|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Why take a chance on being Christian?
In Romans 11:26-30 it says that all religious Jews are saved, even as they reject Jesus. In Matthew 7:21-23 it says that lots of people who not only claim to be Christian but who preach and even heal in Christ’s name, will turn out to be damned.
Christians often like to ask atheists, “why take a chance?” I have the same question to Christians? Why take a chance on being Christian, when Jesus assures us that lots of people who think they are Christian are damned, but that this is not the case with Jews? Being Jewish is a sure path to salvation, according to the Bible, while Christianity is not, so why take a chance?
Christians often like to ask atheists, “why take a chance?” I have the same question to Christians? Why take a chance on being Christian, when Jesus assures us that lots of people who think they are Christian are damned, but that this is not the case with Jews? Being Jewish is a sure path to salvation, according to the Bible, while Christianity is not, so why take a chance?
First off: I am not Christian.
Becoming a Christian is not about whether you want to save yourself from being damned; anyone who converts probably would be. God - as viewed in Christianity - would not damn people simply because they were or were not a Christian, he is not like that. I would like to know what you mean here by damning people anyway - if someone is damned what do you think happens to them?
You should not join Christianity, or any other religion, just to take a chance. I would say that you should convert or join a religion if you feel that you truly believe in the faith and want to be a part of it. I would like to point out that you don't necessarily have to be a Christian to follow Christian beliefs or to worship in their churches; I don't know what other religions think about this, but I would be interested to know.
Why would being Jewish be a sure path to salvation? Remember that if your mother is Jewish you are Jewish too; there is no changing it either - once a Jew, always a Jew. You don't even have to believe in or follow any part of the Jewish faith if you are Jewish yourself. So what happens, then, if you go out and commit mass murder? Say you kill 100 innocent people with a bomb in some busy London square? Do you then get salvation? I would think not. Although remember that God loves everyone and will save us all in the end (if he exists, and the Bible is correct in its most likely interpretation).
So I would say: "Why take a chance?" 'Because I can't be bothered to first experience the religion, I'd rather just go straight in, therefore creating the possibility that I will regret it later on. [But oh well.]'
It's not about being Christian, being Jewish, being a Muslim or being something else - or it shouldn't be. It should be about what you do in life, because there are some really great people who don't follow any religion. Indeed, there are some truly amazing people who have saved the lives of many and made sacrifices for others yet whom are atheist.
Becoming a Christian is not about whether you want to save yourself from being damned; anyone who converts probably would be. God - as viewed in Christianity - would not damn people simply because they were or were not a Christian, he is not like that. I would like to know what you mean here by damning people anyway - if someone is damned what do you think happens to them?
You should not join Christianity, or any other religion, just to take a chance. I would say that you should convert or join a religion if you feel that you truly believe in the faith and want to be a part of it. I would like to point out that you don't necessarily have to be a Christian to follow Christian beliefs or to worship in their churches; I don't know what other religions think about this, but I would be interested to know.
Why would being Jewish be a sure path to salvation? Remember that if your mother is Jewish you are Jewish too; there is no changing it either - once a Jew, always a Jew. You don't even have to believe in or follow any part of the Jewish faith if you are Jewish yourself. So what happens, then, if you go out and commit mass murder? Say you kill 100 innocent people with a bomb in some busy London square? Do you then get salvation? I would think not. Although remember that God loves everyone and will save us all in the end (if he exists, and the Bible is correct in its most likely interpretation).
So I would say: "Why take a chance?" 'Because I can't be bothered to first experience the religion, I'd rather just go straight in, therefore creating the possibility that I will regret it later on. [But oh well.]'
It's not about being Christian, being Jewish, being a Muslim or being something else - or it shouldn't be. It should be about what you do in life, because there are some really great people who don't follow any religion. Indeed, there are some truly amazing people who have saved the lives of many and made sacrifices for others yet whom are atheist.
| ninjakannon wrote: |
| would not damn people simply because they were or were not a Christian, he is not like that. |
| ninjakannon wrote: |
| if someone is damned what do you think happens to them? |
| ninjakannon wrote: |
| Why would being Jewish be a sure path to salvation? |
| ninjakannon wrote: |
| You don't even have to believe in or follow any part of the Jewish faith if you are Jewish yourself. |
| ninjakannon wrote: |
| So what happens, then, if you go out and commit mass murder? |
| ninjakannon wrote: |
| So I would say: "Why take a chance?" 'Because I can't be bothered to first experience the religion, I'd rather just go straight in, therefore creating the possibility that I will regret it later on. [But oh well.]' |
| ninjakannon wrote: |
| Indeed, there are some truly amazing people who have saved the lives of many and made sacrifices for others yet whom are atheist. |
| mike1reynolds wrote: | ||
|
Yet they can still be a Jew merely because their mother was. I'm simply questioning the Bible here because times have changed and no longer do all Jews follow the Jewish faith, indeed some of them may be atheists.
| mike1reynolds wrote: |
| You don’t even believe in the Bible, so the whole question you are asking is utterly moot. Notice, I really didn’t ask atheists what they thought, I only gave them one choice in the poll, to simply answer that you are an atheist. Whether or not you agree with the reasons was not even requested in the poll. |
I know you didn't request it, but I thought I would post my answer anyway because my post had been leading up to that anyway and it made a good 'pre-ending' too.
I do in fact believe some parts of the Bible. I'm sure that some of the events recorded between its covers are true although some I believe are very likely to be fiction and many are likely to be edited and/or miss-translated and/or exaggerated. But I am sure that some events really occurred. Furthermore, it is not that I don't believe that God exists, I am not sure whether he exists or not (and cannot prove or disprove it either way). I, personally, do not see the need to follow a faith - whether God exists or not. And God - if he exists - will understand my reasons for this and know that I am a good person (or try to be most of the time).
I must say that I don't believe that God will condemn anyone; he won't damn people but will save everyone. If indeed there is a God.
My reason for this? Well think about it; I will, for the sake of this hypothetically both Heaven and Hell exist. If God sends all the people whom he has damned to Hell and all the rest to Heaven then both places will be equally bad. Because humans are not perfect and you cannot please all of the people all of the time, thus Heaven would be just as bad as Earth is now when it comes down to it. Thus - to make Heaven really fit its image (as we humans have given it) God would have to change all the people who went there to make sure that he could please all of the people all of the time. But hang on a minute, if God changes all of the people who go to Heaven to make it the best place one could possibly go, why then does he not simply do the same to the people who he has 'damned'? He might as well, and that would be in-character as he is all-loving. Damning people is out of character for the God theists look up to. Do you not agree?
