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

[Yoshua]

And the list goes on. Paul's concept of the separation of grace and works is as unscriptural as it can be. Absolutely nothing concerning grace and Law has changed since Yeshua... or Adam for that matter. Men who lived before Yeshua were no less treated to God's wonderful grace and mercy, and man today is under no less obligation to obey God.

Hi Simplelogic,

How would you understand this scripture? can you give some explanation. What is the relation of grace, faith and salvation here?

Eph. 2:8-10
8. For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
9. Not of works, lest any man should boast.
10. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.

Thanks

 

[Yoshua]

I believe God is spirit and that is all. And you prove my point in that you cannot simply discuss what Christ teaches without the need for verses to support your position. Do you know what the Sermon of the Mount says? In your own words, mind. I honestly doubt you can or do. I mean no disrespect by that Yoshua but honestly, can you think for yourself here? Can you tell me what Christ taught even once?

Hi Jo,

Yes. That is, if I followed your way of understanding the scripture without any sub-verses or parallel scripture, I may interpreted it literally as God is a big bird with wings. Your belief that God is spirit in John 4:24 "God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth." matched. This is exactly what I'm pointing out; It is not regarding my position or to anyone, but to everyone (in general) who would like to study the scripture. The Bible is not a story book that we can easily read and interpret thoroughly without the helps of word origin, custom and traditions, maps, geography, discoveries, science, scriptural context and others. This is the purpose of having a standard/art of biblical interpretation--hermeneutics.

Matt. 5:1-17
1. And seeing the multitudes, He went up on a mountain, and when He was seated His disciples came to Him.
2. Then He opened His mouth and taught them, saying:
3. "Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
4. Blessed are those who mourn, for they shall be comforted.
5. Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth.
6. Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they shall be filled.
7. Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy.
8. Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God.
9. Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God.
10. Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness' sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
11. "Blessed are you when they revile and persecute you, and say all kinds of evil against you falsely for My sake.
12. "Rejoice and be exceedingly glad, for great is your reward in heaven, for so they persecuted the prophets who were before you.
13. "You are the salt of the earth; but if the salt loses its flavor, how shall it be seasoned? It is then good for nothing but to be thrown out and trampled under foot by men.
14. "You are the light of the world. A city that is set on a hill cannot be hidden.
15. "Nor do they light a lamp and put it under a basket, but on a lampstand, and it gives light to all who are in the house.
16. "Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works and glorify your Father in heaven.
17. "Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill.

Jesus is telling on how a person shall be blessed at v.3, v.8, and v.8. If there is blessing, there will be a salvation upon you. Those are the qualities of a person that God wants for us; poor in spirit, meek, hunger and thirst for righteousness, merciful, pure in heart, peacemakers, persecuted because of righteousness. He called us to be the light and salt of the earth, to be his representative, and a follower. This is not easy. A person needs to be always on-guard to attain this righteousness.

Thanks

 

[JoStories]

Hi Jo,

Yes. That is, if I followed your way of understanding the scripture without any sub-verses or parallel scripture, I may interpreted it literally as God is a big bird with wings. Your belief that God is spirit in John 4:24 "God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth." matched. This is exactly what I'm pointing out; It is not regarding my position or to anyone, but to everyone (in general) who would like to study the scripture. The Bible is not a story book that we can easily read and interpret thoroughly without the helps of word origin, custom and traditions, maps, geography, discoveries, science, scriptural context and others. This is the purpose of having a standard/art of biblical interpretation--hermeneutics.

Matt. 5:1-17
1. And seeing the multitudes, He went up on a mountain, and when He was seated His disciples came to Him.
2. Then He opened His mouth and taught them, saying:
3. "Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
4. Blessed are those who mourn, for they shall be comforted.
5. Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth.
6. Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they shall be filled.
7. Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy.
8. Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God.
9. Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God.
10. Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness' sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
11. "Blessed are you when they revile and persecute you, and say all kinds of evil against you falsely for My sake.
12. "Rejoice and be exceedingly glad, for great is your reward in heaven, for so they persecuted the prophets who were before you.
13. "You are the salt of the earth; but if the salt loses its flavor, how shall it be seasoned? It is then good for nothing but to be thrown out and trampled under foot by men.
14. "You are the light of the world. A city that is set on a hill cannot be hidden.
15. "Nor do they light a lamp and put it under a basket, but on a lampstand, and it gives light to all who are in the house.
16. "Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works and glorify your Father in heaven.
17. "Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill.

