The old Testament

ximmix said:

That sounds like not many Christians will get into heaven...

Click to expand...

The beauty of the cited verse, is that you can then find/pluck another verse to completely counter/oppose the one above. It's a free-for-all

But I doubt you will get a truly satisfactory answer to your OP inquiry...

Even 'Jesus' states, in the Bible, to 'keep the commandments', speaks of original sin, etc... If the commandments are to be kept, and Jesus Himself does not state what is no longer applicable, it kind of forces everyone to be 'cafeteria Christians', and adhere to whatever moral doctrine they so choose. - Picking and choosing themselves, what laws to omit, and what laws to acknowledge. But the kicker to this is... Morals are kind of irrelevant regardless in a way... Without belief, you are doomed. Thus, belief with moral flaws may still award a believer to heaven. The opposite however, no bueno! Meaning, 'good deeds', and lack in belief would most certainly result in an 'eternal hell' sentence, according to this Book apparently.

But again, there is as many denominations in Christianity, as there exists the hairs on the average middle aged man's head

Good luck in getting a satisfactory answer

cvanwey said:

"For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished."

The above seems pretty straight forward... This verse, in and of itself, seems to suggest none of the Biblical laws are to be negated/ignored/no longer followed, unless Heaven was to cease to exist. Meaning, no such given law(s) will be negated, as Heaven is permanent.

Click to expand...

So is earth permanent. Life is the fabric that structures heaven. The evil spirits were cast out, there was no place found for them. I think you are looking at what the law is from the wrong angle. The Law is human nature. We aren't being what God made us to be. We need laws to be what God intended. To be fully human. Jesus is human as God intended. He fulfilled the law and so there now is a way for all of us to be fully human as God intended. Laws are for lawbreakers. If every human were fully human, there would be no reason for a law. In the mean time "not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished."

cvanwey said:

Anyone whom does not abide by these pronouncements, and instead 'create' their own path, are less likely to enter Heaven.

Click to expand...

cvanwey said:

"For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven."

Meaning, you 'better come correct', if you think your own laws are better than the ones given before you, via the Bible.

Click to expand...

Being correct is being a disciple of Christ. Anyone who confesses Jesus as their Lord is more righteous than the Jews that rejected Him.

cvanwey said:

how might one choose which of the old laws to ignore, and which ones to keep?

Click to expand...

There was a time when Christians honored the sabbath at the synagogue on Saturdays and gathered for the breaking of bread on Sundays. Eventually the synagogue was hostile to them and in time no longer available. The Holy Spirit in this way guided them to the New Day, the first day of the week, when they gathered to break bread was really the Lord's day. Honoring the Lord's day is a moral law but the particular day is ceremonial and the authority of the apostles could change it. Again, the Holy Spirit guided the Church to that Truth and has been doing so since. So, how do we choose? we don't have to those choices were made long ago.

ximmix said:

Really? I hear a lot about Satan being the lord of this fallen world.

Click to expand...

Well, people have a right to choose.

ximmix said:

How do you go about this discovery? If God is as you say surrounded by paradox and confusion, how are you sure your interpretation is the only correct one?

Click to expand...

Jesus' mother pondered these things in her heart. You go about your day and if some situation or circumstance contains resolution you will be reminded of the matter pondered and connect a dot or perhaps what was a mystery to you will no longer be hidden.
Scriptures, like Shrek , has layers. Interpretations of Scritures don't really come in 'only's'. There are meanings that are correct yet don't express the entire depth of it's meaning. We must always be open to the possibility that we can misunderstand scriptures or at the very least there is depth to them that we don't know. Funny thing about that is, when we are exposed to that depth we may reject it not knowing that what we understand is validated by it. Very few scriptures have an 'only correct interpretation' atatched to them. That would make them a textbook rather than a living Word.

Eloy Craft said:

So is earth permanent.

Click to expand...

I think you might be mistaken here... Indications suggest the earth is not permanent.

Eloy Craft said:

Life is the fabric that structures heaven.

Click to expand...

I would agree, in the sense that it seems to require humans, whom have the ability to invent heaven.

