People have different ideas about heaven. Many have no understanding of God at all, but still like to think of heaven as the "better place" where we all go when we die. Most people don't give heaven much thought until they attend a funeral or a loved one dies.

But the Bible has a lot to say about life after death, and it contradicts popular opinion. John 3:16 says, "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life." Then in verse 36, Jesus goes on to say, "Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God’s wrath remains on them." Hebrews 9:27 says, "It is appointed to men once to die, but after this the judgment." According to these verses, everyone dies, but not everyone goes to heaven (Matthew 25:46; Romans 6:23; Luke 12:5; Mark 9:43).

God is holy and perfect. Heaven, His dwelling place, is holy and perfect, too (Psalm 68:5; Nehemiah 1:5; Revelation 11:19). According to Romans 3:10, "there is none righteous, no not one." No human being is holy and perfect enough for heaven. The people we call "good" are not good at all compared to the sinless perfection of God. If God allowed sinful humans to enter the perfection of heaven, it would no longer be perfect. What standard should be used to determine who is "good enough?" God's standard is the only one that counts, and He has already ruled. Romans 3:23 says that "all have sinned and fallen short of God's glory." And the payment for that sin is eternal separation from God (Romans 6:23).

Sin has to be punished, or God is not just (2 Thessalonians 1:6). The judgment we face at death is simply God bringing our accounts up to date and passing sentence on our crimes against Him. We have no way to make our wrongs right. Our good does not outweigh our bad. One sin ruins perfection, just as one drop of arsenic in a glass of water poisons the whole glass.

When we stand before God one day, we cannot beg entrance to heaven based on our own merit. We have none to offer. Compared to God's standard of holiness, not one of us is good enough. But Jesus is, and it is by His merit we can enter heaven. First Corinthians 6:9-11 says, "Do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And that is what many of us were. But by repentance you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God." The sacrifice of Jesus covers it all.

The people who go to heaven are all alike in one way: they are sinners who have placed their faith in the Lord Jesus Christ (John 1:12; Acts 16:31; Romans 10:9). They have recognized their need for a Savior and humbly accepted God's offer of forgiveness. They have repented of their old ways of living and set their course to follow Christ (Mark 8:34; John 15:14). They have not attempted to earn God's forgiveness but have served him gladly from grateful hearts (Psalm 100:2). The kind of faith that saves a soul is one that transforms a life (James 2:26; 1 John 3:9-10) and rests fully on the grace of God.

Is there any other way to enter heaven? Could you share so we can reason together brother skeldon_man.

Jesus told the man enquiring about how he can get to heaven that he has to follow the commandments. Those same commandments that Moses brought down from the mountains. He himself followed those commandments so he too can get to heaven. All his predecessors had that same understanding and so did he. Even at the time he was on the cross he believed that. Then after his departure Paul who hated Jesus started preaching against the same commandments that Jesus so diligently followed. I think he did this to stray people away from what Jesus believed because of his hate for Jesus. He was smart enough to use Jesus' name so he can throw people off his scheme. Now Jesus doesn't really have followers who believe what he believed and what he struggled to emphasize. To correct Paul's mischief Muhammad came to remind people of what he, Jesus and all the other who came before them believed. That the only way to heaven is by following the commandments.

Now this only matters for those who believe in a heaven. Those like Hindus who don't believe in heaven will not be interested in how to get to heaven. For those who believe in heaven, Muhammad, Jesus as well as all those who came before them believed totally in following the commandments as the way to get to heaven.

Our Protector

To understand Jesus’ response to the rich young ruler’s you are referring too in your statement let look at he question being asked.

Question: "What must I do to be saved?"

We must consider three things: the background of the rich young ruler, the purpose of his question, and the essence of the gospel of Jesus Christ. The young man had asked Jesus, "Teacher, what good thing must I do to get eternal life?", Matthew 19:16. Jesus responded, "If you want to enter life, keep the commandments" (verse 19). It appears that Jesus is saying that the young man and, by extension, all people must obey the commandments in order to be saved. But is that really what He was saying? Since the essence of the salvation message is that we are saved by grace through faith (Ephesians 2:8–9), why would Jesus offer the rich young ruler an "alternative plan"?

Let explore a bit more, the story of the rich young ruler is found in all three of the Synoptic Gospels, Matthew 19:16–23, Mark 10:17–22, and Luke 18:18–23. The man is described as a ruler, which means he was a prince or magistrate of some sort. Since no Roman ruler would address Jesus as teacher or master, it is assumed that this man was a Jewish ruler in the local synagogue. This man also had great wealth according to Matthew 19:22, and Jesus later used His conversation with this man to teach the detrimental effect money can have on one’s desire for eternal life (verses 23–24). The lesson Jesus draws from this incident concerns money, not salvation by works. Do you understand thus far?

