How will you get yourself into heaven? On your own merit or via a scapegoat?

reply to post by 3NL1GHT3N3D1


If Jesus had not been quoting Hosea, then I would say that you are correct. But, the passage He quoted mentioned sacrafice in the context of burnt offerings. He knew this, the Pharisees knew this, and it really pissed them off. Jesus was implying that He was and is the Messiah without directly stating it. The Bible is filled with poetry, and Jesus was fond of parables and riddles. It would be closed minded to ignore the poetic implications of His response. I'll even go as far as to say that He was employing dual entondra, making both interpretations simultaneously valid.

God has integrity to maintain. Its the integrity of the balance of God's Justice, Righteousness and Love that separates God from man. God can not show mercy to sinners without first requiring a worthy sacrafice.

Its ridiculous. When the bible makes literal claims, everyone wants to take it metaphorically. When the bible presents poetic references, suddenly its taken literally.

That is true hypocracy.

reply to post by BELIEVERpriest

Jesus didnt die just for the sanctification of the Church. He died for the sins of all mankind past, present and future.

You can't show that the Bible teaches that.
That's a dogma a lot of people believe, that comes from a particular point of view probably originating from the Roman Empire and their form of justice.

Why do you think the soul in Abraham's Bosom had to wait for His death before they could ascend to heaven? They had to wait for the permanent atonement of their sins.

I have no idea what you are talking about. This may be another bit of mythology that you picked up from meetings.

His death paid for everyone's sins, His life is what sanctified the Church.

You have probably a different definition of sanctified than what the Bible means by it.
The way I see it is that there is another, theological definition that is used in salvation theory.
Those are two different things.
There is the idea that was promoted in the Protestant Reformation that there is this sort of gradual progress in the move towards sainthood in the individual believer, which was given a theological label of sanctification, but it has its existence only in theoretical discussions on religion, and is completely disconnected from Paul's discussions in the Bible.

reply to post by BELIEVERpriest


If he wanted them to learn the entire verse(s) he would have repeated it in its entirety, but he takes only one part of it out of context. Why would he not mention the entire verse if he wanted them to look at the entire verse? He takes it out of context for a reason, and that was to say that he did not desire any sort of sacrifice.

Let's compare this to another passage.

Mark 12
28 One of the teachers of the law came and heard them debating. Noticing that Jesus had given them a good answer, he asked him, “Of all the commandments, which is the most important?”

29 “The most important one,” answered Jesus, “is this: ‘Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one. 30 Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.’ 31 The second is this: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no commandment greater than these.”

32 “Well said, teacher,” the man replied. “You are right in saying that God is one and there is no other but him. 33 To love him with all your heart, with all your understanding and with all your strength and to love your neighbor as yourself is more important than all burnt offerings and sacrifices.”

34 When Jesus saw that he had answered wisely, he said to him, “You are not far from the kingdom of God.” And from then on no one dared ask him any more questions

Jesus could have easily rebuked the man and said that the sacrifice he was going to make was more important than loving your neighbor, but he thinks the man answers wisely and agrees that loving your neighbor is more important than ANY sacrifice.

Taking this into context with the passage in Matthew 22, it is clear that Jesus was not talking about sacrificing himself for everyone but was saying he did not desire sacrifice of any kind.

Jesus clearly differentiates the righteous from the sinners, meaning the righteous could not be sinners otherwise he wouldn't have separated them. This also flies in the face of what Paul says about no one being righteous, Jesus states otherwise.

reply to post by 3NL1GHT3N3D1

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
Glad you joined Joe.

Thanks….

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
If all of the Law and Prophets hang on his two commandments, that includes the prophet Moses' laws as well.

I think Jesus means, that those are the 2 underlining Laws/Commandments, on which all other Laws should be built…

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
I'm only going off of what Jesus said, which was that all of the Law and Prophets hang on his two commandments.

That’s how I thought you meant it…

Problem is, in your discussion around “the curse of the Law”. DISRAELI was looking at the “the curse of the Law”, as not being able to follow, ALL of the Old Testament Laws…

But of course, that wasn’t how you were viewing the Law.

From what I could gather…you were looking at the Law from the perspective of Jesus teachings, on the Law/Commandments i.e. Matthew 22:37-40…which btw I agree with…

Just thought it was important to point that out, in relation to the discussion, because I don’t think that DISRAELI, realized how you were viewing it.