Eloy Craft said:

The evil spirits were cast out, there was no place found for them. I think you are looking at what the law is from the wrong angle. The Law is human nature. We aren't being what God made us to be. We need laws to be what God intended. To be fully human. Jesus is human as God intended. He fulfilled the law and so there now is a way for all of us to be fully human as God intended. Laws are for lawbreakers. If every human were fully human, there would be no reason for a law. In the mean time "not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished."

Click to expand...

This ties right back to the crux of the OP-er's point/question(s)....

God asserted all laws. Some of these laws appear trivial, or not necessary in 'human nature'. Which ones do we no longer adhere to, and which ones do we abide by? Do we only abide by the ones which adhere to our 'human nature'? If so, we still have a problem. Morals appear subjective.

If, as you state, "the law is human nature", why does human nature vary legitimately from human to human?

Furthermore, some OT laws appear not to even comply with this human nature. Meaning, 'don't eat shell fish', 'don't mix fabrics', etc... does not appear to be on anyone's scope of 'right/wrong', as it applied to 'human nature.' Such laws instead appear amoral. And yet, at least at one time, God considered them 'sin.'

Well, was/is it a sin to eat shell fish, mix fabrics, etc..? And are they still considered sin today? Again, this is the crux. What do humans get to consider 'sin'? And what do humans get to consider not a 'sin'?

According to Matthew 5:17-20, all stated Biblical laws are never-changing...

****************

If as you say, 'He fulfilled the law and so there now is a way for all of us to be fully human as God intended,' this still does not seem to solve any problems...

Again, does Jesus consider all stated laws of the Bible sin, or not? Or, which OT laws are no longer considered sin? And if some are no longer sin, why did they used to be sin, but are no longer sin?

You see, Matthew 5:17-20 seems to conflict....

Eloy Craft said:

Being correct is being a disciple of Christ.

Click to expand...

Belief is neither moral nor immoral. Belief is an amoral action. Seems odd that the crux of heaven/hell hinges upon an uncontrollable action (i.e.) belief.

Eloy Craft said:

Anyone who confesses Jesus as their Lord is more righteous than the Jews that rejected Him.

Click to expand...

What if the recipient simply does not feel the evidence left behind is compelling enough to convince them that such a claimed event (resurrection) is even true? Is it instead considered more righteous to invoke 'faith' that it is true, in spite of this skeptic's senses, which directs them otherwise?

Belief is neither moral nor immoral. Belief is an amoral action. You cannot control what you believe.

Eloy Craft said:

There was a time when Christians honored the sabbath at the synagogue on Saturdays and gathered for the breaking of bread on Sundays. Eventually the synagogue was hostile to them and in time no longer available. The Holy Spirit in this way guided them to the New Day, the first day of the week, when they gathered to break bread was really the Lord's day. Honoring the Lord's day is a moral law but the particular day is ceremonial and the authority of the apostles could change it. Again, the Holy Spirit guided the Church to that Truth and has been doing so since. So, how do we choose? we don't have to those choices were made long ago.

Click to expand...

Again, which laws are still considered laws, and which ones are no longer considered laws? Again, according to Matthew 5:17-20, all stated laws in the Bible are forever. And even IF you adhere to Christ, which ones does He no longer consider a law?

cvanwey said:

I think you might be mistaken here... Indications suggest the earth is not permanent.

Click to expand...

The evidence in question is the biblical text though. Everything Indicates that this world will pass away and become a New Earth that is permanent

cvanwey said:

I would agree, in the sense that it seems to require humans, whom have the ability to invent heaven.

Click to expand...

It's the other way around. Humans can conceive heaven because it exists, if it didn't then it would be inconceivable.

cvanwey said:

God asserted all laws. Some of these laws appear trivial, or not necessary in 'human nature'. Which ones do we no longer adhere to, and which ones do we abide by? Do we only abide by the ones which adhere to our 'human nature'? If so, we still have a problem. Morals appear subjective.

Click to expand...

The Holy Spirit Guided the Church into all that truth a long time ago. There were Christians who thought circumcision must be maintained in the beginning and the finer points on the matter are resolved as the life of the Church proceeded.

cvanwey said:

If, as you state, "the law is human nature", why does human nature vary legitimately from human to human?

Click to expand...

We are human in species and a species unto ourselves as well. All rational creatures are.

cvanwey said:

Furthermore, some OT laws appear not to even comply with this human nature. Meaning, 'don't eat shell fish', 'don't mix fabrics', etc... does not appear to be on anyone's scope of 'right/wrong', as it applied to 'human nature.' Such laws instead appear amoral. And yet, at least at one time, God considered them 'sin.'

