We have a little problem. James and Paul's statements on justification flat out disagree. Paul's arguments are laid out in Romans, Galatians 3 and Ephesians 2.
James statement on justification makes a death bed salvation impossible. Paul's does not. James justification by works and faith reduces God's grace.
have any of you exjdubs who are now real christians, every read watchman nee?
i am reading the spiritual man.
it has some interesting points to consider, but honestly, i think the 3 volume set has more words than the nt.
There is something more to the Christian life then saying your grace and trying to be a better person. How does one go about living by the Spirit? How does one worship in spirit? These questions are rhetorical for this forum. What was started by the spirit, will be completed by the Spirit, or Paul's lying to us in Galatians.
I am saved from penaty i deserve for my sins by grace through faith and not by works.
Ephesians 2.
As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins, 2 in which you used to live when you followed the ways of this world and of the ruler of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient. 3 All of us also lived among them at one time, gratifying the cravings of our flesh [ a ] and following its desires and thoughts. Like the rest, we were by nature deserving of wrath. 4 But because of his great love for us, God, who is rich in mercy, 5 made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions—it is by grace you have been saved. 6 And God raised us up with Christ and seated us with him in the heavenly realms in Christ Jesus, 7 in order that in the coming ages he might show the incomparable riches of his grace, expressed in his kindness to us in Christ Jesus. 8 For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— 9 not by works, so that no one can boast. 10 For we are God’s handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.
Ask yourself, is there a more powerful statement about salvation that would refute what Paul's saying here? Paul explicitly denies works. If you think James says we earn our salvation by works, then what does that do to God's reputation for his incomparable riches of graces? James never says that a person having faith but not having works faces wrath.
have any of you exjdubs who are now real christians, every read watchman nee?
i am reading the spiritual man.
it has some interesting points to consider, but honestly, i think the 3 volume set has more words than the nt.
Have any of you exJDubs who are now real Christians, every read Watchman Nee? I am reading the Spiritual Man. It has some interesting points to consider, but honestly, I think the 3 volume set has more words than the NT.
poster fernando makes the statement on another thread that we are all "fallen, imperfect, dysfunctional" .
everybody.. i get the feeling that this is not too far removed in its thinking from the wt statement that apostates are mentally diseased, now i am aware that fernando is perpetuating the late doctrine of original sin, and his words were about all mankind, not just us on jwn.. but do you believe you are cursed by what a fictitious couple did in a fabled garden around 6,000 years ago ?
does that make you imperfect, fallen and dysfunctional ?.
Fernando is correct because his point is biblically true. The Bible is true because it has proven itself by the fullfillment of prophecy.
Never been a JW but I have a good friend who is a 'born in' JW and I came here to learn how people get out so I can help him.
I guess I'm not surprised by what I find here. Many people who leave come to the conclusion that all religion is rubbish. If you think about it, that's a secondary benefit to the work of the false prophet. He's doing an excellent job! xJWs have trouble with discerning truth, nearly as much as when they were in. When they were in they repressed truth. Do JW's know anything about false prophets? Most certainly. Who would they consider responsible for the 'Great Apostasy' --- the answer must be that it was started by and is propagated by False Prophets.
When they find out/stop repressing the truth which is that they have been led by a false prophet so many totally give up. That there is a such a thing as a false prophet requires a true prophet or true teacher. Otherwise all prophets are false. Think about this. What would be the point of making a distinction if all prophets were false? I can understand why they come to this conclusion. They are taught and shown how all world's religions are pagan. When they find out the GB is false, they are too burned out to consider that maybe Christendom has some truth after all.
Finding out that the GB is false does not negate the religion of the ancient Jews and their messianic writings. Finding out that the GB is false does not negate Isaiah 53. Finding out that the GB is false does not negate the point that the most likely conclusion of the NT manuscripts is that they were written in the first century with verifiable accounts of miraculous events.
what have you found is a productive way for you to study the bible?
do you have a group?
or a solitary preference?.
I prefer to read verse by verse, with a purpose of understanding a book.
the resurrection of jesus is at the heart of the christian faith.
"but if it is preached that christ has been raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead?
if there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even christ has been raised.
mP:
What proof have you got that Paul actually knew Jesus. The only thing he says about Jesus is he died for us and thats about it.
Paul testified that Jesus began a relationship with him while he was on the road to Damascus. Have you read the letters of the NT? Your statement is so misinformed that you either don't know anything about the bible or you are purposefully lying.
- What facts does Paul tell us about jesus life, ministry, miracles and eventual resurrection ?
At the time of Paul letters there are already creeds in place. Look this up for yourself.
Unfortunately the evidence from his own letters are very very few. In another thread the best Tec could show was Paul mentioning James, John and Cephus and thats it. He never mentions Jesus birth, Bethlehem or any of the basic facts we know about jesus.
Since the disciple John is not mentioned in Paul's writings he therefore does not exist and is a fabrication of the early church. The same is true about the Great Pumpkin.
the resurrection of jesus is at the heart of the christian faith.
"but if it is preached that christ has been raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead?
if there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even christ has been raised.
I find it interesting you leave out Paul's list of witnesses to the resurrection. The manuscript evidence points to the first century authorship. This is something that cannot be debated.
Put yourself in the first century as an investigator. Do you have enough details to verify the claims?
All of this takes on more meaning if you are jewish and you know anything about the prophecies concerning the messiah.
The cartoon's point is misleading. Consider the manuscripts as affadavits, that was Luke's point in his gospel and travelogue (Acts). He gathered the details and wrote his report. How is this different from other ancient myths that include eyewitness accounts? Paul's claims were provable when recorded. How is this different from the Mormons? They had 'eyewitness' too. I don't know how they received the plates, but nothing in the book was provable when it was translated. JW's are taught to ignore details.
when the uber-liberal, agnostic bart ehrman says it...it must be true.. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bart-d-ehrman/did-jesus-exist_b_1349544.html.
mP,
Your suggestion that maybe the papyrus is not referring to Jesus is childish. I won't continue with this. If you are generally interested in the topic of historical manuscripts I suggest you read a book on Palaeography.
I made the point that early 2nd century dating of the Rylands papyrus argues strongly for 1st century authorship. John wrote his books sometime in the 1st century (year 1 to 100 AD) The Rylands papyrus is not the original autograph.
I'm well aware of the issues from Mark. The point is similar to JWs saying there's not trinity in the Bible. What does the Angel tell the nice ladies? What are the possible conclusions from the discussion?
