Judas better if he had not been born?

[Dallas]

yes, Paul said that in Corinthians...go find where Jesus said we'll judge the angels...or that any other than the 12 appointed apostles would judge Israel...

-noname

Matthew 19:27 "Then Peter said to Him, "Behold, we have left everything and followed You; what then will there be for us?" 28 And Jesus said to them, "Truly I say to you, that you who have followed Me, in the regeneration when the Son of Man will sit on His glorious throne, you also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel. 29 "And everyone who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or children or farms for My name's sake, will receive many times as much, and will inherit eternal life. 30 "But many who are first will be last; and the last, first."

[Dallas]

deleted

[Dallas]

noname-

Tertullian also quotes Paul to establish his beliefs about the delays of the antichrist. He quotes Paul's 2 Thessalonians to prove that Rome being in power stops the Antichrist from being revealed.

So if your source is how you denounce Pauls authority and that very source uses Paul's teachings there is quite the contridiction.

If Paul is false and needs to be rejected you can't also use Paul's writting to prove you ideas.

" 'For that day shall not come, unless indeed there first come a falling away,' he [Paul] means indeed of this present empire, 'and that man of sin be revealed,' that is to say, Antichrist, 'the son of perdition, who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God or religion; so that he sitteth in the temple of God, affirming that he is God. Remember ye not, that when I was with you, I used to tell you these things? And now ye know what detaineth, that he might be revealed in his time. For the mystery of iniquity doth already work; only he who now hinders must hinder, until he be taken out of the way.' What obstacles is there but the Roman state, the falling away of which, by being scattered into the ten kingdoms, shall introduce Antichrist upon (its own ruins)? And then shall be revealed the wicked one, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of His mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of His coming: even him whose coming is after the working of Satan, with all power, and signs, and lying wonders, and with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish."

From his book, On The Ressurection chapter 24

[Dallas]

deleted

[Dallas]

Against Marcion Book One

Chapter 14. All Portions of Creation Attest the Excellence of the Creator, Whom Marcion Vilifies. His Inconsistency Herein Exposed. Marcion's Own God Did Not Hesitate to Use the Creator's Works in Instituting His Own Religion.
Now, when you make merry with those minuter animals, which their glorious Maker has purposely endued with a profusion of instincts and resources, — thereby teaching us that greatness has its proofs in lowliness, just as (according to the apostle) there is power even in infirmity 2 Corinthians 12:5 — imitate, if you can

Marcion already claimed in the early 100s that only Paul's gospel was the real one
Tertullian in 5 books totally floors his arguments

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/03125.htm

Don't know what you are talking about noname.

According to Tertullian Paul is an apostle!

You really need to read book five, you told me to read Against Marcion, well maybe you need to re-read it because
Tertullian uses Paul's teaching and constantly quotes Paulin order to despute Marcion. He even devotes the entire book 5 to prove that Paul is an apostle and agrees with the rest of scripture!!

Polycarp Clament seemened also to like Paul...

http://www.chnetwork.org/journals/justification/justify_12.htm

[willieH]

willieH: Hi Syndicated... to TM...

I understand the part about mankind betraying God, hence being able to be called 'Traitors', however...

Let him that is WITHOUT SIN (which is "BETRAYAL" to the COMMAND of GOD, and which "betrayal" resulted in the DEATH of JESUS CHRIST), ...cast the 1st stone at the "traitor", ...JUDAS...

I thought that Jesus stated this to the crowds that were about to stone an adultress woman, not at Judas... I don't understand how that statement can be made in reference to Judas.

Why not?  The WORD dispenses with ALL (unjust) JUDGES except himself, and in the GRACE of the WORD, is found forgiveness for that which deserves no forgiveness... (the unjust - both the doer of deeds and the "JUDGES" of those deeds)

The statement made to the Pharisees was making a point to ALL sinners, which propose judgment of another sinners ...SIN...

JUDAS actually FULFILLED a prophecy the WORD made of him -- Psalm 41:9 / Acts 1:16 / John 13:18 -- so did he really have a choice to abstain?  I think NOT... What is WRITTEN in God's WORD shall not be CHANGED by ANY MAN... it shall be FULFILLED.

He could NOT have done anything other than that which he DID, for the WORD had "written" of him, his destiny... and the Scriptures CANNOT BE BROKEN -- John 10:35

Also, I understood that the phrase 'Without Sin' meant being blameless in ANY aspect, not just to betray the command of God.

