I’ll wrap up our current look at the Sermon on the Mount with some final thoughts. Back to the idea of dismissing the sermon, I think there are some reasons from within the sermon itself that make people feel justified in taking it with a grain of salt:
- The reference to the altar in Matthew 5:23 and other references to the Law make some say that the sermon is merely for the Jews, that it merely applies to those who were under the Law of Moses. I disagree, obviously. I think that all of Jesus’ teachings have something to say to us about how we should live; as Paul said to the Romans: “For everything that was written in the past was written to teach us, so that through endurance and the encouragement of the Scriptures we might have hope.” (Romans 15:4) Just as the Old Testament writings can prepare us for Christian living (2 Timothy 3:14-17), so Jesus’ teachings to those under the Law can still speak to us.
- The use of hyperbole in Matthew 5:29-30 makes some feel that all of the sermon is symbolic. I do appreciate the use of figurative language and know that we have to recognize its presence in certain texts, but to try and make the teachings themselves into mere abstract philosophizing is a mistake.
I think Jr’s comment from early on is worth hearing: we can’t make the Sermon on the Mount into some new legal code that must be fulfilled to be saved. But as the largest block of teaching material that we have recorded from all that our Lord and Savior spoke, it’s definitely worth our paying attention to.
when did something being figurative or symbolic make it untrue??
I see the same prob with a study of revelation, just because the message is taught in symbols, does not make it any less true, just a little harder to understand.
same with the proverbs and psalms, people think because it’s poetry, it has no authority, or not as much as paul’s letters. I don’t know where they mindset comes from.
Good point Brian.
I agree that that Sermon on the Mount cannot be made into some new law by which we must do to be justified. But that does not resolve the issue about judgment. It is worth note that Jesus ends the sermon on a note of judgment and the wisdom of practicing his teaching (or the foolishness of not) (cf. Matt 7.15-27). And this is certainly not the only place in the NT where is speaks of people (Christians included) facing judgment for the deeds they have done (cf. 2 Cor 5.10; Rev 22.12).
I realize that opens the door to a lot of further questions regarding justification from sin in the present and final judgment in the future. Nevertheless, regardless of how certain difficult passages in the Sermon on the Mount are interpreted (e.g., 5.44), Jesus’ final words about judgment for those who fail to practice his teachings ought to serve as a SEVERE warning… this is a non-negotiable teaching for Jesus. We are not free to dismiss it or treat it like a vending machine from which we pick and choose what we like, ignoring what we don’t like. Failure to practice his teaching can only expect judgment (and practice does not mean we never will fall short but it does exclude the apathetic option of not even trying).
Grace and Peace,
Rex
Rex: It is not hard to reconcile the issue. I’ll partly quote you as an attempt here.
Those who “fail to practice his teaching can only expect judgment…” because they do not have genuine faith. They aren’t really (nor were they ever) justified in Christ. For those who are, will.
The question we must ask ourselves is this: Are we truth tellers or are we liars? Everyone that confesses His Name must live in this discipline of introspection (Phil 2:12-13, 1 John 1:6-7).
I believe 2 Cor 5.10 and Rev 22.12 deal with reward for believers, and punishment for non-believers. Nobody who is truly in Christ will be condemned. Jesus said “you will know them by their fruit.” Well, the judgment of Christ will show who really was in Christ, and who was just paying lip service.
You’re absolutely right about the warning being severe: 2 Thess 1:5-10 is going to be rather brutal, I presume.
May God’s grace be with us all –
Jr
I believe the beauty of the Sermon on the Mount can be seen in its simplicity. Jesus says…this is the way that you once knew life and religion (according to a rigid legal code), but now, I have come to show you a new way of practicing a life of Godliness (according to grace and spirituality). Aside from the certain complexities that are revealed through a deeper look at Jesus’ first significant message, I believe that the simple, profound nature of what the Lord is saying is transformational in and of itself.
Jr.,
Respectfully, I disagree. There is nothing in those verses and their context to support your conclusion. Paul and John both believed they were writing to Christians of genuine faith who had been justified in Christ. To say otherwise seems to require too much speculation. The fact is that Paul and John were writing to Christians they believed to be as spiritually blessed as they were and yet they warned them of judgment for the disobedient – and neither warning came with any footnote saying this was only for those who are actually non-believers, so to say it was is to interject upon scripture something it does not say.
