The thief on the cross: The rule or the exception?

[javajo]

So when Paul says "Continue to work out your salvation in fear and trembling", it has nothing to do with "stablishing" your own righteousness.

When Christ says "Be perfect", he means "You will automatically be perfect". When he says "Verily your righteousness must exceed the Scribes and Pharisees" he means "Just trust me and I'll make your righteous on your own" and obviously every so-called believer today is teeming with righteousness.

No need to actually get into what "Righteousness" actually means in scriptural terms.

No need to look at all the verses that say you actually have to obey the Law. We can rely on Paul's epistles (including the dubious ones) as cherry picked as we want to trump and negate any inconvenient verse by Jesus. What's the point in repentance if you don't have to obey the commandments? None apparently.

When Jesus says its better to chop your hand off than use it in a way to cause you to enter the fire, that has nothing at all with "stablishing" your own righteousness, whatsoever. He really meant to say "Do whatever you want, I'm just kidding!"

All the things Yashua says about having to be righteous and restrain from sin and "Work hard to enter the Kingdom", he was just kidding. You just have to believe! Like Parappa, "I gotta believe!"

I believe in obeying God, doing what is right, doing good works, striving against sin, loving others, and all that, but not in order to get saved, but as a result of having been freely saved. When one goes about trying to earn their salvation by their own works of righteousness, they will fall short, for the Bible says that we are all as an unclean thing, and all our works of righteousness are as filthy rags (Isaiah 64:6). Abraham believed God and God's righteousness was imputed unto him. When we trust in Christ we have Christ's righteousness imputed unto us in place of our own filthy rags righteousness. We therefore stand before God justified in Christ's righteousness, because of what he did for us on the cross.

20He (Abraham) staggered not at the promise of God through unbelief; but was strong in faith, giving glory to God; 21And being fully persuaded that, what he had promised, he was able also to perform.
22And therefore it was imputed to him for righteousness.
23Now it was not written for his sake alone, that it was imputed to him;
24But for us also, to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe on him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead;
25Who was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification.

 

[Shermana]

So we agree that Isaiah 66 is still in effect:

17 Those who consecrate and purify themselves to go into the gardens, following the one in the midst of those who eat the flesh of pigs and rats and other abominable things--they will meet their end together," declares the LORD.

And 24

[URL="http://niv.scripturetext.com/isaiah/66.htm"]New International Version

(©1984)
"And they will go out and look upon the dead bodies of those who rebelled against me; their worm will not die, nor will their fire be quenched, and they will be loathsome to all mankind."

[/URL]

Now I assume you think that those who rebel are merely those who refuse to accept this easy faith and grace doctrine, I view it as people who willfully resist things like Isaiah 66:17.

 

[e.r.m.]

I think Romans 9:32 and Romans 11:22 bring this all together.

 

[javajo]

So we agree that Isaiah 66 is still in effect:

No, we are under the New Testament (Covenant) which was made in effect by the death of the Testator, Jesus Christ. Under the New Covenant: I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing unclean of itself: but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean. And, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common. I know an idol is not a god and is nothing but wood, stone and metal. I worship one God and one Lord Jesus Christ so I have a clear conscience, unlike one who believes those gods are real and eats.

And 24
Now I assume you think that those who rebel are merely those who refuse to accept this easy faith and grace doctrine, I view it as people who willfully resist things like Isaiah 66:17.

Isaiah also says:

All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all. 53:6
But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away. 64:6

Romans 3:23 says, For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; You and me both have sinned, are unclean and are guilty before God and no amount of works of righteousness we could perform, including avoiding certain foods, can fix that. The only thing that can fix that is faith in Christ wherein he gives us his righteousness in place of our own. And there is nothing easy about laying aside one's pride and self-efforts for salvation and placing their faith entirely in what Christ has done for our salvation.

 

[javajo]

I think Romans 9:32 and Romans 11:22 bring this all together.

