Yes, I think that what he said following, "I tell you the truth..." should be considered as truth. As to everything else that he said, I believe that that was true too, but I feel that he especially wanted to emphasize what he said folowing, "I tell you the truth..." I think any follower of Jesus is best off trusting in Jesus, and holding his words as true, dear, and to-be-acted-upon. Truth, I would say, is anything that does not offend God's basic character of unconditional love. Rich blessings. 

How about religious pluralism. Does your " church" teach all ways, or one way?

My take is that the both the OT and NT teach one way. Inviting now all you revs who have another way of interpreting the bible to give me a few scriptures that can overwhelm the 100 or so that I can produce that show that Jesus and scripture point to him as the only way.

Also demonstrate (those of you who think there are many ways) how you can call Jesus a good teacher, when he calls himself God.

Are you asking me, or in general?

My church is a conservative Baptist one. We teach one way to God -- through Jesus Christ.

I know Jae,

I'm challenging UCC teachers to give reason for their beliefs. Jesus was a Jew, who held to the word of God. Does a follower do the same?

SnP- other people who grew up with other religious traditions have been taught that their way is the only way- and they truly believe that to be right for them. What happens by insisting on it, is it then leads to extremes whereby people taking extreme religious positions will endorse killing of their 'enemy' in the name of their brand of God. Jesus said "love your enemy", not convert your enemy to Christianity. Jesus lived in a religiously diverse society. Seeing as Jesus said nothing about turning the Samaritan into a Christian, or even a Jew, but measured his faith by how he treated an injured stranger- I don't believe we should either. He showed particular disappointment with those Pharisees who castigated him for supporting and fulfilling the spirit of the law rather than the letter of the law. He overturned the tables of the money changers using the temple as a business enterprise. Speaking out against these people got him killed. There are deeper messages and metaphors in there beyond the surface of the stories. I know you don't believe that.

All major world religions have the "Golden Rule" at their core. It was this that Jesus wanted to see practiced. Not "I'm better than you". Religious pluralism means healing of the nations, sects, denominations, that have warred for too long in the name of God.

But you asked a minister for their views...

Hi Kimmio,

Are you saying that I am wrong in saying that Jesus is the only way?

Relativism,

Do you teach that what true for you is true for you and what is true for me is true for me?

Or does God have absolute truths?

Please find scripture that you can interpret to support relativism.

I don't know if you'll understand this the way I do, but, Jesus IS the Golden Rule, in spirit. And in flesh through those who live it. So, yes, Jesus is the only way. But we are looking at it from a different point of view.

God has absolute truths- life has absolute truths.

A while back on a thread I got in trouble for going off on a tangent about a diagram someone posted. Christianity brings up "the narrow path". Many take that to mean that only believing the literal interpretation of the bible is this "narrow path". Looking at it from a completely different angle, imagine this: each religion, denomination, faith, belief in a theistic God, or lack thereof, as a line on a page criscrossing each other like an asterisk. Each of these 'beliefs', either theistic or humanistic, has the 'Golden Rule'- empathy, loving one another- at it's core. Maybe that narrow path isn't represented by one of those lines. Looking from above, perhaps it's the point in the centre that is the portal to that 'narrow path'. My imaginative ramblings...but think about it.

"...no other religious or philosophical system has its equal.... Frequently, liberal critics and secular humanists attempt to explain away the uniqueness of the Golden Rule, saying it is a common ethic shared by all religions. Such is not the case...."

Source: gotquestions.org

The full article can be found here: http://www.gotquestions.org/Golden-Rule.html

Hi Saul_now_Paul     your quote     Is there any point in calling yourself a Christian when you don't believe what he said. Besides confusing other people, aren't you just really confused yourself?

