Which Commandments?

Lion IRC · Apr 21, 2021

doubtingmerle said:
nobody seems to understand which commandments God requires you to follow

Do you concede that at least two garden variety biblical theists in THIS thread have stated an agreed understanding?

doubtingmerle · Apr 21, 2021

Lion IRC said:
Yes, two.
See Mathew 22:36

Which Commandments?

Ah, so Jesus got it wrong when he listed 7? And the person who told me all of them had it wrong? And the person that said you can get to heaven without obeying any commandments had it wrong?

Can you show me where the Bible says we need to follow these two, and just these two, to get to heaven?

doubtingmerle · Apr 21, 2021

Paulomycin said:
As expected, you want it to appear as-if I'm arguing both sides of the question without any charity in the discussion. Answer: The one that receives Jesus as their substitute for sin does not need to keep the commandments or do anything else to earn their way into Heaven.

Ah, so when you said one needs to keep all the commandments to get to heaven, you were mistaken? Now you say "does not need to keep the commandments".

Is that you final answer?

However: Lifetime hypocrites, those who claim a "license to sin," or those who do not show any obedience to the law of Christ (this is the new bit), might very well have never been saved to begin with.

You say those who disobey might not be saved. But you cannot say they definitely are not saved?

Are you saying that those who rape, murder, plunder, and steal might possibly be saved and be going to heaven?

Again, all of them. No doublespeak.

Got it. You think we need to keep all of them to get to heaven.

Answer: The one that receives Jesus as their substitute for sin does not need to keep the commandments

Got it. You think we need to keep none of them to get to heaven.

Again, all of them. No doublespeak.

Got it. You think we need to keep all of them to get to heaven.

Answer: The one that receives Jesus as their substitute for sin does not need to keep the commandments

Got it. You think we need to keep none of them to get to heaven.

Again, all of them. No doublespeak.

Paulomycin · Apr 22, 2021

Wow. Over an hour edit history. I see you were working on your response for a very long time.

doubtingmerle said:
Ah, so when you said one needs to keep all the commandments to get to heaven, you were mistaken? Now you say "does not need to keep the commandments".

Is that you final answer?

I was not mistaken. It's like you're not even aware that I'm paying the most attention to the, "to get the heaven" part.

doubtingmerle said:
You say those who disobey might not be saved. But you cannot say they definitely are not saved?

Hey, only God can read hearts and minds. I never claimed to be omniscient.

doubtingmerle said:
Are you saying that those who rape, murder, plunder, and steal might possibly be saved and be going to heaven?

Before salvation? Most definitely. After salvation? Ehhh. I'm sticking with what I stated above. If someone would "rape, murder, plunder, and steal" after professing faith in Christ, then it's pretty clear they failed to examine themselves. -2 Corinthians 13:5 This is why I generally urge all professing Christians to attend Communion on a regular basis. Because that's what it's for.

doubtingmerle said:
Got it. You think we need to keep all of them to get to heaven.

But we inevitably fail. Because "none righteous," -Romans 3:10

doubtingmerle said:
Got it. You think we need to keep none of them to get to heaven.

Because everyone failed. That's why a Redeemer is necessary.

doubtingmerle said:
Got it. You think we need to keep all of them to get to heaven.

lol. But we inevitably fail. Because "none righteous," -Romans 3:10

doubtingmerle said:
Got it. You think we need to keep none of them to get to heaven.

Correct. Because everyone failed. That's why a Redeemer is necessary. The one that receives Jesus as their substitute for sin does not need to keep the commandments, because they can't.

doubtingmerle said:

I can do this all-day.

JohnClay · Apr 22, 2021

I'll quote Matthew 19:16-21 using the NIV since it is easier to understand.

Just then a man came up to Jesus and asked, “Teacher, what good thing must I do to get eternal life?”

“Why do you ask me about what is good?” Jesus replied. “There is only One who is good. If you want to enter life, keep the commandments.”

“Which ones?” he inquired.

Jesus replied, “‘You shall not murder, you shall not commit adultery, you shall not steal, you shall not give false testimony, honor your father and mother,’ and ‘love your neighbor as yourself.’”

“All these I have kept,”

So it seems that if the guy wants to have eternal life, he just has to follow the specified commandments...

the young man said. “What do I still lack?”

Jesus answered, “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.”

The young man became sad because he wasn't able to be perfect. This means in addition to going to Heaven he could have also had treasure there too....

doubtingmerle · Apr 22, 2021

Paulomycin said:
But we inevitably fail. Because "none righteous," -Romans 3:10

Sir, I did not ask you if we fail. I asked you if we needed to keep all the commandments to go to heaven.

Your answer appears to be, "Yes".

Because everyone failed. That's why a Redeemer is necessary.

You say this in response to, "You think we need to keep none of them to get to heaven."

So you are agreeing with that statement that we need to keep none of the commandments.

lol. But we inevitably fail. Because "none righteous," -Romans 3:10

You say this in response to, "You think we need to keep all of them to get to heaven."

So now you are switching back to, "All of them."

So which is it? All of them or none of them?

Correct. Because everyone failed. That's why a Redeemer is necessary. The one that receives Jesus as their substitute for sin does not need to keep the commandments, because they can't.

Now you are switching back to none of them.

Is that your final answer?

I can do this all-day.

I wouldn't brag about being skilled at answering, "All...None...All...None..." to the same question ad infinitum.

If someone would "rape, murder, plunder, and steal" after professing faith in Christ, then it's pretty clear they failed to examine themselves. -2 Corinthians 13:5 This is why I generally urge all professing Christians to attend Communion on a regular basis. Because that's what it's for.

