Engaging ThinkOfOne

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne

So "good trees" no longer commit sin and are the only ones who are not "cast into the fire".

So "sons" no longer commit sin and are the only ones that remain in the house forever.

So those "born of the spirit" no longer commit sin and are the only ones that can enter into the Kingdom of God.

The same basic concepts expressed in three different metaphors.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------]

Until you explain your filters more thoroughly I conclude some things about the so called "gospel" you espouses.

I think of your "gospel" message:

1.) It is an anti spiritual growth teaching. Rather one is instantaneously fully matured or one is not a son of God. There is no room for the new birth to be followed by growth of what has been born.

2.) This "gospel" opposes Christ by rejecting His servants.
This rejections is cloaked in being for the pure message of Jesus as He walked on earth. But that is only the posture presented. In reality the goal is to reject the delegated authority Christ ordained for His apostles.

This is very subtle. It is rejecting Christ by refusing His apostles.

An analogy of rejecting Christ's delegated authority:

When Jesus fed the thousands with a few loaves and fishes He first distributed the food to his disciples to eat. After they ate He told them to gather the crumbs and distribute them to the crowd. This was a miracle of Him multiplying the food.

ToO takes the attitude that if he was in the crowd he would refuse to take the food from Christ's disciples. As if in those groups of 50 and 100 sitting on the grass one should complain that Jesus didn't give him the food.

"No. I will not take these crumbs of food from any one of you disciples of Jesus. Jesus Himself has to come down and bring the basket and Jesus Himself must put the crumbs into my hand. "

This kind of pride would have been foolish because Jesus delegated the distribution of the food TO His disciples. And to receive it from the disciples WAS to receive it from Jesus Himself in reality.

You put up an insistence on only caring for the so-called "red letters" of the four gospels. (I think your use of John is more selective). I see no place for Acts or any other books in the NT after that in your theology.

One would think that the link between Luke and Acts being by the same writer would engender some confidence that Luke knew what he was writing about.

One would think that the letters of Paul which are actually historically earlier than the writings of the four gospels, would be significance.

Aside from not wanting to take anything past four gospels, even your skeptical filter is much at work on them also, selectively.

The only sinless One is Jesus Himself.
Like the feast of unleavened bread, we are to EAT Him that we may also become unleavened.

It is at the transfiguration there is the hope that the sin filled fallen body will changed. The Christian life does not START at the transfiguration of the body. The Christian life does not start at the resurrection or rapture of the physical body.

Though Paul (who you do not like to refer to ) speaks of "sonship" as the redemption of our body in transfiguration (Rom. 8:23) he doesn't say no sons exist beforehand.

" For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus." (Gal. 3:26)

Yet he further speaks of the quality of sonship by saying those led by the Spirit are sons of God.

" For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God." (Rom. 8:14)

The teaching of Jesus that the disciples should wash one another's feet in John 13:1-11 in love proved expectation of their discipleship He knew that in the world they would pick up dirt. They should wash one another's feet in humility meaning not not allowing it to hinder fellowshiip. It is not tolerating sins. It is bringing one another back in love to the ongoing cleansing of Christ in the church life.