Click to expand...

The Jews agreed to do these things and not making good on a promise is a sin. Christians have a different agreement with God.

cvanwey said:

Well, was/is it a sin to eat shell fish, mix fabrics, etc..? And are they still considered sin today? Again, this is the crux. What do humans get to consider 'sin'? And what do humans get to consider not a 'sin'?

Click to expand...

Jesus lifted the Law to it's highest human dimension. "Eye for an eye" to "do unto others" then Jesus' "turn the other cheek" and "love your enemy." The old Law wasn't abolished it was fulfilled.

If one wants to know what sin is there are sources available.

cvanwey said:

According to Matthew 5:17-20, all stated Biblical laws are never-changing...

Click to expand...

Not true. As demonstrated above.

cvanwey said:

Again, does Jesus consider all stated laws of the Bible sin, or not? Or, which OT laws are no longer considered sin? And if some are no longer sin, why did they used to be sin, but are no longer sin?

Click to expand...

It's a safe bet that if the wrongness of a certain deed permeates humanity it's a keeper. There are universals. The truth of the matter is you got it turned around in your mind. It was once ok to have two wives and divorce one or both.God let it slide for Moses' sake and the fact that Human nature as God intended had not yet been revealed. But it was a sin because it doesn't conform with human nature. It's not that Christians are off the hook because a perfect human nature has entered human life.

cvanwey said:

Matthew 5:17-20

Click to expand...

New Earth new life New Testament New Day, these are all what became of the old. Not either or but both and.

cvanwey said:

Belief is neither moral nor immoral. Belief is an amoral action. Seems odd that the crux of heaven/hell hinges upon an uncontrollable action (i.e.) belief.

Click to expand...

I'm sure you've heard of denial.

cvanwey said:

What if the recipient simply does not feel the evidence left behind is compelling enough to convince them that such a claimed event (resurrection) is even true? I

Click to expand...

In as much as their ability to know is hindered at no fault of their own it's not a personal sin...but if denial is desired..it's evil, the evidence is undeniable. Unbelief is rejection of God because He has revealed Himself as fully as we can receive .

cvanwey said:

Belief is neither moral nor immoral. Belief is an amoral action. You cannot control what you believe.

Click to expand...

Yeah you can in many ways. Willful ignorance comes to mind.

cvanwey said:

Again, which laws are still considered laws, and which ones are no longer considered laws? Again, according to Matthew 5:17-20, all stated laws in the Bible are forever. And even IF you adhere to Christ, which ones does He no longer consider a law?

Click to expand...

The Holy Spirit has been guiding Christians since the beginning on that matter. You can believe them or not.

Eloy Craft said:

It's the other way around. Humans can conceive heaven because it exists, if it didn't then it would be inconceivable.

Click to expand...

Humans can 'conceive' of many 'things' which most likely don't exist or have not happened. Ever heard of fairy tales, super heroes, alien sightings/contact/abduction, and schizophrenic hallucinations, just for starters?

Eloy Craft said:

The Holy Spirit Guided the Church into all that truth a long time ago. There were Christians who thought circumcision must be maintained in the beginning and the finer points on the matter are resolved as the life of the Church proceeded.

Click to expand...

Again, there appears no hard list to now ignore, verses to continue adhering to... And again, Matthew 5:17-20 offers no caveats, exceptions, or revisions to such would-be now prior 'law'. Stay tuned...

Eloy Craft said:

We are human in species and a species unto ourselves as well. All rational creatures are.

Click to expand...

This answers nothing... Since ('human nature' / morals) appears subjective from individual to individual, what is THE law for all 'moral absolutes'? Again, this hits home to the OP. What do we ignore, and what do we continue practicing as law?

Eloy Craft said:

The Jews agreed to do these things and not making good on a promise is a sin. Christians have a different agreement with God.

Click to expand...

This response does not address my concerns.

Why would God ever consider mixing fabrics a sin? Such 'law' appears amoral (verses) 'human nature.' And simply claiming 'ceremonial law' does not address why I'm asking either.