FIRST -- the passage (one of my favorites, for I have written a song about it) that you refer to, does NOT mention being "blameless" -- John 8:3-11 -- It notes to them any WITHOUT SIN (essentially the same as "blameless", but specific in reference to sin)

KJV -- John 8:7 -- so when they continued asking Him, He lifted up Himself, and said unto them: he that is WITHOUT SIN among you, let him first cast a stone at her.

NASB -- 7 But when they persisted in asking Him, He straightened up, and said to them, "He who is WITHOUT SIN among you, let him be the first to throw a stone at her."

NIV -- 7 But Jesus bent down and started to write on the ground with his finger. 7When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, "If any one of you is WITHOUT SIN, let him be the first to throw a stone at her."

ESV -- 7 And as they continued to ask him, he stood up and said to them, (A) "Let him who is WITHOUT SIN among you(B) be the first to throw a stone at her."

ASV -- 7 But when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is WITHOUT SIN among you, let him first cast a stone at her.

SECOND -- If you have BETRAYED the COMMAND of GOD -- which is conveyed by HIS WORD... then you have BETRAYED ...HIS WORD... and are therefore NOT "blameless" and NOT "without sin"

Can you clarify that for me?  I don't think I understand what it is you're trying to convey here.

Hope what I have noted helps you understand what I am trying to convey. 

What JUDAS did was fulfill prophecy... How can that be considered by another as an act which is unacceptable? 

GOD decided the "fate" or "destiny" of JUDAS, by writing of him, that destiny, in the ETERNAL WORD... not JUDAS...

And as I have maintained within this discussion... WITHOUT JUDAS (or someone like him)... we would not have SALVATION, for his act of BETRAYAL was necessary for the plan to go forth, which was WRITTEN of CHRIST and His redeeming sacrifice for US... 

...willieH 

[rosered]

Pauls words are scripture (2 Peter 3:15,16) and are good enough for me. But it can be inferred from Jesus to. Here are some of the places; Rev. 3:21, Luke 22:30 (Judas was already gone here, see John 13:30),  Matt. 24:47, Matt. 19:28,29.

I can't even see how Luke 22:30 and Matt. 19:28 are being limited to the apostles since Acts 1:22,23 tell us that Matthias and Barsabas was there to.

Unsure about Luke 22:30?
Luke 22:14 When the hour came, Jesus and his apostles reclined at the table.

Pauls words are scripture (2 Peter 3:15,16) and are good enough for me.

first, 2 Peter is generally accepted amongst most scholars to be a "pseudograph", ie a book written after it was claimed to be, in other words, not in Peter's time and not by him...this book has been disputed since the early days of Christianity

second, do you know the requirements for adding to Scripture?
it must be done by a true prophet who's prophecies have been tested.

"Only a true prophet from God can add text to the Bible. (Deut. 18:15.) The Bible itself lays out the tests for such authorized additions
to the Bible. These tests are spelled out in Deuteronomy chs. 4, 12, 13 & 18. A key test is that no prophet could be legitimate who tried to "diminish" (subtract) any command previously given. (Deut. 4:2; 12:32 (quoted in inset).) This was true even if they had "sign and wonders that came to pass." (Deut.13:1-5.) This is reiterated in Isaiah 8:20.

example - Paul's Words Are Not Always Prescient:

Paul Predicts Loss of Life
Acts 27:10
[A]nd said unto them, Sirs, I perceive (theoreo, perceive with the eyes, discern) that the voyage will be with injury and much loss, not only
of the lading and the ship, but also of our lives.

Paul Predicts No Loss of Life
Acts 27:22-24
(22) And now I exhort you to be of good cheer; for there shall be no loss of life among you, but only of the ship. (23) For there stood by me this night an angel of the God whose I am, whom also I serve, (24) saying, Fear not, Paul; thou must stand before Caesar: and lo, God hath granted thee all them that sail with thee.

in the passages above "prophet" Paul clearly contradicts himself

  Using this passage   without verse 18 and 19   etc   and the crux of it 

  is kind of deceptive to me
    Its the Lord   who showed Paul there would be no loss of Life  only loss on the ship 
  Kind of does not contradict  anything   
 

10 "Men," he said, "I believe there is trouble ahead if we go on—shipwreck, loss of cargo, and danger to our lives as well." 11 But the officer in charge of the prisoners listened more to the ship's captain and the owner than to Paul.


 18 The next day, as gale-force winds continued to batter the ship, the crew began throwing the cargo overboard.

19 The following day they even took some of the ship's gear and threw it overboard.

 
 20 The terrible storm raged for many days, blotting out the sun and the stars, until at last all hope was gone.

 21 No one had eaten for a long time. Finally, Paul called the crew together and said, "Men, you should have listened to me in the first place and not left Crete. You would have avoided all this damage and loss.
 

