Is The Bible A Failure?

[1Mind1Spirit]

Please demonstrate that Jesus said this from the synoptic gospels.

Yore kidding right?

The gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke are referred to as the synoptic Gospels because they include many of the same stories, often in a similar sequence and in similar or sometimes identical wording. They stand in contrast to John, whose content is largely distinct.

Synoptic Gospels - Wikipedia​

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synoptic_Gospels

 

[The_drake_]

Thanks for the reply. But these men were talking to Jesus "In that Day" (Whenever this Day was), claiming to cast out devils in HIS NAME, not anyone else. And my question was "Can a man cast out devils in Jesus Name, if Jesus doesn't know them?

So I'm not sure exorcism prior to His Ministry or existence, or in this case, HIS return as Judge of the quick and the dead, is relevant to my inquiry.
And a man claiming to know Jesus, isn't as important as Jesus knowing the man, as this verse surely implies.

Interesting reaction to this seemingly simple question, I am somewhat surprised.

True true, I get what you're saying. That makes sense and is totally different. My apologies, should have spotted that.

 

[The_drake_]

Jesus, being fully man, as well as fully God, had a human nature, as we do, that could sin, could be tempted, had desires (which is what works on our will in decision making). The difference between Jesus and us in that regard, is that His desires were not towards sin as ours are, but towards obedience to God. As to how this can be so with a human mother, and since this sinful desire is inherited, who knows? Not me. There is an avenue of conception that is different and that is that His Father was not human but is God. Which leaves the possibility that it is through the male that this nature is passed. And God could do that, and He did make Adam, not Eve the federal head of all humanity, and the Bible repeatedly says that it is through one man that sin came. That of course would not leave any woman sinless or without a sin nature, because it takes a man to make a woman and a woman to make a man. It would just leave the possibility that it passes via the male. How this would be is and always will be speculation at least this side of heaven.
The Bible says Jesus was without sin. Therefore He was without sin. The Bible says He was like us, therefore He was like us. If He had had desires towards sin, my guess is He would have sinned.

Yes yes. I agree it doesn't make sense to overturn what it says. I'm just saying it's hard to figure and that it isn't really possible to resolve without making up theories that have little textual support.

For example, I think your assertion that he was never tempted isn't exactly the strongest. Kind of undermines the whole thing really. Also OG sin being responsible for ALL temptation doesn't make a ton of sense, given Adam and Eve both were tempted/sinned in a state pre-existing OG sin.

 

[Grace Accepted]

Please demonstrate that Jesus said this from the synoptic gospels.

Jesus said, "Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned." It is in believing, that we are saved. Believing in his ransom for us. "For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.” Mark 10:45

Doing Good works is what happens when we get a new heart. A good man brings good things out of the good stored up in him, and an evil man brings evil things out of the evil stored up in him. Matthew 12:35

Restricting yourself to just the synoptic means that you miss so much of God's plans for us.

 

[Arial]

For example, I think your assertion that he was never tempted isn't exactly the strongest. Kind of undermines the whole thing really. Also OG sin being responsible for ALL temptation doesn't make a ton of sense, given Adam and Eve both were tempted/sinned in a state pre-existing OG sin.

That isn't exactly what I was saying. I will try and make it more clear----don't hold your breath . I did say that Jesus could be tempted. We see Him being tempted in the wilderness. He began His earthly ministry, I believe, in the same condition as Adam and Eve. His will was absolutely free and could go either way in any situation. Whereas we begin with a propensity to sin---that is, with desires that are sinful in the face of holiness, that given the right temptation, yield to those desires. We see even in a small child the desire to be disobedient to parents, often accompanied by a devastatingly cute and impish smile! Jesus was tempted by disobedience (the wilderness)but His focus and purpose was complete obedience to the Father in order to accomplish His mission. The way in which we view temptation makes it somewhat confusing. We see it as actually being tempted to commit a particular act and sometimes it is. We see it as something we want to do, are tempted to do but that temptation is within us., because of sin in us. Jesus' temptations were external, i.e. the devil outside making Him offers. He wasn't in a battle against spirit and flesh as we are (Christians) but it was a simple question. Obey or disobey.

What is OG?

 

[Phedup]

Yore kidding right?

The gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke are referred to as the synoptic Gospels because they include many of the same stories, often in a similar sequence and in similar or sometimes identical wording. They stand in contrast to John, whose content is largely distinct.

Synoptic Gospels - Wikipedia​

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synoptic_Gospels

Yes, I agree, 90% of John is unique to John where Jesus says nothing anywhere else remotely like it. Not only that, it sometimes directly contradicts the other three gospels. In general, scholars do not believe this was written by John, but was compiled by a group of people from the church of Ephusus, a church that had been greatly influenced by the apostate Paul. There is recent debate about this, cuz it is probably gonna get worse.

Historical reliability of the Gospels - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

"According to the majority viewpoint, the gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke, collectively referred to as the Synoptic Gospels, are the primary sources of historical information about Jesus and of the religious movement he founded.[19][20][21] The fourth gospel, the Gospel of John, differs greatly from the first three gospels."