I know this isn't answering your question, but I am trying to question the question you ask and also some of its roots. As I believe the question itself is a rather silly [for want of a better word] one.
I suppose I don't get the "Jews are saved" argument out of Romans 11:26-30. To me, it is saying that Jesus will come to save Israel. That doesn't imply anything about the Jewish faith to me, but perhaps I overlooked or misread something.
I also think that Matthew 7:21-23 has been misinterpreted here as well.
Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?' Then I will tell them plainly, 'I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!'
It's saying that you can't just say "I am Christian" and get into Heaven, you have to live the Bible as well. There are many Christians out there simply going through the motions just to do it - and those Christians are not saved.
Furthermore, John 3:36 "He who believes in the Son has eternal life" and many other examples make it clear that those who believe, not just say they believe, but truely believe will make it to Heaven.
That being said, I think this argument is completely false.
I also think that Matthew 7:21-23 has been misinterpreted here as well.
Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?' Then I will tell them plainly, 'I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!'
It's saying that you can't just say "I am Christian" and get into Heaven, you have to live the Bible as well. There are many Christians out there simply going through the motions just to do it - and those Christians are not saved.
Furthermore, John 3:36 "He who believes in the Son has eternal life" and many other examples make it clear that those who believe, not just say they believe, but truely believe will make it to Heaven.
That being said, I think this argument is completely false.
I have to agree with you, Soulfire. From what I know the Bible does not say that God will damn people, your interpretation of Matthew 7:21-23 is also correct. I didn't have a Bible close at hand (although admittedly I could have gone and fetched one without much difficulty) so I decided not to attack the interpretations of the quotes from the Bible as I could not find them quickly (call me lazy if you want). I'm glad you did find those quotes though. I want to read what mike1reynolds has to say on this now, I'm very interested.
Okay, Mike, I'm not too worried about what everyone else posted right now. I want to know how you think that being Jewish is a straight path to salvation without any damnation. Do your history books skip WWII and the Holocaust? I mean sure, sometimes the constant attacks to our faith are a bit annoying, but compared to millions being killed just because they refuse to give up their faith...there is a big difference.
Early Christians had it bad in the start, but it wasn't near what went on in Germany. Plus, we never had drunken actors yelling racist phrases at the police.
God bless,
Pampoon
Early Christians had it bad in the start, but it wasn't near what went on in Germany. Plus, we never had drunken actors yelling racist phrases at the police.
God bless,
Pampoon
| Soulfire wrote: |
| I suppose I don't get the "Jews are saved" argument out of Romans 11:26-30. |
The title for verses 25-32 in the NIV version is ”All Israel Will Be Saved”
| Soulfire wrote: |
| To me, it is saying that Jesus will come to save Israel. That doesn't imply anything about the Jewish faith to me, but perhaps I overlooked or misread something. |
28As far as the gospel is concerned, they are enemies on your account; but as far as election [salvation] is concerned, they are loved on account of the patriarchs
| Soulfire wrote: |
| I also think that Matthew 7:21-23 has been misinterpreted here as well.
Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?' Then I will tell them plainly, 'I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!' It's saying that you can't just say "I am Christian" and get into Heaven, you have to live the Bible as well. There are many Christians out there simply going through the motions just to do it - and those Christians are not saved. |
Bible belt Christians are going to Hell in droves because they are mislead by preachers who are totally disconnected from Apostolic Tradition. Soulfire, I’ll grant you an exception for Catholicism, that as long as you have a good priest or pastor of a good denomination, then you are also in good shape. The distinction is that you are less likely to go wrong with Rabbis.
Jesus explicitly says in Matthew 7:21-23 that there will be Christian religious leaders of mainstream religious movements that will lead their followers to Hell. Romans 11:25-32 says that there will be no false denominations of Judaism that will ever evolve.
| pampoon wrote: |
| Okay, Mike, I'm not too worried about what everyone else posted right now. I want to know how you think that being Jewish is a straight path to salvation without any damnation. |
Jews are good hearted people with a loving culture that interprets the Bible in a loving way. John says, "God is love and those who know love know God." Lots of Christians by contrast are very hateful people and interpret the Bible in hateful ways that are totally contrary to God.
Another factor is that all religious Jews are looking for a messiah in the flesh, whereas most Christians are not. Since the Bible guarantees that a messiah will come in the flesh at the End Times, Jews are a big step ahead of Christians in this regard.
| pampoon wrote: |
| Do your history books skip WWII and the Holocaust? I mean sure, sometimes the constant attacks to our faith are a bit annoying, but compared to millions being killed just because they refuse to give up their faith...there is a big difference.
Early Christians had it bad in the start, but it wasn't near what went on in Germany. Plus, we never had drunken actors yelling racist phrases at the police. |
Salvation and Earthly suffering are two completely different things, as the Book of Job exemplifies. The closer you get to God the more you are tested, so the Jews have been tested most of all. One thing to consider is that evolutionary advances take place most rapidly under the harshest conditions, during mass extinctions. When selective pressures are hard it favors the genetic potential of fittest members of a group. So, from the standpoint of God as the Great Genetic Engineer, the Holocaust could well have been the final tempering of a race that is about to be given something very important, like the messiah. The messiah will be Jewish, not Christian.
| mike1reynolds wrote: |
| Jesus explicitly says in Matthew 7:21-23 that there will be Christian religious leaders of mainstream religious movements that will lead their followers to Hell. |
That is wrong, about what Jesus said in Matthew 7:21-23. There is no direct mention of Hell in the Bible, none whatsoever - therefore Jesus does not explicitly say this. One of the rare and few possible links to Hell in the Bible is in the Book of Revelation where it mentions the "lake of fire and brimstone"; this is often interpreted as Hell, however I believe that this is wrong. In Corinthians, chapter 15 God says all shall be reconciled to him. That is everyone, therefore if that is true then there is no Hell - this I believe.
Jesus may say that there will be corrupt religions leaders in the future who will not teach what is true, morale, good or right. But he most certainly does not mention Hell.
| mike1reynolds wrote: |
| Jews are good hearted people with a loving culture that interprets the Bible in a loving way. |
You appear to have ignored the point I made earlier about Jewish people not necessarily being theists etc.
