Would you consider this Christian?

[Shermana]

I think this shodul probably be moved to same faith debates...

Probably, this is not really discussion material but most certainly debate, but I'd move it to religious debates in general.

Then again, is there anything that's NOT debate material when it comes to Christian doctrine?

 

[Windwalker]

This is incorrect, Jesus said all the commandments HANG on those two. Not "repluaced by" or "All you have to do is love God and neighbor and you automatically have fulfilled the rest".

The point is, that each commandment has something to do with Love of God or neighbor.

Not lusting after your neighbor's wife is love of neighbor. Obeying the Sabbath is love of God. Not stealing is love of Neighbor. Not commiting idolatry is love of God.

It's sort of like saying "All the rules of traffic Hang on watching the road and not hitting your neighbor".

Why do you think Jesus said to people, "Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery: But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart." There is no way to fulfill that if you are functioning out of simple human interest. The point of the great commandment is to have a heart filled with divine love. There is a reason it comes first. Doing that first is the condition through which you are able to naturally fulfill the law. We are talking about divine love, not human emotions. There is no way in your natural powers to move into seeing others as God sees them without putting on that mind, without experiencing the world with and through that Heart.

And no, simply obeying these rules is NOT "loving God". If you do so because you do so for yourself, then you are not doing loving God. You are looking at yourself. What do you think all these versus was all about:

"Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men's bones, and of all uncleanness."

"Thou blind Pharisee, cleanse first that which is within the cup and platter, that the outside of them may be clean also."​

Oh, they were "obeying" God all nice and fine. But what they didn't have was a heart that "works no ill", because they didn't love God, to the point that they didn't exist anymore, and all that was left was divine love which naturally fulfills the law. That's why he points out the heart.

 

[Me Myself]

Jesus was not lying, because love of God is much about "Obedience to the commandments", taking into account everything else Jesus taught and not just a cherry picked passage or two, we see that Jesus pointed out that love of neighbor involves obeying all the social commandments, just as loving God involves obeying all his other commandments.

Would one be loving his neighbor by ignoring what Jesus said about who will be called "The least in the Kingdom" and not taking steps to help them avoid this fate of having a reduced portion and standing?

But Jesus did directly spoke against old commandments. He said to have no care with what we eat, while there are commandments of food restrictions for example.

 

[Me Myself]

Probably, this is not really discussion material but most certainly debate, but I'd move it to religious debates in general.

Then again, is there anything that's NOT debate material when it comes to Christian doctrine?

I wuod say there is nothing that is hardly not debate material period.

I mean you can literally even debate about "nothing"

 

[Shermana]

Why do you think Jesus said to people, "Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery: But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart." There is no way to fulfill that if you are functioning out of simple human interest. The point of the great commandment is to have a heart filled divine love. There is a reason it comes first. Doing that first is the condition through which you are able to naturally fulfill the law. We are talking about divine love, not human emotions. There is no way in your natural powers to move into seeing others as God sees them without putting on that mind, without experiencing the world with and through that Heart.

And no, simply obeying these rules in NOT "loving God". If you do so because you do so for yourself, then you are not doing loving God. You are looking at yourself. What do you think all these versus was all about:

"Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men's bones, and of all uncleanness."

"Thou blind Pharisee, cleanse first that which is within the cup and platter, that the outside of them may be clean also."​

Oh, they were "obeying" God all nice and fine. But what they didn't have was a heart that "works no ill", because they didn't love God, to the point that they didn't exist anymore, and all that was left was divine love which naturally fulfills the law. That's why he points out the heart.

I'm not sure I'm completely following what you're trying to say exactly. And the Pharisees were being hypocritical and ignoring many social commandments, like helping the poor, which Jesus berated them for. Having a heart to WANT to help others is key. But that by itself is not enough either. How exactly does one measure whether one truly loves God and neighbor? How will it be manifested?

Yes, obedience to the rules is of critical importance, and as mentioned, Jesus said anyone who teaches to break the LEAST of the commandments shall be called the least in the Kingdom. So thus, if you do in fact care about fellow believers, you should most certainly want to help them not have a sorely reduced portion and rank and standing in the Kingdom by pointing out to them that they are violating what Jesus actually taught.

So what do you make of 1 John 5:3 then?

 

[horizon_mj1]

So what were people doing in the old days when they had prophets and had days of repentance in Sack cloth and ashes?

Communicating with the Divine through Angels and Elementals.

