So, what's the algorithm? How are exhibits A-E ordered? What if your entire life has been lousy works, but at the very, very end, you repent (but don't get baptized)?
This is ultimately very silly, as we're sitting here discussing things that are qualitatively different than our normal experience. We are cave fish arguing about rainbows.
16:27 & 28 are pretty clearly not from the mouth of Jesus, I believe. They don't jive at all with the previous verses (which I consider to be the core of Jesus' teachings), and they don't work with Paul's theology as expressed in Galatians and Romans. In fact, according to Paul, the law leads to sin, which leads to death. Clearly the adulterous woman was not judged by her works. Nor were the folks who were forgiven by Jesus (some of whom were brought passively, as the paralytic). Jesus does not say "believe in the correct doctrine and you'll be saved". Nor does he say - except in John, which has lots of authenticity questions - believe in me (which makes sense, since he was trying to usher in the kingdom of God, not the kingdom of himself).
The Bible (and numerous other extra-canonical writings) is the best attempt by a lot of imperfect men to describe the reality of God. The skeptics are right - if you try to read the Bible as a book of objective facts, it falls apart pretty quickly. It's just not a very good scientific journal. One has to start doing incredible mental gymnastics - gymnastics that one would likely not find suitable for any other area of their life - for it to hang together (see exhibit a: DTS & SBC).
True spiritual wiritings always live in metaphor, because true sprituality can only be experienced. Spritual writings only really makes sense when you are able to get past facts and start catching glimpses of the truth behind it; that is when God truly speaks. That's really hard for us to do as children of the enlightenment.
This is ultimately very silly, as we're sitting here discussing things that are qualitatively different than our normal experience. We are cave fish arguing about rainbows.
16:27 & 28 are pretty clearly not from the mouth of Jesus, I believe. They don't jive at all with the previous verses (which I consider to be the core of Jesus' teachings), and they don't work with Paul's theology as expressed in Galatians and Romans. In fact, according to Paul, the law leads to sin, which leads to death. Clearly the adulterous woman was not judged by her works. Nor were the folks who were forgiven by Jesus (some of whom were brought passively, as the paralytic). Jesus does not say "believe in the correct doctrine and you'll be saved". Nor does he say - except in John, which has lots of authenticity questions - believe in me (which makes sense, since he was trying to usher in the kingdom of God, not the kingdom of himself).
The Bible (and numerous other extra-canonical writings) is the best attempt by a lot of imperfect men to describe the reality of God. The skeptics are right - if you try to read the Bible as a book of objective facts, it falls apart pretty quickly. It's just not a very good scientific journal. One has to start doing incredible mental gymnastics - gymnastics that one would likely not find suitable for any other area of their life - for it to hang together (see exhibit a: DTS & SBC).
True spiritual wiritings always live in metaphor, because true sprituality can only be experienced. Spritual writings only really makes sense when you are able to get past facts and start catching glimpses of the truth behind it; that is when God truly speaks. That's really hard for us to do as children of the enlightenment.