The first thing Jesus says to the man’s greeting, "Good teacher," is to remind him that no one is good except God (Matthew 19:17). Jesus was not denying His own divinity. Rather, Jesus was immediately getting the man to think about what "good" really means since only God is good, then what we normally call human goodness might be something else entirely. This truth comes into play later in the conversation. When the man asked Jesus to specify which commandments he should keep, Jesus recited six of the commandments, including “love your neighbor as yourself” (Matthew 19:19). The man replies, “All these I have kept. . . . What do I still lack?” (verse 20), and that is a key statement. The young man was obviously religious and sincere in his pursuit of righteousness. His problem was that he considered himself to be faultless concerning the Law. And this is the point that Jesus challenges.

Jesus tells the man, “If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me” (Matthew 19:21). The young man decided that Jesus was asking too much. “He went away sad, because he had great wealth” (verse 22). Rather than obey Jesus’ instructions, he turned his back on the Lord and walked away. The man’s choice undoubtedly saddened Jesus as well, because Jesus loved him (Mark 10:21).

The main point
In telling the young man to keep the commandments, Jesus was not saying that he could be saved by obeying the commandments; rather, Jesus was emphasizing the Law as God’s perfect standard. If you can keep the Law perfectly, then you can escape sin’s penalty but that’s a big if. When the man responded that he met the Law’s standard, Jesus simply touched on one issue that proved the man did not measure up to God’s holiness. The man was not willing to follow the Lord, if that meant he must give up his wealth. Thus, the man was breaking the two greatest commands; he did not love his neighbor as himself, and he did not love the Lord with all his heart. He loved himself (and his money) more. Far from keeping “all” the commandments, as he had claimed, the man was a sinner like everyone else. The Law proved it.

If the man had loved God and other people more than he did his property, he would have been willing to give up his wealth to the service of God and man. But that was not the case. He had made an idol of his wealth, and he loved it more than God. With surgical precision, Jesus exposes the greed in the man’s heart greed the man did not even suspect he had. Jesus’ statement that only God is good (Matthew 19:18) is proved in the young man’s response to Jesus’ command.

In His conversation with the rich young ruler, Christ did not teach that we are saved by the works of the Law. The Bible’s message is that salvation is by grace through faith (Romans 3:20, 28; 4:6; Galatians 2:16; Ephesians 2:9; 2 Timothy 1:9). Rather, Jesus used the man’s love of money to show how the man fell short of God’s holy standard as do we all. The rich young ruler needed the Savior, and so do we.

Let us understand what is it we are reading and not just read to make hieratical remarks because at the end of those remarks you might end up looking foolish due to a lack understand.

Keith posted:

To understand Jesus’ response to the rich young ruler’s you are referring too in your statement let look at he question being asked.

Question: "What must I do to be saved?"

We must consider three things: the background of the rich young ruler, the purpose of his question, and the essence of the gospel of Jesus Christ. The young man had asked Jesus, "Teacher, what good thing must I do to get eternal life?", Matthew 19:16. Jesus responded, "If you want to enter life, keep the commandments" (verse 19). It appears that Jesus is saying that the young man and, by extension, all people must obey the commandments in order to be saved. But is that really what He was saying? Since the essence of the salvation message is that we are saved by grace through faith (Ephesians 2:8–9), why would Jesus offer the rich young ruler an "alternative plan"?

 

In His conversation with the rich young ruler, Christ did not teach that we are saved by the works of the Law. The Bible’s message is that salvation is by grace through faith (Romans 3:20, 28; 4:6; Galatians 2:16; Ephesians 2:9; 2 Timothy 1:9). Rather, Jesus used the man’s love of money to show how the man fell short of God’s holy standard as do we all. The rich young ruler needed the Savior, and so do we.

Let us understand what is it we are reading and not just read to make hieratical remarks because at the end of those remarks you might end up looking foolish due to a lack understand.

Dude, why do you always tell people that they look foolish when if you were a decent honest person, you would have to admit that it is you who look foolish. At the top you quoted the passage where Jesus told the man to follow the commands to get to heaven but then foolishly went on to say that Jesus was not saying that. With friends like you, does Jesus really need enemies. You are now saying that Jesus was lying to the man. Grace was not a belief of anyone prior to Paul introducing it into the discussion. Jesus knew nothing about grace. He knew nothing about Ephesians, Romans, Galatians or Timothy. Those are all Paul's mischief and they are totally against what Jesus preached and practiced. He was vigilant about following the commands and fought with other when he thought they weren't.

So next time you feel like jumping on your high horse telling others that they look foolish, stop and think for once. You will realize that it is you who look foolish with the things you post.

Take some lessons from me on how to properly propose a thought. I use historical data and form a cohesive conclusion. You instead ramble on and on.

