Christians...why Bother Us?

[chefranden]

FYI I'm an ex-minister as well as an ex-Christian. Ancient Language was my major.

 

Silly Chef! All your fancy book learnin' don't mean squat to a True Believer™ who knows what God REALLY meant when he wrote the Bible.

 

Your knowledge has made you unknowledgeable, your smarts become foolishness before swine, fool me once, uh, you can't fool me again. Whatever - I know they have some pat answer to refute your misunderstanding of the ORIGINAL FUCKING TEXT!!!!!

 

Yah, I thought of that just after posting.

 

"

1) There is only One God

2) God had revealed Himself as existing as Father, Son, & Holy Spirit

3) There is a three-in-oneness in Scripture

 

The doctrine of the Trinity means that there is only One God, who exists as three Persons who are co-equal and co-eternal.

 

Trinity does not mean three gods."

 

This could have been me many years ago. Somehow the Christian believer does not get the one is not three concept. I suppose it comes from that old saw that if you repeat an untruth often enough it seems true. Never mind of course that this point of view was a political decision under dear old Constantine complete with terrorism and other skulduggery.

[chefranden]

1) There is only One God

2) God had revealed Himself as existing as Father, Son, & Holy Spirit

3) There is a three-in-oneness in Scripture

 

The doctrine of the Trinity means that there is only One God, who exists as three Persons who are co-equal and co-eternal.

 

Trinity does not mean three gods.

 

One wonders why if this is such an important doctrine that unbelief concerning the same could according to many traditions cause you to be damned even if you believed in God otherwise, say like a JW, that this doctrine is not clearly spelled out even if only in the NT.

 

In addition why mislead the Jews in this matter: שְׁמַ֖ע יִשְׂרָאֵ֑ל יְהוָ֥ה אֱלֹהֵ֖ינוּ יְהוָ֥ה ׀ אֶחָֽד׃ "Hear O Israel Yahweh our God is one Yahweh."?

 

This certainly does not seem fair to insist at one time that Yahweh is one and then later insist that well not exactly one. You can't argue that it was because the Jews couldn't understand. They could tell the difference between one an three the same as we. The doctrine would be no more mysterious to them than to us, as the usual cop out is to exclaim the mysteries of God are not for us to understand.

 

At best the above is a credal statement, for what you have just written above does not explain anything. It sounds like an explanation to you because you hear it and repeat it over and over again. But sounding explanatory does not equal being explanatory. Darth has already pointed out many of the problems that this does not address, so I won't get into them.

[hereticzero]

The biggest obstacle Christianity has is, well, Christianity. Christianity stole its religion from the Jews, god and all, which Christians do not really understand, otherwise they would not insist on the 1+1=3 drivel. I really like the idea of the earth as god--it sustains life, feeds us, and kills us when it throws a snit! And, the earth does not need anyone telling us its 'secret' message cuz when the earth throws a fit we know we are going to die!--unlike the Christian god that requires volumes of sermons telling us why its god wants to kill all of us. Nice and tidy, mother earth. She loves us and cares for us. Thanks Mom!

[Thurisaz]

My, my - are we touchy. Too much coffee?

 

Translation: "I, errrrrm, *cough cough*, have... no evidence whatsoever. I'm just pulling it all out of my arse."

 

As was to be expected.

*PLONK*

[rayskidude]

The action of those in Chicago politics to rebuild this particualr church with $1,000,000 in public funds had nothing to do with a faith-based initiative, it was a blatant move to buy votes - thus the opposition from many in Chicago for this plan. So corruption had everything to do with it. Since 1980, 27 Chicago alderman have been convicted - and just yesterday another one was indicted. We've had 3 former governors imprisoned - and now with Blago, it may be 4.

 

Yes, I support faith-based initiatives - any time that religion and gov't can work togther to accomplish benefits for people - I would be in favor of that.

 

Are you really this dense? You said Christians don't fear or hate atheists. I gave you a quote and then another from Christian leaders that show Christians do indeed hate and fear atheists, and you think I'm talking about Chicago Politics? Are you stupid or are you just trying to change the subject?

 

Exactly which Christian leaders have you quoted?

[rayskidude]

The doctrine of the Trinity means that there is only One God, who exists as three Persons who are co-equal and co-eternal. Trinity does not mean three gods.

 

"Then why does Jesus talk to him? He refers to him as a separate person on numerous occasion, speaks to 'Father' directly, and asks him to change his mind. If they're the same person, why would he do that? Wouldn't he not need to ask, talk to, or otherwise communicate with himself if they're all one in the same being?"