 

[Shermana]

But Jesus did directly spoke against old commandments. He said to have no care with what we eat, while there are commandments of food restrictions for example.

No, I've explained this to you before I believe, which is perhaps for another thread, but these are simply misinterpretations and often due to deliberately fudged translations. Jesus's thing on the ritual handwashing was called a "parable" for one thing. It was not an invitation to eat puffer fish and roaches and eels. He'd be ripe for a legitimate stoning if that's what he taught.

If Jesus actually taught to disobey the old Commandments, he'd be a false prophet, and apparently Peter didn't get the message even long after Jesus was gone by that logic.

Likewise, he did not teach it was okay to do anything you want on the Sabbath.

I'll be happy to expound on that but I'm not sure if I'm crossing the line into debate land.

 

[Me Myself]

Communicating with the Divine through Angels and Elementals.

Sounds about right to me. I would say "spirits" ,but ultimately that is just semantics.

 

[horizon_mj1]

According to the Scripture, you are a Christian "if" & only you follow Christ's Plan of Salvation...just calling yourself a Christian does not make you one. True promoting peace and love are Christians virtues but non-Christians can promote peace and love, which many do...probably moreso than many Christians....

I would never claim myself to be anything I am not. I do not call myself Christian, nor do I call myself by any other faith. I am asking you as a Christian if these are "Christian concepts". I fully believe in promoting peace and love, but I do not believe in kneeling before the war is over either.

 

[Me Myself]

No, I've explained this to you before I believe, which is perhaps for another thread, but these are simply misinterpretations and often due to deliberately fudged translations. Jesus's thing on the ritual handwashing was called a "parable" for one thing. It was not an invitation to eat puffer fish and roaches and eels. He'd be ripe for a legitimate stoning if that's what he taught.

If Jesus actually taught to disobey the old Commandments, he'd be a false prophet, and apparently Peter didn't get the message even long after Jesus was gone by that logic.

Likewise, he did not teach it was okay to do anything you want on the Sabbath.

I'll be happy to expound on that but I'm not sure if I'm crossing the line into debate land.

I think we all have... >_> iit would probably be up to the thread starter to request the thread be moved to religious debates or not, but till then best I ll just wait.

 

[Shermana]

Communicating with the Divine through Angels and Elementals.

Moses is said to have directly talked to God himself. Same for Elijah and Jonah and other prophets. It's non-prophets who usually communicate through an Angel, though an Angel was sent to Moses at FIRST at the burning Bush to speak for God. There's no indication that this was the case afterwards. An Angel was sent for the Israelites later but it's not implied all their communication was done through them.

The sackcloth and ashes thing however displays that they still had the ability to repent and get back in line back then through atonement.

 

[horizon_mj1]

This sounds sorta like the Recapitulation Theory of Atonement, which was an ancient idea spoken of by the first Christians. But then again, mankind was always to COMMUNICATE to God, even after the Fall. It's not the communication between God and man that was broken, it was the wholeness of the relationship.


Not worshipping Jesus definitely falls outside standard Trinitarian Christianity.

Thank you very much, that is the what I thought, but wasn't sure by Christian view if I was correct.

 

[Me Myself]

I would never claim myself to be anything I am not. I do not call myself Christian, nor do I call myself by any other faith. I am asking you as a Christian if these are "Christian concepts". I fully believe in promoting peace and love, but I do not believe in kneeling before the war is over either.

The way I see it, "christian concepts" are those that come directly from Jesus. Ten again, we can only go by what is written of him, so we would have to say that if Jesus is written as to having said "X" concept, and we trust this writing, then we can say it is a christian concept.

 

[horizon_mj1]

I think we all have... >_> iit would probably be up to the thread starter to request the thread be moved to religious debates or not, but till then best I ll just wait.

I honestly did not mean for this to turn into a debate, I honestly wanted an opinion from someone who is dedicated to their Faith. (I can definitely see how this conversation would be good in the Religious Debates section however).

 

[Green Kepi]

Well my opinion involves going by the entirety of what Jesus teaches, and the fact that "hangs on" does not mean "is replaced by". The "Finished work of Jesus Christ" simply is a reference to him serving as the Guilt Offering prophcecied in Isaiah 53:10, but continuing to sin will, as Hebrews 10:26-29 states, make the sacrifice no longer effective for you, resulting in "Fiery indignation".

As 1 John 2:6 states, one must "Walk as he walked". It's not a suggestion. It means one must live as he lived. It's a race that has to be won. No one will be saved unless they "endure until the end". When Jesus was asked by the Rich Man how to enter into life, his first answer was "Follow the commandments".

