The Gospels and Paul

[deut31:12]

These are not additions to what Jesus did on the cross and they do not take away from what Jesus did on the cross. People are making all of God's will based only on Jesus death when it is not. Jesus' death has its place in God's plan of salvation and the rest is left up to man in living the rest of their lives according to what and how the scriptures tell us to live. If we don't then we will not make it into heaven.

Sorry, but that is a false Gospel. Those who teach a false gospel are under a curse.

Salvation is not a partnership between you and God. You cannot fulfill the righteousness of the law, and THAT is what has to occur within you on a daily basis for you to remain saved. Your works were not good enough to get you saved, and so they are certainly not good enough to keep you where they could not take to, in the first place. If your works were good enough to keep you in salvation, then you are your own Messiah.

Either you are kept by Jesus, or you are keeping yourself. God does not share the credit for your salvation. Salvation = Jesus + 0. Anything else is just the pride of religious vanity thinking it is something better than it is.

I'm done talking in the same circles. You are omitting over half of the scriptures to support this basis of belief. The OP brought a valid point in their actual study of the scriptures and got a great overview of what they entail, but it takes beliefs like this to dismiss most of what the scriptures are trying to teach us by saying that if we actually keep the obedience of the scriptures the way they were meant to be then we are doing everything that you just said.

Jesus said if you love me keep my commandments, but according to you if we do then we are doing it out of pride, keeping ourselves, sharing credit, etc.

I'm done. You can keep this watered down doctrine.

[Guest shiloh357]

This has nothing to do with the passage in chapter 25, as they are two different contexts and are not parallel in nature. One cannot be used to interpret the other, as they are addressing different issues. Only parallel passages can be used in comparative interpretation.

So... scripture cannot interpret scripture? Was Yeshua fudging a bit when He defined who His brethren are?

Scripture interprets Scripture, but there are rules as to how that works. We only use passages that are identical in context and subject matter to interpret any given passage. People make the mistake of assuming that just because two passages use the same words, that they can be used to understand or "interpret" each other and that is simply not true.

As I stated, Jesus in the passage in Matthew 12 is speaking in spiritual terms. Jesus declares that his mother, sister and brothers are those that do the will of His Father. He was responding to an interruption of His teaching.

In Matthew 25, Jesus is speaking about the last days, and he is using "bretheren" in different sense than in Matthew 12. He gives a description of a coming judgment in the last days. A judgment of the nations. In THIS passage, people are separated as sheep and goats as respecting how they treated Jesus' bretheren after the flesh, the Jewish people. If the sheep are Jesus followers, and those who do His will, then who are his bretheren? The sheep are the ones who are given eternal life and enter into heaven according to Matt 25. Jesus bretheren are mentioned as a distinct group from the sheep. The sheep and His bretheren cannnot be same people, because Jesus does not represent them as the same. The sheep were kind to His bretheren.

[Xan]

This has nothing to do with the passage in chapter 25, as they are two different contexts and are not parallel in nature. One cannot be used to interpret the other, as they are addressing different issues. Only parallel passages can be used in comparative interpretation.

So... scripture cannot interpret scripture? Was Yeshua fudging a bit when He defined who His brethren are?

Scripture interprets Scripture, but there are rules as to how that works. We only use passages that are identical in context and subject matter to interpret any given passage. People make the mistake of assuming that just because two passages use the same words, that they can be used to understand or "interpret" each other and that is simply not true.

As I stated, Jesus in the passage in Matthew 12 is speaking in spiritual terms. Jesus declares that his mother, sister and brothers are those that do the will of His Father. He was responding to an interruption of His teaching.

In Matthew 25, Jesus is speaking about the last days, and he is using "bretheren" in different sense than in Matthew 12. He gives a description of a coming judgment in the last days. A judgment of the nations. In THIS passage, people are separated as sheep and goats as respecting how they treated Jesus' bretheren after the flesh, the Jewish people. If the sheep are Jesus followers, and those who do His will, then who are his bretheren? The sheep are the ones who are given eternal life and enter into heaven according to Matt 25. Jesus bretheren are mentioned as a distinct group from the sheep. The sheep and His bretheren cannnot be same people, because Jesus does not represent them as the same. The sheep were kind to His bretheren.

Whenever I have a blood sugar crash, I have a tendency to be evil clown http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/evilclown.htm, so out of respect for you and your dogmatic beliefs on Israel, I will bow out before making any more sarcastic remarks until I feel better.

Edited June 1, 2008 by Xan

[Guest shiloh357]

This has nothing to do with the passage in chapter 25, as they are two different contexts and are not parallel in nature. One cannot be used to interpret the other, as they are addressing different issues. Only parallel passages can be used in comparative interpretation.