 

Yes - you've got it; they're NOt the same Person, they are separate Persons, who can and do communicate with one another. However, they are One God. "I and the Father are One." The Greek word "one" is neuter, meaning one essence, not one personage.

 

"Trinity Tri = 3 it's literally what the word means

.

 

Yes, and note that 1 x 1 x 1 = 1. As in 1 length x 1 height x 1 width = 1 space. In a similar fashion, there are three separate, co-equal, co-eternal Persons within the One God.

 

 

It's the story about a God who makes something that he knows is going to disobey him, because he wants something to worship him, to fill a need he doesn't have, because he's perfect, and perfect things don't have needs, get's mad at that something and curses it, but promises himself to forgive it, by killing himself, to appease himself and his own temper, and then raise himself from the dead in three days and nights by his own word, even though the actual number of days between his death and resurection don't add up to three days and nights, so he can ascend into heaven to be with himself, and allow his creations to enter the other realm he made himself, because the rules he made up wouldn't allow him to let them into his realm, because he'd upset himself, made a pact with himself, and repeatedly punished the creation for his own mistakes, that he couldn't have made because he's perfect, yet has a bad temper, and an insecurity complex. and says that he'll come back someday in the lifetimes of the people that he met while he was down there, to end the world he created, even though he didn't, and save a few of his creations, while sending the rest into a pit of fire to burn for eternity, for crimes that could not have been committed over the course of more than say about 65 years on average, and call it just and fair, all while rewarding people for just thinking he was real, as opposed to actually spending their lives doing good things, because of magic forgiveness boxes that he installed in the houses he never needed to live in, or because they told him they were really sorry. While all the other good people who did nice things for their entire lives get to spend all their time roasting forever with the worst of the believers for no good reason whatsoever.

 

You're right - this makes no sense because it is NOT the teaching of Scripture

You can't claim Jesus is God without realizing that he was schitzophrenic to a disturbing degree either. He talks to himself, a lot, as if he's talking to a completely different person.

 

Either they're one being, or they're not. Don't try and pull this 'they're three separate beings, but the same thing' crap. The New Testament, and Jesus's interaction with God the 'Father' clearly shows that's not true at all.

 

The three Persons of the Trinity are One God with one essence - not three beings with a shared essence (this would be human beings)

[chefranden]

The action of those in Chicago politics to rebuild this particualr church with $1,000,000 in public funds had nothing to do with a faith-based initiative, it was a blatant move to buy votes - thus the opposition from many in Chicago for this plan. So corruption had everything to do with it. Since 1980, 27 Chicago alderman have been convicted - and just yesterday another one was indicted. We've had 3 former governors imprisoned - and now with Blago, it may be 4.

 

Yes, I support faith-based initiatives - any time that religion and gov't can work togther to accomplish benefits for people - I would be in favor of that.

 

Are you really this dense? You said Christians don't fear or hate atheists. I gave you a quote and then another from Christian leaders that show Christians do indeed hate and fear atheists, and you think I'm talking about Chicago Politics? Are you stupid or are you just trying to change the subject?

 

Exactly which Christian leaders have you quoted?

 

 

Well that was made clear in the quotes if you'd bother to read them.

 

edit: Oh wait. I see you poking around the idea that the people quoted are not leaders or are not Christians. You couldn't just come out and say that, why? Since they are leaders and apparently chosen by God for that role, you must mean that they are not Christian. And I suppose that you know they are not Christians because they disagreed with you about hating atheists. Oh yes and because one was a democrat. That makes you a genuine no shit TrueChristian™ right? I shall have to watch my Ps and Qs around you, and perhaps I should look after my fs as well.

[chefranden]

Yes - you've got it; they're NOt the same Person, they are separate Persons, who can and do communicate with one another. However, they are One God. "I and the Father are One." The Greek word "one" is neuter, meaning one essence, not one personage.

 

And apparently they don't get along since Jesus asked for unity and didn't get it. But then many schizophrenic persons are like that, with some personalities not knowing what the other personalities are up to. So you've succeeded in showing that God is schizophrenic, but why should that recommend him to us? Which is the boss personality? Is the it evil one, or the nice one? The HS personality must be very introverted as it doesn't say much, or maybe it is autistic?

 

Perhaps they run the show by voice vote? Maybe the HS doesn't bother to voice an opinion unless a tie breaker is needed? Perhaps Yahweh and HS were against unity? Maybe they feared that whole tower of babble thing all over again. Maybe Jesus forgot about that?