But we both know this is really an issue about free-will, so I’ll leave it at that.
Grace and Peace,
Rex
Tim,
i’ve been out of commission for a while, but wish i hadn’t missed so much of this series. i just wanted to point out that there is a difference between saying that Jesus’ teaching was addressed to Jews and Jesus’ teachings are meant only to be followed by Jews. You can believe the former without believing the latter. Jesus did give applications that could only be followed by Jews (the sacrifice/altar bit you mention), but both Paul, Peter, and James all mention bits of the Sermon on the Mount as binding on their readers.
i think the key is that Jesus is actually not teaching things that were new. They were simply new to the hearers who had been inundated with Pharisaical teaching rather than proper interpretation of the Law of Moses. i did a series of posts arguing for this view of the Sermon. i won’t bore you with the details here. But i think there’s at least 5 reasons to think that Jesus is not countermanding Moses in any of the Sermon–but rather is attacking Pharisaical teaching. The rest of Matthew bears this out i think.
–guy
Rex: I’m only mentioning this because we both know and respect him; but I discussed those two passages with Dr. Oster and he (to my amazement) agreed with the position I presented above. Of course, you may now disagree with him as well (as I do on other things). :)
But for further study and edification, I found the ESV Study Bible notes on this very honest about the debate and helpful to me as I considered the positions.
For 2 Cor 5:10: “so that each one may receive what is due for what he has done … whether good or evil.”
This underscores the principle that present-day actions have eternal consequences. All Christians will appear before the eternal judgment seat of Christ, to receive “what is due” to them for the deeds that they have done in their earthly life. It is debated, however, (1) whether the aim of this judgment is to determine the measure of reward that the Christian will receive in the age to come; or (2) whether the aim is to provide demonstrative evidence regarding who is lost and who is saved. Because the context of Paul’s statement refers back to both the believer’s hope for the resurrection (see 2 Cor. 5:1, 4) and to the reward of “glory beyond all comparison” (see 4:16–18), it would seem that both aims are in view. Thus, with regard to the first case, many interpreters hold that the believer’s deeds will provide public evidence to indicate the measure of rewards that the believer will receive, corresponding to the believer’s “obedience of faith” (acts of service, love, and righteousness; cf. Rom. 1:5; 16:26). In the second case, some interpreters hold that the believer’s deeds will also provide public evidence brought forth before the judgment seat of Christ to demonstrate that one’s faith is real—that is, public evidence, not as the basis for salvation, but as a demonstration of the genuineness of one’s faith. Paul therefore makes it his aim to “please” Christ (2 Cor. 5:5–9), because the extent to which one does this corresponds to the measure of rewards that one will receive (see Matt. 6:20; Luke 19:17, 19; 1 Cor. 3:12–15; 1 Tim. 6:19; Rev. 22:12), likewise giving evidence for the genuineness of one’s faith. Paul is confident that genuine believers will pass Christ’s judgment, since the new covenant ministry of reconciliation has brought them under the life-transforming power of the Spirit—based on the forgiveness of their sins through faith in Christ alone, all of which is the result of God’s grace alone (see 2 Cor. 1:12, 22; 3:6, 8–9, 18; 4:4–6, 15; 5:5, 14–15, 16–21; 8:19; 9:8, 14; etc.).
For Rev 22.12:
As the Divine Warrior of Isa. 62:10–63:6, Christ will come to repay everyone for what he has done, rewarding faithful servants and punishing every evildoer. “Recompense” (Gk. misthos, “wages, reward”) indicates degrees of reward for believers and punishment for unbelievers (cf. Luke 12:47–48; and 1 Cor. 3:14–15 with note).
Grace be with you, may the Lord guide us as we seek His wisdom.
Jr
Jr. Dr. Oster has changed his view, which is (of course) ok. Nevertheless, I still disagree. As I am trying to urge, David Garland (in his commentary on 2 Corinthians) argues that these words were written as a warning to the Christians (and thus not a promise of judgment to unbelievers) that must be held in tension with the promise of assurance. Thus, though believers have in Christ an assurance of salvation, if as moral-beings with choice they should continue living in disobedience then they will indeed suffer judgment. Such warning of judgment is not for the unbelievers but for the believers with a genuine faith and if it were not, it makes no sense why Paul would elsewhere warn with the promise of judgment for believers to abstain from the works of the flesh and instead live by the Spirit which in manifest in the palpable “fruit” of the Spirit (cf. Gal 5.16-26).
