Basic Christ teachings.

S’okay?

Looking through the comments above, I’m not sure what you are asking. Was it from a different post?

Are you asking if I believe that God communicated harsh things via His prophets? I sure do.

Are you asking if I believe that God still may choose to communicate harsh things to folks via prophets? Yep. I think He probably does.

I am very wary of anyone claiming to speak for God and would never presume to speak for Him unless I was absolutely sure the message was His. From what I see in the Bible, God takes a very dim view of those who claim to speak for Him something He did not tell them to say.

I like the way the Message renders Deuteronomy 18:20-22

“But any prophet who fakes it, who claims to speak in my name something I haven’t commanded him to say, or speaks in the name of other gods, that prophet must die.”

You may be wondering among yourselves, “How can we tell the difference, whether it was God who spoke or not?” Here’s how: If what the prophet spoke in God’s name doesn’t happen, then obviously God wasn’t behind it; the prophet made it up. Forget about him. [emphasis is mine]

To people who claim to know what others must do about things not explicitly spelled out in scripture, I would urge tremendous caution. They better be right. Or God himself will likely put an end to it.

If they are sure, even knowing the consequences were they to be wrong, then I say fire away. The issue is between them and God (and the person being shot at too, I suppose).

Me personally, I have yet to find an instance when I was willing to go out on that limb on an issue not explicitly spelled out in scripture.

(I had asked earlier: “Surely you believe in the prophetic voice? Would you have wished that Isaiah had not condemned all those kings and the wealthy oppressors? Would you have called that class warfare? Would you have wished that Mary had not talked about God sending the “rich away empty”? Was that class warfare? Was James brutal treatment of the wealthy a sign of class warfare?”)

Can I assume that you DO agree that there is a time for Godly vocal (even bluntly so) criticism and a time for agreement? A time for communal questioning of our practices and a time for unity?

I just have a problem with the dismissal of Jesus’ teachings so often done by the church. And downplaying or ignoring (or totally reinterpreting backwards) the Bible’s blunt teachings about materialism is chief amongst the Western Church’s sins. That’s all I’m saying.

What I am saying is that our actions, our doing good things, our following Jesus’ teachings are not required for us to become acceptable to God.

They will be demonstrated naturally in a believer’s life as a result of believing.

Following Jesus, obeying his teachings, is a byproduct of the process of becoming acceptable to God, not a step in that process.

Otherwise, where is the list of things that must be done? How long must someone be doing them?

How do you account for someone like the thief on the cross next to Jesus? He couldn’t do anything. He was nailed to a cross! Yet somehow he still partied with Jesus in heaven later that very day.

Listen + Believe = Acceptable to God

Everything else flows out of the new life that comes from that acceptance. We do nothing but gum up the works when we change the equation that Jesus laid out.

My trouble comes when some followers of Jesus find Jesus’ teaching distasteful. When they flat our reject Jesus’ teachings as ungodly. Are these people following Jesus? Of course, they would never overtly say Jesus’ teachings are ungodly. What the Church tends to do is ignore the greater specific teachings of Jesus and focus on minor vague phrases.

Yes, Jesus said, “I assure you, those who listen to my message and believe in God who sent me have eternal life.”

But Jesus also told us the parable of the sheep and the goats, making it clear that those who weren’t doing the work of loving and tending to our neighbors, were not followers at all.

Jesus also told the rich young man (EVEN THOUGH all he had to do to receive eternal life was “believe”) that he MUST sell all he had, give it to the poor and join Jesus’ community.

Bonhoeffer describes it as Cheap Grace. The notion that we can “believe” in Jesus but not believe or follow his teachings.

We can not earn our way in to heaven. We are in agreement there. It is God’s grace alone, God’s gift to us.

But the “believer” who rejects or ignores Jesus’ teaching is a believer in a make-believe God. An ear-tickling God. You want to own ten cars, two mansions and a summer home? Go ahead! Want to kill some of your more scary enemies? Sure! Why not!

Yes, Jesus came to set us free, hallelujah! Free from hatred, free from materialism, free from oppression, free from captivity! But we DO have to accept this freedom.

The prisoner who sits in his jail cell and rejoices in his freedom but who never leaves, is he truly free?

However I do disagree with you when you say there is a third step required for acceptance by God. Let me explain.

I see the following that you talk about not as a requirement for acceptance, but as the natural out flowing of believing. Our actions are not what cause us to gain acceptance, but rather are the results of the change in us that comes from believing.

Our actions (our following) can be evidence that a change has taken place because of believing. But those same actions can be done without actually believing in the first place.

The other danger is that when we add requirements beyond what Jesus laid out, those requirements quickly turn into a list of rules, or “ought to’s” and “ought not to’s”. Yours did in the span of one comment.

Paul wrote the scathing letter of Galatians in large part to confront this very issue in that church. He also told the Colossians

These rules may seem wise because they require strong devotion, humility, and severe bodily discipline. But they have no effect when it comes to conquering a person’s evil thoughts and desires.

Jesus didn’t come to weigh folks down with rules. No. He came to set us free

“1. Listen 2. Believe

That’s it. According to Jesus, that’s all it takes to be acceptable to God. There’s no special sacrifice required, no long pilgrimage, no heroic deeds or great quest, and no list of rules to follow.”

We are saved by God’s grace and God’s grace alone. It is a gift to us all.

But I think most evangelical religions would state that “even the demons” 1. listen and 2. believe but that it doesn’t help much unless one also 3. follow.

One can believe in Jesus all they want and AS LONG AS, by “believe,” you mean believe Jesus’ teachings and think they’re worthy of following, then your belief is not much help.

But I’m sure this is what you mean, right? Just believing in Jesus as a historical character or even just believing in Jesus as son of God is useless unless you also agree with his message and also follow. Are we in unity on this?

And when I say follow, I don’t mean that we’ll never hate nor be greedy, but rather, that we Agree with Jesus that we ought not hate nor be greedy and have that as our goal. God is not a dictator. If someone wants to reject Jesus’/God’s Way, God will let them.

What say ye?