 

And Yahweh said, Behold, the people are united, and they have all one language, and this is only the beginning of what they will do.

And nothing that they propose to do will now be impossible for them.

 

 

My it looks like God couldn't beat us in a fair fight so he had to cheat, for even if we proposed to kick his ass we could. People, even just believers, being united would not be that great an idea. Therefore "the world knowing that God sent him and has loved them even as God had loved him" wouldn't be worth the risk of getting a hole poked into the bottom of heaven. 10,000 denominations is better than that!

 

Edit: Which one of them flipped the switch when the evil one said "let there be light"? Jesus? HS? Oh and how is it there is light with out anything to emit it? You know they didn't get around to light emitters until the 4th day I believe. Maybe there was just like a flash of light on the first day form the tip of Jesus' wand. By the Fourth day God thought, "well it would be nice if the light stayed on," so he made some light emitters.

[rayskidude]

"Are you really this dense? You said Christians don't fear or hate atheists. I gave you a quote and then another from Christian leaders that show Christians do indeed hate and fear atheists, and you think I'm talking about Chicago Politics? Are you stupid or are you just trying to change the subject?"

 

Exactly which Christian leaders have you quoted?

 

"edit: Oh wait. I see you poking around the idea that the people quoted are not leaders or are not Christians. You couldn't just come out and say that, why? Since they are leaders and apparently chosen by God for that role, you must mean that they are not Christian. And I suppose that you know they are not Christians because they disagreed with you about hating atheists. Oh yes and because one was a democrat. That makes you a genuine no shit TrueChristian right? I shall have to watch my Ps and Qs around you, and perhaps I should look after my fs as well.

 

Whoa - you guessed it - a political leader is not a Christian leader! When did either Pres Bush or the Chicago alderman claim to be Christian leaders? They may be public leaders, who happen to also be Christians. Much like Christian athletes. They're also not Christian leaders, but rather athletes who are also Christians.

 

Good catch!

[rayskidude]

Yes - you've got it; they're NOt the same Person, they are separate Persons, who can and do communicate with one another. However, they are One God. "I and the Father are One." The Greek word "one" is neuter, meaning one essence, not one personage.

 

And Yahweh said, Behold, the people are united, and they have all one language, and this is only the beginning of what they will do.

And nothing that they propose to do will now be impossible for them.

 

It would help if you read the Bible in context - and not just yank verses out of the storyline. SO let's see what led up to this statement from God.

Gen 6:5 The LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intention of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.

Gen 9:1 And God blessed Noah and his sons and said to them, "Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth.

Gen 11:1 Now the whole earth had one language and the same words.

Gen 11:2 And as people migrated from the east, they found a plain in the land of Shinar and settled there.

Gen 11:3 And they said to one another, "Come, let us make bricks, and burn them thoroughly." And they had brick for stone, and bitumen for mortar.

Gen 11:4 Then they said, "Come, let us build ourselves a city and a tower with its top in the heavens, and let us make a name for ourselves, lest we be dispersed over the face of the whole earth."

 

So the people directly disobeyed God's command to fill the earth, and they sought to build a tower to reach up to pray to their false gods. No other evil would be beyond the grasp of this united humanity seeking to arrogantly make a name for themselves; so in an act of mercy God established a variety of languages, which caused the people to separate and fill the Earth - as we observe today.

 

 

"Edit: Which one of them flipped the switch when the evil one said "let there be light"? Jesus? HS? Oh and how is it there is light with out anything to emit it? You know they didn't get around to light emitters until the 4th day I believe. Maybe there was just like a flash of light on the first day form the tip of Jesus' wand. By the Fourth day God thought, "well it would be nice if the light stayed on," so he made some light emitters.

 

What makes you think God needs a star to create light? And have you not read the Book of Revelation?

Rev 21:1 Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and the sea was no more.

Rev 21:2 And I saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.

Rev 21:3 And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, "Behold, the dwelling place of God is with man. He will dwell with them, and they will be his people, and God himself will be with them as their God.

Rev 21:23 And the city has no need of sun or moon to shine on it, for the glory of God gives it light, and its lamp is the Lamb.

Rev 21:24 By its light will the nations walk, and the kings of the earth will bring their glory into it,

Rev 21:25 and its gates will never be shut by day--and there will be no night there.

Rev 21:26 They will bring into it the glory and the honor of the nations.

Rev 21:27 But nothing unclean will ever enter it, nor anyone who does what is detestable or false, but only those who are written in the Lamb's book of life.