Suppose someone had faith in Christ, took Communion on a regular basis, examined himself, and still repeatedly raped, murdered, plundered and stole. Will he go to heaven?

Paulomycin · Apr 22, 2021

doubtingmerle said:
Sir, I did not ask you if we fail. I asked you if we needed to keep all the commandments to go to heaven.

Sir, we need to keep all the commandments to go to heaven, but we are doomed to fail. You can't compartmentalize this. You can't omit the context here whenever it suits you.

doubtingmerle said:
You say this in response to, "You think we need to keep none of them to get to heaven."

Via The Redeemer (Christ). That's the difference. He does it; we don't.

doubtingmerle said:
So you are agreeing with that statement that we need to keep none of the commandments.

To get to heaven. . .through Christ.

doubtingmerle said:
You say this in response to, "You think we need to keep all of them to get to heaven."

Individually. . .without Christ.

doubtingmerle said:
So which is it? All of them or none of them?

That depends entirely on who's keeping the commandments. Get it?

doubtingmerle said:
I wouldn't brag about being skilled at answering, "All...None...All...None..." to the same question ad infinitum.

You're not paying attention to the one consistent detail I'm switching on. Namely, "how" you get to heaven. If under your own effort to keep the commandments, then you will certainly fail, even though God doesn't change His standard or grade on a curve. However, if you place all of your trust (faith) in Christ alone, then He gets you there by keeping all the commandments for you.

doubtingmerle said:
Suppose someone had faith in Christ, took Communion on a regular basis, examined himself, and still repeatedly raped, murdered, plundered and stole. Will he go to heaven?

Probably not, because that would indicate a superficial ritualistic religion at best. CHRINOs never go to heaven. One who honestly examines themselves will generally repent of their sin and turn themselves in at the first gross infraction.

doubtingmerle · Apr 23, 2021

Paulomycin said:
Sir, we need to keep all the commandments to go to heaven, but we are doomed to fail.

In Matthew 19, where Jesus was talking to the man about keeping commandments to go to heaven, Jesus explains, " With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible."

Is it possible to keep the commandments as Jesus said, or are we doomed to fail?

Via The Redeemer (Christ). That's the difference. He does it; we don't.

Are you saying we still need to keep the commandments in order to get to heaven, but he helps us?

Or are you saying he keeps the commandments for us, so we can get to heaven without keeping them?

That depends entirely on who's keeping the commandments.

Good question. Can you answer please?

Who needs to keep the commandments for us to get to heaven? Do we need to keep the commandments, or can we skip the commandments because he kept them for us?

You're not paying attention to the one consistent detail I'm switching on. Namely, "how" you get to heaven.

Does your "how to get to heaven" require us to keep the commandments or doesn't it? Your answer keeps changing.

If under your own effort to keep the commandments, then you will certainly fail, even though God doesn't change His standard or grade on a curve. However, if you place all of your trust (faith) in Christ alone, then He gets you there by keeping all the commandments for you.

If Jesus keeps the commandments for us, does that mean we can get to heaven without keeping them?

Probably not, because that would indicate a superficial ritualistic religion at best.

You say this in response to:

Suppose someone had faith in Christ, took Communion on a regular basis, examined himself, and still repeatedly raped, murdered, plundered and stole. Will he go to heaven?

So this person had faith in Christ, but he probably won't go to heaven.

In addition to faith in Christ, what also does he need?

One who honestly examines themselves will generally repent of their sin and turn themselves in at the first gross infraction.

The same thing applies to non-Christians. When we see things we are doing wrong, most of us set out to correct it. We are not perfect. But I find we do just as well, if not better, at addressing wrongful behavior patterns as Christians do.

Paulomycin · Apr 23, 2021

doubtingmerle said:
In Matthew 19, where Jesus was talking to the man about keeping commandments to go to heaven, Jesus explains, " With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible."

Is it possible to keep the commandments as Jesus said, or are we doomed to fail?

We are doomed to fail, but with God all things are possible.

doubtingmerle said:
Are you saying we still need to keep the commandments in order to get to heaven, but he helps us?

No. I am saying we still need to keep the commandments in order to get to heaven, but we are doomed to fail and so He does it all for us if we just trust Him to do it for us. <-- In that order.

doubtingmerle said:
The same thing applies to non-Christians. When we see things we are doing wrong, most of us set out to correct it. We are not perfect. But I find we do just as well, if not better, at addressing wrongful behavior patterns as Christians do.

So you claim to know the hearts and minds of all non-Christians. "Most of us" never turn a blind eye, shift blame, or come up with excuses. Got it.

doubtingmerle · Apr 23, 2021

Paulomycin said:
We are doomed to fail, but with God all things are possible.

OK, with God it is possible to live a moral life. True.

Without God it is also possible to live a moral life. Atheists live moral lives every day.

Nobody is perfect, no, but many people of many religions live good moral lives.

So no, if you are saying only Christians are capable of living moral lives, I disagree.

No. I am saying we still need to keep the commandments in order to get to heaven, but we are doomed to fail and so He does it all for us if we just trust Him to do it for us. <-- In that order.

Again, what does "he does it all for us" mean? You can underline it a thousands time, but if you refuse to answer the question, you are not helping.

Once again. :sigh:

Are you saying that:

1) Jesus keeps the commandments for us, and therefore we can go to heaven without keeping them.
or 2) Jesus helps us keep the commandments, knowing that we need to keep them to get to heaven.

I have heard you say it both ways. You go back and forth and refuse to tell us which you are talking about.

They cannot both be true.

And you will refuse to answer again, yes?

So you claim to know the hearts and minds of all non-Christians. "Most of us" never turn a blind eye, shift blame, or come up with excuses. Got it.

