Jesus and Paul's teachings, Is there a difference?

[Simplelogic]

Everyone on this topic who does their research knows your statement to be true. But they have been told that Paul was the great Apostle of Jesus who spread the teachings of Jesus to the gentiles. Christians, who bother to read the words of Jesus know this too. But to admit it to themselves, means that their whole conception of their own beliefs is based upon assumptions that are not true. In most cases, these people grew up believing these assumtions, which are ingrained into their childhood and adult life, as I was. It was hard to let go of these false assumtions, but the relief of knowing and living the truth of the teachings of Jesus was worth shedding the lies of the self proclaimed "Apostle Of Christ".

Wow….well said.

 

[Simplelogic]

Here is a corrected version of John 3: 16 which is in line with the original Greek:

For God so love the world He gave His only begotten son, that whosoever obeys him should not perish but have eternal life. John 3:16

As I stated earlier. The Greek word pisteuo was inaccurately translated as "believe" in order to make Jesus mesh with Paul's later logic.

The same goes for all the other "believe in me" verses in John.

Problem solved.

 

[wizanda]

The same goes for all the other "believe in me" verses in John.

Joh 14:1 Let not your heart be troubled: you obey (believe) in God, obey (believe) also in me??

G4100 - πιστεύω - pisteuō
From G4102; to have faith (in, upon, or with respect to, a person or thing), that is, credit; by implication to entrust (especially one’s spiritual well being to Christ): - believe (-r), commit (to trust), put in trust with.

 

[Simplelogic]

Joh 14:1 Let not your heart be troubled: you obey (believe) in God, obey (believe) also in me??

It can be translated obey or trust. I think trust would be most fitting in this specific verse.

Also…Strongs is a concordance not a lexicon. Big difference between the two. Strongs is based on a specific ENGLISH translation of the KJV.

 

[Simplelogic]

More links on the word pisteuo:

Chapter 26-2.JWOS
Chapter 26-3.JWOS
Chapter 26-4.JWOS
Chapter 26-5.JWOS
Chapter 26-6.JWO Paul

 

[Simplelogic]

No one... ...except through me

"If one were to ask an evangelical Christian if a person can be saved without accepting Jesus as their savior, which to them is synonymous with being born again, you would be answered with, "well, Jesus said...", and they would go on to quote their end-all-debate passage from the Gospel of John. It is an answer that is to be understood as "no", and implied that such a person will certainly spend eternity in the torments of the lake of fire. The verse that is quoted and the interpretation that has been laminated on it have been used as a proof-text for so long by evangelists like Billy Graham, that it is almost impossible for anyone to read it anymore without automatically hearing the evangelical's interpretation. The fact that it is almost always quoted to answer the question if one can be saved without knowing Jesus establishes the false presupposition that the passage has something to do with the question. Thus, we automatically hear the "no" interpretation. But if a person had never heard this passage used this way and read it for the first time, it is doubtful they would come to the same conclusion. And if it had been read in light of everything Yeshua had said in the book of John up to that point, it would have been understood perfectly well... just as those who heard him understood him. The verse you will hear, quoted all by itself is...

"I am the way, the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." John 14:6

There it is! Case closed... right? Unless one accepts Jesus as his savior he will never get to heaven, and therefore he will spend eternity in hell! When reading these words a person can see Billy Graham waving his hand and hear his accent in his thundering authoritative voice as he emphasizes the words "No one". Not surprisingly, many evangelicals who quote this verse this way couldn't tell you the context in which it is found or tell you to whom Yeshua was speaking when he said it. This is in spite of the fact that nearly everyone is familiar with the text. It is because this verse has to be ripped out of its context for it to have the full effect of the desired interpretation. After hearing this verse used this way, one would naturally assume that the context in which it was stated must be similar to the debate that precipitated its use by the evangelical. One would expect there to have been a serious discussion, where Yeshua made a statement concerning how one is saved, then a question arose of if there was any hope for others who didn't find that way, and then we would read what has been portrayed as Yeshua's hard-nose, exclude-all-others answer. None of this can be found there. There was nothing somber or threatening spoken in this scene at all! On the contrary, Yeshua had just given a sweet, peaceful promise to his disciples, and he spoke these words to them in answer to a question from Thomas...

