Acceptable religion

But Paul was clearer about what God was doing.

I did not say James was altogether not clear. I said that Paul was more clear.

I love the epistle of James and do not wish it were not in the New Testament canon. But you better look to Paul's thirteen epistles for greater clarity on the new covenant grace.

Originally posted by @divegeester
Yes, of course that is what is meant, but thanks for clarifying.

No problem. Just basic reading comprehension, you know?

Originally posted by @sonship
The rumors were running wild that Paul was against the Law of Moses which distorted the nature of the gospel of grace. It appears that James and associates boasted of thousands in the church there who were zealous for law keeping. He convinced Paul to quell the rumors by himself participating in an old covenant ritual. (A plan which completely blew up in ...[text shortened]... Testament is more important than James'. Again, this is not to say that James has not weight.

What a pile of mumbo jumbo. All of the Apostles were singing the same tune that Jesus preached ie that faith without works is dead, ALL,, there are no exceptions. If anything is different in their teaching then the Holy Spirit has failed.

Your problem is that you do not read all of the teachings of Paul but select out a few passages which focus on faith and ignore Paul when he speaks of good works and righteousness as an essential and necessary requirement for eternal life.

Here is a good example of a single sentence from Paul which you dare not include in your nonsensical voluminous rantings:

For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. (Galatians 5:14 KJV)

Originally posted by @sonship
Yes, sometimes. But that is not to say the lesser amount has no weight.

We have other indications that the weight of Paul's contribution to the New Testament exceeds that of James.

It was James who held [edited] Paul back from being faithful to the gospel of grace in the incident in [b]Acts 21 in Paul's third journey of ministry. The negative ...[text shortened]... s.

What is to be done? They will certianly hear that you have come." (vs.21,22) [/b] [/quote][/b]

The love and mercy of god is talked about much much much more that the metaphor of eternal suffering.

How do you rationalise this on the basis of weight of text = weight of truth? Or will this be a convenient exception?

Originally posted by @sonship
No problem. Just basic reading comprehension, you know?

Indeed and on this occasion your reading comprehension was far better than my typing and checking abilities. 🙂

Originally posted by @divegeester
The love and mercy of god is talked about much much much more that the metaphor of eternal suffering.

How do you rationalise this on the basis of weight of text = weight of truth? Or will this be a convenient exception?

Not to mention the thousands of passages about being righteous or going good Yet all the man talks about is how you dont need to be righteous or do good works.

Originally posted by @divegeester
Indeed and on this occasion your reading comprehension was far better than my typing and checking abilities. 🙂

In matters of no consequence his reading comprehension is exemplary.
When it matters most he is a failure

Originally posted by @divegeester
The love and mercy of god is talked about much much much more that the metaphor of eternal suffering.

How do you rationalise this on the basis of weight of text = weight of truth? Or will this be a convenient exception?

The love and mercy of god is talked about much much much more that the metaphor of eternal suffering.

We can rejoice in that.

Is that suppose to be something that I should feel uncomfortable about ?

The love and mercy of god is talked about much much much more that the metaphor of eternal suffering.

Okay.

But tell us. If the advent of eternal punishment is a metaphor completely without any substance, then on what basis do you hold that the advent of eternal life is not correspondingly?

Preference?

If the Bible says "these shall go away into eternal punishment" is a substantless metaphor then why is it not a substantless metaphor that "but the righteous into eternal life." .

Fondness for one outcome over the other is your only basis ?

If "the smoke of their tormenting goes up forever and ever" (Rev. 14:11) is a substantless metaphor then why isn't " ... and they shall reign forever and ever" (Rev. 22:5) correspondingly a substantless metaphor?

Is it that you just LIKE the latter and DISLIKE the former? Is that your basis for holding one as nonsensical and the other as realism ?

Why is the reigning of God and His Christ "forever and ever" (Rev. 11:15) not just a inconsequential metaphor ?

Explain it to your audience.