Yes, I think you are right. I think it good to post Romans 9:32 in context, it sums it up quite brilliantly:

30 What then shall we say? That the Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, have obtained it, a righteousness that is by faith; 31 but the people of Israel, who pursued the law as the way of righteousness, have not attained their goal. 32 Why not? Because they pursued it not by faith but as if it were by works. They stumbled over the stumbling stone. 33 As it is written: “See, I lay in Zion a stone that causes people to stumble
and a rock that makes them fall,
and the one who believes in him will never be put to shame.”

 

[Thief]

Well for one, those seats were taken.
(NASB)Matthew 20:23
He said to them, "My cup you shall drink; but to sit on My right and on My left, this is not Mine to give, but it is for those for whom it has been prepared by My Father."

And two, if Jesus otherwise didn't have that authority at this point, he did have it 8 chapters later after his resurrection, at which time he also gave the command for baptism,
(NASB)Matthew 28:18-19
And Jesus came up and spoke to them, saying, "All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. [19] "Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit,

That, my friend, is assurance.

A better response than most I get around here.....still....

Are we still discussing the water ritual?...or the baptism He spoke of....
when He told His disciples...'you know not what you ask'....?

And that cup He mentioned....was it not trial and judgment?

King with authority....I think not.
Of Himself He did say....'brother and fellow servant'.

 

[Shermana]

So Isaiah 64 applies but Isaiah 66 doesn't.

So when is Isaiah 66 supposed to take place? Never? So you're saying Isaiah 66 doesn't take place after 53 or just never meant to take place at all?

I do thoroughly appreciate you showing the Protestant (and Orthodox) method of using Paul to trump and negate the words of Jesus.


And I also appreciate the method of associating the idea of being "righteous" on self-effort and believing in "Faith without works is dead" as what it means and not "Faith is the fruit of the saved" with "pride". Because believing that Jesus said you have to actually try to be good and work hard to enter the Kingdom is a matter of pride of course. It's a matter of pride to believe that Jesus meant what he said about it being better to chop off your hand than use it to do something to enter the fire.

 

[javajo]

So Isaiah 64 applies but Isaiah 66 doesn't.

So when is Isaiah 66 supposed to take place? Never? So you're saying Isaiah 66 doesn't take place after 53 or just never meant to take place at all?

I do thoroughly appreciate you showing the Protestant (and Orthodox) method of using Paul to trump and negate the words of Jesus.


And I also appreciate the method of associating the idea of being "righteous" on self-effort and believing in "Faith without works is dead" as what it means and not "Faith is the fruit of the saved" with "pride". Because believing that Jesus said you have to actually try to be good and work hard to enter the Kingdom is a matter of pride of course. It's a matter of pride to believe that Jesus meant what he said about it being better to chop off your hand than use it to do something to enter the fire.

The people in both 64 and 66 sinned. 66:17 has to do with Jews who were to worship only God that turned from God and worshiped idols. Fornicating and eating those meats in the high places and gardens of the idols were acts of idol worship and turning away from the God who brought them out of Egypt. Now if I go to Red Lobster and have some shrimp (as it says, all things are lawful, we have liberty in Christ), and being a gentile, never had that law, and not worshiping a strange god, I have a clear conscience. If u feel you are sinning, then don't eat the shrimp. Again, I believe Jesus' and Paul's words are God's Word and reflect what God wants us to understand about the transition from the Old Covenant to the New wherein he does not write his laws on stone, but on our hearts. We can never be good enough to enter the Kingdom no matter how hard we try. We must have Christ's righteousness imputed unto us freely (though it was of great price to him). Only then do we have the power of God in us to obey and do good works and produce fruit. Anyway. We are still miles apart in our understanding and I am slow and not very good at explaining my faith. I think we both love God and want to do what is right, but we understand things differently from our backgrounds. I don't wish to make you angry, I just see things in a different light, that's all.

 

[Shermana]

Exactly as I thought you'd answer, so you think you can eat swine flesh and rats as long as you don't do so in a Sacred Garden of idols , and as long as you're not a Jew. Well I highly disagree, I think it specifically mentions those who eat those abominable meats for a reason and includes them with those who go in the idol gardens.

as it says, all things are lawful, we have liberty in Christ

All things eh? I see. That would explain the mentality behind many pastors and priests with their sexual exploits.

