The Scandal of the Gracious Judge - the Uniqueness of the Christian Faith

[Red Sky at Morning]

The "Good Thief" is the one who "steals fire from the Devil", using (or sublimating, or transmuting) passion to serve reason. The "Bad Thief" does the opposite, using his reason, that is to say cunning, to satisfy desires, becoming in the process a "slave of the Devil".

As a rather pretentious student of English Literature many years ago, I used to go to a film with friends and we would analyse it over a bag of chips afterwards (seemed like a good idea at the time!)...

The conclusions we used to draw were more often than not related to our own conceptual frameworks and not the directors!!! I found that out myself meter in the year when examinations came round and I was mildly censured for being too solipsistic in my interpretations.

I learned a valuable lesson - we can all create narratives about what a writer meant, but that ability does nothing to alter the writers ideas, just our ability to understand them.

When in doubt, read the immediate context and other works by the same author. If questions like these encourage people to do what the Bereans, did, they are worth asking:-

Acts 17

Paul and Silas at Berea

10And the brethren immediately sent away Paul and Silas by night unto Berea: who coming thither went into the synagogue of the Jews. 11These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so. 12Therefore many of them believed; also of honourable women which were Greeks, and of men, not a few.

 

[shankara]

As a rather pretentious student of English Literature many years ago, I used to go to a film with friends and we would analyse it over a bag of chips afterwards (seemed like a good idea at the time!)...

The conclusions we used to draw were more often than not related to our own conceptual frameworks and not the directors!!! I found that out myself meter in the year when examinations came round and I was mildly censured for being too solipsistic in my interpretations.

I learned a valuable lesson - we can all create narratives about what a writer meant, but that ability does nothing to alter the writers ideas, just our ability to understand them.

When in doubt, read the immediate context and other works by the same author. If questions like these encourage people to do what the Bereans, did, they are worth asking:-

Acts 17

Paul and Silas at Berea

10And the brethren immediately sent away Paul and Silas by night unto Berea: who coming thither went into the synagogue of the Jews. 11These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so. 12Therefore many of them believed; also of honourable women which were Greeks, and of men, not a few.

I think it's really quite obvious that the Bible is supposed to be interpreted allegorically. It makes a lot more sense that way. Unfortunately many people have either lost the capacity to comprehend allegory or unconciously prefer easy doctrines of guaranteed salvation to the real message of the text.

 

[Red Sky at Morning]

I think it's really quite obvious that the Bible is supposed to be interpreted allegorically. It makes a lot more sense that way. Unfortunately many people have either lost the capacity to comprehend allegory or unconciously prefer easy doctrines of guaranteed salvation to the real message of the text.

I think there are complexities you are missing here. The Bible certainly contains allegorical aspects and it also contains literal statements. To read obvious picture language as literal is just dumb. To misread literal statements as mere allegories (for whatever we would prefer them to say) is self deceptive.

A good study relating to literalism and picture language in prophecy...

 

[Infinityloop]

I mean, I believe I have the correct interpretation of that parable, and if that interpretation is correct then the so-called Christians of today are the equivalent of the Pharisees of Jesus' time...

This is correct with the exception to the fact that the Pharisees still followed the Torah, whereas most "Christians" are against the law (which is slightly worse than the Pharisees who where simply misguided and hypocritical in the way the followed it, not the fact that they followed it).

And remembering what Jesus said in Matthew 5:17-20

“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets;
I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.
For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear,
not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen,
will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.
Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands
and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven,
but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees
and the teachers of the law,
you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven.​

 

[Red Sky at Morning]

This is correct with the exception to the fact that the Pharisees still followed the Torah, whereas most "Christians" are against the law (which is slightly worse than the Pharisees who where simply misguided and hypocritical in the way the followed it, not the fact that they followed it).

I think this is more polemic than analysis...

Matthew 5

Jesus Fulfills the Law

17Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. 18For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. 19Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

20For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.

 

[Infinityloop]

I think this is more polemic than analysis...

Matthew 5

Jesus Fulfills the Law

17Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. 18For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. 19Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

20For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.

Why did you just repaste what I posted? https://vigilantcitizenforums.com/threads/the-scandal-of-the-gracious-judge-the-uniqueness-of-the-christian-faith.6762/post-252359

 

[Red Sky at Morning]

Why did you just repaste what I posted? https://vigilantcitizenforums.com/threads/the-scandal-of-the-gracious-judge-the-uniqueness-of-the-christian-faith.6762/post-252359

Because you claim Christians are against God’s Law. You edited your post to add the quote that I also posted.