Back to the question you asked Skeldon_man.

Jesus did not tell the man anything about grace when the man asked him about how to get to heaven. He just told him to follow the commands. But he did something even before he told the man to follow the commands. HE REPRIMANDED THE MAN FOR EQUATING HE (JESUS) WITH GOD BY TELLING THE MAN, "WHY CALL ME GOOD, THE ONLY ONE WHO IS GOOD IS GOD". Just like Muhammad believed that the way to get to heaven is by following the commands, so did Jesus, his cousin John and all others who came before them believed the same thing. The first person that deviated from every other believer in God regarding heaven was Paul and those who follow his teachings don't follow Jesus and are not on his side. Muslims are in line with Jesus' beliefs while Christians are in line with Paul's teachings.

Our Keeper

ksazma posted:

Keith posted:

To understand Jesus’ response to the rich young ruler’s you are referring too in your statement let look at he question being asked.

Question: "What must I do to be saved?"

We must consider three things: the background of the rich young ruler, the purpose of his question, and the essence of the gospel of Jesus Christ. The young man had asked Jesus, "Teacher, what good thing must I do to get eternal life?", Matthew 19:16. Jesus responded, "If you want to enter life, keep the commandments" (verse 19). It appears that Jesus is saying that the young man and, by extension, all people must obey the commandments in order to be saved. But is that really what He was saying? Since the essence of the salvation message is that we are saved by grace through faith (Ephesians 2:8–9), why would Jesus offer the rich young ruler an "alternative plan"?

 

In His conversation with the rich young ruler, Christ did not teach that we are saved by the works of the Law. The Bible’s message is that salvation is by grace through faith (Romans 3:20, 28; 4:6; Galatians 2:16; Ephesians 2:9; 2 Timothy 1:9). Rather, Jesus used the man’s love of money to show how the man fell short of God’s holy standard as do we all. The rich young ruler needed the Savior, and so do we.

Let us understand what is it we are reading and not just read to make hieratical remarks because at the end of those remarks you might end up looking foolish due to a lack understand.

Dude, why do you always tell people that they look foolish when if you were a decent honest person, you would have to admit that it is you who look foolish. At the top you quoted the passage where Jesus told the man to follow the commands to get to heaven but then foolishly went on to say that Jesus was not saying that. With friends like you, does Jesus really need enemies. You are now saying that Jesus was lying to the man. Grace was not a belief of anyone prior to Paul introducing it into the discussion. Jesus knew nothing about grace. He knew nothing about Ephesians, Romans, Galatians or Timothy. Those are all Paul's mischief and they are totally against what Jesus preached and practiced. He was vigilant about following the commands and fought with other when he thought they weren't.

So next time you feel like jumping on your high horse telling others that they look foolish, stop and think for once. You will realize that it is you who look foolish with the things you post.

Take some lessons from me on how to properly propose a thought. I use historical data and form a cohesive conclusion. You instead ramble on and on.

Back to the question you asked Skeldon_man.

Jesus did not tell the man anything about grace when the man asked him about how to get to heaven. He just told him to follow the commands. But he did something even before he told the man to follow the commands. HE REPRIMANDED THE MAN FOR EQUATING HE (JESUS) WITH GOD BY TELLING THE MAN, "WHY CALL ME GOOD, THE ONLY ONE WHO IS GOOD IS GOD". Just like Muhammad believed that the way to get to heaven is by following the commands, so did Jesus, his cousin John and all others who came before them believed the same thing. The first person that deviated from every other believer in God regarding heaven was Paul and those who follow his teachings don't follow Jesus and are not on his side. Muslims are in line with Jesus' beliefs while Christians are in line with Paul's teachings.

It pays to read and understand what you are reading. Something is wrong with your ability to comprehend...In a nut shell the lesson being thought was YOUR GOOD DEEDS would not get you to the kingdom of God, in other words, heaven.

The following is resource from Ravi Zacharias:

 If you ask most people what you have to do to get into heaven (assuming they believe in heaven or an afterlife), the overwhelming response will be some form of “being a good person.” Most, if not all, religions and worldly philosophies are ethically based. Whether it’s Islam, Judaism, or secular humanism, the teaching is common that getting to heaven is a matter of being a good person—following the Ten Commandments or the precepts of the Quran or the Golden Rule. But is this what Christianity teaches? Is Christianity just one of many world religions that teach that being a good person will get us into heaven? Let’s examine Matthew 19:16–26 for some answers; it is the story of the rich young ruler.

The first thing we note in this story is that the rich young ruler is asking the right question: “What good deed must I do to have eternal life?” In asking the question, he acknowledges the fact that, despite all his efforts thus far, there is something lacking, and he wants to know what else must be done to obtain eternal life. However, even though he is asking the right question, he is asking it from the wrong worldview—that of merit (“What good deed must I do...”); he has failed to grasp the true meaning of the Law, as Jesus will point out to him, which was to serve as a tutor until the time of Christ (Galatians 3:24).

