On Tue, 8 Nov 2005 13:10:48 -0700, "icono" <icono@cox.net> wrote:

To read and study.

LOL! Talk about a no-brainer.

Bible John wrote:

In article <1131481253.003372.73740@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
"rogue" <rogue719@hotmail.com> wrote:

JERRY
Back to the assumption that "god gave us the bible." What if the bible
was nothing more than the holdover mythologies of a bunch of
goatherders from over 2000 years ago?

Jerry you are in the wrong boards. These are Christian boards for
theists to debate amongst each other.

JERRY
We've had this discussion. Do you have a learning disability? This is
a discussion FORUM, not a board.

It's a discussion forum for anything to do with Christianity and
Christians.

Therefore, I am on topic, and you the conservative are trying to stifle
my right to free speech. ;-)

JERRY
Back to the assumption that "god gave us the bible." What if the bible
was nothing more than the holdover mythologies of a bunch of
goatherders from over 2000 years ago?

BJ
Jerry you are in the wrong boards. These are Christian boards for
theists to debate amongst each other.

BB
You shouldn't have said that. Jerry is going make sure that you are
not constipated for a long time to come.

On Tue, 8 Nov 2005 11:30:18 -0600, "TomP" <thom_as_p@yahoo.com> wrote:

"Bible Bob" <biblebobnospam@biblebob.net> wrote in message
news:rmf1n1t22s7c4uu4is1tcv2um8vsthnd5c@4ax.com...

On Mon, 07 Nov 2005 21:51:49 -0800, Bible John
<john.doggett@x-files.gov> wrote:

If only the 4 gospels including the 3 synoptics was all we had to know
as christians? Sure Christ is all we need to know for salvation, but
God wants us to memorize and understand his entire bible after we are
saved.


John

John,

That makes no sense. Why does your sentence begin with "If" and end
with a question mark? Why is it that you do not capitalize Christian
or Bible? Don't you have any respect for either?

Where does the Bible say that all we need to know for salvation is
Christ?

It seems to me that Matthew 25:31-46 is a pretty safe guide to what

expects of those who follow Him, and also summarizes what we will all be
judged on. Would those verses apply here? If these do not apply, can

please explain why?

Sure.

Here is what the verses say in context. Notice the first word in
verse 31. It is the word "when" a word that refers to a time
described in the words that follow. Then look at the words in verse
46 which speak of that time in regard to the righteous and the
unrighteous.

Matthew 25:31-46 KJV
31 When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy
angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory:
32 And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall
separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth [his] sheep
from the goats:
33 And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the
left.
34 Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye
blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the
foundation of the world:
35 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye
gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in:
36 Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in
prison, and ye came unto me.
37 Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we
thee an hungred, and fed [thee]? or thirsty, and gave [thee] drink?
38 When saw we thee a stranger, and took [thee] in? or naked, and
clothed [thee]?
39 Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee?
40 And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto
you, Inasmuch as ye have done [it] unto one of the least of these my
brethren, ye have done [it] unto me.
41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me,
ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his
angels:
42 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and
ye gave me no drink:
43 I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me
not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not.
44 Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an
hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison,
and did not minister unto thee?
45 Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch
as ye did [it] not to one of the least of these, ye did [it] not to
me.
46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the
righteous into life eternal.

The Gospel of Matthew presents Jesus Christ as God's Perfect King who
came as the heir apparent to the throne of David to call out the lost
sheep of the house of Israel. His ministry was not to Gentiles or to
the church of God. The latter because the church of God did not exist
until after the resurrection and ascencion. Israel rejected her King
and His kingdom is held in abeyance until a future time when he
returns as king of kings and lord of lords. Matthew has its
fulfillment in the book of Revelation. It is not within the scope of
this post to explain the whole thing; but what Jesus is referring to
is the judgements in Revelation 20 which take place long after Christ
has returned "for" his church (not "with" His saints) (1 Th 4:13-18).

The Gospels are not written "to" the church in the same way that the
Chruch Epistles are written "to" the church. The Gospels contain a
record of the earthly ministry of Christ "for" our learning; but not
"for" our application. People get real confused when they try to
harmonize the Gospels and the Church Epistles. For example, Jesus
speaking to Israel told them they needed to forgive to get forgiven;
but we are told in 1 John 1:9 that all we (the church) has to do is
confess. Our forgiveness is not tied to whether we forgive. We are
saved by grace through the faith of Jesus Christ. Israel was not
saved by grace through the faith of Jesus Christ because was not yet
available and even though He was present He did not have jurisdiction
to give it until he was seated at the right hand of the Father.

Biblical research is the careful systematic study of the Scriptures to
learn what the Scriptures say. This systematic study includes paying
attention to "to whom," "place," "time," "context" and other
considerations. There are three classes of people in the Bible; Jews,
Gentiles, and church of God. God is not a respector of persons but of
conditions and we must know to which group the passages we are reading
apply so that we can rightly divide the word of truth.

Remember, Christ came to be King of Israel. A king only has legal
jurisdiction over the people that are in his kingdom. He has no
authority over those from other kingdoms. He had no authority with
regard to Gentiles when he was on the earth; but was able to bless
those who were willing to do things God's way (as in the case of the
woman from Canaan). His kingdom will one day be restored; then he
will have jurisdiction and do what needs to be done.

One other consideration and that is that Christ is the head of the
body which is the church; the bridegroom. Israel is the bride. The
church is not and never has been the bride of Christ. Israel will be
the bride prepared for the bridegroom after Christ assumes control of
His kingdom.

Hope that helps.

Where does it say that God wants us to memorize and
understand His entire Bible after we are saved (why didn't you
capitalize His; don't you respect God)?

Why do you use the heathen term "synoptic" which refers to the
doctrine of devils? You are not so stupid as to believe what the
Synoptic Gospel doctrine teaches are you? If you are; explain Q
Theory.

I am curious and also I admit confused by your language here. Would you
mind taking a few minutes to explain your position a bit by answering a

questions? Thanks in advance.

Why is a word based on the Greek words for "same" and "eye" either

or the doctrine of devils?

I am pretty sure I have never heard the terminology "Synoptic Gospel
doctrine" before. I looked around your web page and could find anything,

that could simply be my own ineptitude. Would you mind explaining what

mean by that? Or could you please provide a link or two to web pages

explains that doctrine? Thank you.

What do you have against "Q[uelle]" theory? I thought it pretty obvious
that certain passages in Matthew and Luke are nearly identical, thus

is an increased probability they shared a common source independent of
Mark's gospel. I presume you disagree with my judgment. If so, why?

.....
BB
http://www.biblebob.net

.....
BB
http://www.biblebob.net