Now only remains a judgement for unbelief

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
It's easy to understand why so many choose to follow the teachings of Paul rather than the teachings of Jesus. With Paul, it's so easy to follow. If you believe Paul, all one need do is cry, "Lord, Lord, I believe". They are so pleased with this idea that they are blind to this and other teachings of Jesus:

Matthew 7:21-23
Not everyone who says t ...[text shortened]... ks?' Then I will tell them,'I never knew you. Depart from me, you who work iniquity.'[/b]

If I were you I would be concerned with what Jesus might say to those who taught that His resurrection was irrelevant, being afraid to reveal their unbelief in His resurrection.

Are you expecting Him to say "Well done good and faithful servant"?

Originally posted by jaywill
If I were you I would be concerned with what Jesus might say to those who taught that His resurrection was irrelevant, being afraid to reveal their unbelief in His resurrection.

Are you expecting Him to say "Well done good and faithful servant"?

For one, as I keep trying to explain to you:

I keep explaining to you that it is irrelevant to what Jesus taught is required for "eternal life" / "heaven" / "salvation". That does not mean that it is irrelevant to what Jesus taught en toto.

For another, this your your defense to denying the explicit teachings of Jesus?

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
Jaywill, you made the following assertion:

"But to dismiss both teaching and fact as irrelevant seems to me some kind of stealth argumentation."

I gave the following response:
"I keep explaining to you that it is irrelevant to what Jesus taught is required for "eternal life" / "heaven" / "salvation". That does not mean that it is irrelevant to what ...[text shortened]... ven" / "salvation". You are not being rational and are just avoiding the issue.

You are not being rational and are just avoiding the issue.
-------ToONE-----------------------

As is everyone who disagrees with you..........................zzzzzzzzzzzzzz

In any case , whilst you continue to avoid the issues around Matt 6:9 (where you and I both know I've got you firmly by the proverbials) then these words will seem a bit hollow to many. Have you no reasonable answer to the Matt 6:9 issue? If not then stop your hypocritical accusations of others. You have a PhD in avoidance, as many have pointed out.

Originally posted by knightmeister
You are not being rational and are just avoiding the issue.
-------ToONE-----------------------

As is everyone who disagrees with you..........................zzzzzzzzzzzzzz

In any case , whilst you continue to avoid the issues around Matt 6:9 (where you and I both know I've got you firmly by the proverbials) then these words will seem a bit hol ...[text shortened]... our hypocritical accusations of others. You have a PhD in avoidance, as many have pointed out.

Seems like you've still yet to comprehend that I DON'T want to discuss ANYTHING with you. Try to focus on the items in bold since you have difficulty comprehending the larger issues:

[quote]KM: If you don't want to discuss the issues then why not just say so?

I have no intention of trying to discuss anything with a nutter like you as I've told you countless times. That you make such a statement is yet another example of your dishonesty. You have repeatedly and purposely misrepresented me and my position stopping at nothing, including lying repeatedly in order to carry out your vendetta.

That you try to present yourself as wanting to have an honest discussion is yet another example of your dishonesty. As I've told you countless times, it is not possible to have an honest discussion with some with a complete lack of integrity as yourself.

In case you're still too dim to comprehend what I'm saying:
"I have no intention of trying to discuss anything with a nutter like you."

What part of that don't you understand?
[/quote]

You can't even understand the above. Little wonder that you can't comprehend anything else.

And the stalking continues....

And for those who might be inclined into buying into KM's denial of stalking me, just go to his profile and click on "knightmeister's public forum posts". See how many of his posts are either directed at me (most of it Matt 6:9 spam) or are about me. The guy's a nutter.

Your continued dishonesty about this and other matters is truly remarkable.

If nothing else you live up to your Paulianity.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
For one, as I keep trying to explain to you:

I keep explaining to you that it is irrelevant to what Jesus taught is required for "eternal life" / "heaven" / "salvation". [b]That does not mean that it is irrelevant to what Jesus taught en toto.

