By the way -- if you claim to be a Christian...

[ElishaElijah]

You're starting to become very consistent in what can only be called nonresponses. In other words, you respond to questions with posts about something else. I'll have to remember that.

I didn't ask for your definition of good fruit and bad fruit. I'm pretty sure I know them and recognize them when I see them.

Sometimes clarification of fruit needs to be made so we know what we are talking about in that regard. Didn’t see your comment needing a response on that. Also you were unclear who you are addressing.

 

[Polymath257]

I don’t think so, since the letters were contemporary letters

Paul's letters were likely actually written by Paul, that is true. But Paul never met Jesus in life. ALL we worked from were 'visions', which most people would say are hallucinations. His views directly contradicted those of Jesus during his life and were clearly the result of Platonic philosophy being added in.

ANY quote of Paul is questionable for these reasons. Of course, Paul is the reason Christianity even exists today.

 

[Polymath257]

No that’s not what I said, did you really read what I said ? Seemed clear

You said that the Bible says that anyone who claims to be a Christian and practices sin is lying. The obvious conclusion is that you think that true Christians do not sin. As you say, that seems clear.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Sometimes clarification of fruit needs to be made so we know what we are talking about in that regard. Didn’t see your comment needing a response on that. Also you were unclear who you are addressing.

No. I asked simple questions and was very clear. You can keep trying that line, but it won't help any.

 

[ElishaElijah]

You said that the Bible says that anyone who claims to be a Christian and practices sin is lying. The obvious conclusion is that you think that true Christians do not sin. As you say, that seems clear.

If a person claims to be a Christian and is practicing sin like they practice a sport it’s part of their lifestyle, they’ve adopted a sinful lifestyle and are lying.
A person who claims to be a Christian will not practice sin, when they do sin they confess and forsake it, not continue in it.
@Polymath257 and your conclusion was wrong.

 

[ElishaElijah]

No. I asked simple questions and was very clear. You can keep trying that line, but it won't help any.

Didn’t see any question you made and didn’t answer but ok. Would be better to be more direct in our conversation because I’m not following what you’re trying to communicate most of the time.
Then, sometimes you say don’t answer so…

 

[Kenny]

I thought the question is how difficult it can be to determine the truth. You had claimed it to be easy and I was pointing out how it is often not.

Go back 2000 years. Most people didn't travel more than a few miles away from their birth place. News mostly moved by word of mouth. It would have been *trivial* for someone that *did* travel to make claims about events in another land with no fear of contradiction.

I look at the number of people who 'saw Elvis' after his death. If something similar happened to Jesus, it would have easily been the start of the legends we see at the beginning of Christianity. Claims that he stuck around for an extended period of time came later, as the legend grew. Again, in a society that got news largely by word of mouth, this would not have been difficult.

Maybe it was me… I was thinking of spiritual truth and not physical truths (like atoms)

I don’t think I said that finding truth was easy (maybe I said ’not hard’?). I thought I said that maybe you should study the words of Jesus to find out if there was truth in his words. Not the apocalyptical areas only but the living life truths.

 

[Kenny]

Paul's letters were likely actually written by Paul, that is true. But Paul never met Jesus in life. ALL we worked from were 'visions', which most people would say are hallucinations. His views directly contradicted those of Jesus during his life and were clearly the result of Platonic philosophy being added in.

ANY quote of Paul is questionable for these reasons. Of course, Paul is the reason Christianity even exists today.

The NT comprises more than just Paul’s letters (although there are no records of the apostles disputing the words of Paul - rather afirming).

 

[Polymath257]

Maybe it was me… I was thinking of spiritual truth and not physical truths (like atoms)

Please give any example of a 'spiritual truth'. I know of none.

I don’t think I said that finding truth was easy (maybe I said ’not hard’?). I thought I said that maybe you should study the words of Jesus to find out if there was truth in his words. Not the apocalyptical areas only but the living life truths.

And I found nothing out of the ordinary in his other statements. He was *mostly* focused on the apocalyptic message. Even the sermon on the mount was directed to how things would be distributed after the apocalypse.

 

[Polymath257]

The NT comprises more than just Paul’s letters (although there are no records of the apostles disputing the words of Paul - rather afirming).

Yes, there are the gospels, which show a definite progression of the legend from Mark, to Matthew and Luke, to, finally, John.

Then there is Acts, which was written by someone (likely a gentile who never knew Jesus) that claimed to be a traveling companion to Paul (although scholarly consensus questions this). It does show some of the issues in the early church before Paul showed up. Certainly, many of the speeches in Acts were made up out of whole cloth (which was common in historical writings of the time). Also, let's face it, if some of the events in Acts (like the speaking in tongues) had actually happened, we would have seen Roman records of such since the Romans were *very* superstitious.

Most of the other letters are pure propaganda to other churches.

 

[ElishaElijah]

Please give any example of a 'spiritual truth'. I know of none.

Parables, 10 Commandments, Beatitudes, Sowing and Reaping

 

[Polymath257]

Parables, 10 Commandments, Beatitudes, Sowing and Reaping

Parables are stories. They may carry a message, but they are not true (nor are they false--they have no truth value at all).

The 10 commandments are rules of conduct. Once again, they have no truth value-they are neither true nor false.

The Beatitudes and Sowing and Reaping are, again, stories intended to convey a moral message. But moral messages again have no truth value: they are motivations for action, not statements of truth.

It seems to me that you have a problem with the concept of a 'truth' as opposed to a 'directive' or a 'story'.

 

[ElishaElijah]

Parables are stories. They may carry a message, but they are not true (nor are they false--they have no truth value at all).