Eloy Craft said:

Jesus lifted the Law to it's highest human dimension. "Eye for an eye" to "do unto others" then Jesus' "turn the other cheek" and "love your enemy." The old Law wasn't abolished it was fulfilled.

Click to expand...

This claim appears incorrect for many reasons:

Matthew 5:17-20. 'Until heaven disappears', all law is to remain in effect. Even withstanding or ignoring such text, all has not been 'fulfilled'. The 'second coming' has not taken place as well.

Jesus appears to endorse the NT, which allows for virtually undefined slavery (Ephesians 6:5-8), expresses dislike for women to attain authority in church- unlike the male counter part (1 Timothy 2:11-12), and the NT expressed same gender relations as sin (1 Corinthians 6:9–10).

(Disclaimer) - I'm already aware you can locate verses to combat the ones mentioned above. This is yet another reason God appears okay with confusion.. Not only from the OT to the NT, (like the OPer indicated), but even if you were only to adhere to the NT Again, it reinforces the OPer's concerns...

Eloy Craft said:

If one wants to know what sin is there are sources available.

Click to expand...

Do tell? Because trying to make sense of the verses list above from the Bible, directly against finding counter verses from the Bible to negate such explicit statements, 'in which we find mostly 'unpleasant' in the modern day,' does not seem to satisfy...

Eloy Craft said:

It's a safe bet that if the wrongness of a certain deed permeates humanity it's a keeper. There are universals.

Click to expand...

Okay, let's look at the three topics above, just for starters. For this specific sake, I will grant you many liberties here, and only address topics which Jesus seems to continue endorsing post OT...

Is undefined slavery, inequality to women in intellectual leadership, and same gender relations considered 'universals'? Let's start here... If you follow Jesus's 'Golden Rule', how might these three topics apply?

Eloy Craft said:

The truth of the matter is you got it turned around in your mind. It was once ok to have two wives and divorce one or both.God let it slide for Moses' sake and the fact that Human nature as God intended had not yet been revealed.

Click to expand...

So you're saying morals aren't objective/absolute? That 'morals' are situational? Do tell?

Does God sometimes adhere to human's desires/standards, or, do humans adhere to God's standards? Seems odd to sometimes be both ways... If it is sometimes the former, then maybe there could be a future situation, where God will again not consider human desire a sin. Let's start again, with the three topics mentioned above - (slavery, women, and homosexuality)

Eloy Craft said:

But it was a sin because it doesn't conform with human nature. It's not that Christians are off the hook because a perfect human nature has entered human life.

Click to expand...

Again, human nature varies from human to human. What is absolute 'human nature', as it pertains to the undefined topics of slavery, women in authoritarian roles, and homosexuality?

Eloy Craft said:

New Earth new life New Testament New Day, these are all what became of the old. Not either or but both and.

Click to expand...

Again, even granting much leniency, Matthew 5:17-20 poses contradiction against your assertions. As addressed above...

Eloy Craft said:

I'm sure you've heard of denial.

Click to expand...

Are you saying I'm in denial, and instead 'know' the resurrection is a reality?

Eloy Craft said:

In as much as their ability to know is hindered at no fault of their own it's not a personal sin...but if denial is desired..it's evil, the evidence is undeniable. Unbelief is rejection of God because He has revealed Himself as fully as we can receive .

Click to expand...

A book of claims is not good enough for many, including you, and others whom reject competing older/ancient books and their assertions. I trust you understand I'm not speaking about whether or not all recipients agree with the asserted doctrine. But instead, that many simply do not believe such asserted doctrine was comprised of anything other than humans, and their own assertions. I.E. Mormonism, Hinduism, etc...........

Again, unbelief does not fall under the scope or morality or immorality. Belief is an amoral action. And yet, without belief, according to Christian doctrine, you are doomed from the start.

Eloy Craft said:

Yeah you can in many ways. Willful ignorance comes to mind.

Click to expand...

Are you now calling me both in denial and ignorant?

Furthermore, you did not address my statement... Belief is not a choice. And yet, belief is the foundation for Christianity. Seems odd...

Just like you will not believe Islam is true without your needed and necessary evidence, whatever that may actually be..? Again, I'm not speaking about whether or not you (agree) with the competing asserted doctrine(s). Just that you don't currently believe they are even real. Because if you did, you could not also hold the title of a Christian.