For another, this your your defense to denying the explicit teachings of Jesus?[/b]

==========================
For one, as I keep trying to explain to you:

I keep explaining to you that it is irrelevant to what Jesus taught is required for "eternal life" / "heaven" / "salvation". That does not mean that it is irrelevant to what Jesus taught en toto.
====================================

Yes, you keep trying to explain. But you do not explain.

You do not explain because you do not understand the grace of God. Neither as the power of God over man or the power of God working in man, you do not understand the grace of God. And you do not understand that grace in relation to His resurrection life and His salvation.

You cannot explain that the requirement of Christ upon His redeemed has nothing to do with His being resurrected and living past the cross.

You cannot explain that. No one claiming to be a reliable interpreter of the New Testament can explain away the need for the resurrection as a requirement for New Testament salvation.

And you cannot explain because you loosely and generally link three things together "eternal life"/ "heaven" / "salvation" failing to really distinguish these matters.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
Seems like you've still yet to comprehend that I DON'T want to discuss ANYTHING with you. Try to focus on the items in [b]bold since you have difficulty comprehending the larger issues:

[quote]KM: If you don't want to discuss the issues then why not just say so?

I have no intention of trying to discuss anything with a nutter l matters is truly remarkable.

If nothing else you live up to your Paulianity.[/b]

==========================
If nothing else you live up to your Paulianity.
================================

Speaking for myself here, let's get one thing clear.

I feel glorious that I could be associated with the Apostle Paul. He pioneered into the deep experiences of all that Jesus taught.

His depth of understanding into Christ was extraordinary. And like Timothy I would gladly receive Paul's word:

"Therefore do not be ashamed of the testimony of our Lord nor of me His prisoner; but suffer evil with the gospel according to the power of God ..." ( 2 Tim. 1:9)

I feel glorious to be associated with the testimony of our Lord Jesus and of His prisoner in the gospel labors, Paul.

You haven't given a shred of evidence why I should not want to be considered a follower of Paul as he was of Christ.

Or maybe you didn't know that Jesus prayed that there would be oneness with the apostles whom He sent into the world:

"And I do not ask concerning these only, but concerning those also who believe into Me through their word, that they all may be one; even as You, Father, are in Me and I in You, that they also may be in Us ...." (John 17:20,21a)

I rejoice that I have believed into Christ through the word of His apostles, including brother Paul.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
Seems like you've still yet to comprehend that I DON'T want to discuss ANYTHING with you. Try to focus on the items in [b]bold since you have difficulty comprehending the larger issues:

[quote]KM: If you don't want to discuss the issues then why not just say so?

I have no intention of trying to discuss anything with a nutter l matters is truly remarkable.

If nothing else you live up to your Paulianity.[/b]

Once again , another post with no logic , reasoning or reference to Jesus's words.

You don't have to discuss with "ME" - you just need to wrestle with the issues in an authentic manner.

Personalising just means you can continue to avoid the issues . Ask yourself why are you so concerned with what others think about me or you? What difference does it make if some others think I am stalking you/not stalking you? Forget that and focus on the truth. People will judge this on the logic of what is said , not on some vague cyber-personality assessment.

In a funny way I have no main gripe with you. That may sound strange but it's really simple. You are stalking the truth of Jesus with a distortion that needs to be challenged. The moment you stop stalking Jesus and trying to place some false wedge between Jesus and Paul then I'll back off. When I call you a hypocrite I back it up with reasoning. I point out why you are contradicting yourself.

What I see happening here is what I have seen you do with me and many other Christians around this forum. A constant barrage of monotonous scripture with no negotiation or real debate possible because any challenge to your postion is just plain ignored.

In a way I feel sorry for Jaywill because he's not going to get anywhere with you because you will not listen to reason. I could private message him and tell him to stop wasting his time - but I don't.

My hope is that by asking you questions (and you not responding) that others will see your stubborn refusal to accept the logical implications of Matt 6:9 , and see for themselves that all you have is basically a repetitive mantra. You feign to debate , but you only do it on your terms.

There's basically no way in beyond the armour you have created for yourself.

Do you really think I am that bothered about getting a response from you? It would be fine and dandy - but what I am really interested in is the truth and thrashing out the truth using logic and the words of Jesus - and the words of Jesus in Matt 6:9 are a huge logical problem for you because they logically imply that one can follow Jesus and not be fully perfected or totally free from sin.