The questionable book of John should be viewed with a grain of salt, and probably belongs in the psuedapigrapha. I can always tell the severity of the heresy I am dealling with by how much Paul and John is used to for a persons theology.

 

[Phedup]

Jesus said, "Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned."

Jesus never said this. It belongs to the longer end of Mark, which is why I guess you didn't include that info. The longer end of Mark is another Christian lie. It does not exist in the older manuscript and was added hundreds of years later.

Doing Good works is what happens when we get a new heart. A good man brings good things out of the good stored up in him, and an evil man brings evil things out of the evil stored up in him. Matthew 12:35

Then why did Jesus first preach and continued to preach "Repent,...." ?

Restricting yourself to just the synoptic means that you miss so much of God's plans for us.

My God is not Paul, and all that he promised you will end in fire.

 

[Phedup]

Jesus had two groups of people he was highlighting that one group was depending upon their works for salvation. Like those saved by his sacrifice, they will cry, "Lord, Lord," but they do not know Jesus. They thought that they were in because they did these things.

You still need to show where Jesus said there were two groups and that the ones who did works will be rejected. You know nothing of Jesus' teachings.

 

[The_drake_]

That isn't exactly what I was saying. I will try and make it more clear----don't hold your breath . I did say that Jesus could be tempted. We see Him being tempted in the wilderness. He began His earthly ministry, I believe, in the same condition as Adam and Eve. His will was absolutely free and could go either way in any situation. Whereas we begin with a propensity to sin---that is, with desires that are sinful in the face of holiness, that given the right temptation, yield to those desires. We see even in a small child the desire to be disobedient to parents, often accompanied by a devastatingly cute and impish smile! Jesus was tempted by disobedience (the wilderness)but His focus and purpose was complete obedience to the Father in order to accomplish His mission. The way in which we view temptation makes it somewhat confusing. We see it as actually being tempted to commit a particular act and sometimes it is. We see it as something we want to do, are tempted to do but that temptation is within us., because of sin in us. Jesus' temptations were external, i.e. the devil outside making Him offers. He wasn't in a battle against spirit and flesh as we are (Christians) but it was a simple question. Obey or disobey.

What is OG?

OG = Original basically.

But I would only point out that he was later tempted as well, internally, to disobey and avoid the cross. He never contemplated seriously doing it, but the temptation to avoid all that suffering was there, hence the "cup would pass from me" thing. I don't see how this is any different from an internal motivation.

Personally, I don't see any evidence that his condition or trials while on Earth were any different than our own, and that's kind of the point of the whole thing.

 

[Grace Accepted]

You still need to show where Jesus said there were two groups and that the ones who did works will be rejected. You know nothing of Jesus' teachings.

I know enough to be saved, praise the Lord!

 

[Grace Accepted]

Jesus never said this. It belongs to the longer end of Mark, which is why I guess you didn't include that info. The longer end of Mark is another Christian lie. It does not exist in the older manuscript and was added hundreds of years later.



Then why did Jesus first preach and continued to preach "Repent,...." ?



My God is not Paul, and all that he promised you will end in fire.

I and so happy that I have the entire autograph of God in the bible. I take it by faith which is exactly as God has designed. It is good to practice restraint which I am learning. I don't know what I used to react so strongly to scorn and scoffing in the past, but if I can't take it and maintain my equilibrium then I need to learn more of Christ because he is meek and lowly of heart.

I do thank Him for his entire word. People who cut it up according to their own wisdom, do so to their own peril.

The Anvil of God's Word
“Last eve I paused beside the blacksmith’s door,
And heard the anvil ring the vesper chime;
Then looking in, I saw upon the floor,
Old hammers, worn with beating years of time.

“‘How many anvils have you had,’ said I,
‘To wear and batter all these hammers so?’
‘Just one,’ said he, and then with twinkling eye,
‘The anvil wears the hammers out, you know.’

“And so, I thought, the Anvil of God’s Word
For ages skeptic blows have beat upon;
Yet, though the noise of falling blows was heard,
The Anvil is unharmed, the hammers gone.”

—attributed to John Clifford

 

[Studyman]

True true, I get what you're saying. That makes sense and is totally different. My apologies, should have spotted that.

No worries. It was refreshing to have someone actually thinking into the question, as opposed to just blowing it off.

In my view Matthew 7 is a perfect chapter to examine in an attempt to determine the reasons for all the division in the religions of this world. Matt. 7 is a devastating chapter to the religions of this world. If a man pauses to take the time to really "SEEK" the understanding, not through the prism of Calvin or Constantine, or any religious philosopher of this world, but through the prism of Every Word of God/Jesus, it is most enlightening and explains why so many divisions exist.

The chapter itself is a huge warning regarding against complacency and deceivers, and the importance of "choosing" correctly. In my view.

I don't mean to carry on, but I would be interested in your take of the question I asked. I have another I would also ask, not specifically for you, but for anyone.

Matt. 7:13 Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat:

When Jesus says "Enter Ye in", what do you think HE is speaking to here? Enter into where? And is it the same place the "Many" are attempting to "Enter in"?

I look forward to your take.