The Gospel according to Jesus

[Guest yod]

Disobedinece the 'Commandments of God' has not become a work of the Spirit.

And therein lies my question because there are lots of other commandments that you probabaly aren't keeping (if you are SDA) which are also "eternal" so I'm trying to figure out how they decide which ones they want to keep?

[Guest shiloh357]

As usual you answer the words of Jesus with words of your own and then attack me.

And as usual, you refuse to accept the fact that I am answering your application of Scripture and the conclusions you have drawn via that application. It is your way of getting around having to actually be accountable for what you say. You pretend that in disagreeing you, I am attacking the words of Jesus. That is a very dishonest debate tactic.

So when I quote Jesus who said that 'those who do the least of the commandments in the Law and the Prophets and teach them shall be called great in the Kingdom', where am I interpreting anything. This is such a clear statement that even a child can understand it. I can't help it if it disagrees with your understanding. Why don't you ask Jesus why He said them and why they don't agree with what you say.

Being a Jew, I understand EXACTLY why Jesus said that. In that day the Pharisees and divided the commandments of the Torah into heavier (greater) and lighter (lesser)commandments. Those who violated the "lighter" commandments were seen as having committed light (lesser) offenses. Those who violated the heavier (greater) commandments were seen has having committed greater offenses.

Of course the real problem here was that it was up to the Pharisees to arbitrarily decide which commandments were greater or lesser, and as anyone could imagine, the Pharisees never applied the greater commandment/offense to any of those commandments they did not choose to keep. To make matters worse, there were 9 schools of Pharisees in that day, and they all disagreed over what constituted "greater and lesser." It left the people very confused as anyone might imagine.

Jesus was combatting the phony dichotomy the Pharisees had erected between "greater and lesser" commandments. They imposed this dichotomy as a means of masking their hypocrisy and while holding themselves to a different standard of obedience and righteousness than what they they imposed upon the common populace. Jesus exposed this over and over again. In fact, the following verses on the Sermon on the Mount expose this perfectly. When Jesus begins with "You have heard it said..." "...but I say unto you..." He is correcting the egregious errors of the Pharisees and their faulty application of the Law. Jesus is in no way claiming salvific value to the law. He is not requiring law observance in order to gain/maintain salvation. That is not the point he is making at all. He is combatting the legalism/hypocrisy of the Pharisees of that day.

Jesus was in this chapter from the Sermon on the Mount combatting the messed up teachings of the Pharisees. Any amount of thoughtful study on this sermon will reveal that. You just have to be willing to think outside your SDA box to understand it.

I have never attacked you or insulted you personally as you have done with me.

You can lose the phoney persecution complex. I have not attacked you, but I have corrected you, and will not allow your "Ten commandments are necesssary for salvation" false gospel to prosper.

As you know, that it is not only Prophets that are know by their fruit. It is a general principle that applies to all trees, or professing Christian.

The problem is that you are misusing it as an means of judging whether another person is saved. Is is your mishandling of the "idle words" passage as well.

Ro 8:4 That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

Ro 8:5 For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit. Ro 8:6 For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.

Ro 8:7 Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.

Ro 8:8 So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.

Ro 8:9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.

Ro 8:10 And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness.

Ro 8:11 But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you.

Ro 8:12 Therefore, brethren, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live after the flesh.

Ro 8:13 For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: but if ye through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live.

Ro 8:14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.

Yes Yod, breaking God's commandments is of the flesh, not of the Spirit. The same Spirit who inspired Moses to give the '10 Matters of God' to the Children of God as the identifyers of sin, which is always of the flesh, is the same Spirit today who still convicts men of the 'acts of the Flesh' in disobedience to God. The Spirit has not changed His mind. Disobedinece the 'Commandments of God' has not become a work of the Spirit. There is only flesh and Spirit. As Paul says, the carnal mind, the flesh, "is not subject to the law of God" as this post seems to be bearing out.

Orthodox Jews keep the ten commandments, but are not walking after the Spirit. Keeping the commandments does not, in and of itself, indicate that a person is walking in the Spirit. You can keep the Torah and not be pleasing to God. The difference between the person who pleases and does not please God is not wrapped up in what they do, but in what they are. What they do, is the product of who/what they are. You are equating those who do not keep all of the ten commandments with those who are in the flesh (not born again). You are equating those who do keep the ten commandments with those who are led by the Spirit of God and are the Sons of God, which is a completely erroneous application of Romans chapter 8. Any Bible student with one year of hermeneutics under his belt could see the faulty interpretive methods you are employing.