Jesus is telling on how a person shall be blessed at v.3, v.8, and v.8. If there is blessing, there will be a salvation upon you. Those are the qualities of a person that God wants for us; poor in spirit, meek, hunger and thirst for righteousness, merciful, pure in heart, peacemakers, persecuted because of righteousness. He called us to be the light and salt of the earth, to be his representative, and a follower. This is not easy. A person needs to be always on-guard to attain this righteousness.

Thanks

Morning Yoshua
Let's look at this another way Yoshua. In verse 3 you read that theirs is the kingdom of God. Now what do you make of this verse? "The Kingdom of God is not found in buildings of wood and stone. Split a piece of wood and I am there, lift a rock and you will find me". How does that work with the verse you quoted or even does it? IMO, it clearly does but perhaps not in the way you might think. I am interested in how you will respond here

Or let's take another. Let your light shine before men, that they may see your good works. How does some of the things that people of your faith (I am NOT talking about you here Yoshua! Just asking a hypothetical question), how does the things people of your faith, like hating gays (WBC), or burning the Qu'ran (that guy in Florida) among others, how do those things depict someone shining that light? Does it at all? Or does it depict a bigotry and bias that seems to hate? I look forward to your response.

 

[JoStories]

Interesting opinion, but entirely irrelevant to the Xian, and also Judaic, religious paradigm. It doesn't make sense in a ''Jewish'' format, and Jesu was Jewish.

How is it irrelevant to the Christian paradigm Disciple? It speaks directly to the contradictions between Paul and Christ.

 

[Yoshua]

Let's look at this another way Yoshua. In verse 3 you read that theirs is the kingdom of God. Now what do you make of this verse? "The Kingdom of God is not found in buildings of wood and stone. Split a piece of wood and I am there, lift a rock and you will find me". How does that work with the verse you quoted or even does it? IMO, it clearly does but perhaps not in the way you might think. I am interested in how you will respond here

Hi Jo,

When Jesus said this, the kingdom of God or kingdom of Heaven is the place of God, His territory and the place that He resides.

Or let's take another. Let your light shine before men, that they may see your good works. How does some of the things that people of your faith (I am NOT talking about you here Yoshua! Just asking a hypothetical question), how does the things people of your faith, like hating gays (WBC), or burning the Qu'ran (that guy in Florida) among others, how do those things depict someone shining that light? Does it at all? Or does it depict a bigotry and bias that seems to hate? I look forward to your response.

Just to inform you that it is not our culture to burn the Quran. For gays, honestly I don't hate gays. The gay sometime makes themselves to hate them. Some are decent gays and respectable. One example if a gay wants to get near to you and touch you intentionally, this would usually hated by most men. I don't know in others culture.

My understanding to the sentence 'Let your light shine before men' for me is (spiritually) to be an example and an "influencer" to all other people surrounding around you. So by good works that sourced by having faith in Christ, you become a living testimony to all people. This role is difficult, and not an instant man of righteousness/holy Christian. This takes a lot of trials, testing and maturity to attain righteousness.

Keep asking. I'm willing to respond.

Thanks

 

[Thanda]

Paul is simply to misogynist and rule oriented to be anything like what The Christ taught, such as love and caring and understanding.

Nothing gets me as hot under the collar as when people try to make out Jesus for some "anything goes, nothing but love" hippie.

Matt 5:

17 ¶Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

20 For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.​

Secondly it is a tricky business to compare Jesus writings to Paul. Most of Jesus' recorded words were to unbelievers (in him as a Messiah) and so his message was always quite simple - "Come unto me who ever you are and I will heal you" was the basic message. Paul letters on the other hand were always addressed to believers who were within the church - the church Jesus said he would build in Mattew 16. As such his message was within the context of people who had already chosen to organise themselves as a group and who had already accepting Jesus as their Lord and Saviour. From that standpoint they were now ready to receive further laws and instructions that would help enter into the Kindgom of Heaven. So Jesus taught people how to get to the gate that has the path to eternal life. Paul taught what that path looked like. It is not contradiction, it is continuation.

 

[JoStories]

Nothing gets me as hot under the collar as when people try to make out Jesus for some "anything goes, nothing but love" hippie.