And when Paul was commanded to tell gentiles not to eat blood, that too you can ignore, since all things are lawful.

). Only then do we have the power of God in us to obey and do good works and produce fruit

So again, what kinds of works can Only "Christians" do? Last time I asked your answer included "praising G-d with their lips" and I said that just insults Jews and Muslims. So what kinds of works can one only do when they are "saved?" by your definition?

It's not just that we see things in a different light, I see the way you see things (Which is the common mainstream Protestant position) as one of the chief stumbling blocks from Jews accepting Christ, false doctrines and heresies like Lawlessness and Polytheism, even if they are the traditional mainstream view, are false and will send you to H-E double hockey sticks no matter how much you think otherwise. Jesus specifically says so. You disclude things like Matthew 7:22-23 where Jesus specifically says the doers of Lawlessness will be rejected. What makes me angry is these doctrines and the resistance that those who adhere to them which prevents them from looking at things objectively in a complete context, and the very fact you say that you don't have to actually obey Jesus' teachings to be save is as frustrating as it is depressing that this is the mainstream view.

 

[e.r.m.]

A better response than most I get around here.....still....

Are we still discussing the water ritual?...or the baptism He spoke of....
when He told His disciples...'you know not what you ask'....?

And that cup He mentioned....was it not trial and judgment?

King with authority....I think not.
Of Himself He did say....'brother and fellow servant'.

Thank you.
-I am honestly not 100% on what He meant when he said The baptism he will be baptized
with. At first glance it seems to me it meant the same as the cup...as you said, trial and judgement. Jesus sometimes referred to the same idea with different examples in the same conversation, ex-"The kingdom of heaven is like..."
Best guess I could say for the moment w/o diving in. I'm certain though the baptism he referred to himself is different than water baptism for us. As his reference to himself was future tense and he did not get baptized again in water. The baptism in water for us He associated with salvation, something he didn't need, but provided for us.

In terms of king with authority, consider three things:
-He had All authority on heaven and on earth by the time of his resurrection, only then
did he instruct on baptism in His name.
-Whatever authority he didn't have before that time, the Father did have. Jesus followed his Fathers commands. He told Pilate that the only authority Pilate had was what the Father allowed Pilate to have.
-There was a plan. I did a study on Matthew and was amazed at why Jesus did everything he did. The plan implemented through Jesus birth, life, and death was done in such a way as to have the greatest maximum impact on bringing mankind back to God. Exerting Jesus's raw authority would not have acheived the reasons for which he was sent. The people could tell though, they said He spoke with authority, not like the teachers of the law. Whatever commands He gives us, we need to take seriously. Hope this helps.

 

[Shermana]

. We can never be good enough to enter the Kingdom no matter how hard we try.

Too bad Jesus said otherwise.

New International Version (©1984)
"Make every effort to enter through the narrow door, because many, I tell you, will try to enter and will not be able to.
New Living Translation (©2007)
"Work hard to enter the narrow door to God's Kingdom, for many will try to enter but will fail.
English Standard Version (©2001)
“Strive to enter through the narrow door. For many, I tell you, will seek to enter and will not be able.

 

[javajo]

Exactly as I thought you'd answer, so you think you can eat swine flesh and rats as long as you don't do so in a Sacred Garden of idols , and as long as you're not a Jew. Well I highly disagree, I think it specifically mentions those who eat those abominable meats for a reason and includes them with those who go in the idol gardens.

As long as you are not doing it to deliberately worship false gods. If you believe everyone who eats ham, bacon, sausage, lobster, oysters, clams or any other creature God has given is wrong then you are condemning a lot of people to hell. Jesus even said its not what goes into the belly that defiles, but what comes out of the heart. Have you seen what people eat in other countries around the world? Lots of things. And none of those defiles them. Its the judgment and hate and murder and sexual sins that proceed from the heart that defile a man.

All things eh? I see. That would explain the mentality behind many pastors and priests with their sexual exploits.

You know I don't believe that. People who do those things have not trusted Christ and do not have the Spirit of Christ living in them, and you know that.

And when Paul was commanded to tell gentiles not to eat blood, that too you can ignore, since all things are lawful.