"Let not your heart be troubled; you believe in God, believe also in me. In my Father's house are many mansions; if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you to myself; that where I am, there you may be also. And where I go you know, and the way you know." Thomas said to him, "Lord, we do not know where you are going, and how can we know the way?" Yeshua said to him, "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." John 14:1-6

This was in no way a statement of exclusivity. Yeshua's emphasis was on "I", not "No one". The words "No one" were spoken gently as a sweet assurance and personal promise to his disciples that he would be making sure they got to the place he was going to prepare for them. To be sure, they perfectly understood him this way, because they had also heard him say the Father had committed the judgment of all men to him.

"For the Father judges no one, but has given all judgment to the son." "For even as the Father has life in Himself, so He gave also to the son to have life in himself. And he gave authority to him to also execute judgment, for he is the Son of Man. Do not marvel at this; for an hour is coming in which all those in the tombs will hear his voice. And they will come out, the ones having done good into a resurrection of life, and the ones having practiced evil in to a resurrection of judgment." John 5:22,26-29 KJIIV

This is what Yeshua meant by the words, "No one comes to the Father except through me". Only in the sense that Yeshua will judge every man is how he meant that no one gets to the Father around him. This is true whether a person believes in him or not! All he was saying, and what the disciples heard him say would be along the lines of this paraphrase.

"I told you I will be judging every man and determining where they go, and that includes you! So don't let your heart be troubled. You know the judge personally. I am the way. Be assured... I will see to it that you get there."

In summary, it is wrong to use John 14:6 as a proof-text for the evangelical doctrine that suggests unless a man accepts Jesus as his savior, he has no hope of salvation and will therefore spend eternity in the torments of the lake of fire. In John 5:29 Yeshua said that those who have "done good" will be saved and receive a just degree of eternal life." What's at stake

 

[wizanda]

It can be translated obey or trust. I think trust would be most fitting in this specific verse.

That makes it even worse, Yeshua didn't say "trust in him, and you're saved"...He clearly pointed out, that only God has that choice.

Based on the synoptic gospels he said, that if we're following his teachings to the letter, we will get through judgement day.

Tanakh clearly says, righteous people can only save themselves, not others.... Unless we fall into the trap like Paul, John and Simon the stone (petros) have made, of thinking jesus came as a human sacrifice to die for the world.

 

[LASTINGLIGHT]

This is my point against the made up gospel of John, it contradicts Yeshua's main message in the synoptic gospels; there are 11 times where it says we've got to 'believe in jesus'....So until we remove the inconsistencies, we'll never get a clear picture.

That's why I don't use John. It came too late, contradicts the three synoptics, includes doctrine not found in the synoptics, and has long discourses by Jesus that could not be part of the oral tradition.

 

[Simplelogic]

That makes it even worse, Yeshua didn't say "trust in him, and you're saved"...He clearly pointed out, that only God has that choice.

Based on the synoptic gospels he said, that if we're following his teachings to the letter, we will get through judgement day.

Tanakh clearly says, righteous people can only save themselves, not others.... Unless we fall into the trap like Paul, John and Simon the stone (petros) have made, of thinking jesus came as a human sacrifice to die for the world.

I didn't say that. I said trust should be used in that one verse because of the context. The majority should be translated as obey.

Ezekiel 14 is not saying what you are implying either. Their is no mention in the text of any of those men being a sacrifice for others. Its merely stating the their righteousness would not be able to offset the sins of the people.

Vicarious atonement is all throughout the Tanakh btw. Every animal sacrifice was an example of it.

 

[Thanda]

I'm not sure why you want me to interpret this but for me, and one must, of necessity, also have been able to read the verses before and after this one particular one, but it states that Jesus has need of something that they have and they should forfeit that one thing and give it to Jesus. These verses are simply instructions to the disciples from Jesus and things that they were supposed to do. I also see this verse, or rather verses as telling a person that whatever you have, you should give it all to God. In this particular case, however, it was about a donkey and the need for him to travel. Now, can you give your own interpretations of verses without the need to parrot?

Without the need to parrot what exactly? What must my interpretation look like so you don't accuse me of parroting?

 

[Thanda]

You contradict yourself with the sentence I underlined. Either Jesus was God or he was NOT God and as you state here, he was ALSO a god, which, IMO, is idolatry. I believe he was a prophet of God, much like Gandhi, or The Buddha, or many others.

Since he is part of the Godhead, he is God.