The second thing to note is Jesus’ response to his question. Jesus asks a question in return: why is he inquiring into what is good? In other words, Jesus is trying to get to the heart of the matter, namely, that no one is good and no one does good except God. As noted earlier, the man is operating under a false premise: that man is able to do that which is good and earn his way into heaven. To make His point, Jesus says that, if he wants eternal life, he should keep the commandments. In saying this, Jesus is not advocating a works-based righteousness. Rather, Jesus is challenging the young man’s suppositions by showing the man’s shallow understanding of the Law and human ability.

The young man’s response is very telling. When told to keep the commandments, he asks Jesus, “Which ones?” Jesus continues to gently show the man the error of his ways by giving him the second table of the Law, i.e., the commandments that deal with our relationships to other people. You can almost sense the frustration in the young man’s response when he tells Jesus that he has kept all of these since his youth. Two things to point out here: first, the irony in the young man’s response. In saying he has kept all those commandments since his youth, he has broken the commandment regarding false witness. If he were truly being honest, he would have said that, as hard as he has tried to keep the commandments, he fails on a daily basis. He has a shallow understanding of the Law and an inflated opinion of his own ability. Second, he still knows that he is not good enough; he asks Jesus, “What do I still lack?”

Jesus now confronts the young man’s self-righteousness. He tells him that, if he wishes to be perfect (i.e., complete), he must sell all that he has and come follow Him. Jesus has perfectly diagnosed the man’s “lack”—his attachment to his wealth. The man’s great wealth has become an idol in his life. He claimed to have kept all the commandments, but in reality he couldn’t even keep the first one, to have no other gods before the Lord! The young man turned his back on Jesus and walked away. His god was his wealth, which he chose over Jesus.

Jesus now turns to His disciples to teach them a principle: “Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the kingdom of God.” This was shocking to the disciples, who held the common idea that riches were a sign of God’s blessing. But Jesus points out the obstacle that riches often are, in their tendency to fuel self-sufficiency. His disciples ask, “Who then can be saved?” Jesus answers by reminding the disciples that salvation is of God: “With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.”

Who can be saved? If left up to man alone, no one! Why is being a good person not enough to get you into heaven? Because no one is a “good” person; there is only one who is good, and that is God Himself. The Bible says that all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God (Romans 3:23). The Bible also says that the wages of our sin is death (Romans 6:23a). Fortunately, God did not wait until we somehow learned to be “good”; while we were in our sinful state, Christ died for the unrighteous (Romans 5:8).

Salvation is not based on our goodness but on Jesus’ goodness. If we confess with our mouth that Jesus is Lord, and believe in our hearts that God raised him from the dead, we will be saved (Romans 10:9). This salvation in Christ is a precious gift, and, like all true gifts, it is unearned (Romans 6:23b; Ephesians 2:8–9). The message of the gospel is that we can never be good enough to get to heaven. We must recognize that we are sinners who fall short of God’s glory, and we must obey the command to repent of our sins and place our faith and trust in Jesus Christ. Christ alone was good enough to earn heaven, and He gives His righteousness to those who believe in His name (Romans 1:17).

Apologies for the name calling, I will refrain from doing so going forward.

Ravi's concept is wrong. At least where Islam is concerned. Getting to heaven has nothing to do with being a good person. Even Jesus had a problem with the man addressing him as good. Getting to heaven is based on doing good. The more good you do the higher your station in heaven. No one can be as good as God and God is not unreasonable to expect or demand what he knows man cannot be. Even Jesus said he is not good like God. Paul corrupted Jesus' teachings because he hated Jesus. One is better off rejecting Paul and his corrupted teachings.

If Jesus was only good enough to earn heaven, how could he then give that good to others without falling short of enough good to earn heaven? Do some basic math nah.

The truth is that Jesus is only responsible for himself and so is everyone else. No one bears the burden of anyone else. Not Jesus, not Muhammad or anyone else. Everyone earns heaven on their own and they get as little or as much as they earn. That is what reasonable sounds like.

Notice how all the references that denounced Jesus' belief in getting to heaven is through following the commands are coming from Paul. That is the recurring theme. Jesus used to quarrel with the people around him because they were not doing enough. Why would he do that when he could have just told them that all they need is grace. That is because he did not believe in grace. Rather, he believed in works and he lived his life by works to the end.

Oh rant imagine bossman tell his people ,all they need is grace." Dis Grace sounds like either a Ho' or Healer.

If my child came to me and said "daddy, take me to the store". I would understand that he wants to go to the store and my action is to take him. If I paused and tells him that he should have said, "daddy, please take me to the store", I would in effect be emphasizing the importance of him being mannerly and polite more than the need for him to get to the store.