Great Post ----These are my thoughts on this ----

We can call ourself a Christian but not be reconnected to God ---this is the problem -- To try and teach God's word without accepting Christ will be in vain according to scripture ----we can take all the theology courses we want to --but unless we are guided by the Holy Spirit in what the scriptures are meaning we will be preaching our own thoughts not God's thoughts ----I know many --many people who say they believe in God but are not Born Again -----and say they are Christians -----many --many Ministers and Priests are preaching God's word without the Holy Spirit and many Churches are dying off because God is not in the church ---it is all human Spirits running the church and trying to teach God's word and they are confusing people --because they themselves are confused

We think we can go to Seminary School and teach about God ----when we don't know God ourselves ----How can you preach on peace --joy --happiness -- health --trust --belief --faith --answered prayer  etc --when you don't have it yourself ----the Bible addresses all this and tells us how to have this in the life we live now on this planet --

this is the scripture to back up what I believe--- 

Peace

Inclusivity,

I think this is the first priority or center of UCC's gospel. Have to agree, it seems like a good thing.

But the gospel is Jesus life and works and salvation through grace through faith. And faith comes from hearing the word.

The new gospel is no gospel at all. Yes, Jesus loves all, and died for us while we were in our sins. But if you are to follow Jesus, you are to drop your raiki, cosmology, sexual sin, lying, stealing, idolatry, etc. Not bring it into the church and say these things are included.

You are included when you repent and put your trust in Jesus.

Jesus did not have a bunch following him around doing their own things. You can't follow and continue in your rebellious ways.

Sorry, that was my rant of my opinion.

Show me how you interpret scripture to prove me wrong.

There's plenty of sin happening in all denominations, and inside and outside of churches. All of us. Every human being.

Romans 3:10. Ecclesiastes 7:20.

That's sadly true. No one's denying it. The question remaining is what people view as being the remedy for that sin. As for me and some others here, we will go with forgiveness through Christ.

Any reaction to the Golden Rule artcle I posted the link to?

I think the got questions site's biased to begin with. How do you know for sure that other religions are passive about loving others (according to the article), and that Christians who believe in that particular interpretation do such a better job?

Forgiveness through Christ, means to some, following a literal interpretation of the bible. Through Christ, I've already explained what I have come to believe about it. And this wasn't because of UCCan preaching anything down my throat that I 'must' believe. This was because the UCCan gave me room to learn and explore different persectives, from a Christ centred place.

Do you mean Reiki practice? 

I am curious about why you would include it in your list here. 

Sorry, I just edited a typo in above post and forgot to mention it in the post.

Evangelism,

Oooooh swear word around here.

The great commission. Yet most here don't think you should tell the hungry about their saviour. Why is that?

Please support your view by your superior ability to interpret scripture.

Christian organizations in the third world do not ram Jesus down people's throats.

We do know from Jesus teaching that this living water was preferable to regular water. Why would you withhold it from someone with a much higher probability of dying?

What you call a "literal interpretation of the bible," Kimmio, I would probably call a proper interpretation of the Bible. It's sad from my perspective to think, then, that the UCCanada gives people room, and I feel possibly even encouragement, to go astray.

Okay. I shouldn't have used the words "ramming it down people's throats". What I should have said was "asking people to believe a particular interpretation unquestioningly in order to be welcome"

I don't think my ability to interpret scripture is superior. It is what it is. Living water, to me, means understandings and actions that bring life. What I see happening with people who interpret the bible literally, to extremes, is that they are willing to endorse death through religious wars on people who they believe are 'evil' for not believing what they believe. And it ends up that people living decent lives, who have no hatred for other religions, who want nothing to do with those wars, die in them. That's the irony.

I was listening to an lecture by Brian McLaren last week; he made an interesting comment - that in science, medicine etc. we understand and accept that our knowledge, understanding, & interpretation of the world evolves - we do not still hold as 'truth' what was was thought to be so two centuries past - but somehow there are many in religious circles who cling to literal 'truth' of biblical writings of two centuries ago, ignoring evolving knowledge, understanding, interpretation.  Point to ponder, for me at least. 

I disagree, Jae. I have found that it gives people room to grow in faith.

This one really broke my heart.

I've been praying for this place since I found it. I always had faint hope, well at least there are a couple Christian revs remaining.

Then one who I held the most respect for says, I don't believe in the God of the bible, that God is ridiculous. I knew this was the case for most, but then I thought wow, are there any believers left?

Jesus said he and the father are one. So if you are a rev who does not believe in the God of the bible - please show me how you come to that conclusion. What did Jesus say to give you the impression he would hold God up to ridicule?