While I don't eat animals with the blood, if you read the passage it makes perfect sense:

9Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, 10Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.
11And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.
12All things are lawful unto me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power of any.
13Meats for the belly, and the belly for meats: but God shall destroy both it and them. Now the body is not for fornication, but for the Lord; and the Lord for the body.

So again, what kinds of works can Only "Christians" do? Last time I asked your answer included "praising G-d with their lips" and I said that just insults Jews and Muslims. So what kinds of works can one only do when they are "saved?" by your definition?

Anyone can do work of righteousness but none of those works can save anybody. Because we all have sinned and the penalty is death. Only Christ was sinless and only he could die and pay for our sins. Only after we trust him and have our sins paid for do our works come into play.

It's not just that we see things in a different light, I see the way you see things (Which is the common mainstream Protestant position) as one of the chief stumbling blocks from Jews accepting Christ, false doctrines and heresies like Lawlessness and Polytheism, even if they are the traditional mainstream view, are false and will send you to H-E double hockey sticks no matter how much you think otherwise. Jesus specifically says so. You disclude things like Matthew 7:22-23 where Jesus specifically says the doers of Lawlessness will be rejected.

Hm. Well, I don't believe in lawlessness or in polytheism. I believe in loving God and loving others and in doing that I will not do anything that would break his laws. And I do that because I have been freely saved, not to get or keep saved, that Christ get all the glory.

 

[javajo]

Too bad Jesus said otherwise.

New International Version (©1984)
"Make every effort to enter through the narrow door, because many, I tell you, will try to enter and will not be able to.
New Living Translation (©2007)
"Work hard to enter the narrow door to God's Kingdom, for many will try to enter but will fail.
English Standard Version (©2001)
“Strive to enter through the narrow door. For many, I tell you, will seek to enter and will not be able.

And he was preaching the Kingdom of God and the Messiah to Jews under the Law under the Old Covenant. I don't fit that category.

 

[Shermana]

As long as you are not doing it to deliberately worship false gods

I highly disagree, and I think the verse plainly addresses those who eat any kinds of meats WITH those who go into the gardens. The Douay Rheims puts it best. It doesn't even necessarily imply that they are going there to worship but simply to eat unclean things.

They that were sanctified, and thought themselves clean in the gardens behind the gate within, they that did eat swine's flesh, and the abomination, and the mouse: they shall be consumed together, saith the Lord.

Well, I don't believe in lawlessness or in polytheism.

Yes you do, our definitions of "Lawlessness" differ, and I'd bet that mine is more what the author had in mind.

Anyone can do work of righteousness but none of those works can save anybody.

So what does that mean? That you can do anything you want and still be saved? Why does he say your righteousness must exceed the scribes and Pharisees? They weren't necessarily unrighteous. I don't think you understand what "righteousness" actually means (along with almost all "Christians").

I don't see what you're saying when it says "It makes perfect sense", are you saying you are allowed to eat blood or not?

 

[Shermana]

And he was preaching the Kingdom of God and the Messiah to Jews under the Law under the Old Covenant. I don't fit that category.

So Jews have a different gospel to follow? Or did all these words of his die out a few weeks later at the cross even to the Jews?

Are you saying he only meant to try very hard until he died to a select group of Jews?

Now this is interesting logic, you don't have to actually go by Jesus' teachings if you aren't a Jew.

 

[e.r.m.]

Yes, I think you are right. I think it good to post Romans 9:32 in context, it sums it up quite brilliantly:

30 What then shall we say? That the Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, have obtained it, a righteousness that is by faith; 31 but the people of Israel, who pursued the law as the way of righteousness, have not attained their goal. 32 Why not? Because they pursued it not by faith but as if it were by works. They stumbled over the stumbling stone. 33 As it is written: “See, I lay in Zion a stone that causes people to stumble
and a rock that makes them fall,
and the one who believes in him will never be put to shame.”

I think too, it shows that the works were not shunned, what was shunned was that there was no faith behind the works. They trusted in the works themselves without God. Unlike Namaan the leper who acknowledged his trip to the Jordan was all about God.