You think I want discussion ? Ha! I gave up on that a while ago.

That would be plan A , but Plan B is to discredit your ideological position with the truth , logic and the words of Jesus.

It seems you have no answer to Matt 6:9 other than to call me a nutter and a stalker ......not very impressive really. You prefer personalising to discussing the truth? I offer logic and reasoning , you offer more insults and stay stuck in the past.

I'm content that others will see your refusal to debate and see right through it as I have.

It's obvious in Matt 6:9 that Jesus teaches us to pray daily to God and this includes "father forgive us our trespasses". Any idiot can figure out that this means Jesus expected that his followers would not always be totally sin free. It's the only logical explanation.

So what do you do with this fly in the ointment? Pretend it isn't there? If you do that then everyone will know that you have forfeited your right to be respected as an authentic truthseeker.

You continue to live in the past and focus on personal issues instead of the truth. My guess is that your entire position is based and founded on some bad experience in the church or with some Christians , and it is this that is driving your position and not an honest search for the truth. The problem is when you base an ideology on personal grievances or choose to make things personal you lose your objectivity.

This is why you think this is about me and you - it isn't - it's about you and Matt 6:9 (and many other flies in your ointment). Ultimately I don't exist other than a few words on a screen. You are only kidding yourself if you can't see that Matt 6:9 is a problem. You can put all of us on your ignore list , but Matt 6:9 won't go away so easily and I 'm content in the knowledge that you already realise this , because if you had an answer to it you would have said it.

Me? I'm clear about why I do this and always have been. The twisting of the Gospel from it being a Gospel of forgiveness and acceptance to some kind of distorted "Judgementianity" abhors me. You are taking the compassion and love of Jesus and turning it into judgementalism and perfectionism. When I look through your posts I rarely see the word "love" mentioned. It's all sin and righteousness.

But without love there is nothing (as St Paul pointed out). So what would it take to soften your heart and open your mind ToOne?

Give up your judgementianity and you might see something else.

Originally posted by jaywill
[b]==========================
For one, as I keep trying to explain to you:

I keep explaining to you that it is irrelevant to what Jesus taught is required for "eternal life" / "heaven" / "salvation". That does not mean that it is irrelevant to what Jesus taught en toto.
====================================

Yes, you keep trying to explain. ...[text shortened]... "eternal life"/ "heaven" / "salvation" failing to really distinguish these matters.[/b]

Well, it seems you are adamant in your choice to deny the explicit teachings of Jesus.

Originally posted by knightmeister
Once again , another post with no logic , reasoning or reference to Jesus's words.

You don't have to discuss with "ME" - you just need to wrestle with the issues in an authentic manner.

Personalising just means you can continue to avoid the issues . Ask yourself why are you so concerned with what others think about me or you? What difference ne?

Give up your judgementianity and you might see something else.

It's remarkable how you can fit so many misleading statements, misrepresentations and half-truths into one post.

You are deceptive because you have the heart of a liar.

No doubt your response will continue this now extremely long-standing trend.

You exemplify what Jesus taught against.

You are easily one of the most despicable people I've ever come across.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
It's remarkable how you can fit so many misleading statements, misrepresentations and half-truths into one post.

You are deceptive because you have the heart of a liar.

No doubt your response will continue this now extremely long-standing trend.

You exemplify what Jesus taught against.

You are easily one of the most despicable people I've ever come across.

In reality you have no idea who I am and what I am like , but none of that matters does it? Your "Judgementiality" is a distortion. The TRUTH matters and the Truth is what I thought we were trying to debate , wasn't it?

In Matt 6:9 Jesus clearly states that his followers are to ask for continual forgiveness from sin. This is in DIRECT contradiction with the rigid interpretation you have placed on Jesus' teachings. Simple logic dictates that your idealogy on Jesus must be flawed somewhere. Not totally flawed , but still flawed.

And yet you still continue to personalise rather than actually THINK. Who cares whether you despise me or not? The TRUTH is the issue , not me and you.

