying that it is impossible for human beings to enter into Heaven upon their own actions (whether keeping the commandments or giving all you have to the poor or whatever=you can't be good enough or do enough). But THROUGH God's mercy of Christ, you can enter into Heaven.
I'm interested in what other people think it means.

 

[jimmiej]

Of course.

What was that purpose, in your opinion?

I don't know all the routes. Infants? Children? People who dienever hearing Jesus' name? Jews? Muslims?

What I find interesting is that Jesus didn't talk about it much (as a general theme, I think many Christian churches today spend most of their time talking about things Jesus didn't spend much time on - and spend very little time talking about the thing Jesus talked about most)

Well, for one thing, there's more to the NT than just the gospels.

When he did, it was usually because he was asked. When Jesus was asked, he gave a very different answer than you (or I) would give. Just something to think about - why did Jesus give the answer he did, and why didn't he give the answer Christians today would give?

18 An official asked him this question, "Good teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?" 19 Jesus answered him, "Why do you call me good? No one is good but God alone. 20 You know the commandments, 'You shall not commit adultery; you shall not kill; you shall not steal; you shall not bear false witness; honor your father and your mother.'" 21 And he replied, "All of these I have observed from my youth." 22 When Jesus heard this he said to him, "There is still one thing left for you: sell all that you have and distribute it to the poor, and you will have a treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me."
23 But when he heard this he became quite sad, for he was very rich.
24 Jesus looked at him (now sad) and said, "How hard it is for those who have wealth to enter the kingdom of God!
25 For it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the kingdom of God."
26 Those who heard this said, "Then who can be saved?"
27 And he said, "What is impossible for human beings is possible for God."

Many Christians will be happy to tell you what Christ is trying to say with this story. But that just begs the question - why didn't Christ just say what you think he was trying to say, rather than what he did?

When you take stories like this in context with overall Scripture, I think it becomes easier to understand. However, if you really want to know what it means, look at a commentary or study the original language. Read other translations. Sometimes, I think we make it too difficult.

From Matthew Henry's commentary:

Verses 17-22 This young ruler showed great earnestness. He asked what he should do now, that he might be happy for ever. Most ask for good to be had in this world; any good, ; he asks for good to be done in this world, in order to enjoy the greatest good in the other world. Christ encouraged this address by assisting his faith, and by directing his practice. But here is a sorrowful parting between Jesus and this young man. He asks Christ what he shall do more than he has done, to obtain eternal life; and Christ puts it to him, whether he has indeed that firm belief of, and that high value for eternal life which he seems to have. Is he willing to bear a present cross, in expectation of future crown? The young man was sorry he could not be a follower of Christ upon easier terms; that he could not lay hold on eternal life, and keep hold of his worldly possessions too. He went away grieved. See , Ye cannot serve God and mammon.

Adam Clarke's commentary:

One thing thou lackest
What was that? A heart disengaged from the world, and a complete renunciation of it and its concerns, that he might become a proper and successful labourer in the Lord's vineyard. See Matthew 19:21. To say that it was something else he lacked, when Christ explains here his own meaning, is to be wise above what is written.

Verse 22. And he was sad at that saying
This young man had perhaps been a saint, and an eminent apostle, had he been poor! From this, and a multitude of other cases, we may learn that it is oftentimes a misfortune to be rich: but who is aware of this?-and who believes it?

These seem to be saying the same thing.

 

[salmoneous]

When you take stories like this in context with overall Scripture, I think it becomes easier to understand. However, if you really want to know what it means, look at a commentary or study the original language. Read other translations.

My question wasn't so much "what does it mean", but why would Christ saying something on such an important issue that requires looking at the overall context of Scripture, a commentary, study in the original language and reading in other translations?

When you talk to people about salvation, do you give them specific commandments to obey and tell them to sell all their possessions? Do you talk about the difficulty of the rich getting into heaven? Or do you spell it out straightforward (1) all are sinners (2) say a salvation prayer and get into heaven (3) otherwise burn in Hell.