I did not say I know the hearts and minds of all non-Christians. I can't judge the heart, but I can see the behavior. When I look at the moral behavior of non-Christians, I find that most of them have moral lives that are as good as, if not better than, most Christians.

So if you claim one needs to become a Christian before he can live a good moral life, then I call flapdoodle on that one.

Paulomycin · Apr 23, 2021

doubtingmerle said:
OK, with God it is possible to live a moral life. True.

More than that. I'm not going to let you slide by on any superficial "with God" vagueness. The "with God" in this case is a total substitutionary atonement. Literally, Jesus = complete substitute morality.

doubtingmerle said:
Without God it is also possible to live a moral life. Atheists live moral lives every day.

A mere assertion on a bus banner in London is not evidence of your claim. Atheists have no objective evidence of morality itself. Atheists have never resolved the classical "Is-Ought problem," nor can it be resolved, because it's a problem confined to your own metaphysical worldview that materialism is all that exists.

doubtingmerle said:
Again, what does "he does it all for us" mean? You can underline it a thousands time, but if you refuse to answer the question, you are not helping.

1. Jesus was the only One capable of living a life of moral perfection that we could not.
2. Jesus provided Himself as the perfect and unblemished substitutional sacrifice for sin. He died under God the Father's eternal wrath (i.e. Hell) so that we wouldn't have to.
3. Humanity is perfectly in-capable of living a moral life. Once you've violated one law, you have violated the whole thing. Either you surrender to Jesus to "do it all for you," or you die in your sin and receive the just wrath of the Father.

doubtingmerle said:
Once again. Are you saying that:

1) Jesus keeps the commandments for us, and therefore we can go to heaven without keeping them.
or 2) Jesus helps us keep the commandments, knowing that we need to keep them to get to heaven.

^^ Option #1. ^^

doubtingmerle said:
I did not say I know the hearts and minds of all non-Christians. I can't judge the heart, but I can see the behavior.

In public, but not in private.

doubtingmerle · Apr 24, 2021

Paulomycin said:
A mere assertion on a bus banner in London is not evidence of your claim.

I didn't assert something I read on a banner. I told you about my experience. It has been my experience that most atheists live moral lives that are as good as, if not better than, most Christians.

Atheists have never resolved the classical "Is-Ought problem," nor can it be resolved, because it's a problem confined to your own metaphysical worldview that materialism is all that exists.

I have explained to you why we ought to be moral. You just ignore what I say.

Your failure to listen to what I say does not mean I did not say it.

3. Humanity is perfectly in-capable of living a moral life.

That's odd, because I live a moral life. Not perfect, but I live a moral life.

Once you've violated one law, you have violated the whole thing.

And if you are playing hockey and get caught high-sticking, then you have violated every rule in hockey?

Flapdoodle.

The player violated the rules, he goes to the penalty box. Case resolved. But please don't tell me that for this one infraction that this person has violated every rule in hockey and is unethical.

Just because one fails to perfectly follow a certain lists of laws does not mean the person is incapable of being moral. Could it be that the set of laws is unreasonable?

Either you surrender to Jesus to "do it all for you," or you die in your sin

Please define what you mean when you ask us to surrender.

This brings us into the issue of lordship salvation. Some people teach that we need to surrender to Jesus as Lord. That must surely mean not only doing everything he commands to all of us, but obeying every little detail he tells us personally. Is that what you mean when you say surrender?

^^ Option #1. ^^

OK, thank you for answering.

Option 1 is "Jesus keeps the commandments for us, and therefore we can go to heaven without keeping them."

So Jesus was apparently mistaken when he said we need to keep the commandments to go to heaven. You specifically state that we can go to heaven without keeping them (in bold, underline, large font).

In public, but not in private.

I don't know what Atheists and Christians do in private, and it is none of my business as long as it doesn't hurt others.

doubtingmerle · Apr 24, 2021

Lion IRC said:
Do you concede that at least two garden variety biblical theists in THIS thread have stated an agreed understanding?

No, sir. If two Christians have agreed on this thread on the list, I missed it.

I have seen a variety of answers here. Which two Christians have agreed on a specific list of commandments that we need to keep to go to heaven?

If you are referring to the fact that Paulomycin echoed agreement with your list of two commands, I remind you that his latest clarification (in bold, underline, large font) is that we need to keep none of them.

So I take it that is in contradiction with your statement that we need to keep two of them. (Zero does not equal two.)

Lion IRC · Apr 24, 2021

doubtingmerle said:
If you are referring to the fact that Paulomycin echoed agreement with your list of two commands, I remind you that his latest clarification (in bold, underline, large font) is that we need to keep none of them.

@Paulomycin did not say "we need to keep none of them".
That's quite wrong to claim he said or confirmed that.
There's an amphibology going on here.

"Sinners can go to heaven thanks to Jesus"
...is not the same as saying;
"Sinning is OK thanks to Jesus"

Please go back and read carefully your proposition and his response. You asked about sinners going to heaven. We all sin.

doubtingmerle · Apr 24, 2021

Lion IRC said:
@Paulomycin did not say "we need to keep none of them".
That's quite wrong to claim he said or confirmed that.
There's an amphibology going on here.

"Sinners can go to heaven thanks to Jesus"
...is not the same as saying;
"Sinning is OK thanks to Jesus"

Please go back and read carefully your proposition and his response. You asked about sinners going to heaven. We all sin.

This thread is not about whether sinning is OK. It is about what commandments you need to follow to get to heaven.

I did not say anybody said "sinning is OK." I was talking about one here who said the commandments are not required to get to heaven. He did not say, "sinning is OK."