Hope that makes a bit more sense…


- JC

Regardless of the OP statements, regardless of what y'all believe, the majority of us don't deserve Heaven.

Our good deeds and actions alone won't grant a pass into heaven. Doing a good deed with expectations of heaven isn't the message.

As soon as we all believe we aren't worthy, but still continue to do good, might pry open the heavenly gates a bit.

Knowing that we are damned regardless of beliefs, while still doing what is right, is a path most of us should take.

Bringing the Kingdom of Heaven to Earth is more important than any other goal IMO.

As for the OP, I won't get into heaven, I will try and bring heaven here (little by little). I don't need a scapegoat, as you may need, I will be responsible for my actions and my actions alone. I don't need to blame Satan or think that he controls everything as you do (no scapegoat for me). I feel sorry for your feeble arguments (all of them) and hope you find your way.

Regards.....

(I live in sin, but not in fear..and I don't blame God or Satan.. we were given freewill for a reason)

reply to post by OptimusSubprime

If God does something then it is righteous, regardless of what it is.

Of course that is dependent on what you define as right.

Humans deem other people innocent, however there are no innocent people in God's eyes because we all have sinned and come short of the glory of God (Romans 3:23).

I think that this is a misuse of this verse since Paul never meant it to mean anything like that.
He wasn't talking about on an individual level, he was talking about everyone in the world, Jews and gentiles, who according to a strict interpretation, fail, as a group.
The point being that the Jews do not have an advantage of being "more righteous".

God is not capable of sinning, or else He wouldn't be God.

If you are willing to forsake the concept of the Trinity.
If not, Jesus was "god" in some aspect at least even when he was on earth as a human born of a woman.
The Bible says that he was tempted in all points as we are, meaning that there was a potential that he could have sinned.

Sin is a human condition. There is only one way into heaven, through Jesus Christ.

Jesus was a human.

reply to post by ChuckNasty

Our good deeds and actions alone won't grant a pass into heaven. Doing a good deed with expectations of heaven isn't the message.

According to Jesus good deeds most certainly will get you into heaven.

Matthew 19
16 Just then a man came up to Jesus and asked, “Teacher, what good thing must I do to get eternal life?”

17 “Why do you ask me about what is good?” Jesus replied. “There is only One who is good. If you want to enter life, keep the commandments.”

And as we know, his commandments were to love God and to love others as yourself, both of which can be labeled under "good deeds".

Heaven is within and the kingdom of heaven is all around you. When you love others and forgive them you have made it into heaven and its kingdom because you have peace of mind.

reply to post by jmdewey60


You know, I would make the case that 'Jesus died for our sins' for you, but somehow I think you would just cook up some "symbolic" interpretation, that means a whole lot of nothing, to explain it away.

The resident souls of Abraham's Bossom aka paradise was evacuated by Jesus when He was resurrected. Go back and read the Gospels (a little slower this time), its there.

Sactification means nothing more than to separate from the rest.

3NL1GHT3N3D1
reply to post by ChuckNasty

 

Our good deeds and actions alone won't grant a pass into heaven. Doing a good deed with expectations of heaven isn't the message.

According to Jesus good deeds most certainly will get you into heaven.

Matthew 19
16 Just then a man came up to Jesus and asked, “Teacher, what good thing must I do to get eternal life?”

17 “Why do you ask me about what is good?” Jesus replied. “There is only One who is good. If you want to enter life, keep the commandments.”

And as we know, his commandments were to love God and to love others as yourself, both of which can be labeled under "good deeds".

edit on 2/4/2014 by 3NL1GHT3N3D1 because: (no reason given)

Can be or is?

Jesus didn't want people to be vain. Doing good because you had to - other than you wanted to - are different. The seed parable should explain the different beliefs.

Maybe you are drinking Greatest I Am's koolaid?

reply to post by 3NL1GHT3N3D1


Well, believe what you want. We'll all find out soon enough, and I dont think anyone will be laughing about it after its too late.

If its as easy as being a good person, then Im set.

reply to post by ChuckNasty


So no one can want to do good? I want to do good to others, not because I will get rewarded but becaue I know I want others to do good towards me. You can want to do good without being vain.