1 John 5:3, again, says that the Love of God is obedience to the commandments.

So how exactly does one "become one"? Is it merely by believing in his finishing work and not have anything to do with actually obeying what he was teaching?

John 1:12 – says that to all who received Him, to those who believed in His name, He gave the right to become children of God...it's “future” tense...


You seem to be saying that if you “love” fully-enough and sincerely believe that all who do this become children of God...here it teaches “believers” have the “right” to become...this means there are other “steps” or (things to do).

 

[horizon_mj1]

Moses is said to have directly talked to God himself. Same for Elijah and Jonah and other prophets. It's non-prophets who usually communicate through an Angel, though an Angel was sent to Moses at FIRST at the burning Bush to speak for God. There's no indication that this was the case afterwards. An Angel was sent for the Israelites later but it's not implied all their communication was done through them.

The sackcloth and ashes thing however displays that they still had the ability to repent and get back in line back then through atonement.

Yeah, I remember reading that in scripture. My favorite scripture in which pertain to a direct communicate with God however was Enoch. No one else has given such an explicit detail of Heaven, and all of the Glories within.

 

[horizon_mj1]

The way I see it, "christian concepts" are those that come directly from Jesus. Ten again, we can only go by what is written of him, so we would have to say that if Jesus is written as to having said "X" concept, and we trust this writing, then we can say it is a christian concept.

I guess another reason why I ask is that in the Bible, Jesus specifically tells us to worship God and to not worship himself. I agree with this, yet at the same time of course I will take all he said to heart. However when the "Keys to the Kingdom" are handed over, I will be one of the first to drop on fallen knee.

 

[Me Myself]

I guess another reason why I ask is that in the Bible, Jesus specifically tells us to worship God and to not worship himself. I agree with this, yet at the same time of course I will take all he said to heart. However when the "Keys to the Kingdom" are handed over, I will be one of the first to drop on fallen knee.

You would probably be interested in this read of mine, long forgotten:

http://www.religiousforums.com/foru...-did-jesus-asked-worshpped-5.html#post3239891

 

[Windwalker]

I'm not sure I'm completely following what you're trying to say exactly. And the Pharisees were being hypocritical and ignoring many social commandments, like helping the poor, which Jesus berated them for. Having a heart to WANT to help others is key. But that by itself is not enough either.

Why? I'll try again to express this. To simply pray, God give me this, take this away, bless me, etc, has the focus on yourself. You are not loving God with all your heart, mind, soul, and strenght. That is a high commandment. It is the ultimate state of love, a self-emptying, dying to all you are, where God and God alone is your desire. You desire love for love's sake alone. To be love, not for you, but for love, for God alone, "not my will, but thine be done", in me, in my body.

That is the first commandment. Because, if you do this, God fills you. You become that love of God in your body. "You are the light of the world". You are married to God, one with God, and how God sees, how God loves, is your love too! There is no distinction. That is why as that becomes you, you act as God in the world, and you will naturally love your neighbor as yourself, as an extension of who you are in the flesh, filled with divine light and love, in your mind, in your heart, in yours soul, and with all your energy or strength. Then, and only then, do you fulfill the law because it is your nature.

All the rest is just some external simulation, like training wheels on a bike that are not actually riding under your own sense of inner balance. This is why I believe Jesus didn't regard such trivial 'rules' as not picking produce on the sabath, as the religious crowd wagged their tongues at him. These laws or for man, he said. I don't know how to convey this, but this is a real state of being for everyone to realize. I believe that was, and is, the core message of everything that Jesus ever said.

In that day my laws will be written on the tablets of their heart. It is a natural response to that inner, realized Love. It is not laws outside you obey, but the law within. Understand?

So what do you make of 1 John 5:3 then?

"For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments; and His commandments are not burdensome"

The commandements of the heart. They are not burdensome, because they are natural. To see these as laws outside yourself, to impose them, to judge others by, is to not know them in yourself.

 

[Shermana]

John 1:12 – says that to all who received Him, to those who believed in His name, He gave the right to become children of God...it's “future” tense...


You seem to be saying that if you “love” fully-enough and sincerely believe that all who do this become children of God...here it teaches “believers” have the “right” to become...this means there are other “steps” or (things to do).

1. The word is "Genesthai" which is not future tense but a form of present tense that can also apply to the past, like "before Abraham was".

2. I don't really understand what your objection is in relation to what I said.

3. My other points still stand.