Matt 5:

17 ¶Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

20 For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.​

Secondly it is a tricky business to compare Jesus writings to Paul. Most of Jesus' recorded words were to unbelievers (in him as a Messiah) and so his message was always quite simple - "Come unto me who ever you are and I will heal you" was the basic message. Paul letters on the other hand were always addressed to believers who were within the church - the church Jesus said he would build in Mattew 16. As such his message was within the context of people who had already chosen to organise themselves as a group and who had already accepting Jesus as their Lord and Saviour. From that standpoint they were now ready to receive further laws and instructions that would help enter into the Kindgom of Heaven. So Jesus taught people how to get to the gate that has the path to eternal life. Paul taught what that path looked like. It is not contradiction, it is continuation.

The fact that this gets you 'hot under the collar' is entirely on you Thanda. I have a right to my opinion and how I view the things that Paul wrote versus what Christ taught. If you disagree, I have no issues with that but it is not my responsibility to have to adhere to how you see this. In fact, it is the responsibility of all to listen, read, interpret and try to get a fresh look at what was written. That said, we simply don't agree. Why not compare the two? Is there some hard and fast rule that precludes someone from comparing them? The two simply are not the same, IMO. Furthermore, there are plenty of people who think that is was Peter who was slated to build that church, not Paul. I need no laws or instructions other than my belief in God and my living a moral and good life to the best of my ability.

 

[JoStories]

Hi Jo,

When Jesus said this, the kingdom of God or kingdom of Heaven is the place of God, His territory and the place that He resides.


Just to inform you that it is not our culture to burn the Quran. For gays, honestly I don't hate gays. The gay sometime makes themselves to hate them. Some are decent gays and respectable. One example if a gay wants to get near to you and touch you intentionally, this would usually hated by most men. I don't know in others culture.

My understanding to the sentence 'Let your light shine before men' for me is (spiritually) to be an example and an "influencer" to all other people surrounding around you. So by good works that sourced by having faith in Christ, you become a living testimony to all people. This role is difficult, and not an instant man of righteousness/holy Christian. This takes a lot of trials, testing and maturity to attain righteousness.

Keep asking. I'm willing to respond.

Thanks

Yoshua, you missed the entire point with the first remark. That remark was pointing to the fact that Christ taught that there is no need of churches or temples or synagogues, etc. All that one needs is to look to find God. And that was the point. Heaven could be right here. Do you know differently?

As for the second, someone intentionally touching you is sexual harassment. I would never say otherwise. What I was asking you is that many of your faith claim to follow God but clearly don't. They live lives of hate and loathing and go as far as harming others in the name of that faith. Or burning books of another faith. How do you know that God is not unlimited enough to be able to be the God of ALL faiths? Bottom line, you don't. Unless you are willing to limit God in some way and I clearly am not.

 

[Thanda]

The fact that this gets you 'hot under the collar' is entirely on you Thanda. I have a right to my opinion and how I view the things that Paul wrote versus what Christ taught. If you disagree, I have no issues with that but it is not my responsibility to have to adhere to how you see this. In fact, it is the responsibility of all to listen, read, interpret and try to get a fresh look at what was written. That said, we simply don't agree. Why not compare the two? Is there some hard and fast rule that precludes someone from comparing them? The two simply are not the same, IMO. Furthermore, there are plenty of people who think that is was Peter who was slated to build that church, not Paul. I need no laws or instructions other than my belief in God and my living a moral and good life to the best of my ability.

I did not say we can't compare the two. I said it is tricky. We have very few records of Jesus preaching to believers. But on those few occasions when he did he always gave a lot of rules and laws. On the other hand we have very few records of Paul preaching to unbelievers. On those few occasions when we do have it we don't read many laws except to repent and turn to Christ.
So taking the entirety of what we know about Paul and what we know about Jesus and concluding that they were opposed because we we see more laws in what we know about Paul than about Jesus is very dangerous. Because by that standard almost every prophets is opposed to every other prophet in the Bible.

That Peter was told to build the church and not Paul does not matter. Clearly he was not expected to do it alone and he had helpers. It appears Paul was one of them.

What is a moral and good life. By whose standard do you judge it - yours, man's or God's. And if God's how did he tell you about his standard?