That is precisely what Jesus did. The man asked Jesus what he needs to do to have eternal life. Jesus intended to tell him to follow the commands as the only way to get to heaven.

But even before Jesus give him that important information, Jesus reprimanded him for addressing him (Jesus) as good emphasizing that only God is good.

After clarifying that only God is good (and since Jesus doesn't want to be addressed as good, then Jesus is not good) he went on to tell him that the way to heaven is to follow the commands.

But he said something important about those ten commands. He told the man to observe the first command in particular.

So what is that first command?

I am the Lord thy God! Thou shalt have no other Gods but me!

Jesus obeyed God's command to Moses without any if, and or buts. He did not equate anyone with God nor did he ask anyone to equate him with God. Had Paul never existed, the beliefs of Jesus would have maintained its basis similar to all others who came before him. The Scribes and Pharisees were never awaiting God coming and living amongst them. They were awaiting a Prophet from God to come and live amongst them. Jesus was that Prophet of God but their expectations of what his circumstances should have been caused them to not recognize him. They were looking for someone from a certain social, economical and political background but since Jesus was born under extremely humble circumstances they couldn't accept him. They were accustomed to having leaders who were kings and princes so when Jesus was born in a barn, they couldn't see him as significant or even equal to their previous leaders who were kings and princes, much less the leader of their previous leaders.

And that, brother Keith is how one processes a thought.   Have a good weekend.

cain posted:

Oh rant imagine bossman tell his people ,all they need is grace." Dis Grace sounds like either a Ho' or Healer.

The trouble though is that bossman never told his people that all they need is grace. It was after he was no longer here to represent himself that a dude who hated him began preaching that all bossman's people need is grace. Bossman didn't like that dude very much and by that dude's own admission said;

And he fell to the earth, and heard a voice saying unto him, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?

And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest: it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks. Acts 9: 4-5

I don't know what the new term is but not so long ago the term 'dickhead' was used to describe some people. Prior to the term 'dickhead' being used, the term 'prick' was used to describe similar people. What type of people did Jesus describe as pricks.

ksazma posted:

Ravi's concept is wrong. At least where Islam is concerned. Getting to heaven has nothing to do with being a good person. Even Jesus had a problem with the man addressing him as good. Getting to heaven is based on doing good. The more good you do the higher your station in heaven. No one can be as good as God and God is not unreasonable to expect or demand what he knows man cannot be. Even Jesus said he is not good like God. Paul corrupted Jesus' teachings because he hated Jesus. One is better off rejecting Paul and his corrupted teachings.

I don't know what Kool-Aid you been drinking, Marja/Imam you been listening too or book you been reading to find Paul hatred of Jesus where Paul corrupted Jesus teaching. Show us your proof of that and I will show you where you lack the understanding of the bible.

I currently don't have the idle time to respond to every fallacious statement you type here. But in case you missed the point of what Jesus was teaching, here it is again"

"In telling the young man to keep the commandments, Jesus was not saying that he could be saved by obeying the commandments; rather, Jesus was emphasizing the Law as God’s perfect standard. If you can keep the Law perfectly, then you can escape sin’s penalty but that’s a big if. When the man responded that he met the Law’s standard, Jesus simply touched on one issue that proved the man did not measure up to God’s holiness. The man was not willing to follow the Lord, if that meant he must give up his wealth. Thus, the man was breaking the two greatest commands; he did not love his neighbor as himself, and he did not love the Lord with all his heart. He loved himself (and his money) more. Far from keeping “all” the commandments, as he had claimed, the man was a sinner like everyone else. The Law proved it"

The Father’s Good Gifts

Question bro Keith. If Jesus didn't think that the man can get to heaven by keeping the commands, why would he waste his time telling the man to keep the commands? You stated that you don't have idle time to address my statements. Does that mean that Jesus had more idle time than you since he wasted his time telling the man the wrong thing?

Secondly, if Paul didn't hate Jesus, why did Paul say that Jesus asked him why he, Paul was persecuting him, Jesus? Did Jesus again had idle time to ask Paul an unnecessary question?

By the time Brother Keith is done with his "Thoughts" he will cut and paste the whole Bible on GNI. Hope he realizes that digital space is not free.

Here is one for you brother Keith, thanks to Brother Riff.
https://guyana.crowdstack.io/topic/ni...xplanation#lastReply

ksazma posted:

Question bro Keith. If Jesus didn't think that the man can get to heaven by keeping the commands, why would he waste his time telling the man to keep the commands? You stated that you don't have idle time to address my statements. Does that mean that Jesus had more idle time than you since he wasted his time telling the man the wrong thing?

