Paul: Devout witness or opportunistic Messiah-maker?

[jmullaney]

*Originally posted by DAVEW0071 *
I still don’t know what you mean by “old” laws and “new” laws

What, do I have to post the entire Gospels here? ::sigh:: OK, this isn’t everything. You should read them again and study, and probably ignore the commentaries as they may come from the devil, but here are the important parts:

" Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
20 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.
21 "You have heard that it was said to the people long ago, Do not murder, and anyone who murders will be subject to judgment.' 22 But I tell you that anyone who is angry with his brother will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to his brother, Raqa’ is
answerable to the Sanhedrin. But anyone who says, You fool!' will be in danger of the fire of hell. 23 "Therefore, if you are offering your gift at the altar and there remember that your brother has something against you, 24 leave your gift there in front of the altar. First go and be reconciled to your brother; then come and offer your gift. 25 "Settle matters quickly with your adversary who is taking you to court. Do it while you are still with him on the way, or he may hand you over to the judge, and the judge may hand you over to the officer, and you may be thrown into prison. 26 I tell you the truth, you will not get out until you have paid the last penny. 27 "You have heard that it was said, Do not commit adultery.’
28 But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.
29 If your right eye causes you to sin, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your
whole body to be thrown into hell.
30 And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your
whole body to go into hell.
31 "It has been said, Anyone who divorces his wife must give her a certificate of divorce.' 32 But I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, causes her to become an adulteress, and anyone who marries the divorced woman commits adultery. 33 "Again, you have heard that it was said to the people long ago, Do not break your oath, but keep the oaths you have made to the
Lord.’
34 But I tell you, Do not swear at all: either by heaven, for it is God’s throne;
35 or by the earth, for it is his footstool; or by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the Great King.
36 And do not swear by your head, for you cannot make even one hair white or black.
37 Simply let your Yes' be Yes,’ and your No,' No’; anything beyond this comes from the evil one.
38 “You have heard that it was said, Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.' 39 But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. 40 And if someone wants to sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. 41 If someone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. 42 Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you. 43 "You have heard that it was said, Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’
44 But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you,
45 that you may be sons of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and
the unrighteous.
46 If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that?
47 And if you greet only your brothers, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that?
48 Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.”

Now, wait, wait. I’m still lacking something here – let me think… Oh yeah…

"Now a man came up to Jesus and asked, “Teacher, what good thing must I do to get eternal life?”
17 “Why do you ask me about what is good?” Jesus replied. “There is only One who is good. If you want to enter life, obey the
commandments.”
18 “Which ones?” the man inquired. Jesus replied, "Do not murder, do not commit adultery, do not steal, do not give false testimony, 19 honor your father and mother,' and love your neighbor as yourself.’ "
20 “All these I have kept,” the young man said. “What do I still lack?”
21 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.”

since they have recognized and accepted Jesus as Lord of all, their lives should be guided by the Holy Spirit, and they would seek to live as God would have them live.

Yeah, you’d think so.

[DAVEW0071]

Thanks for reiterating a large chunk of the Sermon on the Mount. But these are not “new laws”. Jesus was making the point that, even though people had these laws for ages, they didn’t realize how high God’s standards really are, and how impossible it was to live up to them (and thereby gain God’s righteousness through works).

Jesus, by saying, in effect, that even thinking poisonous thoughts about someone is tantamount to murder, is pointing out that there is something wrong with us that we cannot, on our own, or by “following rules” and “being good”, fix. He was pointing out the futility of legalistic religion.

Being “perfect” is not the point, either. Or maybe it is, since we can’t be perfect. Then why was Jesus giving instructions that were impossible to follow? I believe, to point out what Paul points out in Romans 3. That is, the law is there to make sin known to us, and our subsequent need for a redeemer.

As to your final point, I don’t quite understand you. Is this a comment on hypocrisy in the Christian Church? Or on man’s failing to live up to the standards of God and Christ, even if he has professed faith in Christ? Ironic, I agree. But not unique, and I, for one, don’t wish to judge the condition of anyone else’s faith, their works notwithstanding. That’s not my place.

As to commentaries, I’ll choose judiciously and ask for advice from those better educated than I, thank you. I don’t believe I’ll be led astray into heretical teachings in my quest for greater understanding. I am confident that I have a secure enough grounding in the tenets of my faith to recognize spiritual lies when they’re presented to me.