[Pilgrim7]

Shiloh,

Lets see now. In believing the words of Jesus just as He said them, is now dishonest debate. I am pretending that you disagree with His words. How ever you slice it, He still said that those who kept the least of the Commandments would be called great in the Kingdom of God.

Yes the Pharisees did arbitrarily decide which ones to keep. I can see that you have solved that problem, just don't keep any of them. Are you sure you really know exactly why Jesus said what He said. That wouldn't fall under the term arrogance that you have repeatedly applied to me would it?

I have no persecution complex. Just stating fact. I am concerned for you in that Jesus is looking at your words to see if they are really flowing out His love.

Salvific, now there's a true word of man. I'm sure Jesus will be glad to know that most of His words weren't pertaining to Salvation. Why did He need to correct the Pharisees if these things had nothing to do with their salvation. You see that judging actions has everything to do with determining whether their faith was 'Salvific' or not.

It a shame that you think that men need all this 'training of man' to understand the Scriptures. I'm afraid that Jesus disagrees with you here too. He knew that Children would understand the Scriptures, for they were not looking for ways to evade the word, but would simply hear and obey out of love for God.

Didn't the Jews have their own brand of hermeneutics. Isn't this why Jesus said to them:

Mt 15:8 This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me.

15:9 But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

God Bless,

Dennis

[Guest yod]

Didn't the Jews have their own brand of hermeneutics. Isn't this why Jesus said to them:

Mt 15:8 This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me.

15:9 But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

God Bless,

Dennis

I've been out of touch for a few days and don't have time to catch up on the thread right now...

Did ya miss me??

Brother, please be careful about how you use the term "jews" there. Every word of the Bible came through them so Yeshua could not have been making a blanket statement about the "jews" as you seem to have interpreted it.

Yeshua was speaking specifically about the appointed (corrupt) leaders who had bought the priesthood.

context, context, context.....

[EricH]

Didn't the Jews have their own brand of hermeneutics. Isn't this why Jesus said to them:

Mt 15:8 This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me.

15:9 But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

God Bless,

Dennis

I've been out of touch for a few days and don't have time to catch up on the thread right now...

Did ya miss me??

Brother, please be careful about how you use the term "jews" there. Every word of the Bible came through them so Yeshua could not have been making a blanket statement about the "jews" as you seem to have interpreted it.

Yeshua was speaking specifically about the appointed (corrupt) leaders who had bought the priesthood.

context, context, context.....

That's right. Otherwise Jesus would have been including himself and the disciples, since they were Jews as well

[Kabowd]

I have never attacked you or insulted you personally as you have done with me.

You can lose the phoney persecution complex. I have not attacked you, but I have corrected you, and will not allow your "Ten commandments are necesssary for salvation" false gospel to prosper.

This isn't in reference to the topic per se, but I wanted to comment on the above quotes as I've been reading the interaction going on. Why is it when a person's view/position/interpretation or belief is corrected, they very often view this as an "attack" on their person? I've seen this repeatedly, especially here. I realize that views and beliefs are often dearly held, but shouldn't truth and remaining teachable be more highly pursued? I'm honestly puzzled.

What I've seen often is Person A will present their view, and then Person B (who is sometimes more educated on the particular issue) will correct the position Person A holds. What seem to inevitably happen is Person A will take personal offense to Person B's correction..even if Person B presents sound Scriptural support, proper exegesis, historical context and/or is clearly more knowledgable on the issue (as we've seen with Shiloh in this topic). But no matter how carefully Person B seems to choose their words, Person A often sees their refutation as an "attack" on them personally. Not only that, very often then the topic will disintigrate because Person A will counter-attack. I've seen "Person B" called prideful, arrogant and even faithless...often only due to the fact that they are educated, intelligent and are able to refute an erroneous position. So what is the remedy? Is it lack of humility that a person just doesn't want to be corrected?

I guess I'm just utterly amazed that someone wouldn't want to learn from another person who is obviously more well-studied than themselves. I've had some of my dearly held beliefs utterly shredded by people who are wiser than myself before, and although it's frustrating and I may fight it tooth and nail at first....if I'm unable to defend my view and it's obvious they are more wise..I would be a fool not to listen and consider what they are saying. Why is it so hard for us to relinquish our views, even when we're faced with clear evidence that we are in error?