What we believe has no effect on what is true.

I'm not a rev SnP. I said upthread maybe some ministers can answer because that's what you asked for. I jumped in because I have my own thoughts on your OP.

Kimmio, I can't disagree that you have perceived that to be true.

I can say that I have certainly not seen that liberal interpetations of the Bible facilitate Christian growth in anyone during my years in the UCCanada.

Hi Kimmio,

You are a super sweetheart. When I think of who gets harmed by what goes on at WC, I think of you. There are many opportunities where revs could give you a little guidance. They will correct unsafe and airclean, yet let you wander into very dangerous water.

It just came to mind as it was something that was being offered/advertised at a UCC locally.

Thank you SnP. I certainly have my not so sweetheart days. And I have my own mind. I'll let some ministers address your concern. Like others, Rev John has corrected me from time to time- and I appreciate his biblical knowledge. He doesn't insist that I believe exactly as he does, though. And I've received friendly, not necessarily biblically specific, advice from others, too.

Okay, but why would one need to drop it in order to follow Jesus? 

Who was this?

If a UCCan falls in the forest, does she make a sound? ;3

We always interpret the world.  Perception is interpretation.  Thinking is interpretation.  Saying something is interpretation.

Words have multiple usages and words evolve and a word's meaning comes aboot over time as people use it.

...and look at today.  Christians here no longer stone people for adultery or being homosexual.  Wearing mixed fibre clothing is accepted now.  So what happened to those commandments of g_d?  Including hospitality (strange thought:  which would make fast food restaurant experience interesting...)

Take gravity.  Before Einstein, gravity was thought of as a force, a kind of field that moved faster than the speed of light, etc etc.  And the equations worked (its fine to have just equations, theory, but if the theory and equations don't fit with tests, then it's not true...).  Then along came Einstein and 'found' out that gravity can also be geometry, the metaphor of the thin rubber sheet that gets dimpled by planets & stars.  His equations are also true.

And, we're also finding that, perhaps, we, with the act of observing reality can 'create' reality...modify it...scientific tests have been, are, and will be going on testing this...

I think a Christian, if they truly believe, should not be afraid.  They should be able to give of themselves, selflessly, for their fellow critter no matter what.  Even if there isn't any reward ('heaven') after...

I understand, though, this need for 'truth'.  If g_d is all knowing, all powerful, without blemish, and if the bibble was inspired/created by him, then all of His words are True and not relative.

Keep on thinkin and being good and keepin UCCians on their toes

Hi Saul_now_Paul,

I take, on faith, that scripture is truth.  That doesn't force me into literalism.  It does challenge me to discern how the truth is being conveyed.

False dichotomy.  Some of what Jesus said constitutes good advice and is difficult to pigeon hole into black and white categories of truth and non-truth.

Jesus said it is better to enter heaven maimed than to burn whole in the fires of hell.  I gather that is a true statement.  If literalism is called for then I have to wonder why Christianity doesn't lead all faiths in self-mutiliation?

If our eyes causes us to sin we should pluck it out.  Truth.  Who is gouging out their eyes to honour that? 

If our right hand offends we should cut it off.  Truth.  Who is amputating their hands to honour that?

And what ifi it is our tongue speaking lies or fingers typing them.  Are we spared having to remove either because Jesus didn't specifically cover that?  Or is their truth in extending the principle of getting rid of that which commits offence beyond the literalism of amputation?

As much point in calling yourself a Christian when you don't do what he did.  If Christianity was about a perfect mimicry or impersonation of Christ who has earned that lable?  If we reduce it to certain points of doctrine believed shouldn't we be looking closer to see if those points of doctrine are actually lived?

I believe Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, my Master and my Lord.  Does how I live reflect that?

If you believe the same does your life reflect that?

And if the answer for either is no what does that mean exactly?  That we truly don't believe or that we suck at living out our beliefs.

It depends on how others are confused and whether or not we are actually confused ourselves.

Confusion is not the same as inconsistency.

Does your grouchiness permit you to sin?  Is that why you don't call it anger instead?  Scripture admonishes us not to sin in our anger though it permits us to get angry.  Scripture doesn't say anything about being grouchy so can we sin in our grouchiness?  If anger doesn't produce God's righteousness will grouchiness do the trick?

