To tea with Scribes and Pharisees?

[oldbadger]

I go to a tea 'n' chat meeting at a church hall on Tuesday mornings and the conversation there (among all kinds of people) is brilliant. One of the people at this event mentioned that there is another very good tea meeting at another hall nearby on Mondays, and so I went along yesterday. I'm retired and can do this kind of thing, ok?

I arrived at this venue yesterday and found myself sitting within a group of men. It was pleasant enough but some of these people seemed to be very stern in countenance and speech, and as we discussed the gospels one of these men butted in with a very aggressive 'Every word in the bible was guided by the hand of Lord God Almighty!'. He didn't say anything else, either before of afterwards as we sat at this table.

But as I have said, the conversation was alright, although one man wanted to teach me about the flood and Noah's Ark, and mentioned very sternly that the only reason why there are no unicorns in the world is because Noah made a mistake and brought two male unicorns aboard by accident........ at that point he gave me a knowing look. Then one told me about Sodom and Gomorrah, another lesson, and so I did my very very best to reverse in to my most diplomatic mode and just asked questions. The thing is, my wife doesn't come to such events, and the lady who made the tea wanted to know all about my wife, and why had she not come along. After about 90 minutes the meeting ended and the organiser came to shake my hand and asked how I had heard about that weekly event. I mentioned that I had heard about it all at the Tuesday tea 'n' chat meeting just down the road.

The people around me fell silent..... One said, 'They don't follow the bible!' and then the comments followed like machine gun fire....
They marry Gays down there!
......... wouldn't go there.......
...wouldn't have anything to do with them...
Eventually the organiser told me 'They don't follow Jesus down there', and at that point I felt that nobody there could possibly know about how Jesus lived. You see, Jesus took his food and drink with the lowliest, most sinful and corrupt lowlifes in society and these people around me were talking like the Pharisees that Jesus had so despised. So the Pharisees would not sit with the kinds of people where Jesus enjoyed his meals.

I never told them that, I just asked the organizer what he thought Jesus would have said, and he answered that Jesus ordered 'No sinning'.

So I ask you, would I find the love and understanding at the Monday meeting like the one mentioned, or the Tuesday one where the priests will marry any who are in love, no matter who? I think I'll stick with the Tuesday group, but I would be interested to read any replies from members.

[1213]

... If it was 'good', then Paul would have encouraged Christians to follow it. Instead he exhorts them to avoid becoming subject to it...

Why should I reject the scriptures that doesn't fit into your ideas?

I don't think Paul exhorts them. And, if law would not be valid, what would sin mean? If there would be no sin, why would anyone need forgiveness? If nothing is sin, then the whole Christianity is meaningless.

Romans 3:20 Therefore no one will be declared righteous in God's sight by the works of the law; rather, through the law we become conscious of our sin.

Your quotes about judgement are irrelevant. They are just normal morality but Christianity given the credit. The situation is that Judgement on deeds is secondary. Membership of the Christian club is what saves, not deeds and certainly not the law - except for Jews, and Paul isn't sure even about that....

Judgment on deeds is secondary, because deeds are secondary. Deeds comes from the mind of persons, therefore the crucial thing is, what kind of mind one has. Righteous mind produces righteous deeds and unrighteous mind produces sinful deeds, or righteousness is what righteous does and sin is what sinner does. Deeds can tell what kind of person one is, but they are only the result, not the cause. You don't become righteous by acting like one, pretending doesn't fool God. But, if you are truly righteous, you also work righteously.

I think it is sad that people don't seem to understand words of Jesus about a tree and its fruits.

From their fruits you shall know them. Do they gather grapes from thorns, or figs from thistles? So every good tree produces good fruits, but the corrupt tree produces evil fruits. A good tree cannot produce evil fruits, nor a corrupt tree produce good fruits. Every tree not producing good fruit is cut down and is thrown into fire. Then surely from their fruits you shall know them. Not everyone who says to Me, Lord, Lord, will enter into the kingdom of Heaven, but the ones who do the will of My Father in Heaven.
Matt. 7:16-21

Righteous person produces righteous fruit. And as in trees, it is not the fruit that determines the tree, it is the tree that determines the fruit. That is why, Paul is correct also. Faking a good fruit doesn't make people righteous.

[TRANSPONDER]

... If it was 'good', then Paul would have encouraged Christians to follow it. Instead he exhorts them to avoid becoming subject to it...

Why should I reject the scriptures that doesn't fit into your ideas?