It's become increasingly clear to me that you have no interest in actually debating the truth at all - you just want to grind your axe on any Christian you can and personalise things whenever you get on a sticky wicket. (like Matt 6:9)

Forget about Knightmeister ! It's Matt 6:9 that you need to argue against. If you had a convincing answer you would have shared it - I can only conclude that you are too proud and too fundamental in your position to admit any problems with your position.

T'was thus from the very beginning - you just could not (and still can't) handle the idea that just maybe ToOne hasn't got it all wrapped up after all.

I think it's this fact that you find despicable and that's what upsets you , not me. It's the fact that your precious "Judgementiality" doesn't really fit as neatly as you think. But you need it to - you need it to fit so you can try and unsettle and bash Christianity.

I have settled on Matt 6:9 for two reasons
1) It has clear , logical implications regarding whether Jesus thought those who followed him would be sinless.
2) It's Jesus's clear and explict words , teachings etc - it's an instruction on how we should pray.

You say you are in to what Jesus explicitly teaches and you continually quote him as if you were his agent. But when it really comes to it you just chose which teachings to select and which to ignore.

It's quite incredible that you can't see this. I feel sorry for one so lost within his own ideology and rigidity. However , I also console myself that anyone with any logic and objectivity in them will see that Matt 6:9 IS a problem for you.

A despicable liar I may or may not be - but surely you don't think that Jesus was lying in Matt 6:9 ? Even you wouldn't go that far..........

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
Well, it seems you are adamant in your choice to deny the explicit teachings of Jesus.

Well, it seems you are adamant in your choice to deny the explicit teachings of Jesus
-------------ToOne------------------------------

A comment of sheer outstanding hubris given that you continue to ignore Jesus' explicit instructions in Matt 6:9. Do you have any mirrors in your house? - go look in one quickly and ask yourself if you have really thought through what Matt 6:9 logically implies. Once you have done that then you might just have the right to say things like the above to Jaywill.

"Our Father, who art in heaven,
Hallowed be thy Name.
Thy kingdom come.
Thy will be done,
On earth as it is in heaven.
Give us this day our daily bread.
AND FORGIVE US OUR TRESPASSES
As we forgive those who trespass against us.
And lead us not into temptation,
But deliver us from evil.
[For thine is the kingdom,
and the power, and the glory,
for ever and ever.]
Amen.

Originally posted by knightmeister
Well, it seems you are adamant in your choice to deny the explicit teachings of Jesus
-------------ToOne------------------------------

A comment of sheer outstanding hubris given that you continue to ignore Jesus' explicit instructions in Matt 6:9. Do you have any mirrors in your house? - go look in one quickly and ask yourself if you have really t ...[text shortened]... il.
[For thine is the kingdom,
and the power, and the glory,
for ever and ever.]
Amen.

This from the guy who believes that two half-truths equals a whole truth and that there is no word in Hebrew for sin in general. This is just another in a very long line of irrational thought from you. You were just as sure about all those other "flies in the ointment" that you've found. Sorry, but your attempts at reason are just exceedingly poor.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
This from the guy who believes that two half-truths equals a whole truth and that there is no word in Hebrew for sin in general. This is just another in a very long line of irrational thought from you. You were just as sure about all those other "flies in the ointment" that you've found. Sorry, but your attempts at reason are just exceedingly poor.

Although it was clumsily phrased , my point about the Hebrew/Judaic concepts of sin is still valid. The point I was making was that the Judaic tradition has many more words for sin than we do in English (it's the old eskimos and words for snow idea). So although there is a generic word for sin in hebrew there are also many other words that catagorise sin in many different ways. Many of these define sin in different levels of seriousness and also make distinctions between deliberate and involuntary sin , rebelliousness towards God and sins of falling short.

This means that we must be aware of this and realise that when the word "sin" appears for us as a translation , the Hebrew has many more alternative words than we do. We really don't have that many words to pick from. So our translations are always going to have less subtlties and nuances than the original hebrew , just as if we translated something from eskimo into english it would always come out as "snow" - but that may not be a reflection of their language.