[Spider_Woman]

My impression of law is not that it is an end in itself, but rather a tool to enable people to live together more easily; law seems to be the basis of civilization. My probably over-simplified view of the Ten Commandements was that they served as a survival tool to allow the Israelites to come safely through the desert. Most of them were common sense type laws IMHO but apparently people needed to be reminded so that they would not do things to cause other people to want to murder them. There were enough hazards in the wilderness without having to deal with the Children of Israel harming each other.

[Homer]

I just want to know why this hyperlink keeps showing up in a different color than any of the others. It’s a lighter blue shade than anything else.

–Tim

[DAVEW0071]

Spider Woman, I think you are over-simplifying the concept of God’s laws, but I also think it’s a good start. You’re on the right track.

God was in the process of leading Israel to the Promised Land, to fulfill his promise to Abraham. They had been slaves in Egypt for hundreds of years, and didn’t know how to govern themselves, certainly not according to God’s standards. So God was setting up their community, and to do so, had to establish laws. You’re right on that part.

But there’s much more to it, which I can’t begin to get into. Just for starters, Commandment I, in which the entire concept of monotheism (which the Egyptians didn’t have) is presented.

But since it carries through into the New Testament (and even today), the laws had much more significance than that. Specifically, Paul (and less directly, Jesus, as I attempted to point out in my most recent post) maintain that the law is more than just a method of maintaining societal order. It is a way of showing the gulf that exists between God’s perfection and righteousness and man’s imperfection and unrighteousness. Jesus and Paul, rather than saying, “Follow these rules and you’ll be just fine” are saying instead, “Since you can’t possibly follow these rules, you need another way of reconciling yourself to God.” That way being faith in Jesus.

This does not change the significance of the laws for Christians, however. They are still God’s standards of behavior. They are not supplanted or meant to be ignored just because faith, not works, saves us. (This seems to be the nub of contention between myself and jmullaney)

[jmullaney]

*Originally posted by DAVEW0071 *
But these are not “new laws”.

Really? I don’t remember these teachings in the Old Testiment.

Jesus was making the point that, even though people had these laws for ages, they didn’t realize how high God’s standards really are, and how impossible it was to live up to them (and thereby gain God’s righteousness through works).

Wait a minute. You said earlier that you should not sin to make grace abound so much more. No you are saying it is impossible to live without sin – and are implying that, as such a thing is impossible, that man should not even bother trying. Which completely contradicts what you said earlier.

Being “perfect” is not the point, either. Or maybe it is, since we can’t be perfect.

Who says you can not be perfect? Jesus commanded us to be perfect – this is plainly so. Now you are saying such a thing is impossible. Please explain you reasoning.

Then why was Jesus giving instructions that were impossible to follow?

Again, why are these instructions impossible to follow? You just said man should strive not to sin in order to please God.

the law is there to make sin known to us, and our subsequent need for a redeemer.

Yeah, so?

Is this a comment on hypocrisy in the Christian Church?

No. The Church keeps Christ’s teachings. There are many False churches of course. But the true Church keeps Christ’s teachings (although, you claim this is impossible, I think they might take issue with your assertion).

Or on man’s failing to live up to the standards of God and Christ, even if he has professed faith in Christ?

If you have faith, you keep the new commandments given to us by Christ.

I, for one, don’t wish to judge the condition of anyone else’s faith, their works notwithstanding.

Ah, but by their fruits you shall know them. How can you help but know who has the Faith and who does not? You just said that those who have faith would show this through their works, did you not?

I fail to see how you can say what Christ taught is a mere encapsulation of the original ten commandments from God. Christ’s teachings are a fulfillment of these commandments as his teachings as a whole go beyond a legalistic understand of each one individually. Through following his teachings, and only through these, you would have eternal life. Otherwise, you will not. Anyone who claims to follow Jesus should not claim following him is impossible, as this is a logical contradiction.

[DAVEW0071]

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by jmullaney *

*Originally posted by DAVEW0071 *
But these are not “new laws”.(Dave)
Really? I don’t remember these teachings in the Old Testiment.(jmullany)

Not in so many words, and my follow-up statement, below, explains my thinking. I maintain that Jesus was making commentary on the existing laws, making people realize that the law is what separates every person from God, not what separates the “good” people from the “bad”. Paul also recognizes this by saying “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.”