My REPLY: First, you choose to ignore my called to provide proof of Paul's detestation and corrupt teach of Jesus. Not surprise! I can understand the ignorance due to your failure to comprehend the Bible. Have you ever pick up the Bible and read it from Genesis to Revelation, I think not otherwise I am sure we would not be discussing your claptrap.

If you didn't know the Bible instructs us all to "Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth."...Do you understand that statement?

Now in reference to your question. Without an understanding of the context, this can certainly sound as if Jesus is saying that the man could have been saved by keeping the commandments. How many times have I echo for you to look at the surrounding verses more carefully. The dialog between Jesus and the rich, young ruler is found in Matthew 19:16-22, Mark 10:17-22, and Luke 18:18-23, with the subject continuing to be discussed in the verses that follow.

Have you not learned "Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified." Galatians 2:16

Secondly, if Paul didn't hate Jesus, why did Paul say that Jesus asked him why he, Paul was persecuting him, Jesus? Did Jesus again had idle time to ask Paul an unnecessary question?

My Reply: Why are you trying to doubt what you failed to understand? Is this statement hatred? Man you are being ludicrous. Hey I not calling you name just pointing out the obvious.

Do you know the background of Paul? Why don't you read the book of Acts through Hebrews or just up to Timothy then lets talk about Paul.

Hey, do have a great day and enjoy the rest of the week. Love you Bro.

The Character of a Good Soldier

The above is the definition of persecute. Paul said that Jesus asked him why he (Paul) persecutes him (Jesus). The meaning of words have consequences. Why would Jesus say that Paul was persecuting him? That is more than enough evidence that Paul hates Jesus. But there are more evidence. Paul has all Christians paying even less attention to the commands than Jesus did. Jesus was very particular in following the commands and even fought vociferously with his contemporaries when he thought they were not giving enough attention to the commands. He even told the man that if he wants eternal life, he should follow the commands. Every religious leader work diligently to train their followers to follow their belief system and all Paul did was completely destroy everything that Jesus stood for. Imagine spending all your resources building a house and someone comes around and light it afire. That is evidence of hatred for that person who dedicated all their resources into building that house. Now there are many other evidence but those examples are more than reasonable.

Galatians was written by Paul and it totally contradict what Jesus believed in. Acts, Hebrews and Timothy are all written by Paul so what is the use. The reality is that Jesus knew nothing about grace when he walked this world. He knew about works and he lived strictly by works. Either Jesus is real and Paul's doctrine about grace is false or Paul's doctrine about grace is real and Jesus is false but they both cannot be real.

Single-Minded Focus

ksazma posted:

The above is the definition of persecute. Paul said that Jesus asked him why he (Paul) persecutes him (Jesus). The meaning of words have consequences. Why would Jesus say that Paul was persecuting him? That is more than enough evidence that Paul hates Jesus. But there are more evidence. Paul has all Christians paying even less attention to the commands than Jesus did. Jesus was very particular in following the commands and even fought vociferously with his contemporaries when he thought they were not giving enough attention to the commands. He even told the man that if he wants eternal life, he should follow the commands. Every religious leader work diligently to train their followers to follow their belief system and all Paul did was completely destroy everything that Jesus stood for. Imagine spending all your resources building a house and someone comes around and light it afire. That is evidence of hatred for that person who dedicated all their resources into building that house. Now there are many other evidence but those examples are more than reasonable.

Galatians was written by Paul and it totally contradict what Jesus believed in. Acts, Hebrews and Timothy are all written by Paul so what is the use. The reality is that Jesus knew nothing about grace when he walked this world. He knew about works and he lived strictly by works. Either Jesus is real and Paul's doctrine about grace is false or Paul's doctrine about grace is real and Jesus is false but they both cannot be real.

Just a few questions for you on top of the ones you have yet to answers. Why did Jesus asked Saul/Paul that question? Is that a hateful question? Is the following a hateful question? ksazma, ksazma why are you slandering what you failing understand?

Forget the questions above and show me where Paul destroyed everything Jesus stood for?

Have you read the book of Acts - 2 Timothy? to get a true understand of the man Saul...I mean Paul?

On the subject of grace. Why don't you read before speaking about things you have no understand of to get understanding. Look at John 8:1-11. The fact that you are alive and able to breath, walk etc. That's GRACE of Jesus.

Why would I care what the con man Paul wrote about himself. That is no different from all the things Trump said about himself and people are already finding out what a huge con man he is. Similarly those like myself who are not religious hacks can easily see what a con man Paul is. Religious hacks cannot see that clearly.

ksazma posted:

Why would I care what the con man Paul wrote about himself. That is no different from all the things Trump said about himself and people are already finding out what a huge con man he is. Similarly those like myself who are not religious hacks can easily see what a con man Paul is. Religious hacks cannot see that clearly.