But be assured, I am not suggesting that believers must walk on egg-shells never confident in the salvation they have in Christ. Nor am I suggesting that God has a checklist that believers must some how meet a certain criterion, do a certain amount, etc… to be assured of salvation. I am simply saying that my understanding of these passages say that believers with genuine faith wake up everyday with a choice to make…righteousness or unrighteousness, flesh or Spirit, right or wrong (or whatever contrasting terms we want to couch it in). That choice is not something believers can live out on their own, it is only lived by the power of the Spirit but it is not something they are coerced into either way. So believers are admonished to choose righteousness, the Spirit, etc… But if they should continue in the alternative then they have nothing but judgment to expect.
And just pastorally speaking, the more I serve in a congregation as a located preacher-pastor the more it makes sense why Paul was willing to remind these various church communities of such judgment.
Any ways, great discussion. Grace and Peace,
Rex
K. Rex; If you say believers have a loss and a judgement to face but not a loss in salvation, then what would that judgement result in? Loss of rewards? Loss of heavenly blessings? What? Is there anything that is specifically mentioned because I can’t find any in the bible. Maybe you could enlighten us. My only thought that what it might be is a consequence of the flesh, which would result in a physical loss. ie, bad decision driving causes a death. Gambling causes a loss of a home due to foreclosure.
Doesn’t knowing your saved offer a person a relief in knowing that grace makes forgivess of sin complete?
Heavenbound,
Grace is what saves us and grace is what continues to give us assurance as we try to live out the life of Jesus and stumble along the way (which we will do). However, grace does not save disobedience. And what I mean by disobedience is the believer who knows that what he/she is doing is of the flesh (cf. Gal 5.19-21) and continues in such behavior regardless…that is disobedience. Also, this is a disobedience for which true believers with genuine faith can be influenced into, otherwise there is no good reason for Paul warning Christians about such behavior and the consequences. Further more, when NT writers such as the Apostle Paul and John spoke of God’s judgment (and that is what 2 Cor 5.10 and Rev 22.12 are speaking of), I am completely convinced that they meant a judgment of punishment rather than just a judgment of consequences since the same God throughout history has rendered judgments of punishments on people and nations for sin and evil.
Grace and Peace,
Rex
K.Rex: If I am to understand your position of disobedience it has to be from a position of breaking an ordinance, law, vow. How long does this disobedience continue to warrent a loss of salvation? An hour? A day? All of a person’s life. Consider a child who is disobedient. The parent doles out the punishment fit for the crime? To what end? Would a parent destroy the child for disobedience?….. Does God destroy souls for disobedience because that is what you have just said. When does God say ahhh,, thats enough? This absolutely makes no sense whatsoever. If you disagree, be specific and sight something that is concrete. Not vague generalities.
Since the law was nailed to the cross, where is the proof of guilt in the eyes of God?
You can’t bestow grace, with conditions, it isn’t grace, and as you have described it
grace is conditional, therefore the cross is conditional. You and I both know that the cross is not conditional. Unlike the Catholics who view our Christ on the cross suffering. I mean the whole point of salvation is the fact that he no longer is on the cross and that his death paid the total price, and if you contradict this then in your mind he is still the suffering Christ……and there is no complete forgiveness and grace
H.B.,
The phrase “the law was nailed to the cross” doesn’t appear in the Bible. When people say that, they are typically misquoting Colossians 2:14. (Bobby Valentine explains this well)
“You can’t bestow grace with conditions.” Why not? If God chose to do that, would you stand in His way?
I believe that God will punish disobedience:
Grace and peace,
Tim Archer
The fact is that we have two different New Testament writers who wrote to Christians and included, however subtle, a warning about judgment for living in disobedience. And why…because grace is given to teach us to say “no” to ungodliness (cf. Tit 2.11-14) but such choice inevitably means that some who have received grace could once again say “yes” to ungodliness. And pastorally speaking, it is the utmost sham to think that because we have been saved by grace that we should have nothing to fear in terms of judgment if we should once again willfully live (disobedience) in sin – and yet, as a preacher, there are some Christians who have willfully chosen to live in egregious sin and want to hide behind grace.
Grace and Peace,
Rex
Tim: Read these verses. For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse; for it is written, Cursed is everyone that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law, to do them. But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident for the just shall live by faith. And the law if not of faith but the man that doeth them shall live in them.
Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us for
IT IS WRITTEN CURSED is EVERYONE THAT HANGETH ON A TREE.
Galatians 3 10-13 Its obvious that in this passage the law is nailed to the tree………
K Rex: is cheating on a test, damnation for every kid that cheats? Is gossiping going to put someone in hell. I mean to what end do take this disobedience thing?
H.B.,
If you want to say that the curse of the Law was nailed to the tree, I have no problem with that.
Grace and peace,
Tim Archer
I do not deny a judgment for genuine believers, but for genuine believers it is not a judgment for salvation, for THAT judgment was handed down effectually at Golgotha, 30AD when the wrath of God was poured out upon Jesus who became sin and thus the appropriate and completely successful propitiation. On the other hand, those who call themselves believers, but who prove out to be liars by their deeds at the judgment, will be justly condemned, for Golgotha 30AD was ineffectual for them. They were never saved or justified by it.
In translating the first chapter of 1 Peter, chapter 1 verse 7 struck me as it speaks to faith that is genuine and faith that is not: “so that the tested genuineness of your faith—more precious than gold that perishes though it is tested by fire—may be found to result in praise and glory and honor at the revelation of Jesus Christ.” If one’s faith is/was not genuine it will not be found. And those will be shown to be false believers at the judgment and will be condemned.
Perseverance will prove who is true and who is not. James 1:12, “Blessed is the man who remains steadfast under trial, for when he has stood the test he will receive the crown of life, which God has promised to those who love him.” Hebrews 3:14, “For we have come to share in Christ, if indeed we hold our original confidence firm to the end.”
These passages should indeed be viewed as a sober warning—intended as a means that God uses to keep Christians resolved in faith and obedient until the end. The verses provide a grave warning to everyone who claims to be saved—that is, to examine oneself carefully to be sure that one is in fact a genuine believer, because if there is no evidence of perseverance in faith and obedience, then there is real reason to doubt that such a person has ever been saved.
To say that a genuine believer can be condemned at the judgment so trivializes the gospel and the atonement that it becomes unrecognizable and hardly worthy to be called “good news.”
I think the problem is that we are far too loose with the word “Christian.” Rex wrote, “there are some Christians who have willfully chosen to live in egregious sin and want to hide behind grace.” And so what I propose that instead of looking out into our congregations and wonder why so many are not living changed lives we should instead look out into our congregations and realize that a good number of them that though they claim Christ, are not really born-again.
May we all live in the introspection that grace requires –
Jr
It seems to me that this type of “assurance” would give me nightmares: I can think that I’m saved but in fact not be a “genuine believer.” Thanks, but that’s certainly not my blessed assurance.
Admittedly, part of the problem comes from the definition of believer. Your usage obviously takes it beyond the demon-level belief that James describes, and I’m guessing beyond the level of belief that John said many Jews had in John 12, those that wouldn’t publicly declare their faith.
Some of this goes back to our old discussion of “falling from grace,” or whatever we choose to call it. Your definition says that if someone falls, they were never really a believer. My definition says that a believer can fall. The practical aspects of that are much the same.
This is certainly a fine rhetorical device, because who wants to be guilty of trivializing the gospel? Of course, if we are in a discussion seeking truth, such declarations have a negative effect. The best response is, “Well you’re trivializing the atonement by…”, and then where does that get us?
As for the broad use of the word Christian, doesn’t it correspond to the way Paul used the term “saint” in his letters? We deal with people based on what they aspire to be for we don’t have the ability to see their hearts and know who they are on the inside. How would we label Simon in Acts 8? Luke treats him as a believer, yet shows that at a certain point in time, Simon was away from God.
Part of the problem, and please forgive me for rambling, is that we want to put heavenly things into our time constraints. Salvation is past, but it’s also future. We’re in the Kingdom now, but waiting to be received into it. You say that judgment happened at Golgotha; yes, that’s true, but our time to stand before the Lord, to be commended or condemned for what we’ve done, that time is still in the future. It’s the eschatological tension of “now, but not yet.”
Grace and peace,
Tim Archer
Tim, your point about how we define “believer” is, I think, accurate. Like the parable of the Sower we have those who receive the word with joy then when persecution or riches of the world came they faded. They believed, but their belief proved to be false (therefore not genuine, i.e. no depth of soil). This, I think, is what Heb 3:14, Jms 1:12, 1Pet 1:7, and Mk 13:13 are getting at. So when I speak of believer in this context, I’m speaking of a genuine believer.