So... scripture cannot interpret scripture? Was Yeshua fudging a bit when He defined who His brethren are?

Scripture interprets Scripture, but there are rules as to how that works. We only use passages that are identical in context and subject matter to interpret any given passage. People make the mistake of assuming that just because two passages use the same words, that they can be used to understand or "interpret" each other and that is simply not true.

As I stated, Jesus in the passage in Matthew 12 is speaking in spiritual terms. Jesus declares that his mother, sister and brothers are those that do the will of His Father. He was responding to an interruption of His teaching.

In Matthew 25, Jesus is speaking about the last days, and he is using "bretheren" in different sense than in Matthew 12. He gives a description of a coming judgment in the last days. A judgment of the nations. In THIS passage, people are separated as sheep and goats as respecting how they treated Jesus' bretheren after the flesh, the Jewish people. If the sheep are Jesus followers, and those who do His will, then who are his bretheren? The sheep are the ones who are given eternal life and enter into heaven according to Matt 25. Jesus bretheren are mentioned as a distinct group from the sheep. The sheep and His bretheren cannnot be same people, because Jesus does not represent them as the same. The sheep were kind to His bretheren.

Whenever I have a blood sugar crash, I have a tendency to be evil clown http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/evilclown.htm, so out of respect for you and your dogmatic beliefs on Israel, I will bow out before making any more sarcastic remarks until I feel better.

Yeah, I know its rough when one is faced with the reality that there are rules of literary analysis in play where any piece of literature is concerned and that those rules prevent us from making any kind of interpretation of any text as we see fit.

I also find it interesting that we treat newspapers, novels, and cookbooks with more literary honesty than we do the Bible. It seems when it comes to the Bible, we feel that we should just be able to interpret/apply it in any manner that suits our fancy, or our agenda, as opposed to simply letting the text speak for itself.

[Xan]

This has nothing to do with the passage in chapter 25, as they are two different contexts and are not parallel in nature. One cannot be used to interpret the other, as they are addressing different issues. Only parallel passages can be used in comparative interpretation.

So... scripture cannot interpret scripture? Was Yeshua fudging a bit when He defined who His brethren are?

Scripture interprets Scripture, but there are rules as to how that works. We only use passages that are identical in context and subject matter to interpret any given passage. People make the mistake of assuming that just because two passages use the same words, that they can be used to understand or "interpret" each other and that is simply not true.

As I stated, Jesus in the passage in Matthew 12 is speaking in spiritual terms. Jesus declares that his mother, sister and brothers are those that do the will of His Father. He was responding to an interruption of His teaching.

In Matthew 25, Jesus is speaking about the last days, and he is using "bretheren" in different sense than in Matthew 12. He gives a description of a coming judgment in the last days. A judgment of the nations. In THIS passage, people are separated as sheep and goats as respecting how they treated Jesus' bretheren after the flesh, the Jewish people. If the sheep are Jesus followers, and those who do His will, then who are his bretheren? The sheep are the ones who are given eternal life and enter into heaven according to Matt 25. Jesus bretheren are mentioned as a distinct group from the sheep. The sheep and His bretheren cannnot be same people, because Jesus does not represent them as the same. The sheep were kind to His bretheren.

Whenever I have a blood sugar crash, I have a tendency to be evil clown http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/evilclown.htm, so out of respect for you and your dogmatic beliefs on Israel, I will bow out before making any more sarcastic remarks until I feel better.

Yeah, I know its rough when one is faced with the reality that there are rules of literary analysis in play where any piece of literature is concerned and that those rules prevent us from making any kind of interpretation of any text as we see fit.

I also find it interesting that we treat newspapers, novels, and cookbooks with more literary honesty than we do the Bible. It seems when it comes to the Bible, we feel that we should just be able to interpret/apply it in any manner that suits our fancy, or our agenda, as opposed to simply letting the text speak for itself.

I'm assuming just like you? I'm sorry if my honesty over a medical crisis brings out the viper in you. But you probably think it's ok to kick a sick sister when she's down and making a sincere temporary bowing out of a debate until she is medically feeling better since, after all, I'M A GENTILE!

[Guest shiloh357]

This has nothing to do with the passage in chapter 25, as they are two different contexts and are not parallel in nature. One cannot be used to interpret the other, as they are addressing different issues. Only parallel passages can be used in comparative interpretation.

So... scripture cannot interpret scripture? Was Yeshua fudging a bit when He defined who His brethren are?

Scripture interprets Scripture, but there are rules as to how that works. We only use passages that are identical in context and subject matter to interpret any given passage. People make the mistake of assuming that just because two passages use the same words, that they can be used to understand or "interpret" each other and that is simply not true.