 

[JoStories]

I did not say we can't compare the two. I said it is tricky. We have very few records of Jesus preaching to believers. But on those few occasions when he did he always gave a lot of rules and laws. On the other hand we have very few records of Paul preaching to unbelievers. On those few occasions when we do have it we don't read many laws except to repent and turn to Christ.
So taking the entirety of what we know about Paul and what we know about Jesus and concluding that they were opposed because we we see more laws in what we know about Paul than about Jesus is very dangerous. Because by that standard almost every prophets is opposed to every other prophet in the Bible.

That Peter was told to build the church and not Paul does not matter. Clearly he was not expected to do it alone and he had helpers. It appears Paul was one of them.

What is a moral and good life. By whose standard do you judge it - yours, man's or God's. And if God's how did he tell you about his standard?

A good and moral life is one where I don't harm others, I don't take from others and I try to give to others as much as I possibly can. I judge that by reading many sacred texts, meditating, and asking God what is right for me. I don't understand your last question. How did God tell me what is right and moral? It has to do with what is the right thing to do. Loving others. Caring about others and fighting the good fight. Trying to be kind even in the face of adversity. Being generous to others. But mostly its about not harming others and attempting to further myself on my journey toward enlightenment. That includes living in harmony with nature. For example, I have a vegetable garden. A deer is eating all the tops of my beets, my green beans, etc. I won't stop that deer because it is God that made that deer and if my greens can feed it, so be it. I am the better for that.

 

[Desert Snake]

How is it irrelevant to the Christian paradigm Disciple? It speaks directly to the contradictions between Paul and Christ.

Because the proposal/s/ (there are a few variant but similar ones), does not include an extremely important, actually the most important part of the Xian theism. I ''understand'', where your coming from, in the logic, but my research indicates that, if anything, the early church was underrepresenting the belief in the Deity of Jesu. It is the main part of the faith, really. We know this even from 'straight' textual reference, //ie with no traditional teaching input; and that is where the semantics and obfuscation, to the leaving out of entire books, of the Bible, enters the picture. It's just the facts of the religion. For the sake of argument, say that we read the Bible in the manner of your interpretation; how much, ''metaphor'', are we dealing with? It's ridiculous, people are creating a fictional ''version'' of the Bible, and calling it historical or historically accurate. That is basically nonsense, because we don't know for sure, the 'basics', that a secularist might believe to be the 'most likely' scenario. There are reasons, why, this is not an easy thing to do; it is different from some other texts, because there are elements in it, that do not point to a ''story of a man who was later deified''. When I read the Bible, this is actually, an unlikely scenario, not the most logical. The timeline of that theory, itself, makes no sense. The deific title usage. So, anyways, we simply will disagree on this. What seems logical to you, does not seem logical to me.

 

[Simplelogic]

Links that destroy Paul. Well written and very logical.

Paul the false apostle

Paul a liar

Paul

Attributes part 3

 

[Simplelogic]

Hi Simplelogic,

How would you understand this scripture? can you give some explanation. What is the relation of grace, faith and salvation here?

Eph. 2:8-10
8. For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
9. Not of works, lest any man should boast.
10. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.

Thanks

I'm glad you brought this up. The concept that faith and works are mutually exclusive concepts is the root of the problem itself and can ONLY be found in Paul's letters. I would challenge you to find me any text (besides Paul's) which teaches this type of logic. This statement in Ephesians 2: 8-10 is tied to Paul's very unique views on "the law" itself. To find out what Paul truly meant by this logic we have to go to Romans. This is where we get to hear Paul expand on his inner logic behind his theological views. Here is my close friend Scott Nelson's take on this matter, which I am in complete agreement with:

""Moreover the Law entered that (for this purpose) the offense (sin) might abound. But where sin abounded, grace abounded much more, so that as sin reigned in death, even so grace might reign through righteousness to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord." Romans 5:20

Again he draws the mutually exclusive picture of Law versus grace in the following.

"For sin shall not have dominion over you, for you are not under Law but under grace." Romans 6:14

Later on in Romans, Paul uses an analogy from the time of Elijah to make his grace-versus-works point.