[chefranden]

Whoa - you guessed it - a political leader is not a Christian leader! When did either Pres Bush or the Chicago alderman claim to be Christian leaders? They may be public leaders, who happen to also be Christians. Much like Christian athletes. They're also not Christian leaders, but rather athletes who are also Christians.

 

They are leaders and they are Christians, therefore they are Christian Leaders. That is enough evidence for me, what ever semantic bullshit you might want to use for smart ass weaseling.

 

As I accused you above, I accuse you again: "Aye Captain, 's no a True Scotsman!"

[rayskidude]

Yes - you've got it; they're Not the same Person, they are separate Persons, who can and do communicate with one another. However, they are One God. "I and the Father are One." The Greek word "one" is neuter, meaning one essence, not one personage.

 

"And apparently they don't get along since Jesus asked for unity and didn't get it. But then many schizophrenic persons are like that, with some personalities not knowing what the other personalities are up to. So you've succeeded in showing that God is schizophrenic, but why should that recommend him to us? Which is the boss personality? Is the it evil one, or the nice one? The HS personality must be very introverted as it doesn't say much, or maybe it is autistic?

 

Perhaps they run the show by voice vote? Maybe the HS doesn't bother to voice an opinion unless a tie breaker is needed? Perhaps Yahweh and HS were against unity? Maybe they feared that whole tower of babble thing all over again. Maybe Jesus forgot about that?"

 

If you read Genesis 1, John 1, and Hebrews 1 - you'll see that all the Persons in the Trinity cooperated in the Creation. And if you read I Peter 1:1-5 and Eph 1:3-14 - you'll see that all three Persons cooperate in our salvation. God exists as One Divine Being of one divine essence, yet as three separate Persons.

[chefranden]

If you read Genesis 1, John 1, and Hebrews 1 - you'll see that all the Persons in the Trinity cooperated in the Creation. And if you read I Peter 1:1-5 and Eph 1:3-14 - you'll see that all three Persons cooperate in our salvation. God exists as One Divine Being of one divine essence, yet as three separate Persons.

 

Hey, guess what? I've read Genesis a few dozen times including reading it in Hebrew. I never seen that all the persons in the Trinity cooperated in the creation. True Elohim is plural and Elohim seems to address others. But there is no indication in the text that these others are of the trinity. That has to be read back into the text. The others could be anything, or nothing at all if it is the royal we. Elohim is not regarded by Jewish scholars as meaning more than one god. True that a case can be made for the trinity from the NT, however it is anything but definitive and no case can be made from scripture that it must be believed to qualify for salvation. It is in fact Catholic doctrine, and could well have been pitched along with other Catholic doctrines during the reformation. If Luther and Calvin had rejected it you'd be singing a different tune today, well unless you are Catholic. But in that case you wouldn't need no stinking scripture to defend the doctrine. You could just say, "the Church says so".

[rayskidude]

If you read Genesis 1, John 1, and Hebrews 1 - you'll see that all the Persons in the Trinity cooperated in the Creation. And if you read I Peter 1:1-5 and Eph 1:3-14 - you'll see that all three Persons cooperate in our salvation. God exists as One Divine Being of one divine essence, yet as three separate Persons.

 

"Hey, guess what? I've read Genesis a few dozen times including reading it in Hebrew. I never seen that all the persons in the Trinity cooperated in the creation. True Elohim is plural and Elohim seems to address others. But there is no indication in the text that these others are of the trinity. That has to be read back into the text. The others could be anything, or nothing at all if it is the royal we. Elohim is not regarded by Jewish scholars as meaning more than one god."

 

I agree that Elohim refers to One God; it is used with singualr verbs. And the term Elohim certainly is consistent with One God existing as multiple Persons; as is the phrase, "Let Us make man in Our image..." But also note Gen 1:2; "The Spirit of God was moving (i.e., brooding) over the surface of the waters - certainly consistent with the Person of God the Spirit. The Trinity is definitely more clear in the NT, and when we look back at the OT we can see consistency with the Triune Godhead. And taking all the chapters I noted would show cooperation with the Triune Godhead.

 

"[The Trinity] is in fact Catholic doctrine, and could well have been pitched along with other Catholic doctrines during the reformation. If Luther and Calvin had rejected it you'd be singing a different tune today, well unless you are Catholic. But in that case you wouldn't need no stinking scripture to defend the doctrine. You could just say, "the Church says so."

