07 Mar '06 09:11>
Originally posted by Hand of HecateSo I'm not going to hell then, you clown.
I would say that they are the majority by far.
Originally posted by Hand of Hecate7. dj2becker - Secretly hates Jesus.
We all know that the following list of RHP'ers are on the express bus to Hell. Rate who deserves to burn the most(spot the sin) and who can still be saved (please include an action plan for saving said sinners).
1. No1Marauder - Lawyer on Satan's legal team.
2. DoctorScribbles - Liar and pompous hack.
3. Phlabibit - stupid git pseudo mod.
4. da ...[text shortened]... en with fish.
13. Me - Spiritual and social deviant.
666. User 6789666 - Sheep herder.
Originally posted by FreakyKBHNaturally.
All parables need to be interpreted within the light of their intended audience, era, and etc.
Originally posted by lucifershammerThe parable of the sheep and the goats is unpopular amoungst many Christians and suprisingly very much over looked as it is one of the few teaching by Jesus himself about who should go to heaven. Many Christians turn rather to teachings by later followers of Christ rather than Christs actual teachings.
Naturally.
However, taking the audience (pre-Christianity Jews) and era (1st cent. AD) into account, I cannot see any reasonable interpretation for that parable that supports the sola fide position. In fact, Christ says nothing about faith at all (which doesn't mean it's not important). The parable of the sheep and the goats is more in concordance ...[text shortened]... ich, of course, is why Luther wanted to drop the Epistle of James from the Bible altogether...
Originally posted by twhiteheadJust a superficial reading of any of the parables will land the reader so-disposed to follow in all kinds of psychological trouble (as discussed in the Red-Letter Christian thread).
The parable of the sheep and the goats is unpopular amoungst many Christians and suprisingly very much over looked as it is one of the few teaching by Jesus himself about who should go to heaven. Many Christians turn rather to teachings by later followers of Christ rather than Christs actual teachings.
The reasons behind this may include:
1. If taken li ...[text shortened]... y strictly and therefore try to draw focus away from it by highlighting the importance of faith.
Originally posted by FreakyKBHThe parable is not a complete allegory of all aspects of salvation. So, it doesn't have to define exactly what the "ticket to heaven" is. But it does give us enough information to say what it isn't - and it isn't faith without works.
However, even applying a topical reading of the passage cited will yield all types of theological pricklies. For the people represented by the sheep and the goats, what is their 'ticket to heaven?'
Originally posted by lucifershammerI actually think that Matthew 25 presents a very Jewish argument*—in parable form. What was to become rabbinical Judaism was in its beginnings at this time: the schools of Hillel and Shammai (at least some of whose arguments would later be recorded in the Talmud) were already established. Now the rabbis have expressed very differing viewpoints on the nature of the olam ha’ba the “world to come,” and who might be eligible to enter that world. Jesus seems here to be offering his “torah” (teaching) on the matter. But, it may very well have not been his only torah on the matter, as I think both you may be implying (as a matter of fact, the parable of the wise and foolish virgins immediately precedes the one about the sheep and goats, and before that, the one about the wise and the wicked servants).
The parable is not a complete allegory of all aspects of salvation. So, it doesn't have to define exactly what the "ticket to heaven" is. But it does give us enough information to say what it isn't - and it isn't faith without works.
Originally posted by vistesdMakes one wonder why Jesus never made it to the Talmud...
I actually think that Matthew 25 presents a very Jewish argument*—in parable form. What was to become rabbinical Judaism was in its beginnings at this time: the schools of Hillel and Shammai (at least some of whose arguments would later be recorded in the Talmud) were already established. Now the rabbis have expressed very differing viewpoints on the natu ...[text shortened]... magine both these formulations being stated later in the Talmuds.
* EDIT: As LH noted.
Originally posted by lucifershammerMakes one wonder why Jesus never made it to the Talmud...
Makes one wonder why Jesus never made it to the Talmud...
EDIT: Just saw your "Had Jesus' followers" sentence.
Re: spinning the Torah with the best of them
Considering he was doing it at age 12, I'm not surprised. 😉
Originally posted by vistesdI don't know if that is due to his lurid novels or his unorthodox views. To be honest, I don't know much more about him than his name.
BTW, he is great friends with priest/sociologist/novelist Andrew Greely (probably not beloved in conservative Catholic circles);
Originally posted by lucifershammer< off-topic mode: on >
If he is heterodox, then it's a different matter.