Paulomycin · Apr 24, 2021

doubtingmerle said:
I didn't assert something I read on a banner. I told you about my experience. It has been my experience that most atheists live moral lives that are as good as, if not better than, most Christians.

Subjective experience doesn't count. I don't try to push any of my subjective experience with atheists, as they'll only dismiss them. Why the double-standard?

doubtingmerle said:
I have explained to you why we ought to be moral. You just ignore what I say.

I'd take you a lot more seriously if you could solve the classical Is-Ought problem. The last one to try was Sam Harris, and his case got torn apart by his own atheist peers.

doubtingmerle said:
That's odd, because I live a moral life. Not perfect, but I live a moral life.

By your own subjectively arbitrary and circular moral standard. Why should I believe you?

doubtingmerle said:
And if you are playing hockey and get caught high-sticking, then you have violated every rule in hockey?

Yep. Every rule. Because God's standard is not the rules of hockey. False analogy. Different game.

doubtingmerle said:
Just because one fails to perfectly follow a certain lists of laws does not mean the person is incapable of being moral. Could it be that the set of laws is unreasonable?

God's standard of morality is 100% absolute sinless perfection. I thought you said you read the Bible.

doubtingmerle said:
Please define what you mean when you ask us to surrender.

Literal surrender. Stop fighting Jesus.

doubtingmerle said:
This brings us into the issue of lordship salvation. Some people teach that we need to surrender to Jesus as Lord. That must surely mean not only doing everything he commands to all of us, but obeying every little detail he tells us personally. Is that what you mean when you say surrender?

You're misrepresenting Lordship Salvation.

What is lordship salvation? | GotQuestions.org

doubtingmerle said:
Option 1 is "Jesus keeps the commandments for us, and therefore we can go to heaven without keeping them."

So Jesus was apparently mistaken when he said we need to keep the commandments to go to heaven. You specifically state that we can go to heaven without keeping them (in bold, underline, large font).

No. You're simply (and deliberately) failing to include every-single-step in the necessary process here. You're not stupid, so stop overplaying your hand.

I clearly stated that. . .

(a.) God never lowers His standards. We need to keep all the commandments 100% perfectly. If we fail, even in the slightest infraction of God's law, then we are doomed to eternity in Hell. Thus, Jesus is correct in Matthew 19.

(b.) Everyone fails. Therefore, everyone who ever lived is doomed to eternity in Hell.

(c.) Jesus offers Himself as our substitutionary atonement. Jesus fulfills the entire law perfectly in our place. Jesus also takes the punishment that we deserve on our behalf.

(d.) If one places their faith (trust) in Jesus, and surrenders to Him as Lord and Savior ("come, follow Me. . ."), ONLY THEN can one go to Heaven without keeping the commandments, because Jesus does it for us.

A Christian's justification by faith is forensic; not moral. Because it's based on the merit of Christ. Not the merit of the Christian! Jesus was the only One to live a moral life.

doubtingmerle said:
I don't know what Atheists and Christians do in private, and it is none of my business as long as it doesn't hurt others.

Morality isn't limited to what you do in public.

doubtingmerle · Apr 25, 2021

Paulomycin said:
Subjective experience doesn't count.

Rewind.

I had asserted that, "Many people of many religions live good moral lives." You replied that this was a mere assertion on a bus banner, so it does not count as evidence. I replied by explaining to you that it was not something I read on a bus banner. It was something I have observed. Many people of many religions live moral lives.

And your response now? Subjective experience doesn't count! Oh for crying out loud. Of course subjective experience counts. If you declare that non-Christians cannot be moral, and I reply by mentioning non-Christians that I have seen to be moral, then that counts as evidence. You have been shown to be wrong. At least one non-Christian is moral. If I can find one moral non-Christian, then I have shown that it is possible for non-Christians to be moral.

By your own subjectively arbitrary and circular moral standard. Why should I believe you?

No sir, my morality is not circular. My morality is based on our common need for each other, and the need for rules by which people work together. By that standard I am a moral person.

What is your standard of morality? Is morality defined by whatever the Bible says God wants? The Bible says you can't wear fabrics of wool and linen woven together (Deuteronomy 22:11). If a person does that, is he immoral?

Yep. Every rule. Because God's standard is not the rules of hockey.

How do you know that is God's standard? Because the writer of the book of James said so? How do you know that writer was not mistaken?

If you violate Deuteronomy 22:10, and plow with an ox and a donkey yoked together, are you a murderer, a thief, a false witness, and a wearer of two fabrics woven together?

God's standard of morality is 100% absolute sinless perfection. I thought you said you read the Bible.

I did read the Bible. It tells me that David was a man after God's own heart, that Noah was perfect in his generations, and that Lot was a just man, even though each sinned.

Literal surrender. Stop fighting Jesus.

You state this as the requirement to get to heaven.

If God tells a person that is truly surrendered to him to become a missionary in darkest Peru, then that person needs to do it, yes? If God tells him to not wear fabrics of two materials, he must obey, yes? If God tells him to not to want another person's wife, he must make sure that he does not ever want her, even for a second, yes?

Lordship salvation, if truly followed, is much more stringent then salvation based on a few commandments.

You're misrepresenting Lordship Salvation.

What is lordship salvation? | GotQuestions.org

Huh? You say I misrepresent Lordship Salvation, then post a link that says exactly what I said! Unbelievable.

From your link:

Faith must involve a personal commitment to Christ (2 Corinthians 5:15). It is more than being convinced of the truth of the gospel; it is a forsaking of this world and a following of the Master...

