Paul VS Jesus

[dvd_holc]

Ultimately, God is the only who invest his presence in people. No one will not respond to him unless God is with them....as my other family members have pointed out.

 

[CrazyforYeshua]

Jesus' resurrection didn't prove who He was, it confirmed it. He spoke all thru His ministry of who He was, why He was here, and what He would do. When He rose from the dead, it just showed all that believed in Him that He was right-He was who He said He was.

 

[Faith In God]

Others have done that, as well. But "the meat of the issue" is not related to the questions I ask, so I never actually get answers.

Sorry.

To begin, were Jesus' claims true?

Yes.

 

[I_are_sceptical]

Sorry.

How others behave is not your fault.

Were Jesus' claims true before He died on the Cross?

 

[CrazyforYeshua]

Yeshuas' claims were always true, His works proved that.

 

[I_are_sceptical]

Yeshuas' claims were always true, His works proved that.

Were His claims true before He did any works?

 

[Faith In God]

How others behave is not your fault.

Were Jesus' claims true before He died on the Cross?

Yes.

Were His claims true before He did any works?

He did not lie, so yes, His claims were true before He worked.

 

[I_are_sceptical]

He did not lie, so yes, His claims were true before He worked.

If Jesus had not been bodily raised from the dead would His true claims have become false?

 

[CrazyforYeshua]

He is God in the flesh, so every claim He made would have been true, regardless.

 

[dvd_holc]

If Jesus had not been bodily raised from the dead would His true claims have become false?

I agree with CrazyforYeshua, but I want to add that the resurrection of Jesus is a still a vindication of several things two of which is what is the true temple of God and Jesus' way of being is the true way.

 

[I_are_sceptical]

Okay, thank you.

 

[Faith In God]

He is God in the flesh, so every claim He made would have been true, regardless

I disagree. Christians start from the fact of Jesus being divine and work backwards, and that is not how testing truisms work.

If Jesus had not been bodily raised from the dead would His true claims have become false?

No.
But!
Here's the thing:

One of Jesus' claims concerned what would happen to Him in the future (paramount being the resurrection). It technically could not be true unless it was fulfilled.

Therefore, if one of His key prophecies didn't come to pass, He lied. If He lied, He wasn't God, and no matter how true His other claims were, He was not the Savior if He was not God (if He wasn't the Savior, His other claims don't matter: just another man).

How'd I do that time?
The point I'm making is that Paul was right: the Hope of the Christian does lie very squarely on the resurrection, because if it didn't happen, He was not God (ie the Center of the Gospel).

 

[visionary]

You should never compare Yeshua with Paul. Paul will have to bow out everytime as He should in the presence of God.

Ephesians 2:10
For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.

Doesn't say Paul

Ephesians 3:9
And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ:

It wasn't Paul who created, Paul is just a commentator on the subject. It is the Pharasee in him to be that way, making faith difficult to undersand sometimes

Ephesians 4:24
And that ye put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness.

Here is where we should be heading in our faith, putting on a new man created in God's righteousness and true holiness, not man's

 

[I_are_sceptical]

butxifxnot
It seems to me that CrazyforYeshua and dvd_holc trust Jesus, and believe that His claims are true because He says they are. They are the first Christians ever who have said that to me, and I was so happily surprised that I was speechless.

If you want me to respond to your post:
1. "No but" is not "no" and it is not "yes", therefore you did not answer my question.
2. Your entire argument is in your own words. What did Jesus have to say on this issue? Another way to put it would be - how reliable are statements in your words? Are they equally as reliable as Jesus' words?
3. You said "no matter how true His other claims were" and "His other claims don't matter". Personally I feel that if Jesus made a true claim it matters, even if none of us get our sins forgiven and go to Heaven.

 

[Faith In God]

butxifxnot
It seems to me that CrazyforYeshua and dvd_holc trust Jesus, and believe that His claims are true because He says they are. They are the first Christians ever who have said that to me, and I was so happily surprised that I was speechless.

Hm. Yes, I trust Jesus, but I am speaking to one who presumably does not share my presumption of Jesus is Christ first. For me, it is confirmation.
For you to whom I am speaking, it is a proof for an argument: that Jesus is God. I already have my conclusion, you do not.

I am appreciating the steps that you must go through in order to find the truth for yourself rather than force truth down your throat because it is my conviction.

If you want me to respond to your post:
1. "No but" is not "no" and it is not "yes", therefore you did not answer my question.

Yes, I did. You are just working with symantics.

If Jesus spoke truth, it is truth.

I believe He spoke truth. I have started from there and my own studies continue to confirm it. Most Christians are the same. However, we can't speak to non-Christians only on our own terms: we assume Christ is God: non-Christians do not. We (for the most part) assume the Bible is God's word. Non-believers do not.

So:
Jesus' claims were true.

"But"

By "but" I mean "here is an important point you can't miss":

One of Jesus' claims concerned what would happen to Him in the future (paramount being the resurrection). It technically could not be true unless it was fulfilled.

Therefore, if one of His key prophecies didn't come to pass, He lied. If He lied, He wasn't God, and no matter how true His other claims were, He was not the Savior if He was not God (if He wasn't the Savior, His other claims don't matter: just another man).

For your understanding (ie if you aren't a believer) you must start from "Jesus: was He God or not?"

IF
He lied, He wasn't God.

Time tested His claims and revealed that He did speak truth.

THEREFORE, Jesus' claims were true, and the cross and resurrection proved it.