 

[Thief]

Thank you.
-I am honestly not 100% on what He meant when he said The baptism he will be baptized
with. At first glance it seems to me it meant the same as the cup...as you said, trial and judgement. Jesus sometimes referred to the same idea with different examples in the same conversation, ex-"The kingdom of heaven is like..."
Best guess I could say for the moment w/o diving in. I'm certain though the baptism he referred to himself is different than water baptism for us. As his reference to himself was future tense and he did not get baptized again in water. The baptism in water for us He associated with salvation, something he didn't need, but provided for us.

In terms of king with authority, consider three things:
-He had All authority on heaven and on earth by the time of his resurrection, only then
did he instruct on baptism in His name.
-Whatever authority he didn't have before that time, the Father did have. Jesus followed his Fathers commands. He told Pilate that the only authority Pilate had was what the Father allowed Pilate to have.
-There was a plan. I did a study on Matthew and was amazed at why Jesus did everything he did. The plan implemented through Jesus birth, life, and death was done in such a way as to have the greatest maximum impact on bringing mankind back to God. Exerting Jesus's raw authority would not have acheived the reasons for which he was sent. The people could tell though, they said He spoke with authority, not like the teachers of the law. Whatever commands He gives us, we need to take seriously. Hope this helps.

What I high lighted, is what I hoped you would bring back.
It's that item in particular that most people overlook.
The baptism He spoke of is not a ritual.
Water rituals save no one.

As for His authority.....that's a different topic.

As for that thief....it was his last moment realization....his faith...
his last breath....that made all the difference.

 

[javajo]

So Jews have a different gospel to follow? Or did all these words of his die out a few weeks later at the cross even to the Jews?

Are you saying he only meant to try very hard until he died to a select group of Jews?

Now this is interesting logic, you don't have to actually go by Jesus' teachings if you aren't a Jew.

Good news has different meanings. One can just mean, hey, I got some good news. Then there is the Good News of the Kingdom that Christ preached as he was the Messiah and the Kingdom had come to the Jews but they rejected him and so it has been delayed for a time. And there is the Good News that Christ died and rose again so all who believe in him may have eternal life. Every time Christ mentioned the Gospel of the Kingdom it was the former. When he mentioned it in Mathew 26 when Mary anointed his feet, he said it was for his burial, and that her name would be known wherever that Gospel was preached. That Gospel is the Gospel of Christ's death, burial, and resurrection which was preached after Pentecost. Christ said to come unto me all ye who are heavy laden and I will give you rest. In Hebrews it says those who have believed in Christ have ceased from their works and have entered into his rest, but some have not due to unbelief. They went back to the Law, rejecting him and crucifying him to themselves once again.

 

[Shermana]

Good news has different meanings. One can just mean, hey, I got some good news. Then there is the Good News of the Kingdom that Christ preached as he was the Messiah and the Kingdom had come to the Jews but they rejected him and so it has been delayed for a time. And there is the Good News that Christ died and rose again so all who believe in him may have eternal life. Every time Christ mentioned the Gospel of the Kingdom it was the former. When he mentioned it in Mathew 26 when Mary anointed his feet, he said it was for his burial, and that her name would be known wherever that Gospel was preached. That Gospel is the Gospel of Christ's death, burial, and resurrection which was preached after Pentecost. Christ said to come unto me all ye who are heavy laden and I will give you rest. In Hebrews it says those who have believed in Christ have ceased from their works and have entered into his rest, but some have not due to unbelief. They went back to the Law, rejecting him and crucifying him to themselves once again.

Wait, so first you say the Jews have different rules by Jesus, then you say they were wrong for going back to those rules that Jesus tells them to follow, because he never meant for them to listen to him in the first place. Yes, Antinomian logic makes great sense. No need to actually listen to Jesus' words, you can just assume they all got nailed to the cross with him.

 

[javajo]

Wait, so first you say the Jews have different rules by Jesus, then you say they were wrong for going back to those rules that Jesus tells them to follow, because he never meant for them to listen to him in the first place. Yes, Antinomian logic makes great sense. No need to actually listen to Jesus' words, you can just assume they all got nailed to the cross with him.

That's not what I said. If you study what Gospel means in the scriptures you will find those three meanings.