Those with genuine faith—those who are submitted to the lordship of Christ—follow Jesus (John 10:27), love their brothers (1 John 3:14), obey God’s commandments (1 John 2:3; John 15:14), do the will of God (Matthew 12:50), abide in God’s Word (John 8:31), keep God’s Word (John 17:6), do good works (Ephesians 2:10), and continue in the faith (Colossians 1:21–23; Hebrews 3:14). Salvation is not adding Jesus to the pantheon of one’s idols; it is a wholesale destruction of the idols with Jesus reigning supreme...

Scripture teaches that Jesus is Lord of all. Christ demands unconditional surrender to His will (Romans 6:17–18; 10:9–10). Those who live in rebellion to God’s will do not have eternal life..

Lordship salvation teaches that if you do not forsake the world, obey the commandments, do good works, and obey his every demand that you will not go to heaven.

"If you don't do these things you will not go to heaven" is logically the same thing as saying you must do these things to go to heaven.

God never lowers His standards. We need to keep all the commandments 100% perfectly. If we fail, even in the slightest infraction of God's law, then we are doomed to eternity in Hell.

Ah, but there is another person posting from your account that stated (in bold, underlined, large font) that we don't need to keep the commandments to go to heaven.

Now this Paulomycin steps into the ring and says we need to keep them 100%.

Are there two of you working as a tag team using your account?

(d.) If one places their faith (trust) in Jesus, and surrenders to Him as Lord and Savior ("come, follow Me. . ."), ONLY THEN can one go to Heaven without keeping the commandments, because Jesus does it for us.

Wait, now you made the tag and the other Paulomycin comes back into the ring? And this Paulomycin says you can get to heaven without keeping the commandments? The Paulomycin that said, "We need to keep all the commandments 100% perfectly" has left the ring defeated?

Am I so good it takes a tag team to beat me?

Paulomycin · Apr 25, 2021

doubtingmerle said:
I had asserted that, "Many people of many religions live good moral lives." You replied that this was a mere assertion on a bus banner, so it does not count as evidence.

You didn't get my historical reference. Forget it.

doubtingmerle said:
I replied by explaining to you that it was not something I read on a bus banner. It was something I have observed. Many people of many religions live moral lives.

So you assume.

doubtingmerle said:
And your response now? Subjective experience doesn't count! Oh for crying out loud. Of course subjective experience counts.

Sorry, but no. It really doesn't. If it did, then atheists wouldn't bother arguing here.

doubtingmerle said:
If you declare that non-Christians cannot be moral, and I reply by mentioning non-Christians that I have seen to be moral, then that counts as evidence. You have been shown to be wrong. At least one non-Christian is moral. If I can find one moral non-Christian, then I have shown that it is possible for non-Christians to be moral.

1. You have no objective evidence of a moral standard.
2. Your (imaginary) moral standard is far lower than the one I hold, which is no less than God's absolute holiness and moral perfection.

doubtingmerle said:
No sir, my morality is not circular. My morality is based on our common need for each other, and the need for rules by which people work together. By that standard I am a moral person.

"common need" = fickle, ambiguous, and measurement varies.
"need for rules" = you have no morally absolute rules to begin with. Pragmatism is never a moral claim.

doubtingmerle said:
What is your standard of morality?

God's nature of absolute holiness and perfection.

doubtingmerle said:
Is morality defined by whatever the Bible says God wants?

No. It's defined by who God is.

doubtingmerle said:
The Bible says you can't wear fabrics of wool and linen woven together (Deuteronomy 22:11). If a person does that, is he immoral?

You mean, "if an orthodox Jew does that, is he immoral?" I'm a Gentile convert. Don't bother considering this or anything. Just knee-jerk reject it as-if you never read the Bible before. You either completely forgot or never read Acts 15.

doubtingmerle said:
How do you know that is God's standard?

Because hockey was invented long after the Bible was finished.

doubtingmerle said:
Because the writer of the book of James said so? How do you know that writer was not mistaken?

The Bible's infallible. Never assume someone is mistaken if there's no evidence of such.

doubtingmerle said:
If you violate Deuteronomy 22:10, and plow with an ox and a donkey yoked together, are you a murderer, a thief, a false witness, and a wearer of two fabrics woven together?

Jews take it a lot more seriously than I did. Maybe there's something to it after all. . .

Dangerous Mixtures - Because these two opposite aspects became joined together, no benefit came to the world. - Ki Teitzei (chabad.org)

doubtingmerle said:
I did read the Bible.

You're only proving you didn't. Listening to a few Sunday Sermons or Sunday School lessons a couple decades ago doesn't give you enough to convincingly fake it.

doubtingmerle said:
It tells me that David was a man after God's own heart, that Noah was perfect in his generations, and that Lot was a just man, even though each sinned.

Mmm-hmm. Yep. You missed something. But you claim you read the Bible. But you don't know what you missed here. Verdict: Faking it.

doubtingmerle said:
You state this as the requirement to get to heaven.

Surrender and trust isn't a meritorious work. It's total dependence.

doubtingmerle said:
If God tells a person that is truly surrendered to him to become a missionary in darkest Peru, then that person needs to do it, yes?

Yes, but not to "earn" heaven.

doubtingmerle said:
If God tells him to not wear fabrics of two materials, he must obey, yes?

If you really read the Bible (instead of faking it), then you meant to say, "If God tells a pre-Acts 15 orthodox Jew to not wear fabrics of two materials, then that pre-Acts 15 orthodox Jew must obey, yes?" <-- Yes.

doubtingmerle said:
If God tells him to not to want another person's wife, he must make sure that he does not ever want her, even for a second, yes?

That one still applies to everyone. And you'd know that if you really read the Bible.

doubtingmerle said:
Lordship salvation, if truly followed, is much more stringent then salvation based on a few commandments.