Jesus was making the point that, even though people had these laws for ages, they didn’t realize how high God’s standards really are, and how impossible it was to live up to them (and thereby gain God’s righteousness through works).(Dave)
Wait a minute. You said earlier that you should not sin to make grace abound so much more. No you are saying it is impossible to live without sin – and are implying that, as such a thing is impossible, that man should not even bother trying. Which completely contradicts what you said earlier.(jmullaney)

Those are Paul’s words, not mine, regarding grace abounding. I never implied that we shouldn’t bother trying. You did. I stated that God’s laws are not supplanted or meant to be ignored. I also did not say that we should not even bother trying to obey them, I said the opposite. You are either suffering a faulty memory, or you are deliberately misquoting me on this. Paul also says, about himself, that he is “chief among sinners”, and that he knows and desires to do what is right, and yet he does what he knows to be wrong. Paul’s desire was to be obedient to God and please God, but he recognized that he was still a man, and subject to sin. This in no way compromised Paul’s faith, however, nor his resolve to act without sin so as to please God.

Being “perfect” is not the point, either. Or maybe it is, since we can’t be perfect. (Dave)
Who says you can not be perfect? Jesus commanded us to be perfect – this is plainly so. Now you are saying such a thing is impossible. Please explain you reasoning.{jmullaney)

You have taken Jesus’ injunction to be perfect, as God is perfect, out of context. The passage form the Sermon on the Mount has Jesus telling his listeners that it’s not enough to be good to those who are good to you. Anybody is willing to do that. He exhorts us to love our enemies. he gives the example of God making the sun shine on both the evil and good, and the rain to fall on the righteous and the unrighteous. Don’t be like the pagans, he says, but be perfect (in a mature spiritual sense) in the same way the heavenly Father is perfect, i.e. showing kindness and love even to your enemies.

Then why was Jesus giving instructions that were impossible to follow? (Dave)
Again, why are these instructions impossible to follow? You just said man should strive not to sin in order to please God. (jmullaney)

I asked the question to show the irony of such an instruction. Besides, striving to please God does not guarantee success. Let me ask you, since you seem to think such an instruction is not impossible: Are you, personally, sinless and perfect? Do you never even think angry, lustful or selfish thoughts? Ever? This is part of my point. Although wanting to please God, and trying to avoid sin is what Christians should do, they are bound to fail, simply because they are human. The point I made (and which Paul makes too) is that failing does not condemn us if we know that God forgives us through Jesus. However, knowing that we will fail from time to time should not discourage us from attempting to live virtuously. It’s like a race. Everone entring knows that there will be only one winner. But they strive to win anyway. They finish the race even if they are well behind the winner. No one says, “only one person can win, so the odds are aginst me, I won’t even try.”

the law is there to make sin known to us, and our subsequent need for a redeemer. (Dave)
Yeah, so?(jmullaney)

Yeah, so…following the law does not save us. Faith, not works, saves us. Works, as you point out below, is a way that faith can be shown.

Is this a comment on hypocrisy in the Christian Church? (Dave)
No. The Church keeps Christ’s teachings. There are many False churches of course. But the true Church keeps Christ’s teachings (although, you claim this is impossible, I think they might take issue with your assertion). (jmullaney)

Again, does the Church keep Christ’s teachings 100% of the time? And does failure or backsliding condemn them? Or can there be a repentance and a return to Christ even by a body of believers? The Church is an earthly institution with a heavenly purpose. But it’s made up of people; those same people who struggle with sin every day. They are not infallible.

Or on man’s failing to live up to the standards of God and Christ, even if he has professed faith in Christ? (Dave)
If you have faith, you keep the new commandments given to us by Christ. (jmullaney)

Every minute of every day? What if you fail? Are all those good works shot to pieces?

I, for one, don’t wish to judge the condition of anyone else’s faith, their works notwithstanding. (Dave)
Ah, but by their fruits you shall know them. How can you help but know who has the Faith and who does not? You just said that those who have faith would show this through their works, did you not? (jmullaney)

Therefore, those who behave better are saved? What about the thief on the cross? He didn’t do much of anything to show the fruits of his faith. My comment intended to show that it is not my place to determine the status of a person’s relationship with God, however many commandments they keep. This, I believe, is the meaning of the injunction to judge not, lest ye be judged.

I fail to see how you can say what Christ taught is a mere encapsulation of the original ten commandments from God. Christ’s teachings are a fulfillment of these commandments as his teachings as a whole go beyond a legalistic understand of each one individually.

That’s why I say they’re not new. They expand on the law, but the basic premises of God’s law given in the Old Testament are there unchanged.

Through following his teachings, and only through these, you would have eternal life. Otherwise, you will not.

Where does faith come into it? You’re talking about works, which do not earn anyone eternal life.