Sorry if I hijack this thread with my questions...if needed I can begin a new one because I'm genuinely curious.

[EricH]

I have never attacked you or insulted you personally as you have done with me.

You can lose the phoney persecution complex. I have not attacked you, but I have corrected you, and will not allow your "Ten commandments are necesssary for salvation" false gospel to prosper.

This isn't in reference to the topic per se, but I wanted to comment on the above quotes as I've been reading the interaction going on. Why is it when a person's view/position/interpretation or belief is corrected, they very often view this as an "attack" on their person? I've seen this repeatedly, especially here. I realize that views and beliefs are often dearly held, but shouldn't truth and remaining teachable be more highly pursued? I'm honestly puzzled.

What I've seen often is Person A will present their view, and then Person B (who is sometimes more educated on the particular issue) will correct the position Person A holds. What seem to inevitably happen is Person A will take personal offense to Person B's correction..even if Person B presents sound Scriptural support, proper exegesis, historical context and/or is clearly more knowledgable on the issue (as we've seen with Shiloh in this topic). But no matter how carefully Person B seems to choose their words, Person A often sees their refutation as an "attack" on them personally. Not only that, very often then the topic will disintigrate because Person A will counter-attack. I've seen "Person B" called prideful, arrogant and even faithless...often only due to the fact that they are educated, intelligent and are able to refute an erroneous position. So what is the remedy? Is it lack of humility that a person just doesn't want to be corrected?

I guess I'm just utterly amazed that someone wouldn't want to learn from another person who is obviously more well-studied than themselves. I've had some of my dearly held beliefs utterly shredded by people who are wiser than myself before, and although it's frustrating and I may fight it tooth and nail at first....if I'm unable to defend my view and it's obvious they are more wise..I would be a fool not to listen and consider what they are saying. Why is it so hard for us to relinquish our views, even when we're faced with clear evidence that we are in error?

Sorry if I hijack this thread with my questions...if needed I can begin a new one because I'm genuinely curious.

And sometimes person "B" is just disatisfied and anxious........and responds accordingly. As far as more learned goes....didn't jesus say "out of the mouth of infants hast thou ordained praise."

Yes, but that was in reference to the children who were praising him and those who were attemting to silence that praise. Jesus did not say that out of the mouths of babes will come accurate and complete theology. Then bible also tells us to "study to show ourselves approved"

[Kabowd]

And sometimes person "B" is just disatisfied and anxious.......

Thank you for giving us an example of what I was talking about Here, you are assuming the authority to judge another person's heart/motives, and based upon your presuppositions you have thereby judged the messenger rather than the message. You've essentially disqualified the content of what the person is saying because of the judgment you have made about their heart.

Sometimes educated people can be wordy, dry and yes sometimes come across arrogant. Nevertheless, this does not mean that what they are communicating should not be considered. And just because someone uses big words or explains something in great detail does not necessarily mean they are trying to flaunt their knowledge or are just being "dissatisfied". This is something that could be perceived, but not necessarily true. Which is another reason we should address one another's arguments instead of making personal judgments

Does this mean Person B is free to respond harshly without grace? Of course not, we are each responsible for trying to communicate in such away that we extend grace to those we are speaking with (Eph. 4:29; Prov. 13:14;15:1) and to correct in love when correction is needed (Prov. 12:18; 16:21; 28:23; John 1:17; Rom. 2:4) .

However, Person A also bears responsibility to extend grace also: by listening carefully to what the other person is trying to convey before responding in anger (Prov. 18:13), by not being quick to take offense (Prov. 19:11) and by remaining humble and open enough to receive correction (Prov. 10:17; 12:1; 13:10,13,18; 15:10,12,14, 31-32; 16:20; 17:10; 18:2,12-13; 19:16,20; 20:3; 25:1; 29:1).

Now, as these verses pertain to my previous post...while I've certainly seen harshness, impatience and lack of grace displayed at times by the various "Person Bs" of the board, in my opinion it is often the result of the attitudes presentd by the "Person As". This doesn't excuse rudeness of course, but to me there seems to be more of a problem with people despising instruction than with the wiser folks just all being arrogant and rude.

As far as more learned goes....didn't jesus say "out of the mouth of infants hast thou ordained praise."

