Quote:
Originally Posted by pelathais
What I meant by "follow through" was that we treat those who are "evil" the same as we treat those who are "good" for, as Jesus points out, this is how our Father in heaven treats people.
When you say "the doctrine of perfection" you seem to be wanting to make it sound like "The Doctrine of Perfection." This idea has even more variables and variants than most "Doctrines." As I pointed out earlier, I had an interesting experience with one man's idea of "Christian Perfectionism" and I've seen others that have been equally bad. Also, the Mormon church has a "Doctrine of Perfection" that fits into their theology nicely.
The King James may even be less than "perfect" in even translating the underlying Greek words into "perfection." The NIV uses "maturity." I think this rendering avoids some of the hill-billy theology that I describe and that you appear to have been fortunate enough to have avoided.
|
Yes who is denying we should follow through with Jesus commands about how to treat people?
But are you denying that we should follow through with all the rest of the teachings of Jesus? If so on what basis? If we are to keep his word about how we treat others what makes the rest of his teachings undoable?
What is the difference in the doctrine of perfection and the Doctrine Of Perfection?
So the King James is a
hillbilly Bible? Thats funny. You suppose it was made here in Kentucky?
So some seem to not understand that Strongs definition of perfect includes being complete
in moral character. If the word just means "mature" we know that means grown up.
So now with
THAT definition alone we are supposed to be grown up
EVEN AS our Father in Heaven is grown up!
If we are to be grown up as the Father is do you suppose we would be sinning?
Threaded Mode