 

I would say that Calvin and Luther rejected Catholic soteriology because it was unBiblical. But they did not reject the Tri-unity of God, because that doctrine is taught in Scripture. I myself left the Roman Catholic Church many years ago - because I've seen that they've rejected some Biblical doctrines and have also added to Biblical doctrines.

[chefranden]

I would say that Calvin and Luther rejected Catholic soteriology because it was unBiblical. But they did not reject the Tri-unity of God, because that doctrine is taught in Scripture. I myself left the Roman Catholic Church many years ago - because I've seen that they've rejected some Biblical doctrines and have also added to Biblical doctrines.

 

Why do you suppose that God, Jesus, Paul, and company didn't mention trinity or the need to believe in it for salvation? You do know that the doctrine of the trinity was a political decision from the 4th century right?

 

Acts2:37Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do? 38Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

 

Odd that Peter didn't think the trinity worth mentioning to these that wanted salvation. Peter doesn't even prescribe a trinitarian formula: "I baptize you in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit."

 

You might name one scripture that says, God is a trinity. This is not to say that you can't find supporting passages for your idea. In scripture you can find supporting passages for just about anything you like from slavery to revolution. Of course we all know that you being the TrueChristian™ have the correct interpretation of any disputed passages and others like the JWs for example are from Satan.

 

Your problem is that I'm no more (or less) impressed by your interpretation than I am of a Catholic's, or a JW's, or a Mormon. You all are fucking wackos IMHO. And I'm no more impressed by the Bible than the Vedas, the Koran, or Mao's Little Red Book.

 

I like to argue from the Bible since I know it so well, but keep it in the back of your head that it's all crap to me.

[chefranden]

I would say that Calvin and Luther rejected Catholic soteriology because it was unBiblical. But they did not reject the Tri-unity of God, because that doctrine is taught in Scripture. I myself left the Roman Catholic Church many years ago - because I've seen that they've rejected some Biblical doctrines and have also added to Biblical doctrines.

 

Soteriology is such a nice word. I use it myself when I want to sound all learned and such.

 

But since you mention it: I suppose you know that there are several soteriologies in the bible. Perhaps you would like to elaborate on why Paul's soteriology is superior to Ezekiel's and Matthew's Jesus.

 

edit: If you do try, I'll be gone for 10 days starting tomorrow.

[rayskidude]

I would say that Calvin and Luther rejected Catholic soteriology because it was unBiblical. But they did not reject the Tri-unity of God, because that doctrine is taught in Scripture. I myself left the Roman Catholic Church many years ago - because I've seen that they've rejected some Biblical doctrines and have also added to Biblical doctrines.

 

"Soteriology is such a nice word. I use it myself when I want to sound all learned and such.

 

But since you mention it: I suppose you know that there are several soteriologies in the bible. Perhaps you would like to elaborate on why Paul's soteriology is superior to Ezekiel's and Matthew's Jesus."

 

I'm sorry - is there some restriction on the theological jargon we can use?

 

Also, if you believe that there is some variety in the doctrine of salvation that is presented throughout Scripture, I ask that you state the differences you see. Then I'd be happy to respond.

[rayskidude]

Why do you suppose that God, Jesus, Paul, and company didn't mention trinity or the need to believe in it for salvation? You do know that the doctrine of the trinity was a political decision from the 4th century right?

 

I suggest you read my three posts under General Theological Issues; Dirty Politics & the Trinity - you'll see that your statment is not true.

 

I like to argue from the Bible since I know it so well, but keep it in the back of your head that it's all crap to me.

 

Then you understand that the Tri-unity of God is a theological doctrine derived from the whole of Scripture, and not an exegetical doctrine based on certain 'proof-texts'

[chefranden]

I suggest you read my three posts under General Theological Issues; Dirty Politics & the Trinity - you'll see that your statment is not true.

 

All I see is that you don't think it is true.

[chefranden]

Also, if you believe that there is some variety in the doctrine of salvation that is presented throughout Scripture, I ask that you state the differences you see. Then I'd be happy to respond.

 

If you don't believe there is some variety in biblical doctrines of salvation, you don't know the book very well. However, there is plenty of extra biblical evidence of soteriological variation in the myriads of denominations.

 

Since I suppose that I can't expect you to think for yourself on the matter here's something I wrote on Ezekiel vs. Paul.

 

Who Has the Best Plan of Salvation: Ezekiel or Paul?