I don't think Paul exhorts them. And, if law would not be valid, what would sin mean? If there would be no sin, why would anyone need forgiveness? If nothing is sin, then the whole Christianity is meaningless.

Romans 3:20 Therefore no one will be declared righteous in God's sight by the works of the law; rather, through the law we become conscious of our sin.

Your quotes about judgement are irrelevant. They are just normal morality but Christianity given the credit. The situation is that Judgement on deeds is secondary. Membership of the Christian club is what saves, not deeds and certainly not the law - except for Jews, and Paul isn't sure even about that....

Judgment on deeds is secondary, because deeds are secondary. Deeds comes from the mind of persons, therefore the crucial thing is, what kind of mind one has. Righteous mind produces righteous deeds and unrighteous mind produces sinful deeds, or righteousness is what righteous does and sin is what sinner does. Deeds can tell what kind of person one is, but they are only the result, not the cause. You don't become righteous by acting like one, pretending doesn't fool God. But, if you are truly righteous, you also work righteously.

I think it is sad that people don't seem to understand words of Jesus about a tree and its fruits.

From their fruits you shall know them. Do they gather grapes from thorns, or figs from thistles? So every good tree produces good fruits, but the corrupt tree produces evil fruits. A good tree cannot produce evil fruits, nor a corrupt tree produce good fruits. Every tree not producing good fruit is cut down and is thrown into fire. Then surely from their fruits you shall know them. Not everyone who says to Me, Lord, Lord, will enter into the kingdom of Heaven, but the ones who do the will of My Father in Heaven.
Matt. 7:16-21

Righteous person produces righteous fruit. And as in trees, it is not the fruit that determines the tree, it is the tree that determines the fruit. That is why, Paul is correct also. Faking a good fruit doesn't make people righteous.

You have a choice - to reject Paul who refutes you or to accept it and drop the idea that Christians have to obey the OT Laws. (the sermon on the mount and David and Shewbread replace them with Jesus' [Pauline] Christian views). As I recall we are arguing that good deeds do not save but membership of the Christian club, provided that sinning does not lose us our membership card.

I may agree on Righteousness (morality), but I query the claim that being a Christian gives you a 'righteous' mind. The debate that Christians are morally better than atheists is an old one and isn't borne out by the data, not even with throwing out the 'Not Real Christians'. What's worse is that doctrinally, we are all sinners even if we have a moral mind. Because of that wretched apple we all, good and bad, deserve to be damned. It is signing up to Jesus that enables the forgiveness loophole. It is the belief in Jesus that saves, not a transformation to a moral mindset, even if it was true that Christianity did that.

I understand the metaphor of a tree and its' fruits. I also understand the one about 'They are not Real Christians'. Indeed, you seem to understand it with 'faking it'.

cue: the CCTV debate. Christians only do right because they fear displeasing God. Atheists do it for no reward other than an idea that it is good for everyone.

[JehovahsWitness]

Most people do not live by bible standards and Christians could not entirely isolate themselves from nonbelieves even if we wanted to (which we do not). We all have friends and family member (even marrage partners ) workmates... that practise the things God condemns in scripture but we try to get along and show love and compassion to them as Jesus would.

That said, there is a limit to how far we would go and there is no reason to put our physical, emotional or spiritual wellbeing at risk by forming close/intimate friendships with those that do not respect bible standards.

[TRANSPONDER]

Most people do not live by bible standards and Christians could not entirely isolate themselves from nonbelieves even if we wanted to (which we do not). We all have friends and family member (even marrage partners ) workmates... that practise the things God condemns in scripture but we try to get along and show love and compassion to them as Jesus would.

That said, there is a limit to how far we would go and there is no reason to put our physical, emotional or spiritual wellbeing at risk by forming close/intimate friendships with those that do not respect bible standards.

First, this has nothing to do with the OT Law and Paul arguing that it could not save (but was rather a burden imposed on the Jews for their hard -heartedness ) and that innate righteousness as Adam had before the fall is written on all our hearts and we can be righteous without the Law. That was his thesis and Christianity is based on that.

That said, yes, I agree what you say above, but that to me is human moral and social values and found in all societies with or without Christianity. Christianity did not invent morality, nor indeed did Judaism. It merely uses it for its' own purposes and probably thinks it is doing it better. I have heard Muslim apologists arguing that the restrictions of Sharya law would make for more moral societies than we now have.

If you aren't impressed by that, you may understand why I'm not impressed by Christian claims to make people better, morally.

[1213]

You have a choice - to reject Paul who refutes you or to accept it and drop the idea that Christians have to obey the OT Laws.