And I’m not sure why that assurance would give you nightmares. I think this kind of introspection is exactly what Phil 2:12-13 is getting at. And isn’t that the discussion: evidence of faith and obedience?
Let us live introspective lives, knowing God is working, and trust in Christ alone in our work and our salvation. Every true and persevering believer will find evidence in their lives, no matter how small. This is not fear, this is glorious proof of our salvation that we can have at this very moment! And most importantly, it keeps salvation in the hands of God and out of the hands of men.
Tim wrote: “We deal with people based on what they aspire to be for we don’t have the ability to see their hearts and know who they are on the inside.” THIS is the key point you made. Did Paul know that everyone he was writing to was saved? Of course not, yet it seems to me you must make that assumption if you then believe that one can lose salvation; and that becomes the lens you read the letters though. This is what I was getting at. We can know we are saved by the evidence of our lives and trusting in Christ alone. So looking out and wondering why so many who call themselves “saints” aren’t living in such a way is the wrong question. Instead, perhaps it’s because they are not true saints (like in Corinth or wherever else). And this is exactly what the warning passages are referring to: Are you a true believer, or are you a liar?
Grace be with you –
Jr
Jr,
Did Paul know that his readers were saved? He certainly assumed so by his language. He was addressing himself to the saved, though he did add at times some “as long as” statements. That is, he assumed that they had been saved at some point and feared that was no longer true. This is exactly what the warning passages are referring to: Are you still a true believer, or have you believed in vain?
Grace and peace,
Tim Archer
Jr. It seems that you are constantly looking introspectively at whether you’re in grace or out of grace. To be honest it is too much work for me to do that. Thank God that my understanding of grace allows me the peace that passes all understanding. Many people demonstrate fruits of the Spirit and have no idea of who Christ is or what he did for us.
I for one don’t believe in election or predestination. Though I don’t know where you stand on those positions from what you said it sounds like that’s your position. Living in a Christian country allows most inhabitants certain advantages others in the rest of the world don’t have. So I can assume you think that there is no offer to those people. You only mention one verse written by the apostle Paul, the minister of the gentiles.
Be assured that the book of James, Hebrews, 1 Peter written to the Jews scattered thru out the Mediterranian. Specific information for a specific people, the Jews……Pauls letters are to primarily gentiles written in a particular time for a particular group of people information to prepare them for a moment in history.
The ushering in of the kingdom promised to Israel…….
H.B.,
James, Hebrews and 1 Peter were written to Christians. Note James’ use of “the twelve tribes” without using the exact Jewish phrase “the twelve tribes of Israel.” He wrote to the new Israel, as did the other New Testament writers. The Christian teachings contained in those books are for God’s people.
There is no conflict between Paul’s teachings and those of other Christian teachers, unless men insert such conflicts themselves.
You would do well to study God’s Word in it’s entirety.
Grace and peace,
Tim Archer
Jr., you said, “On the other hand, those who call themselves believers, but who prove out to be liars by their deeds at the judgment, will be justly condemned, for Golgotha 30AD was ineffectual for them. They were never saved or justified by it.”
If that were true then the only explanation for the imperative instructions of scripture seems to be to prove our justification which takes us right back into a works oriented salvation. Without obeying the imperatives, they prove themselves to be actually unjustified liars so instead, obey to prove yourself.
I am sure that is not what you intend to convey but that is the first reaction I had to reading your comment, so I thought you would enjoy my reaction :-).
Any ways…I’ve enjoyed the conversation with everyone but I am bowing out now. Christians have been debating this issue for many years and have yet to reach agreement and we are not likely to break any new ground…yet we can still remain brothers in Christ and that much excites me.
Grace and Peace,
Rex
heavenbound: It is really hard to decipher what you are saying, but I’ll give it a shot.
To your comment, “many people demonstrate fruits of the Spirit and have no idea of who Christ is or what he did for us.”
And? So what? According to Paul they stand condemned in their sin. Righteous deeds are like a dirty loin cloth to God (Isaiah 64:6) when sin is in the way. And sin is only taken away by faith in Christ, who became sin so that those who believe in Him would be declared righteous. One cannot bear fruit without being in the Vine. Jesus was not a universalist.
You wrote, “I for one don’t believe in election or predestination.”