There are around 15 million Jews in the world today, far less than the number of Christians. As of this it is likely that there are more 'evil' Christians in the world. Yet I ask you, do you seriously believe that all Jews are, in your own words, good hearted people with loving culture? Remember that many Jews live in the same culture as Christians and there really aren't many places which are only inhabited by Jewish people. Thus their culture is, on the whole, the same as where ever they live and is not therefore any more loving than anyone else’s.
There are Jews who are atheists and don't, quite frankly, give a damn about Jewish tradition or teaching. Their have been plenty of Jewish murderers and 'evil' Jews and you are ignoring this! (There are plenty 'evil' people in every other religion, also.)
I am not saying that there are not Jewish people as you suggest, nor am I saying that the majority of Jews are not as you suggest. I am merely saying that you have made a generalisation which is plainly not correct.
Last edited by ninjakannon on Sun Dec 24, 2006 9:40 pm; edited 2 times in total
| mike1reynolds wrote: |
|
Jews are good hearted people with a loving culture that interprets the Bible in a loving way. John says, "God is love and those who know love know God." Lots of Christians by contrast are very hateful people and interpret the Bible in hateful ways that are totally contrary to God. |
Well yes, I have not met a person with a Jewish background that came at me with anything but compassion. Though many of my classmates, friends, and church members have a very aggressive stance on the world. One lady I know is very church-going. She attends masses at my brother's church, she helps the poor, and she helps with the local catholic school. However, she tends to think of herself as "dominant" compared to all other people of different religions. She, like many others, has a stereotypical mind towards Muslims. She sees them all as terrorists and evil people, when in truth most Islamic people are very friendly.
| mike1reynolds wrote: |
|
Salvation and Earthly suffering are two completely different things, as the Book of Job exemplifies. The closer you get to God the more you are tested, so the Jews have been tested most of all. One thing to consider is that evolutionary advances take place most rapidly under the harshest conditions, during mass extinctions. When selective pressures are hard it favors the genetic potential of fittest members of a group. |
Well yes, I agree that salvation and suffering are different. However, if you believe the Bible then you must understand that the Jewish people are God's eternal race. They were the first and will be the last. Today's world, I guess, places Christians and Jews on complete opposite sides of religion; when in reality we are not that different at all. We share a God, we wait for our Saviour, and we study the Old Testament. I think that in the end, the Messiah will be for both of us who have stood the test of time.
| mike1reynolds wrote: |
| So, from the standpoint of God as the Great Genetic Engineer, the Holocaust could well have been the final tempering of a race that is about to be given something very important, like the messiah. The messiah will be Jewish, not Christian. |
Well, the future can only be decided and not foreseen...
God bless,
Pampoon
To start off: I grew up Catholic, but am now Wiccan.
I believe that no matter what religion you are, you should believe in that religion, otherwise don't consider yourself that. I did not believe in the teachings of Catholicism, so I looked deeper into my heart and started what I really believe in. God, as Catholics see him (at least this is what I was taught), will not damn you for being a good person but not believing in Him. Leading a good life, of caring for others, doing what is right, not all the time, but as much as HUMANLY possible, and just leading the best life to your ability, will lead to rewards in the afterlife...
I believe that no matter what religion you are, you should believe in that religion, otherwise don't consider yourself that. I did not believe in the teachings of Catholicism, so I looked deeper into my heart and started what I really believe in. God, as Catholics see him (at least this is what I was taught), will not damn you for being a good person but not believing in Him. Leading a good life, of caring for others, doing what is right, not all the time, but as much as HUMANLY possible, and just leading the best life to your ability, will lead to rewards in the afterlife...
| Quote: |
| The title for verses 25-32 in the NIV version is ”All Israel Will Be Saved” |
Which is a pretty direct statement, if I do say so myself.
My arguments stand unchanged for the rest of the post.
| Soulfire wrote: | ||
|
You completely ignored verse 28:
28As far as the gospel is concerned, they are enemies on your account; but as far as election [salvation] is concerned, they are loved on account of the patriarchs
In other words, Jews are saved even as they are enemies of the gospel of Jesus.
| Soulfire wrote: |
| The title "All Israel Will Be Saved" still does nothing for me in regards to Jews going to Heaven, and like previously stated, Jesus says "I am the way, the truth, and the life. The only way to the father is through me."
Which is a pretty direct statement, if I do say so myself. |
You obviously haven’t read Romans 11.
| Soulfire wrote: |
| My arguments stand unchanged for the rest of the post. |
There was no argument here, only an evasion.
The bible, while an important historical and religious work, is not perfect. or completely literal. It has been translated numerous times, and was done so by humans, who are, surprise, only human and therefore bound to make mistakes.
| jabapyth wrote: |
| The bible, while an important historical and religious work, is not perfect. or completely literal. It has been translated numerous times, and was done so by humans, who are, surprise, only human and therefore bound to make mistakes. |
Another point to remember is that when the bible was codified and the compilers were examining the candidate texts, it would have been very difficult in those days, prior to computers, to accurately cross-reference every point of every text with every point in every other text. Naturally, in such a large collection of texts written by a number of different people, one can expect some discrepencies. Personally, I don't see this as a problem.
But to get back to the point of the original post, I voted:
| Quote: |
| I am some other religion, but I am not impressed with this argument. (Please explain.) |
The main reason I'm not very impressed with this argument is its basing salvation/damnation on anything other than our own actions. I've always believed that "we are our deeds" (to quote the title of a popular book on heathen ethics).
I believe that it is how we conduct ourselves throughout our lives that will determine what happens to us after we die. My reasons for this are based on heathen lore but I'll stick to christian lore here as that was the venue of the original post.
Not to get all Dan Brown-ish on you but I found a neat line in the Gospel According to Mary Magdalene:
| Quote: |
| 26) The Savior said There is no sin, but it is you who make sin when you do the things that are like the nature of adultery, which is called sin. |
Ok, not salvation exactly, but basically says "we are our deeds".
Take care,
Eyvind
| Eyvind wrote: |
| The main reason I'm not very impressed with this argument is its basing salvation/damnation on anything other than our own actions. I've always believed that "we are our deeds" (to quote the title of a popular book on heathen ethics).
|
Heathen as in the Teutonic or Icelandic religions? I am not arguing my point of view, I am arguing that this is the only logical way to interpret to the Bible, regardless of whether or not you are beholden to the Bible.
How one is born is a product of karma, it is not independent of ones previous actions. In the Teutonic religion there was the notion of “hamingja” or family ancestral honor. This included the notion of the sins of the father’s visited on the sons as well as the honor one’s ancestors. So while being born Jewish, Christian or Taoist is not independent of one’s deeds, in the heathen religions one’s inherited spiritual power is considered to be largely independent of one’s deeds (but that is a product of one’s karma too.)