Anyone who claims to follow Jesus should not claim following him is impossible, as this is a logical contradiction.

I didn’t claim following Jesus is impossible, I said being perfectly sinless is impossible, and I already refuted your assertion that Jesus calls for his followers to be perfect.Therefore, I am not contradicting anything.

This thread is getting very frustrating for me. In some cases, you have misread my irony or a rhetorical question. If you can’t tell the difference between these devices and flat-out statements, the fault is yours, not mine. In other cases, you have completely misrepresented and misquoted me. I will be charitable and chalk it up to a misunderstanding on your part, and not a deliberate attempt to put words in my mouth. But I have made every attempt to elucidate my understanding of the subject matter, and I feel you’re being deliberately obstinate, obfuscatory and close-minded. I will, therefore, not be answering any more posts on this thread, unless I am misrepresented again. I have said all I can say on this subject and still remain civil.

[jmullaney]

*Originally posted by DAVEW0071 *
I maintain that Jesus was making commentary on the existing laws…

Perhaps I need to go through the commandments one by one and show how his new teachings line up, so this might be made completely clear to you what he teaches is the fulfillment of the previous laws.

!) Love God above all else.
Fine the way it is.
2) No graven images. Do not bow down to them or serve them
You can not serve both God and mammon.
3) Do not take the Lord name in vain.
Do not take oaths or vow of any kind, whether in vain or not.
4) Keep the Sabbath.
The sabbath was made for man, not man for the sabbath.
5) Honor thy father and mother.
Your family are only those who keep the teachings of Jesus. Honor this family.
6) Thou shalt not kill.
Do not even hate.
7) Thou shalt not commit adultery.
Do not even lust.
8) Thou shalt not steal.
It is not merely enough not to take from those who have. You must also sell all that you have, give the proceeds to the poor, and follow Jesus. The rich shall not see heaven.
9) Do not bear false witness against your neighbor.
Do not bear witness at all. If your brother sins, take him aside and council him in private, and if he does not believe you, bring others with you that he might straighten his ways.
9) Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s property.
No longer really applies. Whatever you ask for in the name of the father shall be given to you. [Although, I have never seen a Jew keep this one either, as how can you even barter for (or buy) anything unless it is for something you want? Or can you only barter for (or buy) things you do not want, which does not make much sense.]
10)Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s wife.
Again, unchanged.

the law is what separates every person from God, not what separates the “good” people from the “bad”.

Those who strive to keep the law are good. Those who do not are bad.

Paul’s desire was to be obedient to God and please God, but he recognized that he was still a man, and subject to sin. This in no way compromised Paul’s faith, however, nor his resolve to act without sin so as to please God.

OK. Hate in the time of spiritual weakness is certaintly not as bad as murder. Begging for money in a time of spiritual weakness is certaintly not as bad as being rich. But the faithful still need to strive not to do these things.

You have taken Jesus’ injunction to be perfect, as God is perfect, out of context.

I do not think so. I believe, as this ends the sermon, and begins with the word “therefore” this summarizes his teachings, not merely the two sentences proceding them. This is his conclusion.

Let me ask you, since you seem to think such an instruction is not impossible: Are you, personally, sinless and perfect? Do you never even think angry, lustful or selfish thoughts? Ever?

Understand that I am fallen away from the Church. But, yes, even when I lived the life of faith, I had occasional failings.

knowing that we will fail from time to time should not discourage us from attempting to live virtuously.

Then why do so many people who claim to be Chistians not attempt to do so?

Faith, not works, saves us. Works, as you point out below, is a way that faith can be shown.

Yes, if you have faith, the way Jesus described it, then you rely on God for your food, clothing, and shelter, rather than other unholy means. If you are in a state of living a faithful life, you can not perform many of the works traditionally associated with salvation before Jesus, such as giving to the poor. So, faith does indeed save you. But, other works, such as spreading and explaining Christ’s teachings should not be ignored.

Again, does the Church keep Christ’s teachings 100% of the time?

Yes, by definition. As those who do not keep his teachings are not part of the Church, the Church is always pure. Of course, there is a difference between minor failings, which only separate a believer briefly, and major ones.

The Church is an earthly institution with a heavenly purpose.

Christ’s kingdom is not of this world. The Church is not “earthly.” I don’t understand how it has a purpose, per se.

You have faith when you keep the new teachings given to us by Christ. Yes, people do have failings, but if they do not return to faith they will not have eternal life.

What about the thief on the cross? He didn’t do much of anything to show the fruits of his faith.