 

 

Sunday, an excellent day on which to consider salvation. I’m going to assume here that the reader and I both pretty much agree on what the plan of salvation is according to Paul via the faith only folks. I’m thinking of the one coming from the likes of those great bible scholars, Billy Sunday, Billy Graham, and Jack Chick: 1. Admit that you are a sinner because we have all sinned and fallen short of the glory of god. 2. Be willing to turn from sin because in times past God winked at ignorance, but now commands all men everywhere to repent. 3. Believe that Jesus Christ died for you, was buried, and rose from the dead so that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus, and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead you will be saved. 4. Through prayer, invite Jesus into your life to become your personal Savior, because anyone who calls upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.

 

Some churches, which are bit closer in thought with the “whore of Babylon” like the Lutheran, Episcopal, Church of Christ will add 5. Be baptized in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, for he that believes and is baptized will be saved. I only add this because you, dear reader, may be from such a church. Much to the annoyance of my old Church of Christ, Paul didn’t put as much emphasis on baptism as could be hoped for. The short coming is troublesome because Church of Christ theologists interpret Christ, Peter, John, James, and the OT via Paul like most Christians do.

 

The salient points of Paul’s salvation thinking are: 1. A person is a worthless pile of crap which naturally God wouldn’t want on his living room carpet. 2. Once a pile of crap, always a pile of crap unless, 3. Someone not a worthless pile of crap has his nose rubbed in it, and 4. I, a self acknowledged worthless pile of crap, believe that this someone did have his nose rubbed in it, then 5. I’m no longer a pile of crap. So, as long as I can hold this picture in my mind as a logical and loving certainty and necessity I get to live for ever.

 

I put the above paragraph in such rude terms on purpose in order that you may more easily see that Ezekiel’s plan of salvation, supported by Matthew’s Jesus, allows one to maintain human dignity and still have a relationship with God.

 

[A quick note on context: Just because the writings found in the Christian Bible were arbitrarily chosen and pasted together by the early Roman Church does not mean that they are in actual context with one another. That means that Paul and Ezekiel do actually disagree with one another, and that there is no contextual reason to suppose Paul superior to Ezekiel in understanding God.]

 

Dear Reader, Ezekiel’s plan of salvation is not well known so you may want to refresh your memory of it by reading through it a couple of times.

Ezekiel 18

 

Ezekiel writes that what he has to say came right from Yahweh. Since Zeke made the bible compiling cut, religious folks have to give him some authority. Paul is somewhat less assertive about the source of his musings. Paul got his information from the Christ, rather then directly from the head God. Since Paul also made the cut, how should one judge between them? As an outsider, I would say go with the guy that reported to the head man especially since he is supported by at least one version of the Son of God and Son Inc. – More on that later.

 

You will notice from the beginning God’s description of a righteous man is given. The righteous man does not eat at mountain shrines, does not look at idols, does not mess with his neighbor’s wife, does not have sex with menstruating women, does not oppress anyone, does not rob, does not take interest on loans (the American Standard is a poor translation here as are most modern translations that dare not speak against capitalism), and in general does not do wrong. A righteous man does return collateral for a loan. A righteous man does feed the hungry. A righteous man does cloth the naked. A righteous man judges fairly between man and man. A righteous man does keep God’s laws.

 

Since God can describe a righteous man, one might be given to ponder the possibility that there could be such people born of Eve. At this point the average Christian will be tempted to guess that God is describing Christ. However, that is not clear. “The righteous man will live,” says Ezekiel, but we know that, according to Paul, the righteous Christ must die. In addition we find that God is disputing Israel’s belief that they, or anyone, dies for someone else’s sin. (Vs. 3&4) One might even get the crazy idea that Yahweh doesn’t have much sympathy for St. Augustine’s idea of original sin either. Vs.20 “… the son will not share the guilt of the father, nor will the father share the guilt of the son.”

 

And then Yahweh says, “The righteousness of the righteous man will be credited to him,” [!!] Ezekiel’s Yahweh doesn’t support the idea that your righteousness is useless being only filthy rags.

 

It is about here that the Pauline apologist will be tempted to claim that the life and death being spoken of is temporal. However, there is little evidence that temporal authorities ever put men to death for oppressing the powerless, the poor, the widow, or the orphan. There is little evidence of men being put to death for charging interest on loans except by medieval kings and lords that didn’t want to make good on their debt. There is even less evidence of people being put to death by temporal authorities for not being charitable. Indeed these are the sorts of behavior that often lead to wealth and power. Vs.21 puts an end to the idea that Ezekiel’s Yahweh is talking about temporal life and death. It is impossible for a dead wicked guy to turn his life around by acting righteously.