22 But take courage! None of you will lose your lives, even though the ship will go down. 23 For last night an angel of the God to whom I belong and whom I serve stood beside me, 24 and he said, 'Don't be afraid, Paul, for you will surely stand trial before Caesar! What's more, God in his goodness has granted safety to everyone sailing with you.'


25 So take courage! For I believe God. It will be just as he said. 26 But we will be shipwrecked on an island."


  I find no counterdictions in Pauls writtings with the Lords teachings they are harmonious 

   Paul style of writing  is that of men and angels that might be where   
  discernment is key to understanding  them .
 peace 

[noname]

please see "Word studies" - paul vs Jesus

[rosered]

please see "Word studies" - paul vs Jesus

  I have not found that study on the site JWOS
?http://www.jesuswordsonly.com/
 
  Will look again and have  read some stuff already , seems  half baked to me  
sorry to be so blunt  
  the carnal mind   can percive  lots of things as evil
 
  I cannot find " word studies" Paul verses Jesus vs Paul  ???  I only found this , is this what you meant ?
  thanks  for clearing this up in advance Noname
 
 "The Problem of Paul to All Faiths From Following Jesus"
 
 ok looking closer    I found a whole page of  discrediting Paul   on that site
 
 http://www.jesuswordsonly.com/Recommended-Reading/recommendedreading.html

[noname]

http://www.tentmaker.org/forum/index.php?topic=7977.0

 Will look again and have  read some stuff already , seems  half baked to me  
sorry to be so blunt  
  the carnal mind   can percive  lots of things as evil

one can only say something's half baked after examining the whole argument...not true?

[rosered]

http://www.tentmaker.org/forum/index.php?topic=7977.0

 Will look again and have  read some stuff already , seems  half baked to me  
sorry to be so blunt  
  the carnal mind   can percive  lots of things as evil

one can only say something's half baked after examining the whole argument...not true?

  fair enough  noname ,
 I do  hope we can reason together   with the Lord  Jesus  in our midst 

[Dallas]

Hello noname-

It is quite clear that the guy writing these things has very little bible understanding. By trying to compare what Jesus said to what Paul said on a basis that the sacrifice hadn't taken place, when in fact the sacrifice TOOK place.

Before Jesus died He was a prophet under the law who preached the law to the Jew. For the Jew entered into an agreement in Exodus 19, Jesus was charging the Jew with failure to meet their side of the agreement. Jesus sacrifice brought an end to that agreement forever changing that structure. The Law that Moses brought was in accord with that agreement, when that agreement ended so did that law.

A new agreement was then established, it was not like the first one, the one Jesus had to speak of. Jesus had to speak of it becuase He was talking to Jews who were under that agreement.

The arguments I have read on the web site you supplied are all based on lack of knowledge on the scriptures as a whole. Read David Chilton's Paradise restored and David Chilton's Days of Veneance. They will greatly help you put things together, and he references true bible scholars, and church Father's. It appears to me that you heard some things, saw how it may appear as such...take some more time and treat yourself to these books. They are free on the net.

[Dallas]

It has become obvious to me you are caught up in something unhealty, without trying to figure it out I'll leave you to it, but here are the books....read them, I have read yours.

http://www.commentary.net/freebooks/docs/a_pdfs/dcpr.pdf

http://www.preteristarchive.com/Books/1987_chilton_days-of-vengeance.html

[jabcat]

IMO, if one understands the flow of scripture, to whom what was primarily written - what and who much of Jesus' earthy ministry was addressing (pre-cross/age of Law), what occurred in 70 AD as fulfillment, the ushering in of the age of grace of which Paul declared (Israel set aside for a season until the time of the Gentiles fulfilled), then much of this is resolved.  It's rightly dividing the Word of truth.

[Dallas]

IMO, if one understands the flow of scripture, to whom what was primarily written - what and who much of Jesus' earthy ministry was addressing (pre-cross/age of Law), what occurred in 70 AD as fulfillment, the ushering in of the age of grace of which Paul declared (Israel set aside for a season until the time of the Gentiles fulfilled), then much of this is resolved.  It's rightly dividing the Word of truth.

Wow?!?!?

Jabcat? Are we actually going to agree on something?!!?

[jabcat]

Don't know how much of a habit we can make it  

[whome?]

So is Judas better or worse off than being born now?

[Dallas]

So is Judas better or worse off than being born now?

Some days do you feel as though it would have been better not to get out of bed? Do you have weeks where it seemed it would have been better you wouldn't have been born?