Well, I might presume that he was not rich, and thus this is why he stole. As he repented of this, he was saved. But I can not find the passage to which you are refering.

it is not my place to determine the status of a person’s relationship with God, however many commandments they keep. This, I believe, is the meaning of the injunction to judge not, lest ye be judged.

I believe the sense of this word is not rule a punishment on others. As you measure such a ruling out, so it shall be measured out on you also. However, to finish the passage, Jesus says “You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.” I would maintain that I can see clearly, having been a believer. Or to quote another Christian text “In the land of the blind, the one eyed man is king, but those with two eyes can see clearly.” Now, I see clearly that I am going to hell, and I can certaintly see this clearly among others.

Where does faith come into it? You’re talking about works, which do not earn anyone eternal life.

You keep using that word “faith,” but it is apparent you do not know what it means as Jesus taught it. Those of little faith do not see how, since they have sold all there possessions and given away all their money in accordance with Christ’s teachings, do not see how they can provide for themselves, and Jesus repeatedly extolls them to have more faith and tells them God will take care of them. This is what having faith means. Do you think Paul deliberately confused the meaning of this word for his own ends?

I already refuted your assertion that Jesus calls for his followers to be perfect.

Therefore, be perfect as your Father in heaven is perfect. Are you denying Jesus said this? What other parts of the Gospel are you willing to throw out?

I will, therefore, not be answering any more posts on this thread, unless I am misrepresented again.

First denial, then anger, how does the rest of it go? I hope I have misrepresented you though somehow, as I would like answers to my questions. Do not think I am being deliberately obtuse, but my focus in this thread is how people who claim to be Christians use Paul’s teachings to continue in lives of sin, which seems to be a very common occurance and I would only like to understand these people better. Should I ever return to the Church, I would like a better understand of how to convert these people; and should I not, I should like to know why these people think they have eternal life when they are clearly damned like me.

[Amulet]

Okay, jmullaney, these are just preliminary thoughts on what’s been posted so far. Hopefully this will give enough of a basis to continue this.

Re: the law. It is my understanding that Jesus came to fulfill the Mosaic law, rather than overturn it. Matthew contains one of the most important passages on this…

5:17 "Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill.

5:18 For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled.

5:19Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

For those who say the law did not pass away, look at verse 18 closely. …till all is fulfilled. He did not come to destroy Judaism or overturn it or render it meaningless. He came to fulfill it, to live up to the demands, so to speak, it made on us. The point of his teachings was that even physical obedience to the commandments was not enough, as the whitewashed tomb carries death and decay inside. Pretty on the outside, but absolutely miserable on the inside. Psalm 51, though a prayer of David, actually gives a fairly clear indication that God is not happy with the outward trappings, but rather with a contrite heart and spirit from which the “works” flow.

Now, the other aspect of this is faith. Faith is not belief. In fact, it can be independent of belief. I do know some people who would be called agnostics by any measuring stick you use, but they live lives of great faith. So when Paul talks about faith alone, he’s not talking about belief alone. He’s talking about where you put your trust, and how your life will follow that. Even Jesus said that – “for where your treasure is, there your heart will be also”. So they’re in agreement on this aspect. The word faith has just been hijacked all to hell. I think CS Lewis said it best in Screwtape – “Our cause is never more in danger than when humans, no longer desiring, but still intending, to do our Enemy’s will, looks round upon a universe from which every trace of Him seems to have vanished, and asks why he has been forsaken, and still obeys.”

I myself have a near certainty as to God’s existence. Big whoo. Even the demons believe in his existence. What should distinguish me as a Christian is (drum roll please) my faith. However, that leaves an awful lot to be desired. Even when I know God has been good to me, I still have the worst time letting go and trusting him to fulfill these things. An agnostic who lives a life of faith is probably in much better position than I am.

…but my focus in this thread is how people who claim to be Christians use Paul’s teachings to continue in lives of sin, which seems to be a very common occurance and I would only like to understand these people better.

They use Paul’s teachings out of (I don’t like using this term, but…) ignorance of scripture, tradition, and reason, and/or a deliberate unwillingness to face up to the real and frightening consequences of what it means to be a Christian. No one should be justifying any sin, for any reason, under any circumstance. That said, I do it all the time.

The bottom line, though, of all of this is that one has to decide whether or not one can obtain salvation on their own. Salvation lies in the fulfillment of the law, and not just the OT stuff, but the NT explanations of the spirit of the law that Jesus taught as well. And if you can do this, the ICR were not necessary.