How about now?

I am doing this for the benefit of unbelievers, not Christians.

2. Your entire argument is in your own words. What did Jesus have to say on this issue? Another way to put it would be - how reliable are statements in your words? Are they equally as reliable as Jesus' words?

Well, test it:
Does it make sense? Is it logical? These are questions you must ask.

As a Bible-based person, I must also ask if it is in line with the Bible, but you don't have to, because you (I'm guessing) don't exalt the Bible as the Word of God.

Sometimes I use the Bible more than others. Right now, I am proving a point extrabiblically for the sake of non-believers.

3. You said "no matter how true His other claims were" and "His other claims don't matter". Personally I feel that if Jesus made a true claim it matters, even if none of us get our sins forgiven and go to Heaven.

Yes. But don't take me out of context.

No matter how true His other claims were, if He wasn't God, He wasn't the Savior, the very core of the Christian religion.

PS May I ask what religion you are?

 

[I_are_sceptical]

May I ask what religion you are?

I belong to the Baha'i Faith.

you (I'm guessing) don't exalt the Bible as the Word of God.

If you're asking if I base my religious beliefs on the Bible, no I do not. But I think that a discussion of what the Bible does or does not teach should be based on the Bible, not the personal opinions of Christians.

By "but" I mean "here is an important point you can't miss"

Okay, are you saying that Jesus' claims about Himself are true no matter what Paul or anyone else says? That Christian beliefs should be based on the teachings of Jesus Christ alone?

For your understanding (ie if you aren't a believer) you must start from "Jesus: was He God or not?"

Who says that's where I "must" start? Who is making these decisions that I am required to obey?

How about now?

If you are asking me if you have succeeded in convincing me that I should accept your interpretation of a statement made by Paul as God's Will for my life, no you have not. You persist in ignoring what Jesus says. Try quoting Him in support of your arguments. That will get my attention.

You are just working with symantics.

I disagree. "Jesus' claims are true but" means "Jesus' claims are true some of the time and also false some of the time".
"I trust Jesus but" means "I trust Jesus only if Paul agrees with Him. Otherwise I ignore Jesus and follow Paul as my spiritual guide".
That's certainly how contemporary Christian doctrine sounds to me.

 

[Faith In God]

I belong to the Baha'i Faith.

If you're asking if I base my religious beliefs on the Bible, no I do not. But I think that a discussion of what the Bible does or does not teach should be based on the Bible, not the personal opinions of Christians.

Yup. In fact, our personal opinions should be shaped by the Bible. That'll make some radicals.

Okay, are you saying that Jesus' claims about Himself are true no matter what Paul or anyone else says? That Christian beliefs should be based on the teachings of Jesus Christ alone?

True.

Who says that's where I "must" start? Who is making these decisions that I am required to obey?

No one is. But if you aren't a Christian, odds are, you won't come to the question assuming that Jesus is God before setting out to find out if He is. It's just common sense.

If you are asking me if you have succeeded in convincing me that I should accept your interpretation of a statement made by Paul as God's Will for my life, no you have not.

Are you reading my posts?

I don't mean to be rude, but when you reply, could you quote the whole of my posts to give me the feeling that you are indeed reading what I'm writing? Because it seems like you are missing what I'm saying...

Help me out here.

You persist in ignoring what Jesus says. Try quoting Him in support of your arguments. That will get my attention.

I am not ignoring Him: what gave you that impression?
John 11:37-38
"Do not believe me unless I do what my Father does. But if I do it, even though you do not believe me, believe the miracles, that you may know and understand that the Father is in me, and I in the Father."
Jesus preached in the same manner I am preaching now: if you want to know if Jesus was God, reflect on Him. Does He do what God the Father does?
Does He heal? Love? Forgive? Preach repentance?

Does He lie?
IF
(notice how both He and I use this word)
He does lie, He is not God.

One of His miracles was His prediction of His death. That came to pass as well, though no one knew it until it happened.

So, for your benefit, I challenge you to see if Christ is not God: that is how confidant I am that Christ is God and Savior.

I disagree. "Jesus' claims are true but" means "Jesus' claims are true some of the time and also false some of the time".

This confirms my suspicion that you aren't reading all of my posts. Please at least fool me by quoting all of my words. "Jesus' claims are true"

BUT

Some of them were about future events, so they tested His truthfulness.

Please note:
1) the BUT does not negate the first statement
2) I have not mentioned Paul nor any of his distinct doctrines (if that really matters to you)
3) I am taking the non-Christian's point of view before my own, so you will see some "ifs" and "proofs".

"I trust Jesus but" means "I trust Jesus only if Paul agrees with Him. Otherwise I ignore Jesus and follow Paul as my spiritual guide".
That's certainly how contemporary Christian doctrine sounds to me.

My first and really only comment on Paul (this is separate from the rest of the post):
I am of the conviction that if you follow Paul, you will be following Christ along the way, for Paul was a follower of Christ himself. Heeding Paul by no means constitutes ignoring Jesus.
If you want to discuss that, go right ahead: right now, the discussion has to do with Jesus' claims.

 

[I_are_sceptical]

True.

Okay, thank you. That's all I wanted to know.

right now, the discussion has to do with Jesus' claims.

I'm done here.

 

[Faith In God]

I'm done here.

I don't know what to say except that if I didn't answer your question, I did my best and don't know how you couldn't (if you didn't) glean the answer from my effords; God bless.