And when you lash out at all clergyare you holding all of them equally accountable for some short-fall that perhaps all of them do not share in?  Is that speaking truth or ignoring it?

And if I or another clergy person fall short what is your Christian obligation and duty?  If you fall short on that do you still entitle yourself to wear the name Christian?

And to set them free from the bonds forged by their own sin.  It is easy to see the mote in the eye of another while missing the plank in our own eyes.  Or is that simply not true?

That is the question Pilate asked.  Following up on your initial question what was Jesus' answer?

Prior to Pilate asking the question Jesus says that everyone who belongs to the truth listens to his voice.  How does that show do you think?  In an ability to repeat what has been said over and against an ability to do what has been said?

Grace and peace to you.

John

In the beginning is the word.

Some will wonder why I change "was" to "is". I base this on words the evangelist attributes to Jesus: "You have heard it said, but I say unto you..." The evangelist goes on to have Jesus bring teaching from the past into the present. Why? Because Jesus stands in a relationship with the living God, the everlasting word of life.

Where is that living, eternal, word, by which alone we may be saved, located? It is the image of God living, though much ignored and refused, at the heart of every person born into this world. This word was silenced by the sin of Adam and quickened by the obedience of Jesus. I am persuaded of this by the testimony of Deuteronomy and the Apostle, who say: 

"It is not in heaven, that you should say, “Who will go up to heaven for us, and get it for us so that we may hear it and observe it?” Neither is it beyond the sea, that you should say, “Who will cross to the other side of the sea for us, and get it for us so that we may hear it and observe it?” No, the word is very near to you; it is in your mouth and in your heart for you to observe."

 How do I understand this and how do I live it out in my experience? I understand that in my baptism, the ego, the self -seeking and self-affirming fallen human being, is put to death. Out of that death, as out of a seed that falls in the ground to die so that it may bear fruit, comes the resurrection life to which the evangelists bear witness.

Rooted in this realization I affirm, in spirit and in truth, that it is no longer I who live but Christ who lives in me. Having the living word of God within me, I cannot consider that word to be contained in the pages of a book, even though I affirm that a book has pointed me to the truth which has set me free. I certainly cannot bow before the authority of those who exploit the scripture for the sake of power and prestige. With the apostle I am obliged to say:

"Whether it is right in the sight of God to give heed to you rather than to God, you be the judge; for we cannot stop speaking about what we have seen and heard."

always happy to go the second mile...

Rev (UCC) George

Hi Saul_now_Paul,

II teach that God is Sovereign and God honours all covenants that God enters into.

I can agree with that on a big picture.  Where God is Trinitaritan and nothing the Father does occurs behind the back or against the will of the Son or the Holy Spirit.  I don't think that big picture is honoured by zooming in on any one person of the Godhead to the exclusion of all others.

Romans 9 for example where Paul talks about Israel and the covenant of election between Israel and God has been interpreted in many ways.  Some (dispensationalists) tend to read a substitution in the text where Paul says "not all of Abraham's children are his true descendants."  They substitute Church for Israel and diminish covenants with the Jews suggesting that they will not stand.

Paul says, "I will have mercy upon those whom I have mercy and I will have compassion on those whom I have compassion" which points to the grace of God

Which leads me to conclude that confessing Christ as Lord and Saviour something we who look at Christ up close think of as being all-important may not be all important for Jews who live with another covenant.

As a Trinitarian you can't have one without the other every time I reference God explicityly Jesus and the Holy Spirit are referenced implicitly and the same holds true if one explicitly references Jesus or the Holy Spirit.  The other two parties of the Godhead are implicit.

And yet, some get tied up in literal words.  Unless Christ is reference explicitly Jesus has been ignored.

I am a husband and a father as well as a son and a brother.  If my sister only refers to me as her brother I do not cease to be a husband, father and son.  And yet, for some Christians unless I make specific reference to Christ Jesus I haven't mentioned him at all.

I find that curious.

As a result I don't think that the Jews need to do what a lot of other Christians insist they must do.