 

[Infinityloop]

Because you claim Christians are against God’s Law. You edited your post to add the quote that I also posted.

I quoted Matt 5 BEFORE you posted it, it was part of the message of my post (I originally just said the verse numbers).

The meaning of that passage is that the Pharisees where hypocrites who followed the law only legalistically but where otherwise mindless in their following of it. Jesus was there to demonstrate how the Torah is to be understood. The closing of that passage states that unless you are MORE righteous in your following of the Torah, then you will not be going to heaven. It's a very serious passage but you Protestants are always so more infatuated with 5:17 and ignore the rest of the passage.

 

[Red Sky at Morning]

I quoted Matt 5 BEFORE you posted it, it was part of the message of my post (I originally just said the verse numbers).

The meaning of that passage is that the Pharisees where hypocrites who followed the law only legalistically but where otherwise mindless in their following of it. Jesus was there to demonstrate how the Torah is to be understood. The closing of that passage states that unless you are MORE righteous in your following of the Torah, then you will not be going to heaven. It's a very serious passage but you Protestants are always so more infatuated with 5:17 and ignore the rest of the passage.

Not to nit-pick but the post you had put up is quoted in my response.

Regardless, Jesus fulfils the Law, and the Holy Spirit in the life of Christians helps them to want to keep it e.g. Philippians 2:


12 Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling.

13 For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure.

 

[Infinityloop]

Not to nit-pick but the post you had put up is quoted in my response.

Regardless, Jesus fulfils the Law, and the Holy Spirit in the life of Christians helps them to want to keep it e.g. Philippians 2:


12 Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling.

13 For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure.

This bit is especially explicit:

For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear,
not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen,
will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.

Clearly if he denies that he's abolishing the Law then it is clear that the law is still in motion:

Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets;
I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.

To fulfill it, then means that he is demonstrating the way that the Pharisees, and everyone else, is supposed to be following/observing the Torah. Period.

 

[Red Sky at Morning]

This bit is especially explicit:

For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear,
not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen,
will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.

Clearly if he denies that he's abolishing the Law then it is clear that the law is still in motion:

Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets;
I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.

To fulfill it, then means that he is demonstrating the way that the Pharisees, and everyone else, is supposed to be following/observing the Torah. Period.

Mark 2

23And it came to pass, that he went through the corn fields on the sabbath day; and his disciples began, as they went, to pluck the ears of corn. 24And the Pharisees said unto him, Behold, why do they on the sabbath day that which is not lawful? 25And he said unto them, Have ye never read what David did, when he had need, and was an hungred, he, and they that were with him? 26How he went into the house of God in the days of Abiathar the high priest, and did eat the shewbread, which is not lawful to eat but for the priests, and gave also to them which were with him? 27And he said unto them, The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath: 28Therefore the Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath.

Jeremiah 31

A New Covenant

31Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah: 32Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD: 33But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people. 34And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.

John 16

5But now I go my way to him that sent me; and none of you asketh me, Whither goest thou? 6But because I have said these things unto you, sorrow hath filled your heart. 7Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you. 8And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment: 9Of sin, because they believe not on me; 10Of righteousness, because I go to my Father, and ye see me no more; 11Of judgment, because the prince of this world is judged.

Hebrews 10

19Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus, 20By a new and living way, which he hath consecrated for us, through the veil, that is to say, his flesh; 21And having an high priest over the house of God; 22Let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water.

 

[Red Sky at Morning]

Further to your comment @Infinityloop Jesus wrote the Beatitudes to the Jews who followed the laws of God already, so in context Jesus was stating that outward following of OT commandments was not enough.

 

[shankara]

So this saying:

"For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven."

Is very interesting... It makes me wonder how people can then interpret Christ's mission as being simply to make people "believe". I would say that the idea of "believing" means being open, aware of reality, which is to say aware of the kind of things this site is about. To not be one of the "scoffers" who has a very narrow worldview and labels everything around them, "conspiracy theories", "crazy" etc.

I also think that the whole business about not doing away with the law is interesting. I certainly don't think we need to follow all of the laws found in the Pentateuch, some of them were "time and place" revelations specific to a certain people. But I think there are some elements which are intended to be universal, for example the prohibition on eating pork, hence why the Prophet Mohamed (Peace Be Upon Him) re-established this tradition.