Really? Paul did. Ephesians 1-2, Romans 8:29-33, Romans 11:7, 2 Tim 2:10, Titus 1:1, just to name a few.
You wrote, “the rest of the world don’t have.”
Ever read Romans 1? The “others” as you call them, “are without excuse” (v.20).
Besides, what is the advantage of living in America? Jesus said it is hard for a rich man to enter the Kingdom. In today’s world that means, “it is hard for those living in America to enter the Kingdom.” No advantage there. America is the camel.
Rex: I know you are done, but I don’t see how the proof of justification equals works-based salvation. The proof doesn’t gain anything, certainly not justification. Justification/salvation is already completed in Christ, by grace through faith. It’s done. The obedience then is fruit of that justification, which proves the already completed justification. It’s doesn’t earn us anything.
It’s been good. Iron/Iron.
Grace be with you –
Jr
Jr: Fruits of the spirit is love, joy, peace, long suffering, gentleness, goodness, faith.
notice love is first and faith is last. Wonder why? Because its our faith and not Christ’s faith. Of course Christ’s faith is more important than any mere human. For it is Christ’s faith that He has, in his own finished work that saves. Love, in that the love of Christ is first and foremost in the eyes of God. Not yours or mine. As far as 1 Peter, the writer states: to the strangers scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappodicia, Asia and Bithynia, elect according to the foreknowledge of God. Elect and the term strangers in foreign lands.(Israel)
James: to the 12 tribes scattered abroad greeting. 1:1
Hebrews: 1:1 God who at sundry times and in diverse manners spoke in time past unto the fathers by the prophets. Clearly talking to Israel and of course the name of the letter, to the Hebrews.
Now my point in my previous post demonstrates the fact that fruits of the Spirit are found in many non Christians. This would include all Jews born since Golgotha.
Since there is now no difference between Jew and Greek as Paul writes, then in your scenario all Jews have no heavenly hope as well, right? What about Catholics?
What about all Christians that accept grace plus nothing, like me? Since I can figure out what your response is, I am so glad that I have a loving Christ in my view and not a vengeful, judgemental God, the covenant God of the old testament. As Paul points out we are justified by faith and not by works lest any man may boast.
heavenbound: I’m curious, do you even read what other people write and attempt to understand it? How many straw-men must you present to make your case while completely misrepresenting mine, or of anybody else?
I see you ignored all the Pauline texts that speak about predestination and election. And are you aware that this, as you called Him, “vengeful, judgmental God” of the OT is the God that Jesus calls Father? It is the God that Paul and any true Christian worships as well. The God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob is Our God. And being that the Son was always with the Father from eternity, when you read the “OT God,” know that the Son is also there.
And you must know that Paul bases his entire case on justification by faith on the example of Abraham. The Old Testament is a testimony of the grace of God on a rebellious people who deserved nothing but death and destruction; just like me and you. Grace and mercy without judgment does not exist. Ever heard of propitiation? Romans 3:21-25?
How about Paul’s letter, 2 Thessalonians, when he speaks of Christ’s return: “when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with his mighty angels in flaming fire, inflicting vengeance on those who do not know God and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. They will suffer the punishment of eternal destruction.”
Is this not the vengeance of Christ to come? Is Paul misrepresenting Christ? This sounds a lot like that mean ‘ol God of the OT.
H.B.,
When you begin to pit Jesus against the God of the Old Testament, you are flirting dangerously with the ancient heresy of Marcionism. Why not spend some time reading what Paul says about the Old Testament, including the quotes he makes from the Old Testament?
I thank God that I have come to know the God of the Old Testament, He who is slow to anger and quick to forgive, He who sent His Son to die so that I might live.
Grace and peace,
Tim Archer
mmmm….sounds like truth and right/wrong have been nailed to the Cross. Yippee!
God was infinitely more patient with Israel than any human would have been, yet he’s a bad guy because he finally punished them.
What an awful thing he did to Sodom and Gomorrah! Just ask Lot..2 Peter 2:7-8
so did Jesus overthrow that mean, vengeful, bloodthirsty god? Or is god schizophrenic? Did God realize the error of his mean ways and become Jesus?
Was Jesus angry at YWHW for all the blood he shed in the OT. Did he try and talk him out of it?
HB,
just to clarify and understand your comments (sorry for labels) but would you consider yourself a “universalist”?