Eloy Craft said:

The Holy Spirit has been guiding Christians since the beginning on that matter. You can believe them or not.

Click to expand...

Again, we can start with 'slavery', 'women', and 'homosexuality'. What does the law say about these three topics, and does 'human nature' always agree?

ximmix said:

Sorry for the late reply.

I wasn't aware of any passage in the Bible where Jesus' mother pondered anything, Im not a scholar of the bible so I may be wrong of course.

And the rest of your reply leads me back to my original question, if it's all interpretation, who decides what to follow and not to follow?

Click to expand...

Late replies give me an excuse for my own.

Can you imagine having a child that people you don't know from near and far come to see even though there was no earthly way for them to know? These people even knew things about her child that she didn't know. Then all the things one would experience being so close to God incarnate made her the first Christian contemplative. Anyway here is a verse.
Luke 2:18-20
18 and all who heard it were amazed at what the shepherds told them. 19 But Mary treasured all these words and pondered them in her heart. 20 The shepherds returned, glorifying and praising God for all they had heard and seen, as it had been told them.


As far as interpretation goes, Jesus said the community that surrounded Him since the beginning would be on earth until He returned and that the Holy Spirit would be guiding them to All Truth. For that to happen the teaching they already knew wold have to be true. If their light were tinted they couldn't be lead to know what was all true. The Truth is out there being taught by Churches that trace their teaching back to the apostles.

cvanwey said:

Again, unbelief does not fall under the scope or morality or immorality. Belief is an amoral action. And yet, without belief, according to Christian doctrine, you are doomed from the start.

Click to expand...

But it does. Sometimes people don't want to believe what's true and effectively believe what is not. A cheated on spouse may disbelieve until they witness the act.

cvanwey said:

Furthermore, you did not address my statement... Belief is not a choice. And yet, belief is the foundation for Christianity. Seems odd...

Click to expand...

You aren't saying that people don't tend to believe what they want to believe? After all that is the main thing that taints interpretation.

Eloy Craft said:

But it does. Sometimes people don't want to believe what's true and effectively believe what is not. A cheated on spouse may disbelieve until they witness the act.

Click to expand...

You are instead speaking about denial and/or deception.

I'm referring to belief. (i.e.) I read a book. In this book, it's stated a man resurrected from the dead. I don't believe this event happened. The book tells me if I don't believe this event happened, I am going to be condemned.

Again, disbelief is neither moral nor immoral. It is amoral. And yet, the entire premise of Christianity states that the mere beginning to earn the rights to heaven, is to start by believing. Something I cannot change or control.

Sure, I could state I don't believe it happened, but deep down, actually think it did happen. But as you eluded to prior, that would instead present denial or deception. I either believe the story, or I don't.

Well, unless you are in affect, calling me some sort of a liar, or in denial, I'm telling you I don't buy the asserted story; based upon my assessment of the events and in study.

Thus, if it were in fact true, I'm doomed.

Eloy Craft said:

You aren't saying that people don't tend to believe what they want to believe? After all that is the main thing that taints interpretation.

Click to expand...

I'm saying you cannot help what you believe. Make yourself spontaneously believe the earth is made of jello.

Again, if you want to bring in denial or lies, that is an entirely different story. But again, you would then be asserting that you think I am in denial or am lying, about not buying the story line from the Bible.

Thus, again, The Bible seems to state that disbelief is immoral. When is reality, it appears amoral.

Re Matthew 5:17-20, I believe the Lord answers this in that we are to keep the commandments which actually even is given in the OT ( see Psalms 15, Ezekiel 18:4-9 etc.). In the NT, the Lord tells the rich young man in Matthew 19:16-19 (the rich young man could have paused there). St. Paul in Romans 13:8-10 tells us this same fulfillment of the law. Note in Romans 13:1-7, St. Paul tells us how we live under secular rule. I believe St. Paul stressed obedience in light of the repeated failed rebellions against the Romans.

The Lord tells us to always come to Him because we will have trials in keeping our faith ( John 16:33, Matthew 6:5-15).

Those without the Lord will be judged by their works ( John 5:22-30, Romans 2 etc.). Sometimes it seems that few will be saved ( Matthew 7:13-14) yet the Lord also states ( Matthew 12:31-32). We should know the mercy of God but also His judgment ( Romans 11:22).