 

Not only does the wicked man save himself by repenting and practicing righteousness, but he gets his sins forgiven and taken off the books: vs.22 “none of the offenses he has committed will be remembered against him.” This is repeated with more power in vs. 28: “Because [the wicked man] considers all the offenses [the wicked man] has committed and turns away from them, [the wicked man] will surely live; [the wicked man] will not die.

And it is re-emphasized again in vs.30: “Repent! Turn away from all your offenses; then sin will not be your downfall.”

 

Warning, Jack Chick wannabes might want to skip over this next bit of vs. 22. Ezekiel’s Yahweh says “Because of the righteous things he [that’s the wicked man] has done, he [that’s the wicked man] will live. Hmmm! According to Paul this can’t happen. Vs. 24 is a spoiler for those readers who might be of the “once saved, always saved” stripe. If you are invested in that belief you may want to skip vs.24.

 

What does this mean if Ezekiel is writing the Word of Yahweh? Well of course it means that you don’t need a savior. It means that you can be righteous in the sight of Yahweh by your own efforts to be righteous. To say otherwise makes Ezekiel’s Yahweh out to be flip flopper at best and a liar at worst. However, I think that the notion that Yahweh is the same yesterday, today, and always kind of does away with the possibility of Yahweh being a flip flopper. So either Yahweh is a liar or Paul is. As an atheist I would say that the problem is just another illustration that shows that religion is what ever the latest James Dobson type says it is. However, if I were still religious I would lean towards Ezekiel, because doing so solves a number of problems.

 

The most serious problem it solves is that of being condemned for something you have no control over. The Pauline idea of condemnation is rather like condemning a dog for not being able to fly. “Not fair,” I’d say. But old Zeke said, “don’t whine about not fair! Of course it’s fair. You do what you’re told and you’re in. And, even though you are a measly human, you can do what you are told.” I like that if only because it prevents Hitler, Stalin, Mao, and their ilk from getting into heaven at the last second via a quick sinner’s prayer.

 

Since I’m still an admirer of Jesus as a good teacher, sorry Clive, I’m amused and gratified to know that at least one version of him agrees with old Zeke.

Matthew 25: 31-46.

 

Upon close reading now that you are familiar with Ezekiel 18 you will notice how much Jesus’ picture of the “last judgment” echoes Zeke. To me what is more telling is what Jesus doesn’t mention as being important when standing before God for the last time.

 

Nothing about what you believe is mentioned. No troublesome beliefs are required. You don’t have to believe that Noah crammed two or seven of all the animals in the world in a wood boat for a year with no place to put the poop. You don’t have to believe in a Virgin Mary. You don’t have to believe blood is better than Tide for whitening. You don’t have to believe that you are a worthless piece of crap. By means of silence Jesus clears up all the theological bickering and killing over crap like baptism, communion, trinity, Popes, tongues, etcetera, etcetera, and etcetera. Heck, believing in God himself is not even required. Just were you as good to people as you could be given your resources and abilities? Even I can do that.

[rayskidude]

Since I suppose that I can't expect you to think for yourself on the matter here's something I wrote on Ezekiel vs. Paul.

Who Has the Best Plan of Salvation: Ezekiel or Paul?

 

You will notice from the beginning God’s description of a righteous man is given. The righteous man does not eat at mountain shrines, does not look at idols, does not mess with his neighbor’s wife, does not have sex with menstruating women, does not oppress anyone, does not rob, does not take interest on loans, and in general does not do wrong. A righteous man does return collateral for a loan. A righteous man does feed the hungry. A righteous man does cloth the naked. A righteous man judges fairly between man and man. A righteous man does keep God’s laws.

 

Please note just a few things that Paul says about true Christian faith & the resultant behaviors;

Rom 13:8 Owe no one anything, except to

love each other, for the one who loves another has fulfilled the law.

Rom 13:9 For the commandments, "You shall not commit adultery, You shall not murder, You shall not steal, You shall not covet," and any other commandment, are summed up in this word: "You shall love your neighbor as yourself."

Rom 13:10 Love does no wrong to a neighbor; therefore

love is the fulfilling of the law.

Rom 13:11 Besides this you know the time, that the hour has come for you to wake from sleep. For salvation is nearer to us now than when we first believed.

Rom 13:12 The night is far gone; the day is at hand. So then let us cast off the works of darkness and put on the armor of light.

Rom 13:13 Let us walk properly as in the daytime, not in orgies and drunkenness, not in sexual immorality and sensuality, not in quarreling and jealousy.

Rom 13:14 But put on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make no provision for the flesh, to gratify its desires.