This would make sense of why Jesus comes down hard on "sin" in some passages (eg he who commits sin is a slave to sin) but is also understanding of sin and realises the need for confession (Matt6:9 ). This could easily be because it is different kinds of sin he is talking about.

Committing sin (ie making a conscious committment to sin as an act of rebellion and deviousness) is obviously different from falling short or involuntary sin ( ie making a mistake out of good intentions or the imperfections of a flawed charactor ) . Jesus would obviously come down harder on one than the other. Also , because he can see the heart and he knows the difference between someone who is righteous at heart but has failings , and someone who is praticising wickedness , it's entirely plausible that Jesus would be able to make these distinctions - apparently you can't.

The fact that Hebrew does have these differing words and catagories seems to not interest you. Presumably it's because you prefer the "one size fits all" concept of sin that fits with your "Judgementiality" - the problem is whatever mistakes I may have made the principle point remains. There are Hebrew words for sin for which we don't have an easy translation.

Hey but don't let these little nuances get in the way of your agenda......

Originally posted by knightmeister
Although it was clumsily phrased , my point about the Hebrew/Judaic concepts of sin is still valid. The point I was making was that the Judaic tradition has many more words for sin than we do in English (it's the old eskimos and words for snow idea). So although there is a generic word for sin in hebrew there are also many other words that catagorise s

Hey but don't let these little nuances get in the way of your agenda......

It's remarkable how difficult it is for you to understand a point. The point being that your latest is just another in a very long line of irrational thought from you: "Two half-truths equals a whole truth...there is no word in Hebrew for sin in general...Jesus explicitly stated something because it is implied..." Each time an idiotic thought pops into your head, you're so sure you've come across something that contradicts what Jesus explicitly states. You become obsessed to the point of responding to almost every post I make with your latest idiotic idea for months at a time. So now you have a new idiotic idea. So what?

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
It's remarkable how difficult it is for you to understand a point. The point being that your latest is just another in a very long line of irrational thought from you: "Two half-truths equals a whole truth...there is no word in Hebrew for sin in general...Jesus explicitly stated something because it is implied..." Each time an idiotic thought pops into yo your latest idiotic idea for months at a time. So now you have a new idiotic idea. So what?

It only sounds idiotic to you because you seem to lack the ability to make sense of more complex logical points.

Why do you take things so literally? Of course I know that technically to be explicit means not to imply something , but so what? Just because I have an individual way of describing things doesn’t invalidate the point. Are you so dim that you cannot see beyond mere forms of expression?

For example , one can state something “explicitly” even though it is done via an implication or metaphor. Jesus did this at the last supper. He did not explicitly say that he was setting himself up to be the Lamb of God who would take away the sins of the people. However , he deliberately used all the metaphors , images and symbolism that implied this directly. We can also use logic here because by process of elimination we know that it’s ridiculous that Jesus bought into this symbolism unintentionally because it’s illogical to think that he did not realise what he was saying (because his knowledge of Jewish tradition was outstanding). In it’s own way it was as explicit as anything he could have said.

So I don’t see what’s illogical about saying that some things can be said explicitly by implying them. It may be a slightly poetic way of stating it but it’s totally valid. Which part of the above logic do you dispute?

As regards half truths making a whole or bigger truth I can only wonder if you are just plain dim or deliberately ignorant.

For example , in chess one is told to “develop one’s pieces as soon as possible “ (half truth 1) but this is not the whole truth. As everyone knows the following is also true “don’t hastily place your pieces in bad positions” ( half truth 2) .

So which one is true? Truth 1 or Truth 2? Or is it not more intelligent to say that they compliment each other and that although they may seem contradictory to a child who thinks in a limited way , they are actually two halves of a bigger truth and understanding. They work against each other to form a greater understanding of chess.

So which part of this logic do you not understand? Maybe it would help if you pointed out how I am being irrational in these concepts rather than just saying it – as if by repeating it over and over again that makes it more true?

I am beginning to wonder if I have misunderstood you. Maybe you are not arrogant or hypocritical afterall – it could be that you just think in such rigid patterns that you don’t know what to do if someone takes away your “colour by numbers” guide to logic.

I'm confused. Now I don't know whether to find you distasteful or pity your lack of understanding.