No. It's only preached by those who teach Justification by (un-merited) Grace through Faith alone.

doubtingmerle said:
Huh? You say I misrepresent Lordship Salvation, then post a link that says exactly what I said!

No, it doesn't.

doubtingmerle said:
From your link:

Faith must involve a personal commitment to Christ (2 Corinthians 5:15). It is more than being convinced of the truth of the gospel; it is a forsaking of this world and a following of the Master...

Those with genuine faith—those who are submitted to the lordship of Christ—follow Jesus (John 10:27), love their brothers (1 John 3:14), obey God’s commandments (1 John 2:3; John 15:14), do the will of God (Matthew 12:50), abide in God’s Word (John 8:31), keep God’s Word (John 17:6), do good works (Ephesians 2:10), and continue in the faith (Colossians 1:21–23; Hebrews 3:14). Salvation is not adding Jesus to the pantheon of one’s idols; it is a wholesale destruction of the idols with Jesus reigning supreme...

Scripture teaches that Jesus is Lord of all. Christ demands unconditional surrender to His will (Romans 6:17–18; 10:9–10). Those who live in rebellion to God’s will do not have eternal life..

Lordship salvation teaches that if you do not forsake the world, obey the commandments, do good works, and obey his every demand that you will not go to heaven.

No, you're reading into it. None of what you posted "earns" the right to go to heaven. There's a huge difference that you're (deliberately) overlooking here: Lordship salvation teaches that if you do not forsake the world, obey the commandments, do good works, and obey his every demand, then you never really trusted Christ alone by Grace through Faith alone to begin with. It doesn't even say you have to obey perfectly! You just have to have your priorities straight. It's simply saying that Christianity is not license to sin all you want! "Easy-believism" is just another form of Antinomianism, or license to sin.

What is “easy-believism”? (monergism.com)

doubtingmerle said:
"If you don't do these things you will not go to heaven" is logically the same thing as saying you must do these things to go to heaven.

^ But not to "earn" heaven. This is where you're not paying attention. Genuine faith and dependency on Christ will do the good works. <-- But the works themselves don't "do" anything. They don't earn anything. You don't go to heaven on your merit. Ever. It's just saying the believer will become more conformed to Christ and will behave like Christ. If you're not behaving like Christ, then there's a problem.

I know you'll probably avoid answering this, but I'm just wondering out-loud if you were raised in a heretical religion that taught salvation was earned.

doubtingmerle said:
Ah, but there is another person posting from your account that stated (in bold, underlined, large font) that we don't need to keep the commandments to go to heaven.

Now this Paulomycin steps into the ring and says we need to keep them 100%.

Now you're taking my words out of context.

Once again. . .

Paulomycin said:
You're simply (and deliberately) failing to include every-single-step in the necessary process here. You're not stupid, so stop overplaying your hand.

I clearly stated that. . .

(a.) God never lowers His standards. We need to keep all the commandments 100% perfectly. If we fail, even in the slightest infraction of God's law, then we are doomed to eternity in Hell. Thus, Jesus is correct in Matthew 19.

(b.) Everyone fails. Therefore, everyone who ever lived is doomed to eternity in Hell.

(c.) Jesus offers Himself as our substitutionary atonement. Jesus fulfills the entire law perfectly in our place. Jesus also takes the punishment that we deserve on our behalf.

(d.) If one places their faith (trust) in Jesus, and surrenders to Him as Lord and Savior ("come, follow Me. . ."), ONLY THEN can one go to Heaven without keeping the commandments, because Jesus does it for us.

A Christian's justification by faith is forensic; not moral. Because it's based on the merit of Christ. Not the merit of the Christian! Jesus was the only One to live a moral life.

^ You completely blew past this.

doubtingmerle said:
Are there two of you working as a tag team using your account?

No. The record shows you're completely ignoring my posts and I'm down to repeating myself ad nauseum.

doubtingmerle · Apr 25, 2021

Paulomycin said:
So you assume.

You say this in response to, "Many people of many religions live moral lives." No sir, that is not a mere assumption. I have explained to you twice now that I know non-Christians can be moral because I have seen moral non-Christians. It is not simply an assumption.

Your (imaginary) moral standard is far lower than the one I hold, which is no less than God's absolute holiness and moral perfection.

And how do you know God's moral standard? From reading the Bible? And yet the Bible is full of contradictions. How can that be authoritatively telling you God's standard?

The Bible says that God commanded Saul to kill Amalekite babies. Do you agree with me that it was immoral to kill Amalekite babies?

You mean, "if an orthodox Jew does that, is he immoral?" I'm a Gentile convert. Don't bother considering this or anything. Just knee-jerk reject it as-if you never read the Bible before. You either completely forgot or never read Acts 15.

Let's look at Acts 15.

Acts 15:5 says:

But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed, saying, That it was needful to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses.

These Pharisees agreed with Jesus on this point. Jesus taught:

Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat:
All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not. Matthew 23:2-3

Acts 15 goes on to say that James responded:

Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God:
But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood. Acts 15:19-20

James and Jesus disagree. Who should I go by?

And if I eat meat from a cow that was strangled, have I sinned?

Because hockey was invented long after the Bible was finished.

The rules of hockey make sense: If you do one infraction, you pay for that infraction only.

If an otherwise perfect man spends one second wanting another man's wife is he guilty of murder, kidnapping, and plowing with an ox and donkey together? That simply makes no sense.

The Bible's infallible. Never assume someone is mistaken if there's no evidence of such.

How can a book with contradictory demands for salvation be infallible?

Jews take it a lot more seriously than I did. Maybe there's something to it after all. . .