The 10 commandments are rules of conduct. Once again, they have no truth value-they are neither true nor false.

The Beatitudes and Sowing and Reaping are, again, stories intended to convey a moral message. But moral messages again have no truth value: they are motivations for action, not statements of truth.

It seems to me that you have a problem with the concept of a 'truth' as opposed to a 'directive' or a 'story'.

So do you think someone who is thankful, grateful and generous will live a better, more satisfying life and will receive the same in return compared to someone who is ungrateful, thankless and miserly?

 

[YoursTrue]

Paul's letters were likely actually written by Paul, that is true. But Paul never met Jesus in life. ALL we worked from were 'visions', which most people would say are hallucinations. His views directly contradicted those of Jesus during his life and were clearly the result of Platonic philosophy being added in.

ANY quote of Paul is questionable for these reasons. Of course, Paul is the reason Christianity even exists today.

And you believe Paul's letters were likely written by him because?? The reason I ask is because everything believers say about the Bible is either challenged or put down by naysayers so I hope the same relates to all in fairness. So again, why do you say that the letters attributed to Paul were likely written by him? Thanks.

 

[YoursTrue]

Parables are stories. They may carry a message, but they are not true (nor are they false--they have no truth value at all).

The 10 commandments are rules of conduct. Once again, they have no truth value-they are neither true nor false.

The Beatitudes and Sowing and Reaping are, again, stories intended to convey a moral message. But moral messages again have no truth value: they are motivations for action, not statements of truth.

It seems to me that you have a problem with the concept of a 'truth' as opposed to a 'directive' or a 'story'.

The parables are stories or illustrations but they definitely relate to what they are emphasizing. I'm not asking you to believe that, I believe that. Your belief about it is that--your belief. And my belief is that. My belief.

 

[ElishaElijah]

I found this to be a spiritual truth:
”“One who is faithful in a very little is also faithful in much, and one who is dishonest in a very little is also dishonest in much. If then you have not been faithful in the unrighteous wealth, who will entrust to you the true riches? And if you have not been faithful in that which is another’s, who will give you that which is your own? No servant can serve two masters, for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and money.”“
‭‭Luke‬ ‭16‬:‭10‬-‭13‬ ‭ESV‬‬

 

[YoursTrue]

Yes, there are the gospels, which show a definite progression of the legend from Mark, to Matthew and Luke, to, finally, John.

Then there is Acts, which was written by someone (likely a gentile who never knew Jesus) that claimed to be a traveling companion to Paul (although scholarly consensus questions this). It does show some of the issues in the early church before Paul showed up. Certainly, many of the speeches in Acts were made up out of whole cloth (which was common in historical writings of the time). Also, let's face it, if some of the events in Acts (like the speaking in tongues) had actually happened, we would have seen Roman records of such since the Romans were *very* superstitious.

Most of the other letters are pure propaganda to other churches.

That is your belief and I'm sure the belief of many others. But it is not my belief and others. Now since the Bible involves prophecy and explanation, I look forward to the future as outlined by the Bible.

 

[Sgt. Pepper]

Well, I remember speaking to someone who claimed to be saved but he was a fornicator and I asked him if he thought he'd be doing that in heaven and he said yes. So I left the conversation anyway.

As it has already been mentioned by someone else, you asked a rude question, and you received a rude answer.

Thank you. As with many things, it depends on one's view of the matter. Some sum it up one way, while others sum it up differently. It's good to try to look at it carefully. Some things are clear to me and not necessarily agreed upon by everyone. (Obviously.) One of the scriptures I have in mind is the following, although to better understand it, one may want to go over various translations and importantly, the Hebrew and Greek contexts of the words.

Right now I'm giving these two translations. One says hell the other says Gehenna. But the outcome is the same. There is more, however, to the meanings and translations, however please look at what Jesus said at Matthew 10:28.
Berean Literal Bible
And you should not be afraid of those killing the body but not being able to kill the soul. Indeed rather you should fear the One being able to destroy both soul and body in Gehenna.
King James Bible
And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.

So according to this, what is destroyed?

Please correct me if I'm mistaken, but based on your answer, I can only assume that your entire theology concerning hell hinges on a single verse, Matthew 10:28. Is this correct? If I may ask, what about the other scriptures cited in my previous post? Do you not believe them, or do you consider them in light of 2 Timothy 3:16–17? Finally, I'd like to offer a different interpretation of Matthew 10:28 for you to read, which is this commentary here. I hope you will take the time to read the article, and please understand that I don't expect you to change your mind about the verse after reading it. It's just food for thought.

 

[YoursTrue]

Parables are stories. They may carry a message, but they are not true (nor are they false--they have no truth value at all).

The 10 commandments are rules of conduct. Once again, they have no truth value-they are neither true nor false.

The Beatitudes and Sowing and Reaping are, again, stories intended to convey a moral message. But moral messages again have no truth value: they are motivations for action, not statements of truth.

It seems to me that you have a problem with the concept of a 'truth' as opposed to a 'directive' or a 'story'.

Well, some may learn moral lessons in various ways. The Bible speaks of those who do not know the Bible but their consciences tell them certain things are...wrong. like stealing and adultery among other things. And then the Bible has many accounts of those under the law of Moses who did not obey or observe it.

 

[YoursTrue]

As it has already been mentioned by someone else, you asked a rude question, and you received a rude answer.


Please correct me if I'm mistaken, but based on your answer, I can only assume that your entire theology concerning hell hinges on a single verse, Matthew 10:28. Is this correct?

No that is not correct.