Is that an acknowledgement you have no proof to show me where "Paul destroyed everything Jesus stood for?"

If you doesn't read to edified yourself you will not understand what's being discuss. Whomever you are listening too is feeding you a misrepresentation of the Word of God and you believe it without seeking out the answer for yourself. I also insist you don't take everything I mention here as Gospel, I challenge you to READ and seek truth. Quit listening to what people apprise you as a youth and READ!.

Where did I state that I never read those books. Didn't I state some time back that I have read the whole Bible? I am not interested in Paul propping himself up after Jesus was dead. He wouldn't have dared that when Jesus was here because Jesus would have totally demolished him. Now that Jesus is dead and can't help or hurt anyone, Paul was free to completely bastardize Jesus' teachings and since Jesus didn't make many friends when he was alive, there were not many if any willing or caring to come to Jesus' defense.

Additionally, I have given more evidence than is reasonable.

Think of this. Preachers claim that the Gospels are the word of God or that they are inspired by the Holy Spirit. Yet we see Luke completely disagreeing with that premise. Luke began his work by stating that many have written about the life and times of Jesus but unfortunately their works are a hodgepodge since they are not as familiar of Jesus as he was. He thought that since he is more educated, he can do a better job. Yet preachers are not willing to accept Luke's admission but they take Paul's words blindly. Paul has managed to steal people who were supposed to follow Jesus away from Jesus and on to Paul's doctrines.

That is why we have the saying "Peter pays for Paul and Paul pays for all". Peter was supposed to advance Jesus' ministry but he fell asleep on the job and allowed Paul freedom to destroy Jesus' ministry.

ksazma posted:

Where did I state that I never read those books. Didn't I state some time back that I have read the whole Bible? I am not interested in Paul propping himself up after Jesus was dead. He wouldn't have dared that when Jesus was here because Jesus would have totally demolished him. Now that Jesus is dead and can't help or hurt anyone, Paul was free to completely bastardize Jesus' teachings and since Jesus didn't make many friends when he was alive, there were not many if any willing or caring to come to Jesus' defense.

Additionally, I have given more evidence than is reasonable.

Glad to have clarification that you read the Bible. The problem here it's understanding what you have read. Start with the basic when reading, WHO, WHAT, WHEN, WHERE, WHY...lets add HOW to the mix.

What's highlighted above is the utter nonsense from people I would say failed to understand what he/she has read.

Here is a thought: "Jesus Christ did not come to make bad people good, but to make dead people alive."

I know where you stand on providing evidence, so lets not waste each other time.

Here is another thought. Jesus cannot make anyone good or bad, alive or dead. He doesn't have that kind of power especially now that he is dead.

ksazma posted:

Think of this. Preachers claim that the Gospels are the word of God or that they are inspired by the Holy Spirit. Yet we see Luke completely disagreeing with that premise. Luke began his work by stating that many have written about the life and times of Jesus but unfortunately their works are a hodgepodge since they are not as familiar of Jesus as he was. He thought that since he is more educated, he can do a better job. Yet preachers are not willing to accept Luke's admission but they take Paul's words blindly. Paul has managed to steal people who were supposed to follow Jesus away from Jesus and on to Paul's doctrines.

That is why we have the saying "Peter pays for Paul and Paul pays for all". Peter was supposed to advance Jesus' ministry but he fell asleep on the job and allowed Paul freedom to destroy Jesus' ministry.

Again, what's mention above is utter nonsense from people I would say failed to understand what he/she has read.

The disciples, including Luke as you mention above I would say know Christ better than anyone of us here reading this post. 

---------------------------------------------
ksazma Quote: "Luke began his work by stating that many have written about the life and times of Jesus but unfortunately their works are a hodgepodge since they are not as familiar of Jesus as he was."
---------------------------------------------
Where is this written? Who are the "they" you are referring too? Don't know what you are trying to say but this is the type of claptrap you keep post here. Stop posting pieces of scriptures and post the entire chapter/verse to get the full content of what's being discuss.

---------------------------------------------
ksazma Quotes: "Yet preachers are not willing to accept Luke's admission but they take Paul's words blindly. Paul has managed to steal people who were supposed to follow Jesus away from Jesus and on to Paul's doctrines."
---------------------------------------------
What admission? That Luke knows more than todays preacher/pastors do and are hodgepodge as you are? You certainly don't have anything better to do but to write the nonsense I highlighted here.

Interesting how I can back up my arguments when I care to. Where did Luke state that he was inspired by the Holy Spirit to write his account of Jesus? Rather he stated that he was inspired by others' accounts and since he was had better knowledge of it.

Trust me. I am able to understand the written word because I am not enslaved by what the preachers want me to believe. How can preachers say with straight faces that Luke did not mean what he stated?