The answer is yes, because of the present suffering we would submit to not exsisting. The suffering Judas will go through will be harder than any other. For how hard is it for the common man to accept the works of Christ in denying himself.

How hard is it going to be for Jimmy Swagart to accept the fullness of the goodnews, for he would be completley shamed in his own eyes for such a remark.

But Judas, who is well aware that it was him to betrayed Jesus, now has to face him as a lawless jew, a sinful man and Jesus's personal betrayer.

The present suffering that Judas will undertake will be unthinkable for anybody. We who are so vain arguing with our ability to forgive and love another enough, Judas must face the man, the Son and the God he betrayed to recieve forgiveness....yes it easily would be better for him that he would not have been born. That being said, he who has been forgiven little loves little but he who has been forgiven much, loves much....

[claypot]

Mark 14:21 (King James Version)

21The Son of man indeed goeth, as it is written of him: but woe to that man by whom the Son of man is betrayed! good were it for that man if he had never been born.

Many Churches use this bible verse to claim Judas is doomed to eternity in hell. 
 

Jesus said His words were spirit. It is the  spirit  that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the  words  that I speak unto you, [they] are  spirit , and [they] are life.jn6.63

 IMO Jesus is saying His words are spiritual.

The Son of Man may be that 'Divine' in all of us. Like Adam in the garden. Innocence. This indeed goes (Adam eating the fruit).

Woe to him (the man of sin, the carnal mind man, the old man nature that was in operation in Adam/man before 'he' ate of the tree).

Ultimately the 'man of sin' is crushed by the 'Divine man' thus it would have been good for 'that man' to not have been born but in Gods overall plan it is ideal that 'that man' was born.

Just pondering.

cp

[Dallas]

It is the  spirit  that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the  words  that I speak unto you, [they] are  spirit , and [they] are life

 

IMO Jesus is saying His words are spiritual.

This is exactlly howcome people shouldn't read a language they don't know. Ancient Elizabeathen is dead, let it be dead and read something more updated.

Jesus is saying, "It is the spirit that gives life, your ability to produce life through your works doesn't gain you anything. What I teach you are spiritual things, so that you will have life."

[claypot]

Hey Dallas, so many of your words really move my spirit so I would be interested in your comments about how I described what we are discussing here.

Am I way off base here? I can take criticism. Coming from such a one as you I would consider it good.

cp

[Dallas]

Jesus said His words were spirit. It is the  spirit  that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the  words  that I speak unto you, [they] are  spirit , and [they] are life.jn6.63

 IMO Jesus is saying His words are spiritual.

The Son of Man may be that 'Divine' in all of us. Like Adam in the garden. Innocence. This indeed goes (Adam eating the fruit).

Woe to him (the man of sin, the carnal mind man, the old man nature that was in operation in Adam/man before 'he' ate of the tree).

Ultimately the 'man of sin' is crushed by the 'Divine man' thus it would have been good for 'that man' to not have been born but in Gods overall plan it is ideal that 'that man' was born.

Just pondering

Context is the underlying key to understanding the bible. You can't overlay different doctrines over something to understand it. It must be interpreted based upon the current texts writting. The whole Judas discussion can't be applied to the garden as a simile, or something to combine. It seems to me you are picking doctrines and combining them to create a new one to suit the moment.

[claypot]

Thanks. I will consider what you wrote.

I see the Bible as one whole, not divided segments. It is a spiritual book that transcends time and space.

cp

[Dallas]

Thanks. I will consider what you wrote.

I see the Bible as one whole, not divided segments. It is a spiritual book that transcends time and space.

Absolutley it is, but it has to be taken for what it is also, literature and not some mystical magical book. It was written by men for men so that men would understand it.

I think many people don't have the foundation for something and it opens the doors to self question but with no one able to answer it for them the decide what they want. That unfoutunatley drives our churches and our interpretors, all with some kind of religous slant to it.

The bible is a historical document written by people who lived through it. It is not a gateway to the unknown. What transends time and space isn't it's depth and ever changing meaning, but rather the simple truth of God's story of reconcilling man back to Him. It won't matter who reads it or when the message will always be one of relevance and need.

Not to deep understanding, but to bring people back into fellowship with God...and each other.

[claypot]

I just wanted to add that it is becoming more refreshing and less frustrating to see all the different views of Gods word. It is amazing how so many different things can be drawn from the written word.

I'm glad it is ultimately God who is working in us to will and to do of His good pleasure, otherwise we would all be forever going in a zillion directions.

Dallas, you have good insights and I enjoy reading your posts along with the others.

cp