I don't think that represents the all paths position (which I reject) I also don't think it represents the more common one path mentality (which I think seeks to limit truth rather than embrace it).

Maybe you would like to set up competing sacrifices and have us all call out to God with the understanding that God will only send fire on the one that truly worships him.  That's a biblical model for proving truth right?

Grace and peace to you.

John

Hi kimmio-- You pointed out Ecclesiastes 7:20

Now we know The answer to the question. Yes there was . His Name was Jesus The christ.

A good book Eccl-I like the way King Solomon ended it.

	Ecc 12:12	My son, beware of anything beyond these. Of making many books there is no end, and much study is a weariness of the flesh.
	Ecc 12:13	The end of the matter; all has been heard. Fear God, and keep his commandments; for this is the whole duty of man.
	Ecc 12:14	For God will bring every deed into judgment, with every secret thing, whether good or evil.

Could it be put more simple or plain?This was a very Wise Man

I believe Jesus is the embodiment of truth itself that would mean the opposite exists. I also believe the words of Jesus, “My grace is sufficient for you”. Jesus hung out with sinners and offered life, He never condemned them . Jesus said life takes precedence; he proved that by healing on the Sabbath.

What happens to thouse who never heard the gospel or have no revelation in there hearts of the truth?. Romans teach that God will judge people on what they know and are capable of knowing.  We can know right and wrong and know there is one true God.  Job did, Jethro did and many others. All can instinctively know moral code, even atheist know, they just attribute the knowing to man instead of God, yet it is with in there heart.

So as Christians, we can debate scriptures all day long, but that does not give Life and Grace. For it is better to error on the side of Love than it is to side on correctness, and Jesus Proved this by become sin itself to offer Life.

I believe that Jesus is the only Way , the Truth and the Life, but I also Trust that the Truth I believe in is True in His Grace and mercy on Judgment day for all.

Furthermore I comment the ministers on WC, they have taught me to stretch my faith, to see that its not all black and white, that Life takes precedence and have caused me to study deeper the things of God in the questions that have been but forth here on this site. 

It comes down to understanding what the word is conveying and the Holy Spirit will direct you in your guidence as to the message behind the words -----

Matthew 5:29

Now, I know that yo're speaking about me. I honestly don't care whether you respect me or not, but could you give me the actual quote that upset you so much rather than a paraphrase which I suspect is taken out of context.

As to truth - the word of God is truth; Jesus is the Word of God; therefore Jesus is the truth; therefore we can presume that if Jesus is the truth what Jesus said is the truth. 

your statement is confusing... did Jesus say that to you or are you saying scripture says Jesus said... as I recall Christ according to John's Gospel said the Paralete was the spirit of truth.... not scripture as it has been handed down... Christ left the Paraclete to teach us truth... or am I mistaken...

Hi Saul_now_Paul,

The very idea of truth being verified numerically... my 100 beats your 1.

What do you make of Jesus in the face of his scriptural adversaries? With Ezra and Nehemiah in hand, they soundly denounced the upstart who dared keep company with Samaritans. Had he no idea of what the scripture said about keeping the faith pure?

George

"What is truth?" someone asked Socrates.

"Only the ignorant dare to answer," said he.

Maybe that's why the city fathers of Athens ordered him to commit suicide.

If I understood S_n_P right, he wants to know whether we think that there is an ultimate or absolute Truth.

Yes, I think there is. I think reality is in an ultimate state of nonduality, inseparability, unity or synthesis. Because synthesis is antithetical to analysis, absolute Truth can't be expressed in analytical terms or concepts. But it can be experienced simply because this is how reality really is. Some Christian mystics regarded ultimate reality as divine, and described the experience of the divine reality as visio divina: sacred seeing. 

Ultimate Truth cannot be explained in analytical concepts. IT just is. Thus, Jesus' "I am the Truth" is bang on, and so is Socrates' "Only the ignorant dare to answer."

Lao Tsu also expressed ultimate Truth eloquently:

"The TAO that can be told is not the TAO."