Luke 1King James Version (KJV)

1 Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us,

² Even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word;

³ It seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus,

How to Pass Down Our Faith

ksazma posted:

Interesting how I can back up my arguments when I care to. Where did Luke state that he was inspired by the Holy Spirit to write his account of Jesus? Rather he stated that he was inspired by others' accounts and since he was had better knowledge of it.

Trust me. I am able to understand the written word because I am not enslaved by what the preachers want me to believe. How can preachers say with straight faces that Luke did not mean what he stated?

Luke 1King James Version (KJV)

1 Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us,

² Even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word;

³ It seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus,

I don't think you quit understand what those verses are saying. First of all if you are trying to tell me that Luke was not inspired by the Hold Spirit to write the Book of Luke - Acts let me put your doubt to rest right now.

Biblical inspiration may be defined as God's superintending of the human authors so that, using their own individual personalities and even their writing styles, they composed and recorded without error His revelation to man in the words of the original autographs. Inspiration means that "the Holy Spirit of God superintended the human writers in the production of Scripture so that what they wrote was precisely what God wanted written."

When you break the doctrine of inspiration down to its essential elements, there are seven key factors:

Divine origin and causality;
Human agency;
Written verbally (in words);
Plenary (all of Scripture is inspired, not just parts of it);
Only the "Autographs" (the original documents penned by the biblical authors) are inspired;
Because Scripture is inspired, it is inerrant; and
Because Scripture is inspired and inerrant, it alone has final authority.

Jesus promised His followers that it would be the work of the Holy Spirit to provide an accurate recounting of the events of His life (John 14:26). And because of this, I can trust the Bible as the Word of God. The Holy Spirit superintended the process from beginning to end.

Now about the verses you quotes , Luck 1:1-3
Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile an account of the things accomplished among us, just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and servants of the Word have handed them down to us, it seemed fitting for me as well, having investigated everything carefully from the beginning, to write it out for you in consecutive order, most excellent Theophilus; (Luke 1:1-3).

Many have taken in hand: Luke writes his gospel with the full knowledge that many have already written histories of the life of Jesus. This may be a reference to the works of Mark and Matthew most people think John was written after Luke, and it may also refer to other biographies of Jesus not directly inspired by the Holy Spirit.

Luke writes about those things which are most surely believed among us. He is writing about things already commonly known and believed among Christians. When Luke wrote, most Christians already knew all about the life of Jesus, both from the oral accounts passed on by the original disciples, and by the biographies that had already been written.

Most excellent Theophilus: Luke addresses his gospel to a man named Theophilus, but it was also written with a wider audience in mind.

By his title most excellent, we gather that Theophilus was probably a Roman government official. It is entirely likely that the books of Luke and Acts make up Paul's defense brief for his trial before Caesar, since Acts leaves Paul waiting for that trial.

Whoever Theophilus was, he had already had some instruction in the faith in which you were instructed.

All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works. (Timothy 3:16-17)

I am glad that you brought it back to it all being inspired by God and you ended with 2 Timothy, 3:16-17. Now my friend, please explain the story about Samson meeting a whore on the road to Gaza and had sex with her. We also have the story of Judah having sex with his daughter-in-law on the roadside. Please explain how 2 Timothy, 3:16-17 applies to these two instances. There are many more but I don't care to add them.

I am ignoring your response to Luke 1:1-3 because it was basically a classic ramble that did not address what Luke stated. Try again. What did Luke mean when he wrote "it seem good to me also"? Do yourself a favor and address only that statement because if you expand it further, you may just end up tripping over yourself like you did in the response yesterday.

Luke 1King James Version (KJV)

1 Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us,

² Even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word;

³ It seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus,

Living Out Our Faith

ksazma posted:

I am ignoring your response to Luke 1:1-3 because it was basically a classic ramble that did not address what Luke stated. Try again. What did Luke mean when he wrote "it seem good to me also"? Do yourself a favor and address only that statement because if you expand it further, you may just end up tripping over yourself like you did in the response yesterday.

 

Luke 1King James Version (KJV)

1 Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us,

² Even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word;

³ It seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus,

This is the problem I kept echoing over and over, you take a phrase or one sentence without reading the before, after or the entire chapter.

So now I say to you READ! Luke 1:1, the verse you took the phrase from and the verse after. I hope you get understanding as you read not once but twice.

ksazma posted:

I am glad that you brought it back to it all being inspired by God and you ended with 2 Timothy, 3:16-17. Now my friend, please explain the story about Samson meeting a whore on the road to Gaza and had sex with her. We also have the story of Judah having sex with his daughter-in-law on the roadside. Please explain how 2 Timothy, 3:16-17 applies to these two instances. There are many more but I don't care to add them.

Will address later busy at the moment unlike you I've a job I get paid to do all the best.