If there were one and only one answer - and it was as simple as 1-2-3 - isn't that's how God would have laid it out for us? But he didn't. He makes us search for answers. He makes us think and draw our own conclusions. I think God expect different things from each of us...

 

[KikiFan]

When you take stories like this in context with overall Scripture, I think it becomes easier to understand. However, if you really want to know what it means, look at a commentary or study the original language. Read other translations. Sometimes, I think we make it too difficult.

But ultimately every commentary is just another person's interpretation.
Jesus taught in parables for a reason, imo. Because they were interpretative, they spoke to each person individually. To me, the notion that one interpretation is final and authoritive doesn't make sense. I find as I grow and change in consciousness, my understanding and interpretation changes. The beauty of the Bible imo is that it's almost a living, breathing thing, changing each time I reach for it.

Incidently, I've been asked why I don't believe Jesus was God, and the scripture quoted upthread is one of the reasons. Jesus states, "Why do you call me good? No one is good but God alone." IMO that's Jesus saying he's not God. Obviously YMMV.

 

[Buckalew11]

Quote: " The beauty of the Bible imo is that it's almost a living, breathing thing, changing each time I reach for it. "

I actually agree with this and do think of the Bible that way--not even "almost"! It is the part of the Bible that fascinates me most.

In saying that, I am not meaning that I think the scripture changes. God is the same, always, but I think He speaks through His word and you can definitely get different meanings out of the same scripture at different times. It is very hard to put into words. An example was once I was given the story of the fishes and the loaves 3 x in a row and each time brought a different meaning for me. 1st time it was simply the story that you and I would read. by the third time, I was definitely being giving an answer to a dilema (sp) in my life.

I think the scripture can do that and does do that. I also think that God doesn't have different rules for different people. I think it is all in the way you see something like that. A lot of people want God to be fair by allowing what is right for the individual. For me, that seems unfair and it should be the same rule for everyone.

I also read the part where Jesus states, "Why do you call me good? No one is good but God alone" as Him saying to them "Why are you calling me good? You believe that God alone is good. Are you then calling me God?" As in, do you actually get that I am good and that means I am God?

 

[jaimee1024]

I won't argue with you about your beliefs, but you misrepresent Christianity in the last part of your post. The rules you refer to in Exodus were for the Jews, not Christians.

So you are saying that Christians only have to follow rules set forth in the New Testament? Interesting. I never knew this. Hmmm...changes everything doesn't it? No ten commandments for Christians? It was not my intentions to misrepresent Christianity...I am simply stating my own, personal beliefs and in no way saying that anyone esle is wrong.

 

[JoeEpcotRocks]

Absolutely not. If you've understood anything I've written it would be clear I don't know. ?

Fair enough, but you seem to imply that no one knows. What kind of dufuss God what have a very large Book of His Word where no one understands anything?

In terms of "one and only" the bible is very clear about who - but not clear about how.

So Joe, how did Esau walk with God?

The Bible is clear re the how of the "one and only."

First of all, Esau was before Jesus and was under a different Testament. Secondly, many Biblical men (and women) of God walked with Him despite (often large) imperfections and wrong thinking.

 

[salmoneous]

Fair enough, but you seem to imply that no one knows. What kind of dufuss God what have a very large Book of His Word where no one understands anything?

But that is exactly my point. God did write a book that is open to interpretation - one that doesn't spell out a single answer. And God isn't a dufus. So I don't think God wants us to find one and only one answer.

You seem to want there to be one and only one answer. I honestly don't think God has provided one.

First of all, Esau was before Jesus and was under a different Testament.

Whoa. Under a different Testament??? So it sounds like you are saying there *is* more than one and only way. There is a way that allows Esah to commune with God without ever hearing the name Jesus. Are there others? Infants who die during childbirth? American Indians in the year 1000? Is there any way for them to get to God without ever hearing the name Jesus?

By the way - what's the cutoff for "being under a different Testament"? What year? Which people?