3NL1GHT3N3D1
reply to post by ChuckNasty

 

So no one can want to do good? I want to do good to others, not because I will get rewarded but becaue I know I want others to do good towards me. You can want to do good without being vain.

So basically, you want treat others with good to be rewarded with good treatment?

3NL1GHT3N3D1
reply to post by ChuckNasty

 

So no one can want to do good? I want to do good to others, not because I will get rewarded but becaue I know I want others to do good towards me. You can want to do good without being vain.

...that was my point.

I have met many people who do good things because they believe that is what Jesus wants. Doing good, from your heart, is truly doing good. I have met many atheists who do good, just because they wanted to and not because someone might be watching.

Doing good, because you think you are being judged, is vanity IMO.

If you want to do good, do it. Don't expect special treatment for doing so - is a sign of a good person.

reply to post by BELIEVERpriest


Believe what you want too, I'm just showing you what Jesus really said. He wasn't a scapegoat, that's what those in power want you to think. Jesus represents the good in all of us.

reply to post by BELIEVERpriest

Originally posted by BELIEVERpriest
If Jesus had not been quoting Hosea, then I would say that you are correct. But, the passage He quoted mentioned sacrafice in the context of burnt offerings. He knew this, the Pharisees knew this, and it really pissed them off. Jesus was implying that He was and is the Messiah without directly stating it. The Bible is filled with poetry, and Jesus was fond of parables and riddles. It would be closed minded to ignore the poetic implications of His response. I'll even go as far as to say that He was employing dual entondra, making both interpretations simultaneously valid.

God has integrity to maintain. Its the integrity of the balance of God's Justice, Righteousness and Love that separates God from man. God can not show mercy to sinners without first requiring a worthy sacrafice.

Its ridiculous. When the bible makes literal claims, everyone wants to take it metaphorically. When the bible presents poetic references, suddenly its taken literally.

That is true hypocracy.

I don’t think Jesus can be meaning it poetically and metaphorically, in other verses as well…can he…?

Matthew 12:5-7
5 Or haven’t you read in the Law that the priests on Sabbath duty in the temple desecrate the Sabbath and yet are innocent? 6 I tell you that something greater than the temple is here. 7 If you had known what these words mean, ‘I desire mercy, not sacrifice, you would not have condemned the innocent.

There are also many verses, in the Old Testament, where God doesn’t desire sacrifices either…

Proverb 21:2-3
2 All a man’s ways seem right to him,
but the LORD weighs the heart.
3 To do what is right and just
is more acceptable to the LORD than sacrifice.

God appears to prefer the condition of a mans heart, above sacrifices…

And as for burnt offerings, Jesus has this to say…

Mark 12:32-33
32 “Well said, teacher,” the man replied. “You are right in saying that God is one and there is no other but him. 33 To love him with all your heart, with all your understanding and with all your strength, and to love your neighbor as yourself is more important than all burnt offerings and sacrifices.”

- JC

reply to post by BELIEVERpriest


Maybe I misspoke, but who doesn't want to be treated good? It's mutual, everyone wants to be treated good, no one is an exception to that rule.

Matthew 5
12"Rejoice and be glad, for your reward in heaven is great; for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you.

Jesus says to rejoice because of the reward we will receive, so I don't think my want for good treatment is misplaced.

reply to post by 3NL1GHT3N3D1


No, I totally agree, being treated good is good. But, is being good for the sake of being treated good sufficient for God?

reply to post by Joecroft


Jesus is speaking of the animals that were sacrificed for thousands of years to the OT god. They were innocent yet they were condemned to death. If they knew what that saying actually meant they wouldn't have sacrificed at all. Jesus was clearly against any kind of sacrifice.

reply to post by 3NL1GHT3N3D1


That's not entirely true brother...

A sacrifice that comes from within is pretty high on the scale...

reply to post by BELIEVERpriest


"Do unto others as you would have them do unto you". This is how I live my life. Just because I want to be treated well does not mean that's the reason I treat others well. I simply treat them as I would want to be treated regardless of whether they dislike me or mistreat me in return.

If everyone followed that one simple rule, heaven would be on Earth. Unfortunately those in power have created the scapegoat where people believe that Jesus' death is all they need to reach heaven, good deeds be damned.