Dangerous Mixtures - Because these two opposite aspects became joined together, no benefit came to the world. - Ki Teitzei (chabad.org)

You are going to take the command not to mix wool and linen metaphorically? And the laws forbidding killing, robbery and false witness are also just metaphor? Sorry, if they are intended as metaphor, the author of Deuteronomy should have said so.

Surrender and trust isn't a meritorious work. It's total dependence.

Your "Lordship Salvation" is like buying a car with no money down and saying you got a free car. No, that car is not free. It requires you to be bound by a contract with perhaps years of costly payments. Likewise, Lordship Salvation is not free if it requires you to sign a contract with thousands of demands on your every activity after that.

No, it doesn't.

Yes it does. Again this is what your link says:

Faith must involve a personal commitment to Christ (2 Corinthians 5:15). It is more than being convinced of the truth of the gospel; it is a forsaking of this world and a following of the Master...

Those with genuine faith—those who are submitted to the lordship of Christ—follow Jesus (John 10:27), love their brothers (1 John 3:14), obey God’s commandments (1 John 2:3; John 15:14), do the will of God (Matthew 12:50), abide in God’s Word (John 8:31), keep God’s Word (John 17:6), do good works (Ephesians 2:10), and continue in the faith (Colossians 1:21–23; Hebrews 3:14). Salvation is not adding Jesus to the pantheon of one’s idols; it is a wholesale destruction of the idols with Jesus reigning supreme...

Scripture teaches that Jesus is Lord of all. Christ demands unconditional surrender to His will (Romans 6:17–18; 10:9–10). Those who live in rebellion to God’s will do not have eternal life..

Which is exactly what I said Lordship Salvation teaches. It teaches that, if you do not obey certain commands, you do not have eternal life. That is the same thing as saying you need to obey these commands to have eternal life.

Lordship Salvation might be "no money down", but have you looked into the monthly payments?

No, you're reading into it. None of what you posted "earns" the right to go to heaven. There's a huge difference that you're (deliberately) overlooking here: Lordship salvation teaches that if you do not forsake the world, obey the commandments, do good works, and obey his every demand, then you never really trusted Christ alone by Grace through Faith alone to begin with.

Sir, I am not asking you what you need to do to earn salvation. I am asking what you need to do to go to heaven. I have told you that many times in this thread. Would you like me to repeat that a few more times for your benefit?

It doesn't even say you have to obey perfectly! You just have to have your priorities straight.

If one surrenders to Jesus as Lord, but does not do what he says, has he surrendered?(Matthew 7:21)

Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.(Matthew 7:21)

^ But not to "earn" heaven. This is where you're not paying attention. Genuine faith and dependency on Christ will do the good works. <-- But the works themselves don't "do" anything. They don't earn anything. You don't go to heaven on your merit. Ever.

Sir, I am not asking you what you need to do to earn salvation. I am asking what you need to do to go to heaven. I have told you that many times in this thread. Would you like me to repeat that a few more times for your benefit?

I know you'll probably avoid answering this, but I'm just wondering out-loud if you were raised in a heretical religion that taught salvation was earned.

I was in a group that extremely emphasized salvation by faith alone. I accepted Christ after reading the tract What Must I Do to be Saved? God's Plan of Salvation - John R. Rice (wholesomewords.org). I long considered that as the best description I knew of salvation.

Paulomycin · Apr 25, 2021

doubtingmerle said:
No sir, that is not a mere assumption. I have explained to you twice now that I know non-Christians can be moral because I have seen moral non-Christians. It is not simply an assumption.

You have no objective evidence of the claim of morality. Therefore, it's totally an assumption.

doubtingmerle said:
And how do you know God's moral standard? From reading the Bible? And yet the Bible is full of contradictions. How can that be authoritatively telling you God's standard?

No. You're eisegetically assuming "full of contradictions." Not all paradoxical statements are true contradictions. Sometimes paradoxes are solvable. Creative editorializing and quotemining doesn't magically create contradictions either.

doubtingmerle said:
The Bible says that God commanded Saul to kill Amalekite babies. Do you agree with me that it was immoral to kill Amalekite babies?

I don't agree at all. Total war is like that. Also, God can declare judgment on humanity by any means He chooses. It's not murder because it's an act of judgement on Total Depravity. I already argued this to death with Clizby. Do you realize how many years atheists have been trying to trip me up with your little appeal to emotion fallacy?

doubtingmerle said:
Let's look at Acts 15.

Acts 15:5 says:

But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed, saying, That it was needful to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses.

These Pharisees agreed with Jesus on this point. Jesus taught:

Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat:
All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not. Matthew 23:2-3

Acts 15 goes on to say that James responded:

Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God:
But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood. Acts 15:19-20

James and Jesus disagree. Who should I go by?

James and Jesus both agree on Jews. You're missing the actual subject here.

doubtingmerle said:
And if I eat meat from a cow that was strangled, have I sinned?

Not if you're a Gentile, who are held to a lower standard. Thus, the concept of the "moral law" as separate from the wider set of Mosaic and Levitical laws. Look here:

Romans 2:12 - "For as many as have sinned without law will also perish without law, and as many as have sinned in the law will be judged by the law. . ."

Romans 2:14 - "for when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do the things in the law, these, although not having the law, are a law to themselves,"

Romans 2:15 - "[again, Gentiles] show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and between themselves their thoughts accusing or else excusing them)"

doubtingmerle said:
The rules of hockey make sense: If you do one infraction, you pay for that infraction only.