I don't say Christians have to obey. I say, Christians want to obey, if they are born anew as Jesus taught.

I may agree on Righteousness (morality), but I query the claim that being a Christian gives you a 'righteous' mind.

I wouldn't say "Christians gives...", I think the words of Jesus can cause change of mind and make person righteous.

...that doctrinally...

Maybe it would be good to remain in what is said in the Bible and reject doctrines that are in contradiction with it.

[oldbadger]

I don't say Christians have to obey. I say, Christians want to obey, if they are born anew as Jesus taught.

I wouldn't say "Christians gives...", I think the words of Jesus can cause change of mind and make person righteous.

Maybe it would be good to remain in what is said in the Bible and reject doctrines that are in contradiction with it.

Do you keep to the laws of the bible........?
For example, do you support the law that gives all newlyweds a year's holiday? That would require a special levee on wages, I reckon.
But do you?

[William]

Matthew 22:40
“On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.”

[TRANSPONDER]

You have a choice - to reject Paul who refutes you or to accept it and drop the idea that Christians have to obey the OT Laws.

I don't say Christians have to obey. I say, Christians want to obey, if they are born anew as Jesus taught.

I may agree on Righteousness (morality), but I query the claim that being a Christian gives you a 'righteous' mind.

I wouldn't say "Christians gives...", I think the words of Jesus can cause change of mind and make person righteous.

...that doctrinally...

Maybe it would be good to remain in what is said in the Bible and reject doctrines that are in contradiction with it.

I don't want to be unfair to you. Yes. I do get this idea that becoming 'religious' can turn ones' life around. One reforms, swears off drink, women and anything that smacks of guilty pleasures. Of course as many a Hitchens or Dillahunty hath said in debate 'That religion may turn one's life around does not make it true'. However the 'Jesus saved me from the gutter' gambit and the various 'we need it, true or not' package is not the argument but whether having your life turned around and becoming a plaster saint is what will save you.

It isn't. It is a side effect and ceasing to sin is also a requirement. But it is the Jesus belief that saves, not being 'perfect, as your Father is perfect'.

Which is not only impossible but dangerous as we know the terrible evil and injustice that was done by God, and also the excusing of it by the faithful - that it was 'necessary'. That's where the Righteous anger justified by Faith and God being on your side can become dangerous. But the coalsack constrictive dress codes and the foolish fish on a Friday nonsense is not the question, any more than the crusades and Inquisition and the other 'oh, Christianity isn't to blame for that' problems.

It is to blame for that. It was the reason for it. But the point as I keep laboring, is that deeds will not save, because we are all deserving of damnation from the Fall. Only Jesusfaith can save. Though sinning can damn even someone who thought he was doing God's will by carbombing abortion clinics. Religion can turnaround a social animal into a religious psychopath as easily as turning a street thug into a street preacher.

As to what the Bible says, Faith saves, not deeds. And only Jesusfaith. Nobody gets to the Father but by Jesus. If it were not so, you could get to the Father by being a good Hindu or Buddhist. Doctrinally and Biblically, you can't. And if you say you can. you have invented your own religion.

[1213]

Do you keep to the laws of the bible........?

Probably not perfectly.

For example, do you support the law that gives all newlyweds a year's holiday?...

I am not sure is that the law that is written into peoples heart, when they are born anew, but I support it, but no one else seems to support that, so my thinking doesn't matter much in this.

[TRANSPONDER]

Matthew 22:40
“On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.”

Yes. Here's where I stand on this, understanding of the NT, and early Christianity when the original gospel was put on paper. Paul argued that instinctive righteousness through Godfaith (as with Abraham) would save from the sin of the fall. The Law and Commandments would not save. If anything, they should be avoided. Paul turned Godfaith into Jesusfaith, because innate righteousness (that would somehow make one sinless) had to be turned into Jesusfaith that would make a loophole in original sin. It's a trick and bad reasoning, but that's Paul, and is what Christianity and the gospels became.

No matter that the Commandments are now an icon and shibboleth of Christianity, Jesus sidelined those in the sermon on the mount, the rich young ruler and David and the shewbread. "Something greater than the Temple is here" That's why the Sabbath doesn't matter, because Jesus is Lord of it. The old Laws do not matter because Jesus has 'fulfilled' them. The family does not matter, because the brothers and sisters of the cult - they are now the Family.

Maybe Marcion wasn't wrong in wanting to eliminate all the OT stuff, because Christianity today still teaches that the old Laws and Commandments matter, when the Gospels actually teach that they don't.