Luke 23:43
43 And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise.
2 Cor 12:4
4 How that he was caught up into paradise, and heard unspeakable words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter.
Rev 2:7
7 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the tree of life, which is in the midst of the paradise of God.
So where did Jesus go 'today'?
John 20:17
17 Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and [to] my God, and your God.
1 Peter
18 ¶ For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit:
19 By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison;
20 Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.
21 ¶ The like figure whereunto [even] baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:
22 Who is gone into heaven, and is on the right hand of God; angels and authorities and powers being made subject unto him.
Strong suggestion that paradise is not heaven but a holding place between the resurrection and death. A place where the preaching work continues? If the preaching continues then what of earthly ordinances?
1st Cor 15:
23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming.
...
29 Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? why are they then baptized for the dead?
Do we need to do this work for the dead? Just ideas:) I gotta go to bed:(
Real Christians.....
by Honesty 74 Replies latest jw friends
-
Qcmbr
-
Qcmbr
did you do the sheep thing 'cos I said woolly? :)
-
jaffacake
Jaffa:Whilst I agree that various sacraments are useful as strengthening "means of grace", they are not IMHO the basis of salvation. Otherwise you're gonna have to condemn the thief, which Jesus didn't...
LTI agree, that these are not the basis of salvation, and I agree with your point about the thief (although I don't necessarily believe paradise meant heaven - but a step in that direction). I didnt include the sacraments, the virgin birth, the verbal inerrancy of scripture etc in my suggested list of fundamentals to Christianity. I don't consider myself orthodox, but like Jgnat says, there is a far stronger scriptural case for othodoxy than any of the johhny come lately attempts to reinterpret scripture and claim to be the only true religion. To answer the point about helping hurracane victims, I believe many athiests will attain salvation, and I believe there is scriptural support for such a belief.
Q
You mentioned doing the word of God. But don't you agree that is the problem, none of us agree on what God's word is. You give me one statement from the Bible and it could arguably be interpreted differently by each reader.
-
Qcmbr
Fully agree Jaffa - see my beautifully written random musings thread - I'm just defining why the thief on the cross is not necessarily an excuse to avoid the 'sacraments' (of course it could be !) I'm just filling in the counter 'legalistic' idea. No I really am off to bed.
-
jaffacake
Strong suggestion that paradise is not heaven but a holding place between the resurrection and death. A place where the preaching work continues? If the preaching continues then what of earthly ordinances?
Q
Yeah! thats what I was getting at! The interesting point was that Jesus preached to those killed in the days of Noah. And our prayers can help those who have already died...
But this is old Christian teaching, apparently lost in many religions today (Except LDS & Catholic it would seem? Gotta go to bed too,
Take care y'all
-
Narkissos
Jaffacake,
Sorry I am a bit late; earlier on this thread you wrote:
What is really fundamental to Christian faith? I like a version I read by a theologian I respect:
- existence of a creator God
- revelation of the unlimited love of God shown in the life and death of his Son
- the hope that all might share in the redemption of the world accomplished by God, in and through Jesus Christ & the power of the Spirit
I will not fight for the title of Christian anymore, but here's an objective problem I can see at least with the 1st statement: belief in the "existence of a creator God" practically requires much more of an intellectual leap from the average modern person (especially but not only in Western Europe) than it required from the average people in the Roman empire in the 1st or 2nd century. Belief in gods was still widespread, and the shift from polytheism to Jewish or Christian monotheism was quite fashionable in view of popular monistic philosophy. Real atheism was very rare. A lot of other features of Christianity were by no means strange to the ancient world, e.g. reward and punishment after death, sacrificial logic, etc. The question is, how essential to Christianity are such features which were not specific of Christianity back then but now are?
In view of the above a different paradigm might be offered. Another theologian (François Vouga) once proposed approximately the following: to be a Christian is to be ultimately concerned and affected by the character and story of Jesus-Christ. Belief in God or in an afterworld might be quite secondary to that. What do you think?
-
mkr32208
...
Nuff said, moving on-
-
LittleToe
When did I ever mention heaven? You're making a point over something that I never raised.
My point was simply this - was the thief a Christian? What does the tale imply?
If you get that point then you have an answer to the original question of the thread.
-
Qcmbr
LT I agree that if the thief was a christian AND that Jesus was saying 'you are saved' then your point almost stands. Since we know very very little about the thief let's just play with a few scenarios:
1/ He was christian and had performed all the sacraments. His theft was minor and Jesus forgave him on the cross. This does not suggest that to be a christian just requires a confession of His name.
2/ He was not a christian (formally) but was converted by Jesus at some point during the cruxifiction. This is when the definition of what Jesus said to him becomes important. Clearly Jesus didn't go to heaven so where is paradise? If the thief was with Jesus in paradise and Jesus was teaching disobedient spirits in the spirit prison then it again argues against a 'no need for the sacraments ' approach since it must be possible to accept Jesus on the other side (no need for preaching otherwise) and to repent or change. Paradise must be a place where the good and the bad, christian and non-christian go. Jesus' words to the thief then become a token of comfort (ie we are going somewhere better) rather than 'all that stuff I said about needing baptism - I didn't really mean it.'
3/ He was not a christian nor ever intended to be so. He was merely sympathising with the innocent Jesus. Same point as 2.
4/ Paradise = heaven. Your point stands, we have no need of a priesthood, organisation, sacraments all we need to do is confess Jesus and no matter what we've done were saved. Either which way it puts fundamentalists in a strong position (not that that's an arguement for being a fundamentalist.)
Its important to at least recognise that paradise might not be heaven and that using the thief on the cross to negate the need for performance and obedience is dangerous at best as a means of suggesting that confession is all that is required to be a christian. I just think that there is more to being a christian.
My take on it is that we are looking at the wrong end of the spectrum. The bare minimum required to be a christian is obedience to the commandments - including all the sacraments where possible. When we do that confessing the name of Jesus will come naturally and we will be filled with the Spirit not the other way round. -
heathen
IMO , the theif as you call him was not a christian . Jesus did not offer him the co ruler position that the apostles were promised but merely that he would be in paradise, of which is clear in the old testament, was the promise for faithful jews . When jesus was alive in flesh he was mostly looking for people to put faith in him of which he found very little so he could forgive their sins , he at that time only promised the 12 apostles a co rulership spot . After his death and resurrection he chose more people for co rulership spots but they had to prove faithful til death . The promise of paradise earth for those alive when he returned in kingdom power is still valid .