As I stated, Jesus in the passage in Matthew 12 is speaking in spiritual terms. Jesus declares that his mother, sister and brothers are those that do the will of His Father. He was responding to an interruption of His teaching.

In Matthew 25, Jesus is speaking about the last days, and he is using "bretheren" in different sense than in Matthew 12. He gives a description of a coming judgment in the last days. A judgment of the nations. In THIS passage, people are separated as sheep and goats as respecting how they treated Jesus' bretheren after the flesh, the Jewish people. If the sheep are Jesus followers, and those who do His will, then who are his bretheren? The sheep are the ones who are given eternal life and enter into heaven according to Matt 25. Jesus bretheren are mentioned as a distinct group from the sheep. The sheep and His bretheren cannnot be same people, because Jesus does not represent them as the same. The sheep were kind to His bretheren.

Whenever I have a blood sugar crash, I have a tendency to be evil clown http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/evilclown.htm, so out of respect for you and your dogmatic beliefs on Israel, I will bow out before making any more sarcastic remarks until I feel better.

Yeah, I know its rough when one is faced with the reality that there are rules of literary analysis in play where any piece of literature is concerned and that those rules prevent us from making any kind of interpretation of any text as we see fit.

I also find it interesting that we treat newspapers, novels, and cookbooks with more literary honesty than we do the Bible. It seems when it comes to the Bible, we feel that we should just be able to interpret/apply it in any manner that suits our fancy, or our agenda, as opposed to simply letting the text speak for itself.

I'm assuming just like you? I'm sorry if my honesty over a medical crisis brings out the viper in you. But you probably think it's ok to kick a sick sister when she's down and making a sincere temporary bowing out of a debate until she is medically feeling better since, after all, I'M A GENTILE!

My response had nothing to do with your medical crisis. However, that is not an excuse to play a race card with me. My response simply noted the frustration I have with those who are intent on making the Bible say what they want it to say. I have been nothing but patient with you. It has nothing to do with you being a Gentile. I would have said the same thing to you no matter what so, you can drop the race card nonsense. You will only make things worse if you persist in that vein.

[BurnForChrist]

As I said no thats not the contextual meaning of what the LORD is saying. Although that is a good thing and we should do that, The LORD Jesus is saying that what we do to the brethren (as in believers not all of mankind) we also do to Him.

Actually, Jesus is talking about what we do to HIS bretheren after the flesh, the Jewish people. Jesus separates the sheep and the goats on the basis of how they treated the Jewish people. Jesus in Matt. 25 is referring to the judgment of the nations concerning their treatment of Israel from the book of Joel. It is referring to the judgment of the nations in the valley of Jehoshaphat.

Actually no. There is nothing in this text that indicates that these are only the jewish people. These are Christians, the elect. We know this by judgment. The blessed ones (the Christians), although they are to do charitable acts to all men, did these deeds to other Christians. The "brothers" in the text that the LORD identifies himself with are the saints not the ones after the flesh, there is no evidence in the text for that.

You can disagree I don't care, but I don't want it to turn into a huge debate into something that has nothing to do with the thread.

Grace to you from the LORD,

Burn

[Guest shiloh357]

As I said no thats not the contextual meaning of what the LORD is saying. Although that is a good thing and we should do that, The LORD Jesus is saying that what we do to the brethren (as in believers not all of mankind) we also do to Him.

Actually, Jesus is talking about what we do to HIS bretheren after the flesh, the Jewish people. Jesus separates the sheep and the goats on the basis of how they treated the Jewish people. Jesus in Matt. 25 is referring to the judgment of the nations concerning their treatment of Israel from the book of Joel. It is referring to the judgment of the nations in the valley of Jehoshaphat.

Actually no. There is nothing in this text that indicates that these are only the jewish people. These are Christians, the elect. We know this by judgment. The blessed ones (the Christians), although they are to do charitable acts to all men, did these deeds to other Christians. The "brothers" in the text that the LORD identifies himself with are the saints not the ones after the flesh, there is no evidence in the text for that.

You can disagree I don't care, but I don't want it to turn into a huge debate into something that has nothing to do with the thread.

Grace to you from the LORD,

Burn

Yes it does demonstrate that the Jews are exactly who Jesus is talking about. The sheep represent those treated His bretheren kindly and they are distinct from His "bretheren." The use of the word "bretheren" from the text indicates that it is own people the Jewish people he is referring to and it is directly parallel to the judgment in the Valley of Jehoshaphat in Joel.

Your view makes no sense. Why would some Christians be sheep and the others be "my brethren?" The text does not allow for such an understanding.