But other sports are more strict than that. Particularly individual Olympic qualifiers. One little mistake figure skating, and you're done for the season. Oh, and how about speed-skating? Or ski jumping? <-- You have to be near-perfect just to survive the jump itself. The ancient Greek compares it to the sport of archery, as their word for sin was a word in their competition meaning "to miss the mark." <-- It's their analogies that count. Not yours.

doubtingmerle said:
If an otherwise perfect man spends one second wanting another man's wife is he guilty of murder, kidnapping, and plowing with an ox and donkey together? That simply makes no sense.

It's pretty much a domino-effect. See, your hypothetical man must necessarily covet to want another man's wife, which violates your fellow man as the "imago Dei." Which is also a form of theft, etc. etc. According to the scripture you merely claim to have read, one can never do just one sin.

James 2:10 - "For whoever shall keep the whole law, and yet stumble in one point, he is guilty of all."

doubtingmerle said:
How can a book with contradictory demands for salvation be infallible?

Because you're eisegetically forcing contradictions into the text to justify your atheism.

doubtingmerle said:
You are going to take the command not to mix wool and linen metaphorically? And the laws forbidding killing, robbery and false witness are also just metaphor? Sorry, if they are intended as metaphor, the author of Deuteronomy should have said so.

I never said "metaphor." The link to chabad.org didn't say "metaphor."

doubtingmerle said:
Your "Lordship Salvation" is like buying a car with no money down and saying you got a free car. No, that car is not free. It requires you to be bound by a contract with perhaps years of costly payments. Likewise, Lordship Salvation is not free if it requires you to sign a contract with thousands of demands on your every activity after that.

When did I say you "bought" anything? Did you forget that I am a Calvinist? There's no contractual obligation. You're either a sheep or a goat. You're either wheat or chaff. You're either still a slave of sin, or Christ bought you out of sin. "Jesus paid it all, all to Him I owe; sin hath left a crimson stain, He washed it white as snow."

Gratitude is not earned.

John 15:4-5, Romans 11:17-24. If you're grafted into the True Vine (Christ), then you'll bear good fruit (works). Every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit (Matt 7:17). You're not obligated to make yourself bear fruit to earn the status of "tree-ness," or to earn getting planted in the orchard. It will just naturally be part of the nature of the tree to bear fruit.

doubtingmerle said:
Yes it does. Again this is what your link says:

Faith must involve a personal commitment to Christ (2 Corinthians 5:15). It is more than being convinced of the truth of the gospel; it is a forsaking of this world and a following of the Master...

Those with genuine faith—those who are submitted to the lordship of Christ—follow Jesus (John 10:27), love their brothers (1 John 3:14), obey God’s commandments (1 John 2:3; John 15:14), do the will of God (Matthew 12:50), abide in God’s Word (John 8:31), keep God’s Word (John 17:6), do good works (Ephesians 2:10), and continue in the faith (Colossians 1:21–23; Hebrews 3:14). Salvation is not adding Jesus to the pantheon of one’s idols; it is a wholesale destruction of the idols with Jesus reigning supreme...

Scripture teaches that Jesus is Lord of all. Christ demands unconditional surrender to His will (Romans 6:17–18; 10:9–10). Those who live in rebellion to God’s will do not have eternal life..

As a natural habit of living. Again, "fruit." Nowhere ^ here does it say that obedience is the way to "earn" or "merit" heaven. You're reading a contradiction into it from an assumed outside bias on your part.

doubtingmerle said:
Which is exactly what I said Lordship Salvation teaches. It teaches that, if you do not obey certain commands, you do not have eternal life.

Correct. Are you even paying attention to your own wording here? Because if you do not obey at all, then you were never saved to begin with. It was only a superficial profession of faith, or an insincere profession of faith. But it never says that obedience earns salvation. it is the SIGN of true salvation, i.e. "fruit of righteousness."

That is the same thing as saying you need to obey these commands to have eternal life.

doubtingmerle said:
Sir, I am not asking you what you need to do to earn salvation. I am asking what you need to do to go to heaven.

Heaven is the final stage of true salvation called "glorification." You claim to know Christianity, but you crash & burn over and over again.

doubtingmerle said:
If one surrenders to Jesus as Lord, but does not do what he says, has he surrendered?(Matthew 7:21)

Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.(Matthew 7:21)

The answer is, "evidently not." "Zero fruit" = a false profession of faith. See? That verse doesn't say heaven is earned either. Jesus is simply stating a brute fact.

doubtingmerle said:
Sir, I am not asking you what you need to do to earn salvation. I am asking what you need to do to go to heaven.

Heaven is the final stage of true salvation. Please stop repeating yourself.

doubtingmerle said:
I was in a group that extremely emphasized salvation by faith alone. I accepted Christ after reading the tract What Must I Do to be Saved? God's Plan of Salvation - John R. Rice (wholesomewords.org). I long considered that as the best description I knew of salvation.

*checking link*

*checking pastoral background*

You were raised under a merit-based (works) soteriology. You were taught that the one work of choosing faith saved you, as opposed to others who didn't choose. As a child, I was initially raised under a similar set of pastors, and drew the exact same conclusions you did. I was an atheist (existential absurdism) for a few years after that. If the gospel was the way you understood it, then I'd still be an atheist.

I don't blame you at all. I blame your church. *hugs*

Now that I understand where you're coming from, it makes more sense. Thank you for having the courage to share with me.

Which Commandments?

Newbie

I'll think about it.

I'll think about it.

Well-Known Member

Married Mouth-Breather

I'll think about it.

Well-Known Member

I'll think about it.

Well-Known Member

I'll think about it.

Well-Known Member

I'll think about it.

I'll think about it.

Newbie

I'll think about it.

Well-Known Member

I'll think about it.

Well-Known Member

I'll think about it.

Well-Known Member

Similar threads