But what does the divine response say to him (Elijah)? "I have reserved for Myself seven thousand men who have not bowed the knee to Baal." Even so then, at this present time there is a remnant (of Israel) according to the election of grace. And if by grace, then it is no longer of works; otherwise grace is no longer grace. But if it is of works, it is no longer grace; otherwise work is no longer work. Romans 11:4-6

Paul's logic is so stood on its head, and his proof demonstrated with smoke and mirrors here that it's almost humorous. It would be if so many didn't actually believe this is the infallible word of God! The only thing that Paul derives from what God said to Elijah is that He had reserved a "remnant" for Himself. Nothing more! Never mind the fact that these seven thousand men had themselves remained true to God's Law and not bowed their knee to Baal! Sounds like works to me! But then, to keep the illusion going, Paul states that this new remnant of saved Israel is "according to the election of grace". This he bases on the assumption that he firmly established the concept of predestination and the election by grace earlier in the infamous passages of Romans 9. This detestable doctrine is itself based on numerous misquotes of Scripture as I have shown. But now Paul continues to build lie on top of lie with the flow of logic that if salvation is by grace, then it is no longer by works; otherwise grace is no longer grace! What utter nonsense! Where is it written that grace and Law (works) are mutually exclusive concepts... other than in Paul's writings? Paul had previously tried to establish this principle that the two concepts cannot go together with this slight-of-hand.

"Now to him who works, the wages are not counted as grace but as debt." Romans 4:4

This slight-of-hand is accomplished by renaming elements in the equation much the way an abortionist would never call an unborn child "a baby". If Paul can get away with calling obedience to God "work", then he can get away with calling the benefits of that work "wages", and if we continue to follow him down this road we find out that wages are really a "debt"! Oh no! Who would want to be accused of being so presumptuous as to bill God for grace?!! Phew! Let's back up and start over. What Paul calls "work" is really obedience to God. God is the One with the bill! He made us and demands the payment of obedience. His grace and mercy are benefits (not wages) of doing business with Him. No one, no matter how obedient, can presumptuously demand payment of anything from God. To do so would involve disobedience to the Law concerning walking humbly with God! Anyone who is obedient and walks humbly with God can have all the faith in the world that God will provide the benefits He promised. This is where true faith exists! Now doesn't this sound so much more simple and right?Even a child can grasp this picture. But one has to spend many years in seminary before they can even pretend to comprehend Paul's convoluted mess."
The Law stands

 

[Simplelogic]

Now let's look at Scripture and take notice of whom God deems most worthy of His benefits of grace, and mercy. Let's start with Noah.

So the Lord said, "I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth, both man and beast, creeping thing and birds of the air, for I regret that I have made them." But Noah found GRACE in the eyes of the Lord. This is the genealogy of Noah. Noah was a just man, perfect in his generations. Noah walked with God. Genesis 6:7-9

Then the Lord said to Noah, "Come into the ark, you and all your household, BECAUSE I have seen that you are righteous before Me in this generation. Genesis 7:1

No one else on earth found grace or mercy from God except one man and his family because he was "just" and "righteous"! Contrary to Paul's doctrine, becoming a beneficiary of God's grace has everything to do with works. Grace and works are not mutually exclusive. They are inextricably connected to one another. There is more.

For the Lord God is a sun and shield; the Lord will give grace and glory; no good thing will He withhold from those who walk uprightly. Psalm 84:11

For I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and fourth generations of those who hate Me, but showing mercy to thousands,to those who love Me and keep My commandments. Exodus 20: 5,6

But the mercy of the Lord is from everlasting to everlasting on those who fear Him, and His righteousness to children's children, to such as keep His covenant, and to those who remember His commandments to do them. Psalm 103 17-18

 

[Simplelogic]

Hi Jo,

Yes. That is, if I followed your way of understanding the scripture without any sub-verses or parallel scripture, I may interpreted it literally as God is a big bird with wings. Your belief that God is spirit in John 4:24 "God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth." matched. This is exactly what I'm pointing out; It is not regarding my position or to anyone, but to everyone (in general) who would like to study the scripture. The Bible is not a story book that we can easily read and interpret thoroughly without the helps of word origin, custom and traditions, maps, geography, discoveries, science, scriptural context and others. This is the purpose of having a standard/art of biblical interpretation--hermeneutics.