The Gospels of the Bible are not accurate historical biographies of Jesus. They are what literary scholars describe as "pseudo-biographies," meaning that they were written according to oral versions that had been told and retold many times before they were finally written down. Moreover, they were written by more than one author, and the author they were named after probably was not even one of them. They were written by professional scribes, and are biographical legends rather than accurate historical biographies. To regard them as absolute truth is a matter of unquestioning belief, which can't be argued. One either believes it or not. I don't. 

Hey there everyone,

This is a great video series for those interested in studying of the Gospels ...

Enjoy ...

Yours truly,
 

RH Billy

Hi there Saul_now_Paul,

I think Jesus says "I tell you the truth" because He knew many would find what he said, hard to believe ...

With that in mind, consider the following passages:

Matthew 5:17-19
Matthew 8: 5-13
Matthew 10:22-24
Matthew 10:41-42
Matthew 11:10-12
Matthew 17:19-20
Matthew 18:12-14
Matthew 19:22-24
Matthew 19:27-29
Matthew 21:20-22
Matthew 26:12-14
Mark 11:22-24
Mark 12:42-44
Mark 14:17-19
Luke 4:23-25
John 3:2-4
John 5:24-26
John 6:31-33
John 8:33-35
John 10:1-3
John 13:15-17
John 13:20-22
John 16:6-8

yours truly,

rhbilly

Frank,

I've learned some things from you.  Blessed be WC, giving us the chance to explore & joke together.

rhbilly,

awsome discordian pentad of videos, there :3

S'more thoughts on this

I comiserate on people trying to tease apart what is 'real' from what they want to be 'real'.  Its very difficult.

I also grok the importance of 'hey fellows, love your neighbour as yourself and keep doing it.  NO BUTS!" Human beings seem to be quite good at BUTS!  When something right and cool comes along, we can be very good at outhinking it, taking it apart...

But (OH MY!) i do think that Christianity is out there.  That the fine Jewish tradition that Jesus continued has become a part of the world.  As has science.  And it will never die.  The churches might.  People will come and go.  But the message won't.

yours truly,

rhbilly

Dcn.Jae - you may not have noticed it, but I can tell you that I have certainly experienced growth in my Christian faith over the years - accelerated at times such as during my time here on the Wonder Cafe.

Growth is a funny thing.

Every living creature grows whether that living creature be liberal in outlook or conservative.  It is an undeniable truth.

Everything grows.

The problem of course is not an absence of growth but whether or not the growth is to our liking.

Everyone here at WonderCafe.ca has grown in one way or another.  Each of us have had impact for good or ill upon all others who have engaged us in conversation.  That is growth.

And yet some with eyes do not see.

Why not?

I suspect it is because human beings have a rather arrogant habit of using themselves as universal yard-stick.

I grew such and such and you did not therefore you did not grow.

Everything grows in its own way and everything thrives in its own season.  Consider the trees along the boulevard, the autumn comes and the leaves change colour and fall.  We think of it as death.  The same tree buds green in the spring.  We think of that as life.

And yet, dead trees do not sprout buds.

Leaves die yet the tree lives on.  It doesn't grow as rapidly as a tree in the summer.  That doesn't mean it is dead in winter.  it rests and at the proper time (often determined by the trees because of external influences) it flourishes and knows life in abundance.

Dead trees do not bud.  They rot.

If I do not grow the same as you am I dying?  If you do not grow the same as me ar you dying?

Possibly but not necessarily.

Each living thing should be allowed to grow at its own rate.

The owner passes through the vineyard and sees a tree not producing.  He orders that tree cut down and yet the gardener offers a different suggestion, let me give it some special care, something not entirely unusual but more deliberate.

Will that help?  It won't hurt.

What it will do is buy time and sometimes that is all late bloomers need.  A bit of patience.

Do we bow to the wisdom of the gardener or do we yield to the impatience of the owner?

Clearly the tree was budding it simply had yet to fruit.  Most trees will not fruit until they reach maturity.  Depending upon the tree it can be a couple of years or several.

I wonder, how many trees each of us have felled through our impatience and how many we have nurtured by the gift of a little time and extra care.

As long as it lives it grows.  We can help or hinder the process with effort.

I have yet to meet a tree which yields to threat of destruction.  I have met people so sensitive to such threats that they, unlike the tree which makes no choice about growing, refuse to live.

Grace and peace to you.

John