Apologies for the long post…

[jmullaney]

*Originally posted by Amulet *
Re: the law. It is my understanding that Jesus came to fulfill the Mosaic law, rather than overturn it.

Right. But he primarily is talking about the Ten Commandments – not the larger law – and your quote does cut him off right before he explains what he just said. He definitely redefined kosher, for example. Even the Jews have an explanation of their own interpretation of the Commandments. Jesus clearly taught you do not need to honor your parents, but your family in the Church – “my family are those who hear the word of god and obey it.”

God is not happy with the outward trappings, but rather with a contrite heart and spirit from which the “works” flow.

Good point.

Even Jesus said that – “for where your treasure is, there your heart will be also”.

You know – I’d forgotten that. If your treasure is in heaven, so then is your heart. I like it.

I think CS Lewis said it best in Screwtape – “Our cause is never more in danger than when humans, no longer desiring, but still intending, to do our Enemy’s will, looks round upon a universe from which every trace of Him seems to have vanished, and asks why he has been forsaken, and still obeys.”

Excellent point. I think many people think they would be miserable if they kept the faith – not only because so many elements of our culture would like them to believe it is impossible, but by those who, because of their lack of true faith would have others believe they are wretchedly miserable with their lifestyle. Of course, sometimes this is purely a ruse. Some beggars for example I have known will put on a frown just to get pity.

Even the demons believe in his existence.

Exactly.

What should distinguish me as a Christian is (drum roll please) my faith. However, that leaves an awful lot to be desired. Even when I know God has been good to me, I still have the worst time letting go and trusting him to fulfill these things. An agnostic who lives a life of faith is probably in much better position than I am.

I understand. I had a long year of doubt (if not more) – and I was not quite willing to “let the dead bury their dead,” I did want to tie up some loose ends. Which shows you what a bad candidate I was to begin with! But if you really do have love in your heart and a yearning to live this love, you will never have peace – you are one of the blessed though. You can leave sin behind, and don’t let anyone else convince you otherwise.

The bottom line, though, of all of this is that one has to decide whether or not one can obtain salvation on their own.

A strong root is needed for the plant to flourish. But you would not be on your own long – find the Church and it will take care of you.

Salvation lies in the fulfillment of the law, and not just the OT stuff, but the NT explanations of the spirit of the law that Jesus taught as well. And if you can do this, the ICR were not necessary.

ICR? Um, you lost me there. But you are right, there is a Spirit to the law, else we’d certaintly perish.

[Polycarp]

Nice job, Amulet!!

I admit to being lost on the ICR acronym too. When I first read it, what came to mind was the Institute for Creation Research, a “creation science” think tank of sorts. Which I’d readily agree is “not necessary” – but I sorta don’t think that’s what was meant!

[Amulet]

The ICR: the Incarnation/Crucifixion/Resurrection. Sorry, I forget people can’t read my mind.

I think that salvation outside of these is impossible. That is, if they’d never happened, the whole of humanity would stand before the Judgment Seat, doomed for eternity. While I don’t necessarily believe one must be a professing Christian to be saved (subject of another thread, no doubt), I do believe that without Christ’s death we would all be lost.

I’m still working out what I want to say about the “be perfect as your Father in heaven is perfect”. I do think that’s possible, but only through grace and faith. I haven’t formed a coherent thought about it, though. It’s not making any sense to me and I know what I’m trying to say!

One more thing… jmullaney, you made an offhand reference to “what a bad candidate I was!” I have two things to say about this.

(1) Looking back through church history, it seems to me that the “worse” the candidate was in the beginning, the greater the things s/he did.

(2) I grew up going to Catholic (read: pre Vatican II, even though I’m only 29, the nuns were really old) schools. A very legalistic, joyless, obligated “faith” was instilled in me. I rebelled. Didn’t stop believing, but I would never be convicted of being a Christian. When I finally made the return, I just lost myself in the love of God. I didn’t try to extrapolate from it what I should do. At least, not for a while. I just was. And that was all right. In fact, it was expected, because right after my return my life crashed down around me. Eventually God started kicking me in the butt, but he understood what I needed was to experience the grace that redeemed me, without any strings attached. Now, through the Spirit, God’s grace is transforming me. Slowly – dear Lord, I don’t think it could get any slower – but it’s happening. And each tiny transformation makes me hunger for another. But I couldn’t have gotten there if I’d jumped right into striving to be “perfect” from the very start. You gotta learn to crawl before you can fly.