I hope you aren't attempting to use this Scripture to encourage being unlearned. If that is your attempt, this is a gross misrepresentation of this message. For one, context (Matt. 21) shows us that Jesus was actually silencing the scribes and chief priests throughout this passage for their judgmentalism (in particular here, their criticism of the children). Secondly, He referred to a passage from Psalm 8:2 which was a prophecy of this very occasion that would lead up to His sacrifice for mankind. In short, He was not referring to the children's ignorance or lack of education.

Secondly, if you are attempting to use these verses to support ignorance then you are going to have to explain why it contradicts numerous other passages throughout the bible where we are taught to pursue knowledge and wisdom (all of Proverbs), heed instruction (all of Proverbs), study to show ourselves approved (2 Tim.2:15), be intellectually prepared to defend our faith (1 Peter 3:15), not to mention the fact that Jesus (in the very next chapter) commands us to love God with all our hearts, souls and our minds (Matt. 22:37). There is neither an excuse, nor encouragement given in Scripture for believers to remain "unlearned".

Yes, but that was in reference to the children who were praising him and those who were attemting to silence that praise. Jesus did not say that out of the mouths of babes will come accurate and complete theology. Then bible also tells us to "study to show ourselves approved"

[Guest shiloh357]

Shiloh,

Lets see now. In believing the words of Jesus just as He said them, is now dishonest debate. I am pretending that you disagree with His words. How ever you slice it, He still said that those who kept the least of the Commandments would be called great in the Kingdom of God.

Yes, he said that, I have not said otherwise. The issue I am raising is WHY He said it.

Yes the Pharisees did arbitrarily decide which ones to keep. I can see that you have solved that problem, just don't keep any of them. Are you sure you really know exactly why Jesus said what He said. That wouldn't fall under the term arrogance that you have repeatedly applied to me would it?

It was not that the Pharisees arbitrarily decided which to keep and which not to. The issue is how they measured their level of disobedience. THAT was what Jesus was addressing. He was addressing the Pharisaical approach that excused their disobedience as "light" when according to Jesus, their estimation of their own level of righteousness was not in tune with the Scriptures.

Secondly I did not say not to keep the Ten Commandments, and I defy you to post where I said such a thing. I know exactly why Jesus said what He said, and I know it because I study along those lines. I study history, and the connections Jesus had with the people and the times He lived in. That is called using proper hermeneutics, and coupled with my own personal connection with the Jewish people I see things that fly right under your radar.

I have no persecution complex. Just stating fact. I am concerned for you in that Jesus is looking at your words to see if they are really flowing out His love.

Yeah you do have a complex. It stems from treating correction as persecution. It is a convenient way of sidestepping legitimate objections to your problematic position.

Salvific, now there's a true word of man. I'm sure Jesus will be glad to know that most of His words weren't pertaining to Salvation. Why did He need to correct the Pharisees if these things had nothing to do with their salvation. You see that judging actions has everything to do with determining whether their faith was 'Salvific' or not.

Because works have nothing to do with salvation. Jesus was not telling anyone that keeping the Law was what saved them. To make it an issue of salvation completely flies in the face of the context. The sermon on the mount is a not a treatise on salvation like what we find in John 3 or Epesians 2. The Sermon on the Mount was preached to Jews (unsaved Jews, at that). While it is the cornerstone of the Christian faith, its original audience was not Christian at all. It was to unsaved Jews that Jesus said "Ye are the light of the world." "Ye are the salt of the earth." The "City set on a Hill" was none other than Jerusalem. The Sermon on the Mount is actually a very Jewish sermon.

It a shame that you think that men need all this 'training of man' to understand the Scriptures. I'm afraid that Jesus disagrees with you here too. He knew that Children would understand the Scriptures, for they were not looking for ways to evade the word, but would simply hear and obey out of love for God.

Ah yes, so YOUR understanding of the Bible is pure and has not one iota of human influence whatsoever??? What you say is pure, and anyone who says otherwise is just relying on the "training of man?"

Unfortunately, it is reasoning like yours that causes cults to flourish. Actually Jesus disagrees with YOU, and so does pretty much the rest of the Bible. The book of Proverbs is replete with advice that we should listen and learn from those who are wiser and more learned than us. We are to listen and hearken to the advice and wisdom of our elders, according to Scripture. Furthermore, In Ephesians chapter four, one of the gifts that the Lord gives to the Church are teachers. If Jesus did not want us to have human teachers and if He did not want us to learn from them, why give them to Body of Christ.