 

[Thanda]

And yet, every person who claims to be Christian has said to me that they must be subservient to God and bent to the service of God, so what exactly is your point here? You say you must admit that Jesus is God, is that not subservience? You are admitting that Jesus is your master, similar to God. And in many cases, you say Jesus is the son of God, so a part of the godhead. This is the very nature of subservience. You might ask a Black American over the age of 80 what subservience is. I can assure you, they know.

Do you have any idea what that sentence was related to?

 

[LASTINGLIGHT]

Since he is part of the Godhead, he is God.

Sorry but, God has no head.

 

[Thanda]

Sorry but, God has no head.

Okay

 

[LASTINGLIGHT]

Okay

Just interjecting some lighthearted stuff into a very intense debate.

 

[LASTINGLIGHT]

John 3.7 in The Source New Testament says:

Jesus answered, “Let me emphasize this, that unless one is born from
above, one is not able to see God’s Realm.”

 

[Yoshua]

A Christlike person is a person who does good according to the best of their knowledge. It is written that even Jesus himself grew in wisdom over time as he received "grace for grace". A person cannot be condemned for lacking knowledge. Nor indeed is God interested in people just knowing about him and believing he is there. God is there whether we believe it or not. What God is interested in is that we become more like him.

In John 1:9 it says of Jesus Christ "That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.". So every person who comes into the world has the Light of Christ. And everyone who lives by that light is becoming more christlike even though they may not realise it. But the time will come when everyone realises that that light that they had which helped them know right from wrong and to do good came from Christ. When that day comes the only thing that will be in question is who followed that light and who rejected it.

Hi Thanda,

Yes, I agree with your comment about Light. Did a Christlike person can be saved by his knowledge?
Does a good works for you can saved?

Thanks

 

[Yoshua]

Context does not prove your point Yoshua. As Metis pointed out, Paul wrote in a dualistic manner and further, the word pistis is not what one might think it as. Paulian dogma is simply not what Jesus taught. He added many things that Jesus never taught, the idea of saved by faith alone is just one of those. Don't you find it interesting that the majority of the NT is largely attributed to Paul and not Jesus? The Christian church today is largely Paulian and I am left to wonder what God would think of that. There is another thing to consider here as well. Can you discuss the topic merely from your own POV without adding a ton of verses from Paul? The reason I ask this is because people who continually point to this verse or that are not truly thinking for themselves. They are parroting. Say, for example, you read the Sermon of the Mount. You contemplate it, you ruminate over it. And ultimately, if you really study it, you derive your own views of what was said and taught without the need for repeating it. You can speak of it in your own words. This, for me, is what truly studying and understanding any sacred text is all about. I prefer it that way.

Hi Jo,

Luke 7:47-50
47. "For this reason I say to you, her sins, which are many, have been forgiven, for she loved much; but he who is forgiven little, loves little."
48. And He said to her, "Your sins have been forgiven."
49. And those who were reclining at the table with Him began to say to themselves, "Who is this man who even forgives sins?"
50. And He said to the woman, "Your faith has saved you; go in peace."

Jesus already said that faith can saved.

I already posted the comparison & consistency Jesus and Paul’s teaching in the other thread before. I don’t need to doubt Paul’s teachings because I believed Jesus would not called him to propagate His ministry, introduce Christ to the Jews and Gentiles plus the gospel that he is preaching. If Jesus would not like what Paul is doing, then Jesus should have call him to stop.

Thanks

 

[JoStories]

Hi Jo,

Luke 7:47-50
47. "For this reason I say to you, her sins, which are many, have been forgiven, for she loved much; but he who is forgiven little, loves little."
48. And He said to her, "Your sins have been forgiven."
49. And those who were reclining at the table with Him began to say to themselves, "Who is this man who even forgives sins?"
50. And He said to the woman, "Your faith has saved you; go in peace."

Jesus already said that faith can saved.

I already posted the comparison & consistency Jesus and Paul’s teaching in the other thread before. I don’t need to doubt Paul’s teachings because I believed Jesus would not called him to propagate His ministry, introduce Christ to the Jews and Gentiles plus the gospel that he is preaching. If Jesus would not like what Paul is doing, then Jesus should have call him to stop.

Thanks

Jesus never knew Paul and Paul never even met the man. So your last sentence makes no sense to me Yoshua. Paul's teachings are simply not that of what Christ taught. It is that simple, IMO. There are too many inconsistencies to be a revelation of what Christ taught. We will have to agree to disagree.

 

[JoStories]

Do you have any idea what that sentence was related to?

Which sentence? You lost me here.