Matt. 5:1-17
1. And seeing the multitudes, He went up on a mountain, and when He was seated His disciples came to Him.
2. Then He opened His mouth and taught them, saying:
3. "Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
4. Blessed are those who mourn, for they shall be comforted.
5. Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth.
6. Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they shall be filled.
7. Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy.
8. Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God.
9. Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God.
10. Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness' sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
11. "Blessed are you when they revile and persecute you, and say all kinds of evil against you falsely for My sake.
12. "Rejoice and be exceedingly glad, for great is your reward in heaven, for so they persecuted the prophets who were before you.
13. "You are the salt of the earth; but if the salt loses its flavor, how shall it be seasoned? It is then good for nothing but to be thrown out and trampled under foot by men.
14. "You are the light of the world. A city that is set on a hill cannot be hidden.
15. "Nor do they light a lamp and put it under a basket, but on a lampstand, and it gives light to all who are in the house.
16. "Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works and glorify your Father in heaven.
17. "Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill.

Jesus is telling on how a person shall be blessed at v.3, v.8, and v.8. If there is blessing, there will be a salvation upon you. Those are the qualities of a person that God wants for us; poor in spirit, meek, hunger and thirst for righteousness, merciful, pure in heart, peacemakers, persecuted because of righteousness. He called us to be the light and salt of the earth, to be his representative, and a follower. This is not easy. A person needs to be always on-guard to attain this righteousness.

Thanks

Jesus is clearly stating that humans are blessed based off of their ACTIONS. This is also called "merited favor".

 

[savagewind]

Jesus is clearly stating that humans are blessed based off of their ACTIONS. This is also called "merited favor".

I do not think so. Being poor of spirit is not an action Matthew 5:3 Being hungry is not an action, but they are blessed. Matthew 5:6 Being persecuted should not be an action of the persecuted. Matthew 5:11

 

[JoStories]

Because the proposal/s/ (there are a few variant but similar ones), does not include an extremely important, actually the most important part of the Xian theism. I ''understand'', where your coming from, in the logic, but my research indicates that, if anything, the early church was underrepresenting the belief in the Deity of Jesu. It is the main part of the faith, really. We know this even from 'straight' textual reference, //ie with no traditional teaching input; and that is where the semantics and obfuscation, to the leaving out of entire books, of the Bible, enters the picture. It's just the facts of the religion. For the sake of argument, say that we read the Bible in the manner of your interpretation; how much, ''metaphor'', are we dealing with? It's ridiculous, people are creating a fictional ''version'' of the Bible, and calling it historical or historically accurate. That is basically nonsense, because we don't know for sure, the 'basics', that a secularist might believe to be the 'most likely' scenario. There reasons, why, this is not an easy thing to do; it is different from some other texts, because there are elements in it, that do not point to a ''story of a man who was later deified''. When I read the Bible, this is actually, an unlikely scenario, not the most logical. The timeline of that theory, itself, makes no sense. The deific title usage, in any Jewish or Israelite, sense, makes absolutely no sense, to the point of impossibility.//or at least, some wild aberration// So, anyways, we simply will disagree on this. What seems logical to you, does not seem logical to me.

Respectfully Disciple, we will have to agree to disagree because my research has led me in the exact opposite direction of understanding than you. I understand your POV as it is more prevalent than mine in many cases but that does not diminish those of us with a different POV.

 

[JoStories]

I do not think so. Being poor of spirit is not an action Matthew 5:3 Being hungry is not an action, but they are blessed. Matthew 5:6 Being persecuted should not be an action of the persecuted. Matthew 5:11

I disagree that being poor of spirit is not an action. If one decides to not believe, purposefully, that is action. And I don't speak here of atheists. I speak of having had a spiritual experience and then purposefully denying that. Being hungry can be an action if one is Anorexic or Bulimic.

 

[steveb1]

Hi Jo,

We should study the context well here. It seems that they are contradicted with each other. .. ...
Thanks

In a word: Yes, they contradict each other.
Jesus taught Torah, modified by his understanding of the inbreaking Kingdom of God.
Paul taught anti-Torah, anti-Judaism, anti-circumcision, anti-Kosher... and of course because of all that, Paul taught anti-Jesus.

 

[savagewind]

In a word: Yes, they contradict each other.
Jesus taught Torah, modified by his understanding of the inbreaking Kingdom of God.
Paul taught anti-Torah, anti-Judaism, anti-circumcision, anti-Kosher... and of course because of all that, Paul taught anti-Jesus.

So you are saying Jesus taught Kosher? Matthew 16:6
I think Paul taught Gentiles need not get circumcised. I agree with him. Don't you?
Romans 11:13