Another example might be circumcision. Honestly I was always quite against this, but having lately read something of Gurdjieff I'm wondering whether I should reconsider my opinion. The custom of circumcision guards against the vice of onanism, particularly in childhood and adolescence when it is most harmful.

Also it interests me whether when the Gospel deals with the "Pharisees" it is in fact referring specifically to that group of people who existed at that time. Of course they did exist and did have some particular interpretation of things. But they could also represent all of the "religious" people who dismiss the real meaning of the scriptures because of their blinkered worldview.

 

[Red Sky at Morning]

@shankara

There is a related verse in Matthew 11 which leads to some intriguing conclusions:-

7 And as they departed, Jesus began to say unto the multitudes concerning John, What went ye out into the wilderness to see? A reed shaken with the wind? 8 But what went ye out for to see? A man clothed in soft raiment? behold, they that wear soft clothing are in kings' houses. 9 But what went ye out for to see? A prophet? yea, I say unto you, and more than a prophet. 10 For this is he, of whom it is written, Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee. 11 Verily I say unto you, Among them that are born of women there hath not risen a greater than John the Baptist: notwithstanding he that is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he.

So the question should occur: “In what way was John the Baptist the greatest” (Matthew 11:11)?"

In a discourse about John the Baptist, Jesus honored the prophet with these words: “Truly I tell you, among those born of women there has not risen anyone greater than John the Baptist” (Matthew 11:11a). John certainly did not see himself as “great”—he did not see himself as worthy enough to baptize Jesus (Matthew 3:13–14) or even to carry His sandals (Matthew 3:11).

The “greatness” that Jesus refers to concerning John has to do with John’s unique position in history, not with any special talent, holiness, or personal merit. In fact, immediately after stating that John is the greatest “among those born of women,” Jesus says, “Yet whoever is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he” (Matthew 11:11b). More on this paradox later.

One reason that Jesus called John the Baptist the “greatest” was that John held the honor of being chosen by God as the forerunner to the Messiah. John’s mission was to personally prepare the world for Christ’s arrival. John’s ministry was predicted in Isaiah 40:3 and Malachi 3:1. After Jesus came, John introduced Him to the world as the Lamb of God who would take away the sin of the world (John 1:35–36). John was the herald who introduced to the world the Hero of all history. It was this introduction that accredited Jesus before the Jewish crowds and leaders, some of whom believed on Jesus, and many of whom did not.

John was also the “greatest” in that he preached with the power of Elijah (Luke 1:17; 3:7–18). John shared many qualities with Elijah, including calling a nation to repentance, rebuking the king, and persevering in the face of public misunderstanding and malicious persecution (Matthew 11:16–18; Mark 6:14–19).

John was also the “greatest” in that God had chosen him to break the 430 years of divine silence that had existed since the prophet Malachi. John was the Spirit-anointed bridge from the Old Testament to the New. John was the last of the Old Testament prophets and stood on the cusp of a new dispensation. His preaching was the end of the Law and the beginning of the Promise. He was the last in the long line of prophets who predicted Christ, yet he was the only one who could actually see Christ in the flesh. Moses, Isaiah, and the rest of the prophets had pointed to a far-distant personage they could see only faintly. John pointed at an actual human being who stood directly in front of him. No other prophet had that privilege.

Jesus’ full statement in Matthew 11:11 is paradoxical: “Truly I tell you, among those born of women there has not risen anyone greater than John the Baptist; yet whoever is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he.” How can John be the greatest, if even the “least in the kingdom” is greater than John? Again, the answer has to do with the Christian’s unique position in history, not with his personal merit. John died without seeing the fullness of God’s plan in Christ (see Mark 6:17–29). John never saw the crucifixion of Christ or His glorious resurrection. Yet even the “least in the kingdom of heaven” knows of these events and understands their meaning.

The baptism of John was insufficient to save (see Acts 18:24–26; 19:1–7). The disciples of John in Ephesus needed to hear the whole gospel, not just what John had taught. They needed to be baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus, the one John had predicted. They needed the baptism of the Holy Spirit. John was truly the greatest prophet of his era—the Old Testament time—yet all Christians today have a fuller perspective on the work of Christ.

Source

 

[Red Sky at Morning]

Stepping back to the “judge” element of the OP, there are three judgements to come. The only thing we get to decide is which one we will face...