It is people who believe that they alone have the truth and all other teachings are work of "men" who end up in wierdo cults and strange groups with wacky theology. They have no discipline in interpretation and create all kinds of false doctrines and heresies that feed their ego and place them up on a pedestal.

Didn't the Jews have their own brand of hermeneutics. Isn't this why Jesus said to them:

Mt 15:8 This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me.

15:9 But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

This was speaking of the religious leaders of the day. Jesus was speaking of the extrabiblical commandments they impposed upon the people via the Oral Law. Futhermore, it was not, as Yod said a blanket condemnation upon all Jews.

[EricH]

And sometimes person "B" is just disatisfied and anxious.......

Thank you for giving us an example of what I was talking about Here, you are assuming the authority to judge another person's heart/motives, and based upon your presuppositions you have thereby judged the messenger rather than the message. You've essentially disqualified the content of what the person is saying because of the judgment you have made about their heart.

Sometimes educated people can be wordy, dry and yes sometimes come across arrogant. Nevertheless, this does not mean that what they are communicating should not be considered. And just because someone uses big words or explains something in great detail does not necessarily mean they are trying to flaunt their knowledge or are just being "dissatisfied". This is something that could be perceived, but not necessarily true. Which is another reason we should address one another's arguments instead of making personal judgments

Does this mean Person B is free to respond harshly without grace? Of course not, we are each responsible for trying to communicate in such away that we extend grace to those we are speaking with (Eph. 4:29; Prov. 13:14;15:1) and to correct in love when correction is needed (Prov. 12:18; 16:21; 28:23; John 1:17; Rom. 2:4) .

However, Person A also bears responsibility to extend grace also: by listening carefully to what the other person is trying to convey before responding in anger (Prov. 18:13), by not being quick to take offense (Prov. 19:11) and by remaining humble and open enough to receive correction (Prov. 10:17; 12:1; 13:10,13,18; 15:10,12,14, 31-32; 16:20; 17:10; 18:2,12-13; 19:16,20; 20:3; 25:1; 29:1).

Now, as these verses pertain to my previous post...while I've certainly seen harshness, impatience and lack of grace displayed at times by the various "Person Bs" of the board, in my opinion it is often the result of the attitudes presentd by the "Person As". This doesn't excuse rudeness of course, but to me there seems to be more of a problem with people despising instruction than with the wiser folks just all being arrogant and rude.

As far as more learned goes....didn't jesus say "out of the mouth of infants hast thou ordained praise."

I hope you aren't attempting to use this Scripture to encourage being unlearned. If that is your attempt, this is a gross misrepresentation of this message. For one, context (Matt. 21) shows us that Jesus was actually silencing the scribes and chief priests throughout this passage for their judgmentalism (in particular here, their criticism of the children). Secondly, He referred to a passage from Psalm 8:2 which was a prophecy of this very occasion that would lead up to His sacrifice for mankind. In short, He was not referring to the children's ignorance or lack of education.

Secondly, if you are attempting to use these verses to support ignorance then you are going to have to explain why it contradicts numerous other passages throughout the bible where we are taught to pursue knowledge and wisdom (all of Proverbs), heed instruction (all of Proverbs), study to show ourselves approved (2 Tim.2:15), be intellectually prepared to defend our faith (1 Peter 3:15), not to mention the fact that Jesus (in the very next chapter) commands us to love God with all our hearts, souls and our minds (Matt. 22:37). There is neither an excuse, nor encouragement given in Scripture for believers to remain "unlearned".

Yes, but that was in reference to the children who were praising him and those who were attemting to silence that praise. Jesus did not say that out of the mouths of babes will come accurate and complete theology. Then bible also tells us to "study to show ourselves approved"

I said what I said....and simply put at that....... no extraordinary interpretations, or expansive elaborations required to decipher it.

The heart judges itself. God is judge.

I have judged noone (It would seem- that's what you were aiming to imply, concerning my statement). "And sometimes person "B" is just disatisfied and anxious......." It's completely true....and worthy to be mentioned.

Sounds like you took my statement fully to concience, with that lengthy and unwaranted rebuttal (whew...)- of an otherwise 'accurate statement- without railing'.

"Be ye therefore like children." These shall see the kingdom of heaven.

This really seems more to me a way of dismissing her questions without having to answer them