Call me "not impressed"...It's easy to call yourself Christian, but that doesn't necessarily mean that you are Christian. Obvious Example: Bush, who has continued to wage war just because he can and because of his pride.
Also, The Bible points out that there will a number of antichrists (Note: As contrasted to The Antichrist) that will lead believers astray; just a side-note but worth noting; after all, thse are people that won't be going Upstairs, so to speak...
So, outside of possibly leading to more anti-semitism (by pointing out that Jews have a free ticket, but Christians need to work for it), what was the point again?
HM
Also, The Bible points out that there will a number of antichrists (Note: As contrasted to The Antichrist) that will lead believers astray; just a side-note but worth noting; after all, thse are people that won't be going Upstairs, so to speak...
So, outside of possibly leading to more anti-semitism (by pointing out that Jews have a free ticket, but Christians need to work for it), what was the point again?
HM
It was a message to Christians about how the Bible says Christianity compares to Judaism.
What exactly was your point? You aren't even a Christian so why are you so concerned and offended that I consider Judaism superior?
What exactly was your point? You aren't even a Christian so why are you so concerned and offended that I consider Judaism superior?
1) I am Christian...How do you figure otherwise?
2) It was more of a warning to Christians...In essence, letting them know that Jews had paid their dues, and so were given free pass if they wanted it, but that they themselves had a lot to watch out for...
HM
2) It was more of a warning to Christians...In essence, letting them know that Jews had paid their dues, and so were given free pass if they wanted it, but that they themselves had a lot to watch out for...
HM
1) Sorry, I’m not sure where I got the wrong impression from, other than the fact that most of the objecting posters haven’t been Christian.
2) Most modern Christians do not anticipate the return of a messiah in the flesh, while modern Jews and early Christians did. So modern Judaism is closer to early Christianity than modern Christianity is, in the most important aspects.
2) Most modern Christians do not anticipate the return of a messiah in the flesh, while modern Jews and early Christians did. So modern Judaism is closer to early Christianity than modern Christianity is, in the most important aspects.
| mike1reynolds wrote: |
| 1) Sorry, I’m not sure where I got the wrong impression from, other than the fact that most of the objecting posters haven’t been Christian. |
No prob...
| Quote: |
| 2) Most modern Christians do not anticipate the return of a messiah in the flesh, while modern Jews and early Christians did. So modern Judaism is closer to early Christianity than modern Christianity is, in the most important aspects. |
Except that Christians have already had their Messiah in the flesh...There's just some major debate on whether or not Jesus counts...
HM
| mike1reynolds wrote: |
| I am not arguing my point of view, I am arguing that this is the only logical way to interpret to the Bible, regardless of whether or not you are beholden to the Bible. |
My mistake, sorry. I should have read it more carefully. Ok then… I am still fairly unimpressed with the argument.
First off, if such were really the case (or believed to be the case in Paul’s time) I would expect it to be found elsewhere… even just a hint. One instance does not make a very strong case, especially when it is somewhat enigmatic and there are many other instances that give the impression it is otherwise. Are there any other instances in the new testament to support this idea?
Second, theologically, that Jews would be saved regardless of their faith when pious Christians may not be does not seem to make any real “logical” sense in a Christian text. Theologically, that is.
Practically, it makes a little more sense. I think Paul’s apparent need to support older religious prophecy put him squarely between a rock and a hard place. If the prophecy stated that Israel would be “saved”, it would be very difficult for him to reconcile this with their disbelief, at the time, in salvation through Christ. It seems to me that rather than chuck out the old (sacred) prophecies he felt it more prudent to create a temporary work-around, a way to get them through the gates of heaven without their turning to Christ. It fulfills the prophecy, allows YHWH to keep his covenant and honours the fathers of both religions. At the same time it doesn’t necessarily say that they won’t find salvation through Christ in the future, just that they are opposed to it now. It’s a bit political and untidy but what is the bible if not political and untidy. I think Paul did a fair job of it.
And just to address your comments about hamingja (and then I’ll leave it alone because it’s not really related to your original thread topic):
| mike1reynolds wrote: |
| How one is born is a product of karma, it is not independent of ones previous actions. In the Teutonic religion there was the notion of “hamingja” or family ancestral honor. This included the notion of the sins of the father’s visited on the sons as well as the honor one’s ancestors. So while being born Jewish, Christian or Taoist is not independent of one’s deeds, in the heathen religions one’s inherited spiritual power is considered to be largely independent of one’s deeds (but that is a product of one’s karma too.) |
Yes, indeed, hamingja is a kind of personal luck that can be passed down from your ancestors. Our actions in our life time will influence the hamingja of our children. If we are noble in our actions we pass positive hamingja on to them. If our actions are ignoble then we may pass on a kind of “luck debt” (shild) that can affect our children’s hamingja negatively and even have a negative effect on their vital force (maegen). You’re right that our present level of hamingja is not dependent solely on our own actions but it is not “largely independent of one’s deeds”. We have power over our actions now, not over what our fathers and mothers have done in the past. We have the ability to pay back the luck debt of our ancestors if we choose to. Our hamingja is largely dependent on our actions now.
But really that’s neither here nor there, as my main point was to assert that (I believe) what happens to us in the afterlife is not dependant so much on faith but rather on action. Oh and one more point: hamingja should not, in my opinion, be connected with “spiritual power” and/or “salvation”. Our actions affect our hamingja, yes. And this is manifest in the situations life presents us with. But it is our actions in the eyes of the Gods (or God/Christ for those it suits) that influence our final destination, not how lucky we or our family are.
Take care,
Eyvind
| Eyvind wrote: |
| First off, if such were really the case (or believed to be the case in Paul’s time) I would expect it to be found elsewhere… even just a hint. One instance does not make a very strong case, especially when it is somewhat enigmatic and there are many other instances that give the impression it is otherwise. Are there any other instances in the new testament to support this idea?
|
The fact that, with only one exception, all Biblical authors were Jews. Up until the split between the Johnannites and the rabbis, the early Christians considered themselves as a revivalist movement within Judaism and not something separate from Judaism. After the split there is some very bitter language about Jews in the Bible coming from John, a Jew himself, but then taken up with more earnest by the Bible’s one and only non-Jewish author, Luke.
