Text and Tradition

Originally posted by epiphinehas
"All people, whether Jews or Gentiles, are under the power of sin. As the Scriptures say, 'No one is righteous—not even one'" (Romans 3:9-10).

It is assumed.

Jesus wrote Romans?

Originally posted by epiphinehas
Exactly, and that's why I used the quotes I did, because I was talking about Judgment Day.

God's grace to sinners through Jesus Christ is open to everyone. It is not an elitist club:

“We are made right with God by placing our faith in Jesus Christ. And this is true for everyone who believes, no matter who we are. For everyone has sinned; we all f ...[text shortened]... od's eternal penalty for sin.

Do you believe in Jesus Christ and His message of salvation?

Everyone who did not believe in Christ will be cast into outer darkness, because that is God's eternal penalty for sin.

Do you believe in Jesus Christ and His message of salvation?


As for the first paragraph, Jesus doesn't say that in Matthew 25:31-46, does he?

As for the second, you obviously don't.

Originally posted by vistesd
I still think it’s more likely, though, that the Pharisee’s not being justified has to do with his judgmental pointing to the tax-collector—in part because of the point made in the preface to the parable in verse 9.

Maybe you should investigate the scriptural nuances between a heart sorrowful for sin, and a heart that is not sorrowful for sin. Scripturally it is assumed that all men have sinned, Pharisees included. What is the crux of the issue in the heart of a man who feels true sorrow for his sins? (And yes, the word 'crux' is meant to be conspicuous.)

This Pharisee doesn't know the heart of God. After all, a Pharisee's heart is far from God even though he honors Him with his lips. That being so, he does not recognize that the heart of God is mercy. He has not tasted the Lord's mercy. Consequently, his prayer is self-righteous. On the flip side, a man who knows the undeserved kindness of the Lord could do nothing else but beat his chest in sorrow for his sins.

I suggest that Christ's message is far deeper in this instance than merely painting a picture of a self-righteous hypocrite. He is delineating the heart of true worship in the Kingdom to come, the Kingdom of Heaven, where sinners receive the Lord's undeserved kindness through believing in Jesus Christ (Himself).

Originally posted by no1marauder
Everyone who did not believe in Christ will be cast into outer darkness, because that is God's eternal penalty for sin.

Do you believe in Jesus Christ and His message of salvation?


As for the first paragraph, Jesus doesn't say that in Matthew 25:31-46, does he?

As for the second, you obviously don't.

No, He doesn't say that here, but elsewhere He does:

"He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God" (John 3:18).

You didn't answer my question: do you believe in Jesus Christ?

Yes, I do believe in Jesus Christ.

BTW, I can understand if you're bitter with me; I've been unnecessarily confrontational and rude. Forgive me, please, and let's continue our discussion as amicably as possible.

Originally posted by no1marauder
Jesus wrote Romans?

In a word, 'Yes.' The whole bible is the inspired word of God. Inspired by the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit is the Spirit of Jesus Christ. Everything arose from the Spirit of Truth, and so, yes, Jesus wrote Romans.

Originally posted by epiphinehas
In a word, 'Yes.' The whole bible is the inspired word of God. Inspired by the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit is the Spirit of Jesus Christ. Everything arose from the Spirit of Truth, and so, yes, Jesus wrote Romans.

Jesus descided which books to include in the Christian Canon as well, I suppose? He also made sure all those copies of copies of copies were done with perfection as well?

Originally posted by TheSkipper
Jesus descided which books to include in the Christian Canon as well, I suppose? He also made sure all those copies of copies of copies were done with perfection as well?

That is my hope. If He is God (which He is), and His message is as monumentally important as the bible indicates (which it is), then I trust He made sure that His word would remain undiminished until the end of the age, through means of circumstantial providence or Holy Spirit inspired and controlled individuals. "Nothing is impossible for God..."

I understand your point, though.

Originally posted by vistesd
[b]But if you believe the bible is the word of God, then submit to it.

No, I do not think the Bible is “the word of God”—at least in the way that some seem to mean that phrase (which I think sometimes might approach idolatry). I think it is the words of men (often inspired) about God, and the nature of that God (including a God who becomes inc ...[text shortened]... m to be immune): “It is an awesome/frightening thing to fall into the hands of the living God.”[/b]

God's laws and commands are to be submitted to, via the word of God. In such a way one submits to God's authority. It is not idolatry.

I'm not referring to the logos of God, but the written word of God.

Originally posted by kirksey957
Oiy Vey! I know Stephen would never boast about his accomplishments or abilities related to translating and understanding texts of various languages. So please allow me. He is an incredible scholar and a little humility (which he always shows) would serve you well. You might learn something. What you have working for you is an "all or nothing" theolo ...[text shortened]... yrup on my ice cream, it is crap."