Divegeester is going to now explain WHY -

" ... our Lord and ... His Christ, and He will reign FOREVER and EVER." (Rev. 11:15)

Is to actually occur.

But this ...

"And the smoke of their tormenting goes up FOREVER and EVER." (Rev. 14:10)

Is substantless, unrealistic metaphor.

The former we are to take seriously but the latter we should dismiss as not going to be the case.

(Rev. 14:9-12, I think, refers to the very worst of the worst of the rebels against God and Christ).

Let's see if Divegeester has a rationale why "forever and ever" applies in one instance but not in the other.

Originally posted by @sonship
Divegeester is going to now explain WHY -

[b] " ... our Lord and ... His Christ, and He will reign FOREVER and EVER." (Rev. 11:15) [/b]

The Saints of Christ reign for 1000 yrs. They are only reigning as long as the rule of Christ is in effect. The rule of Christ is a finite period of time, in which Christ will put down all opposition and conquer death and sin in the world. After that Christ gives up the Kingdom to God. There is no ruling after that of the saints and God will be all in all.

In many cases the expression forever and ever refers to an era or a finite but long period of time. It is not always eternity.

Originally posted by @rajk999

The rule of Christ is a finite period of time,

This is wrong. And I have corrected you on this before.

To the extent of His kingdom and of peace there shall be NO END -

The prophet Isaiah -

"For a child is born to us, A son is given to us; And the government is upon His shoulder,

And His name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace.

To the increase of His government And to His peace there is NO END,

Upon the throne of David and over His kingdom to estabish it And to uphold it in justice and righteousness FROM NOW TO ETERNITY,

The zeal of Jehovah of hosts will accomplish this. " (Isaiah 9:6)

And the prophet Daniel -

"I watched in the night visions, And there with the clouds of heaven One like a Son of Man was coming;

And He came to the Ancient of Days, And they brought Him near before Him.

And to Him was given dominion, glory, and a kingdom, that all peoples, nations, and languages might serve Him,

His dominion is an ETERNAL dominion, WHICH WILL NOT PASS AWAY;

And His kingdom is one that will not be destroyed." (Daniel 7:13,14)

Originally posted by @divegeester

I find this interesting because of its simplicity and the way the faith of the Christian is channelled into acceptable good works before God but without any proselytising. Just make a point of helping people.[/b]

See Divegeester, I can do the same thing to you if I wish, using just about all of your own words.

Meanwhile continue to waste your time on this forum while billions [need your help every moment every day and ] go needy at the hands of your monstrous over extended helping god.

See?
Not hard to turn your own blame game around on your humanitarian social gospel of " frantically help everybody NOW ".

How's it feel Dive ? Making good use of your time this afternoon ??

Originally posted by @divegeester
This is NOT about salvation per-se.

Acceptable religion to God for Christians is:

James 1:27 New International Version (NIV)
[b]Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world.

I think this could be simply extrapolate ...[text shortened]... ptable good works before God but without any proselytising. Just make a point of helping people.[/b]

Too late for everyone here, we are all polluted by the world. Pathetic you call it religion. It is such a useless word because it means anything, sort of like Christian. It means anything so it means nothing.

Originally posted by @sonship

The rule of Christ is a finite period of time,

This is wrong. And I have corrected you on this before...

I do not take correction from false teachers like you pal.

The Kingdom has no end. The Kingdom is simply transferred to God. His reign comes to an end when he has put down all opposition as Paul clearly stated. Here is what Paul said he says in simple unmistakeable language.

But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming. Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power. For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet. The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death. For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted, which did put all things under him. And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all. (1 Corinthians 15:23-28 KJV)

Your english comprehension in complex matters is indeed poor.

He will reign UNTIL .. that means that when he as accomplished everything he hands over the kingdom to God. HE REIGNS UNTIL .. GOT THAT ?

The Kingdom has no end.
Jesus reigns in the 1000 yr period
God reigns in the period after that.