The NT, as incredibly short as it is, has almost 200 references to circumcision. In the beginning you had to become Jewish in order to become Christian, and it’s leadership was a society composed exclusively of Jews. They were extremely up in arms about the idea of preaching to anyone else besides Jews, as is noted in Acts when they call Peter on the carpet for doing so. Only after the schism between the rabbis and the apostles did they loosen up about preaching to non-Jews.
| Eyvind wrote: |
| Second, theologically, that Jews would be saved regardless of their faith when pious Christians may not be does not seem to make any real “logical” sense in a Christian text. Theologically, that is.
|
I didn’t say regardless of faith. I said all religious Jews, and to be more precise, I should say all sincerely religious Jews, are given a certain promise in the Bible, which the Bible does not give to all Christian. In Mat 7:21-23 Jesus is warning that if you simply invoke Jesus’ name (i.e. read the Bible only) but dismiss all cultural connections to him, such as Judaism or Apostolic Tradition, then the way is wide open for you to be a sincerely devoted fanatical nut case, like so many non-denominational Protestant Christians in rural areas of this country. That is specifically who Jesus is sneering at in Matthew 7:23.
I think that Matthew 7:23 is all about history, Jesus is saying that if you just read the Bible and ignore all cultural and traditional contexts, you don’t really know anything about Jesus, nor has he ever known you. There are only two main sources of cultural and traditional context here, and that is Judaism and Apostolic Tradition.
| Eyvind wrote: |
| Practically, it makes a little more sense. I think Paul’s apparent need to support older religious prophecy put him squarely between a rock and a hard place. If the prophecy stated that Israel would be “saved”, it would be very difficult for him to reconcile this with their disbelief, at the time, in salvation through Christ. It seems to me that rather than chuck out the old (sacred) prophecies he felt it more prudent to create a temporary work-around, a way to get them through the gates of heaven without their turning to Christ. It fulfills the prophecy, allows YHWH to keep his covenant and honours the fathers of both religions. At the same time it doesn’t necessarily say that they won’t find salvation through Christ in the future, just that they are opposed to it now. It’s a bit political and untidy but what is the bible if not political and untidy. I think Paul did a fair job of it.
|
You fail to acknowledge the tricky fact that Paul was himself a Jew and was not looking at it in anything like the very removed and dispassionate terms that you are thinking in.
| Eyvind wrote: |
| But really that’s neither here nor there, as my main point was to assert that (I believe) what happens to us in the afterlife is not dependant so much on faith but rather on action. Oh and one more point: hamingja should not, in my opinion, be connected with “spiritual power” and/or “salvation”. Our actions affect our hamingja, yes. And this is manifest in the situations life presents us with. But it is our actions in the eyes of the Gods (or God/Christ for those it suits) that influence our final destination, not how lucky we or our family are.
|
Upbringing has a profound effect on moral values which in turn defines the context of all of our actions, so hamingja does affect salvation. Put into a Teutonic context, your likelihood of entering Valhalla is heavily influenced by your ancestry.
| mike1reynolds wrote: | ||
The fact that, with only one exception, all Biblical authors were Jews. Up until the split between the Johnannites and the rabbis, the early Christians considered themselves as a revivalist movement within Judaism and not something separate from Judaism. After the split there is some very bitter language about Jews in the Bible coming from John, a Jew himself, but then taken up with more earnest by the Bible’s one and only non-Jewish author, Luke. The NT, as incredibly short as it is, has almost 200 references to circumcision. In the beginning you had to become Jewish in order to become Christian, and it’s leadership was a society composed exclusively of Jews. They were extremely up in arms about the idea of preaching to anyone else besides Jews, as is noted in Acts when they call Peter on the carpet for doing so. Only after the schism between the rabbis and the apostles did they loosen up about preaching to non-Jews. |
That’s quite interesting, Mike. Thanks for that. Much of that is new to me and does explain a lot. But your answer to my question (Are there any other instances in the NT bible to support the claim that all Jews go to heaven regardless of the faith in Christ?) is “no”?
| mike1reynolds wrote: | ||
I didn’t say regardless of faith. I said all religious Jews, and to be more precise, I should say all sincerely religious Jews, are given a certain promise in the Bible, which the Bible does not give to all Christian. In Mat 7:21-23 Jesus is warning that if you simply invoke Jesus’ name (i.e. read the Bible only) but dismiss all cultural connections to him, such as Judaism or Apostolic Tradition, then the way is wide open for you to be a sincerely devoted fanatical nut case, like so many non-denominational Protestant Christians in rural areas of this country. That is specifically who Jesus is sneering at in Matthew 7:23. I think that Matthew 7:23 is all about history, Jesus is saying that if you just read the Bible and ignore all cultural and traditional contexts, you don’t really know anything about Jesus, nor has he ever known you. There are only two main sources of cultural and traditional context here, and that is Judaism and Apostolic Tradition. |
Ok then, regardless of faith in Christ. Whether they are sincerely religious Jews or not seems beside the point. It is that they are not believers in Christ that is the issue here, isn’t it?
But I think you do make some excellent points about reading the bible in consideration of all cultural and traditional contexts. I’d say this is very important.
| mike1reynolds wrote: | ||
You fail to acknowledge the tricky fact that Paul was himself a Jew and was not looking at it in anything like the very removed and dispassionate terms that you are thinking in. |
Well, actually, I don’t think looking at it “practically” necessarily equates to “dispassionately”. The fact that he was a Jew may be what drove him to reconcile the older writings with his own writings. Old habits die hard. I agree, it is pretty tricky.
| mike1reynolds wrote: | ||
Upbringing has a profound effect on moral values which in turn defines the context of all of our actions, so hamingja does affect salvation. Put into a Teutonic context, your likelihood of entering Valhalla is heavily influenced by your ancestry. |
Ok, your upbringing affects your morals which in turn affect your actions which in turn then affect your worth in the eyes of the Gods. But where does hamingja fit in here? Your upbringing is not your hamingja. Hamingja is your personal/family luck. Your morals are not your hamingja. And your “spiritual worth” is not your hamingja. You seem to be viewing hamingja either as synonymous with or “in series” with one’s worth in the eyes of the Gods, when really, I think, it’s in more of a “parallel circuit.”
As for Valhalla, contrary to popular belief, it’s actually a pretty exclusive club to get into. Most of us have no hope of getting in, even if we really wanted to. Our likelihood of entering has very little to do with our ancestry, but with our martial worth in Odin’s, and only Odin’s, eyes. First of all, you have to be a warrior, and a pretty darn good one to boot. Second, you have to actually die in battle. Third, even if you die in battle there’s a chance you may be selected by Freyja instead of Odin and end up in her hall, Folkvang. There’s a fair bit of debate as to where the rest of us actually end up but many heathens believe - and I’m tending towards this belief myself - that we go to the hall of our ancestors.