You would do well to submit to some learnin', boy.

Learning? I respect vistesd, but he and I have a fundamental disagreement in soteriology. Simply speaking, I believe in Jesus Christ and he does not. I'm not 100% sure exactly what vistesd actually believes in, but it's nothing I'm interested in. That he chooses to dabble in Christian texts is our only point of reference. The line of demarcation between our points of view is exquisitely definite, and I have nothing to learn from him fundamentally speaking; though I appreciate his grasp of NT Greek.

All or nothing theology? If that's what I have working for me, then so be it. Ice cream is better with chocolate syrup. 😉

Originally posted by Nemesio
What it plainly says?

Wow. I'm glad to know that there is at least one person who is
totally unencumbered with 20th- and 21st-century cultural and
theological influences with a complete handle on 1st-century Hebraic
vernacular who can finally tell us what the Bible plainly says.

Whatever.

Indeed, one can firmly believe that the way or that they tell a single
coherent story (in the case of the New Testament).

Nemesio

Indeed, one can firmly believe that the Bible is a God-inspired
text and completely disagree with you and your 19th-century theology.

19th Century theology? Explain that, please. Your comments are like a drive-by shooting.

The question isn't what you think the passage says, but what the author intended by the passage as he tried to reflect Jesus' teachings in the post-temple 1st century.

While the Spirit teaches, it's not what one thinks but what one knows--or better yet, receives--intuitively from the Spirit. It is the Spirit's job to reveal the unsounded depths of God and His word:

"And we the spirit of the world did not receive, but the Spirit that [is] of God, that we may know the things conferred by God on us, which things also we speak, not in words taught by human wisdom, but in those taught by the Holy Spirit, with spiritual things spiritual things comparing" (1 Corinthians 2:12-13 YLT).

The Holy Spirit is the teacher.

And, this necessarily requires you to abandon any pretense that the Bible was preconceived as having 73 books or that the authors of the various texts collaborated in any direct way or that they tell a single
coherent story (in the case of the New Testament).

Again, explain yourself. I'm suspicious of your being in an awful hurry. It makes me question whether there is much argumentative substance underlying your verbal drive-by. Tell me exactly why this 'necessarily requires' me to abandon said pretenses. Aren't there 66 books in the bible? Who claims the authors collaborated? Or that the bible is a single coherent story? By single coherent story, did you mean to refer to the Holy Spirit insipired aspect?

(BTW, very impressive use of sarcasm; quite imposing.)

Originally posted by vistesd
You know, I would hesitate to class writings of the literary stature of the Gospel of Matthew, say, or John, as being “plain.” It strikes me that if the church was seeking “plainness,” the NT canon could have been much smaller (one of the synpotics plus John, say, and Acts)—perhaps with an accompanying list of deutero-canonical NT books (most of the letters, Revelation...).

What is plain in the scriptures is what you have the most problem with. You've been abusing the bible's words so long that I doubt you even recognize exactly where God draws the line in the sand anymore. There is no room for fence-sitters in the bible. Either you believe in Christ or you do not. Period. Somebody in here needs to summon the guts to solve the problem of Christ once and for all: either believe in Him, or reject Him. Stop pretending that the Good News of the Gospel is linguistically uncertain. Your eternal destiny is the only thing 'up in the air'.

🙂 Looks like I was the only one pulling a 12 hour graveyard shift...

...Either that or I won every argument. 😉

Originally posted by epiphinehas
...Either that or I won every argument. 😉

I doubt it. I commend you on your persistant endeavor here, but I think you know that most people argue because they don't "want" God nor the bible to be true. They will nitpick at every trivial thing they can conjure up. This way they won't have to look at their sin. People have a difficult time coming to grips with that word. They refuse to accept Jesus even though He will take all their sin from them, forgive them, etc. If that would happen then "God forbid", He would become Lord over their lives and this is the heart of the problem, methinks.

John 3:19-20
19 "And this is the condemnation, that the light has come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.
20 "For everyone practicing evil hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his deeds should be exposed.
(NKJ)

Originally posted by epiphinehas
What is plain in the scriptures is what you have the most problem with. You've been abusing the bible's words so long that I doubt you even recognize exactly where God draws the line in the sand anymore. There is no room for fence-sitters in the bible. Either you believe in Christ or you do not. Period. Somebody in here needs to summon the gu ...[text shortened]... Gospel is linguistically uncertain. Your eternal destiny is the only thing 'up in the air'.

When you say "somebody in here needs to summon the guts to solve the problem of Christ once and for all" what exactly do you mean?