 

2Co 9:8 And God is able to make all grace abound to you, so that having all sufficiency in all things at all times,

you may abound in every good work.

Gal 5:6 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision counts for anything, but only faith working through love.

Gal 5:13 For you were called to freedom, brothers. Only do not use your freedom as an opportunity for the flesh, but

through love serve one another.

Gal 5:14 For the whole law is fulfilled in one word: "You shall love your neighbor as yourself."

Tit 2:11 For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation for all people,

Tit 2:12 training us to renounce ungodliness and worldly passions, and

to live self-controlled, upright, and godly lives in the present age,

Tit 2:13 waiting for our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ,

Tit 2:14 who gave himself for us to redeem us from all lawlessness and

to purify for himself a people for his own possession who are zealous for good works.

Heb 12:14 Strive for peace with everyone, and for

the holiness without which no one will see the Lord.

 

True Christian Faith is always presented as resulting in Christian virtues and behavior - you cannot have one without the other. Even that great passage on being saved by God's grace alone through faith alone goes on to teach that we are in Christ Jesus to do good works. The works are a result of the faith!!

 

Eph 2:8 For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God,

Eph 2:9 not a result of works, so that no one may boast.

Eph 2:10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.

 

Since I’m still an admirer of Jesus as a good teacher, sorry Clive, I’m amused and gratified to know that at least one version of him agrees with old Zeke. Matthew 25: 31-46.

Upon close reading now that you are familiar with Ezekiel 18 you will notice how much Jesus’ picture of the “last judgment” echoes Zeke. To me what is more telling is what Jesus doesn’t mention as being important when standing before God for the last time. Nothing about what you believe is mentioned. No troublesome beliefs are required. By means of silence Jesus clears up all the theological bickering and killing over crap like baptism, communion, trinity, Popes, tongues, etcetera, etcetera, and etcetera. Heck, believing in God himself is not even required.

 

You misunderstand the meaning of the SYNOPTIC Gospels here - they are to taken together as a whole.

Mar 1:15 and [Jesus was] saying, "The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe in the gospel."

Mat 7:21 "Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.

Mat 7:22 On that day many will say to me, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?'

Mat 7:23 And then will I declare to them, 'I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.'

Mat 16:15 He said to them, "But who do you say that I am?"

Mat 16:16 Simon Peter replied, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God."

Mat 16:17 And Jesus answered him, "Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven.

Luk 24:25 And he said to them, "O foolish ones, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken!

Luk 24:26 Was it not necessary that the Christ should suffer these things and enter into his glory?"

Luk 24:27 And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he interpreted to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself.

Luk 24:44 Then he said to them, "These are my words that I spoke to you while I was still with you, that everything written about me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled."

Luk 24:45 Then he opened their minds to understand the Scriptures,

Luk 24:46 and said to them, "Thus it is written, that the Christ should suffer and on the third day rise from the dead,

Luk 24:47 and that repentance and forgiveness of sins should be proclaimed in his name to all nations, beginning from Jerusalem.

 

Just were you as good to people as you could be given your resources and abilities? Even I can do that.

 

Actually, in their own flesh, nobody can do this.

[Dagan]

Thanks chef for posting the Ezekiel article. I had never thought about that before.

 

And blah, blah, blah, works follows faith, that does nothing to explain why Paul's explanation of salvation is different than Ezekiel's.

[chefranden]

Please note just a few things that Paul says about true Christian faith & the resultant behaviors;

 

Please note that you have said nothing of why Paul's plan of salvation is superior to Ezekiel. I didn't say that Paul's plan wasn't different than Ezekiel's. It is different -- that's the point.

 

 

Actually, in their own flesh, nobody can do this.

 

So then you mean that Ezekiel and thus Yahweh is a liar? They say you can do this. So actually, in their own flesh, anybody can do this.

 

Merely restating Paul doesn't reconcile the differences. I would think that if Yahweh says you can be good enough, than you can be good enough.

[Vixentrox]

I wish these Christians would go to North Korea and Saudia Arabia to spread the good word. Too bad most western Christians are too cowardly to do that. They don't actually have faith enough to leave everything behind and trust in god for thier saftey. Oh, and they should be happy to be matryrs for the faith. So here's a tip Christians, prove your faith and start by preaching in those two countries instead of to us that have "been there, done that". Soldiers for the faith, more like gutless cowards for the faith all we get around here.

[buffettphan]

Q: Why do christians bother us?

 

A: How else are they gonna get their martyr badges in church this weekend?