Take care,
Eyvind
This is turning into the most interesting discussion that I’ve had in a long time!
My point was that it is overflowing with indirect references, and Paul’s verse further implies that the end time messiah will be a Jew and not a Christian. The underlying unspoken assumption to your question, which most Christians also falsely assume, is that Jesus somehow gave up his Jewishness, or that at any point during the Apostolic Period the early Christians had given up their Jewishness. The Jewish/Christian dichotomy was not one that even existed at that time, all Christians were Jews and Christianity was not a separate religion from Judaism, it was merely a revivalist movement within Judaism with one or two additional prophets. Jesus would be absolutely horrified to see the degree to which Christianity turned so completely away from its Judaistic roots in such a short period of time.
Not at all, while there may not be any other specific references to any particular group being saved even if they reject Jesus, the way the Bible gives an exception specifically for Jews, but over and over again it says that God is love and that if you are a loving and caring person then Jesus “knows you” (i.e. can relate to you). What Jesus thinks of you is deemed to ultimately be more important than what you think of Jesus. In Matthew 7:21-23 it says that you can believe in Jesus with total conviction, but if you don’t act in a loving and caring way then on judgment day he’ll say, “I never knew you”.
To add some perspective to this, in my opinion most Taoists are also going to Heaven, because Taosim, like Judaism, is a religion focused heavily on honor as defined in terms of personal responsibility. They are both religions that focus the most effectively on building character. Which segways into our discussion of hamingja.
Everything Jesus taught was rooted in the Tanach, so no reconciliation with Jesus is possible without reconciling with what he taught from. Most Christians don’t have a clue about the extremely dense symbolism in the OT. It sounds like nothing more than a barbaric narrative when Christians read it, but to hear a rabbi’s sermon is mind blowing because the OT is filled with all sorts of very profound but subtle symbolic meanings that you could never get from any Christian theologian.
The first time I saw the movie Circle of Iron, based on a screen play by Bruce Lee that was produced only after his death, I had no idea there was anything deeper to it and I thought it was really stupid. Then I watched it with a Tibetan Lama who explained the profound symbolism of each scene and suddenly this movie that had seemed like the stupidest thing I’d ever seen turned into a mind blowing diamond bullet, a perfect expression of the ultimate goals of Buddhism. That is what a Jewish sermon is like to me.
Most Christians totally miss all the symbolism of the OT and so their interpretation of Jesus is a bizarre distorted parody, like someone idolizing Circle of Iron with no understanding of the Buddhist symbolism and just getting into the martial arts scenes. No one who claims to worship Jesus while being totally ignorant of Judaism really knows anything about Jesus. That is totally contrary to everything Jesus ever intended.
Your upbringing is the single most tangible expression of your hamingja, so you can’t make a distinction between upbringing and hamingja. Hamingja is much more than just luck, it is also honor and ancestral worthiness. In Hebrew it is called nephesh, a word that can be translated as either bloodline or soul force. It is the combination of your genetic potential, your upbringing and the disposition of your ancestral spirits towards you (which in turn plays a huge role in your upbringing, if you were not adopted, and maybe still even then).
It was precisely because of the stringent restrictions on getting into Valhalla that I used it as an example. Are great champions born to just anyone off the street?
Speaking of the hall of our ancestors, I love to listen to good mediums and one of the most striking things I think is the way family members will be grouped together in the afterlife. I almost never hear any of them say, “your mother and your dad are together in the same place”, but siblings are very often with each other and/or one parent. Sometimes they will even refer to both parents being in good places, just not the *same* place. One of the mediums once quoted Jesus in this regard, “my father’s estate has many mansions”.
But you’ve brought up an interesting question, which is, of what sort of battle does an Odinic warrior fight that earns the highest reward? In Icelandic and Teutonic sagas, warfare and even hand-to-hand combat is as much about magical attacks as about physical ones. Who is the greatest warrior, Merlin or Arthur?
Demon hunting is much more subtle than physical combat. Indeed, although Jesus never engaged in physical combat, he was a consummate demon hunter of the highest order.
| Eyvind wrote: | ||
That’s quite interesting, Mike. Thanks for that. Much of that is new to me and does explain a lot. But your answer to my question (Are there any other instances in the NT bible to support the claim that all Jews go to heaven regardless of the faith in Christ?) is “no”? |
My point was that it is overflowing with indirect references, and Paul’s verse further implies that the end time messiah will be a Jew and not a Christian. The underlying unspoken assumption to your question, which most Christians also falsely assume, is that Jesus somehow gave up his Jewishness, or that at any point during the Apostolic Period the early Christians had given up their Jewishness. The Jewish/Christian dichotomy was not one that even existed at that time, all Christians were Jews and Christianity was not a separate religion from Judaism, it was merely a revivalist movement within Judaism with one or two additional prophets. Jesus would be absolutely horrified to see the degree to which Christianity turned so completely away from its Judaistic roots in such a short period of time.
| Eyvind wrote: |
| Ok then, regardless of faith in Christ. Whether they are sincerely religious Jews or not seems beside the point. It is that they are not believers in Christ that is the issue here, isn’t it? |
Not at all, while there may not be any other specific references to any particular group being saved even if they reject Jesus, the way the Bible gives an exception specifically for Jews, but over and over again it says that God is love and that if you are a loving and caring person then Jesus “knows you” (i.e. can relate to you). What Jesus thinks of you is deemed to ultimately be more important than what you think of Jesus. In Matthew 7:21-23 it says that you can believe in Jesus with total conviction, but if you don’t act in a loving and caring way then on judgment day he’ll say, “I never knew you”.
To add some perspective to this, in my opinion most Taoists are also going to Heaven, because Taosim, like Judaism, is a religion focused heavily on honor as defined in terms of personal responsibility. They are both religions that focus the most effectively on building character. Which segways into our discussion of hamingja.
| Eyvind wrote: | ||
Well, actually, I don’t think looking at it “practically” necessarily equates to “dispassionately”. The fact that he was a Jew may be what drove him to reconcile the older writings with his own writings. Old habits die hard. I agree, it is pretty tricky. |
Everything Jesus taught was rooted in the Tanach, so no reconciliation with Jesus is possible without reconciling with what he taught from. Most Christians don’t have a clue about the extremely dense symbolism in the OT. It sounds like nothing more than a barbaric narrative when Christians read it, but to hear a rabbi’s sermon is mind blowing because the OT is filled with all sorts of very profound but subtle symbolic meanings that you could never get from any Christian theologian.