[Xan]

This has nothing to do with the passage in chapter 25, as they are two different contexts and are not parallel in nature. One cannot be used to interpret the other, as they are addressing different issues. Only parallel passages can be used in comparative interpretation.

So... scripture cannot interpret scripture? Was Yeshua fudging a bit when He defined who His brethren are?

Scripture interprets Scripture, but there are rules as to how that works. We only use passages that are identical in context and subject matter to interpret any given passage. People make the mistake of assuming that just because two passages use the same words, that they can be used to understand or "interpret" each other and that is simply not true.

As I stated, Jesus in the passage in Matthew 12 is speaking in spiritual terms. Jesus declares that his mother, sister and brothers are those that do the will of His Father. He was responding to an interruption of His teaching.

In Matthew 25, Jesus is speaking about the last days, and he is using "bretheren" in different sense than in Matthew 12. He gives a description of a coming judgment in the last days. A judgment of the nations. In THIS passage, people are separated as sheep and goats as respecting how they treated Jesus' bretheren after the flesh, the Jewish people. If the sheep are Jesus followers, and those who do His will, then who are his bretheren? The sheep are the ones who are given eternal life and enter into heaven according to Matt 25. Jesus bretheren are mentioned as a distinct group from the sheep. The sheep and His bretheren cannnot be same people, because Jesus does not represent them as the same. The sheep were kind to His bretheren.

Whenever I have a blood sugar crash, I have a tendency to be evil clown http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/evilclown.htm, so out of respect for you and your dogmatic beliefs on Israel, I will bow out before making any more sarcastic remarks until I feel better.

Yeah, I know its rough when one is faced with the reality that there are rules of literary analysis in play where any piece of literature is concerned and that those rules prevent us from making any kind of interpretation of any text as we see fit.

I also find it interesting that we treat newspapers, novels, and cookbooks with more literary honesty than we do the Bible. It seems when it comes to the Bible, we feel that we should just be able to interpret/apply it in any manner that suits our fancy, or our agenda, as opposed to simply letting the text speak for itself.

I'm assuming just like you? I'm sorry if my honesty over a medical crisis brings out the viper in you. But you probably think it's ok to kick a sick sister when she's down and making a sincere temporary bowing out of a debate until she is medically feeling better since, after all, I'M A GENTILE!

My response had nothing to do with your medical crisis. However, that is not an excuse to play a race card with me. My response simply noted the frustration I have with those who are intent on making the Bible say what they want it to say. I have been nothing but patient with you. It has nothing to do with you being a Gentile. I would have said the same thing to you no matter what so, you can drop the race card nonsense. You will only make things worse if you persist in that vein.

You're sarcastic post was in direct response to my wanting to back off until I felt better, so it had everything to do with the medical crisis. My pointing out that I'm a gentile is because of the very passage we are discussing; this one in particular: "I was sick and you visited me", to which you apply to Jews only, according to your posts. Obviously, you can't visit me, but as a brother, I would expect more empathy and patience over my situation until I felt better. I even explained that I did not want to debate because I know my attitude is not at its best during a hypoglycemic event, and I had thought you deserved more respect than that. I'm sorry you were unable to refrain from sarcastic responses as well.

[Guest shiloh357]

You're sarcastic post was in direct response to my wanting to back off until I felt better, so it had everything to do with the medical crisis.

No, it didn't. You did not have to post an immediate response. No one is putting a gun to your head and telling to post immediately after I do. If you are feeling so bad, why are you still on the board in the first place?

My pointing out that I'm a gentile is because of the very passage we are discussing; this one in particular: "I was sick and you visited me", to which you apply to Jews only, according to your posts. Obviously, you can't visit me, but as a brother, I would expect more empathy and patience over my situation until I felt better.

I do not "apply" it to Jews only. I am simply stating that Jesus is judging the nations on the basis of how they treated the Jewish people. the direct reference is to the Jewish people, but the personal application is wider than that, obviously.

I have been nothing but patient with you. I did not make you respond when you did. You have done that totally on your own, with no prodding from me. Like I said, if you are feeling so bad, why jump on here at all? You are under no obligation to respond imediately.

My remark simply noted the obvious frustration with those who prefer to ignore the rules of literary analysis, which apply to the Bible as readily as any other text and who seem intent on ignoring those rules when they contradict a previously held veiw.

You will note that even though your first response was sarcastic and uncalled for, my initial response to you was not.

In my second response, I was simply responding with frustration that anyone when shown commonsense, universally accepted rules of literary analysis that we apply daily to things like new papers, cookbooks and biographical novels, seem to go out the window when the Bible is in play.