The first time I saw the movie Circle of Iron, based on a screen play by Bruce Lee that was produced only after his death, I had no idea there was anything deeper to it and I thought it was really stupid. Then I watched it with a Tibetan Lama who explained the profound symbolism of each scene and suddenly this movie that had seemed like the stupidest thing I’d ever seen turned into a mind blowing diamond bullet, a perfect expression of the ultimate goals of Buddhism. That is what a Jewish sermon is like to me.
Most Christians totally miss all the symbolism of the OT and so their interpretation of Jesus is a bizarre distorted parody, like someone idolizing Circle of Iron with no understanding of the Buddhist symbolism and just getting into the martial arts scenes. No one who claims to worship Jesus while being totally ignorant of Judaism really knows anything about Jesus. That is totally contrary to everything Jesus ever intended.
| Eyvind wrote: | ||
Ok, your upbringing affects your morals which in turn affect your actions which in turn then affect your worth in the eyes of the Gods. But where does hamingja fit in here? Your upbringing is not your hamingja. Hamingja is your personal/family luck. Your morals are not your hamingja. And your “spiritual worth” is not your hamingja. You seem to be viewing hamingja either as synonymous with or “in series” with one’s worth in the eyes of the Gods, when really, I think, it’s in more of a “parallel circuit.” |
Your upbringing is the single most tangible expression of your hamingja, so you can’t make a distinction between upbringing and hamingja. Hamingja is much more than just luck, it is also honor and ancestral worthiness. In Hebrew it is called nephesh, a word that can be translated as either bloodline or soul force. It is the combination of your genetic potential, your upbringing and the disposition of your ancestral spirits towards you (which in turn plays a huge role in your upbringing, if you were not adopted, and maybe still even then).
| Eyvind wrote: |
| As for Valhalla, contrary to popular belief, it’s actually a pretty exclusive club to get into. Most of us have no hope of getting in, even if we really wanted to. Our likelihood of entering has very little to do with our ancestry, but with our martial worth in Odin’s, and only Odin’s, eyes. First of all, you have to be a warrior, and a pretty darn good one to boot. Second, you have to actually die in battle. Third, even if you die in battle there’s a chance you may be selected by Freyja instead of Odin and end up in her hall, Folkvang. There’s a fair bit of debate as to where the rest of us actually end up but many heathens believe - and I’m tending towards this belief myself - that we go to the hall of our ancestors.
|
It was precisely because of the stringent restrictions on getting into Valhalla that I used it as an example. Are great champions born to just anyone off the street?
Speaking of the hall of our ancestors, I love to listen to good mediums and one of the most striking things I think is the way family members will be grouped together in the afterlife. I almost never hear any of them say, “your mother and your dad are together in the same place”, but siblings are very often with each other and/or one parent. Sometimes they will even refer to both parents being in good places, just not the *same* place. One of the mediums once quoted Jesus in this regard, “my father’s estate has many mansions”.
But you’ve brought up an interesting question, which is, of what sort of battle does an Odinic warrior fight that earns the highest reward? In Icelandic and Teutonic sagas, warfare and even hand-to-hand combat is as much about magical attacks as about physical ones. Who is the greatest warrior, Merlin or Arthur?
Demon hunting is much more subtle than physical combat. Indeed, although Jesus never engaged in physical combat, he was a consummate demon hunter of the highest order.
| mike1reynolds wrote: |
| … if you are a loving and caring person then Jesus “knows you” (i.e. can relate to you). What Jesus thinks of you is deemed to ultimately be more important than what you think of Jesus. In Matthew 7:21-23 it says that you can believe in Jesus with total conviction, but if you don’t act in a loving and caring way then on judgment day he’ll say, “I never knew you”. |
So… we are our deeds? Cool.
| mike1reynolds wrote: |
| Everything Jesus taught was rooted in the Tanach, so no reconciliation with Jesus is possible without reconciling with what he taught from. |
One problem with this is the fact that many Christians believe (rightly or wrongly, not being Christian I can’t really comment on that) that what Christ says actually supersedes what is written in the old testament. I mean, how else can you reconcile the classic “eye for and eye” versus “turn the other cheek” discrepancy?
| mike1reynolds wrote: |
| Most Christians don’t have a clue about the extremely dense symbolism in the OT. It sounds like nothing more than a barbaric narrative when Christians read it, but to hear a rabbi’s sermon is mind blowing because the OT is filled with all sorts of very profound but subtle symbolic meanings that you could never get from any Christian theologian. |
I have to agree with you here. The Hebrew bible is a fantastic book (or collection of books). And you’re right, the symbolism is much deeper than most Christians are aware. But this is reasonable I think since it isn’t really their book. I myself learned a great deal about old testament symbolism not so much through the study of the old testament but more through study of modern ceremonial magic, something many Christians would shun. But to be fair to Christian theologians, most of them do study the old testament and do so, at least for a short time if not longer, in the original Hebrew(/Aramaic). Rabbis dedicate their whole life to the study of the Tanak, Talmud, Mishnah, Qabbalah and whatever other sources are part of their program of study. To expect Christian clerics to do that AND be experts in their own book would be, I think, asking too much.
| mike1reynolds wrote: |
| Your upbringing is the single most tangible expression of your hamingja, so you can’t make a distinction between upbringing and hamingja. Hamingja is much more than just luck, it is also honor and ancestral worthiness. In Hebrew it is called nephesh, a word that can be translated as either bloodline or soul force. It is the combination of your genetic potential, your upbringing and the disposition of your ancestral spirits towards you (which in turn plays a huge role in your upbringing, if you were not adopted, and maybe still even then). |
Ooh, this can of worms just got wrigglier! Cool. Ok, here goes.
First things first: nephesh. I’m not Jewish so I don’t really know much about the modern religious interpretation of nphš but as far as classical scholarly interpretation goes I believe it can mean, in various contexts, any of the following: soul, living being, life, self, person, desire, appetite, emotion and passion. It often refers to something that “breathes” but also can be the seat of emotions or mental acts. (If I recall, it’s often paired up with ruach, “breath”, when describing the soul/spirit.) It’s a complicated and deep word to be sure and there are several columns dedicated to it in the Brown-Driver-Briggs-Gesenius Hebrew-English Lexicon that attest to this.
But I don’t think any of these things are representative of hamingja. Old Norse soul lore has a much more detailed breakdown and nephesh would be better compared with some of these other elements of the soul like önd (“breath”) – though this may be more aptly represented by ruach – meginn (spiritual force), or fjör (life itself).
But since we’re on the topic of comparative religion, let’s look at a line from Genesis and compare it with something similar from the Poetic Edda. Both are referring to the creation of humankind.
(There might be better examples but I’m a bit rusty and this is the best one I could come up with quickly.)
Genesis 2:7
And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul (nphš).
Völuspá 18
Breath (önd) they had not, spirit (óð) they had not, character nor vital spark (lá) nor fresh complexions (litu góða); breath gave Odin, spirit gave Hænir, vital spark gave Lodur, and fresh complexions.
Just looking at these two primary sources for a moment I can’t see any link between nephesh and hamingja. (I’ll try to find some primary sources that actually mention hamingja in the next few days and see how these compare to nephesh but for now this was the best I could quickly jot down).
Another interesting point to note is that the hamingja is sometimes understood as an actual protective spirit of an individual, something like a fylgja (fetch) and thus seen as something much more external to the person than nephesh would be.
| mike1reynolds wrote: |
| Your upbringing is the single most tangible expression of your hamingja, so you can’t make a distinction between upbringing and hamingja. |
I’m still not sure why you think this. Can you offer anything from the lore in support?
| mike1reynolds wrote: |
| Speaking of the hall of our ancestors, I love to listen to good mediums and one of the most striking things I think is the way family members will be grouped together in the afterlife. I almost never hear any of them say, “your mother and your dad are together in the same place”, but siblings are very often with each other and/or one parent. Sometimes they will even refer to both parents being in good places, just not the *same* place. One of the mediums once quoted Jesus in this regard, “my father’s estate has many mansions”. |
Interesting. What sort of mediums are you referring to? I can certainly see practical problems with this idea… especially when people are descended from parents of drastically different background. Whose hall would you go to? Your father’s or your mother’s? Tricky, for sure.
| mike1reynolds wrote: |
| But you’ve brought up an interesting question, which is, of what sort of battle does an Odinic warrior fight that earns the highest reward? In Icelandic and Teutonic sagas, warfare and even hand-to-hand combat is as much about magical attacks as about physical ones. Who is the greatest warrior, Merlin or Arthur? |
Well, our heathen ancestors were quite literal about it. Battle is a literal battle not metaphorical. While some modern heathens might like to equate the “fight against cancer”, for example, as a Valhalla-worthy battle, it most surely would not have been considered so in heathen Europe. As for magic, Odin is a god of magic so, personally, I figure a magical battle would constitute a battle in his eyes. Just remember the whole purpose of the gathering of the fallen warriors in Valhalla is to prepare for the final battle at Ragnarok.. I figure a skilled magic worker would be welcome.
Take care,
Eyvind
The Gospel of Matthew is way too early of a book in the Bible. It is one of the first books be written in the new testament (only after Mark). There was not too much organized religion at that time. Being Christian then meant something completely different.
I am very impressed with this post though.
I am very impressed with this post though.
To help get my point of view across, I'm going to go back a couple of verses to Romans 11:24.
Ro 11:24
For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert graffed contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these, which be the natural branches, be graffed into their own olive tree?
Let's look at Israel as being the natural olive tree. Christians who believe and follow the teachings of Christ are the limbs that have been graffed onto this tree. By accepting the teachings of Christ, we, in essence, become adopted into the tribe of Israel.
Ga 3:7
Know ye therefore that they which are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham.
Ga 3:8
And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed.
Ga 3:14
That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.
Ga 3:26
For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.
Ga 3:28
There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.
Ga 3:29
And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.
As far as Matt 7:21-23, this refers to those that teach and preach things that aren't in the Bible. There are some out here that twist things in the Bible to make it say what they want it to. These are the ones being referred to here.
The answer, for me, on why I should take the chance? I'd rather live my life as if there is a God and be shown that there isn't a God, than live my life as if there isn't and be shown that there is. Besides, after all that God has done for me, it only makes sense to worship Him.
Ro 11:24
For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert graffed contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these, which be the natural branches, be graffed into their own olive tree?
Let's look at Israel as being the natural olive tree. Christians who believe and follow the teachings of Christ are the limbs that have been graffed onto this tree. By accepting the teachings of Christ, we, in essence, become adopted into the tribe of Israel.
Ga 3:7
Know ye therefore that they which are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham.
Ga 3:8
And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed.
Ga 3:14
That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.
Ga 3:26
For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.
Ga 3:28
There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.
Ga 3:29
And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.
As far as Matt 7:21-23, this refers to those that teach and preach things that aren't in the Bible. There are some out here that twist things in the Bible to make it say what they want it to. These are the ones being referred to here.
The answer, for me, on why I should take the chance? I'd rather live my life as if there is a God and be shown that there isn't a God, than live my life as if there isn't and be shown that there is. Besides, after all that God has done for me, it only makes sense to worship Him.
| livilou wrote: |
| Let's look at Israel as being the natural olive tree. Christians who believe and follow the teachings of Christ are the limbs that have been graffed onto this tree. By accepting the teachings of Christ, we, in essence, become adopted into the tribe of Israel.
|
You started out right on track with my point, but then you never try to address the question of which is better, to be the periphery or to be the core? You pose Judaism as the core and Christianity as the periphery, which would seem to imply a superior status to Judaism.
| livilou wrote: |
| As far as Matt 7:21-23, this refers to those that teach and preach things that aren't in the Bible.
|
| livilou wrote: |
| There are some out here that twist things in the Bible to make it say what they want it to.
|
| Quote: |
| 21"Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.
|
| Quote: |
| 22 Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many healing miracles?'
|
Jesus doesn’t say anything about changing anything in the Bible here, to the contrary he says they even appeared to have spiritual power. Get enough dupes and you can command their spiritual power, since many of those types are dying to give it away anyway. The problem is that their religion is an egotistical thing while God is all about selfless love. They twist the Bible from misinterpretations due simply to pride and the fact that they use the Bible as a crutch to bolster their petty egos.
| livilou wrote: |
| The answer, for me, on why I should take the chance? I'd rather live my life as if there is a God and be shown that there isn't a God, than live my life as if there isn't and be shown that there is. Besides, after all that God has done for me, it only makes sense to worship Him. |
Are you suggesting that Jews don’t believe in God?? The options given here are between Judaism and Christianity. Atheism is not even remotely being considered here.
Related topics
 |