Biblical inconsistency?

OSV.com ^ | 07-25-18 | Msgr. Charles Pope

[Salvation]

Biblical inconsistency? Jesus does not negate himself but rather gives different teachings on following the commandments

Msgr. Charles Pope

7/25/2018

Question: In Matthew 5:19, Jesus rails against relaxing or changing even the least of the commandments, and yet verse 19 also says that if one does, “[he] will be called least in the kingdom of heaven.” It seems the consequences should be “losing” the kingdom of heaven if Jesus is consistent with what follows in verse 20. Can you explain the seeming inconsistency? — Jim Flynn, via email

Answer: Two different teachings are being made here, hence it is not a matter of consistency.

In verse 19, the operative teaching is that while unrepented mortal sin excludes one from the kingdom of God, not all violations of the law are mortal. Even the Ten Commandments, while indicating grave sin in themselves admit of lighter matter.

For example, regarding the Seventh Commandment, stealing a large amount or something essential or irreplaceable is usually a mortal sin. However, taking something small or insignificant, while a sin, may not be a mortal sin that excludes one from the kingdom of God. Thus, if the Lord were to adopt your word, the condemnation might be too sweeping. It does not follow that if someone breaks the least of the commandments they necessarily lose the kingdom of God.

Further, you will note that there is a kind of parallelism or play of words at work here. The Lord is saying, in effect: “If you break even the least of my teachings, I am going to call you the least!” Preachers often use such sayings in order to be memorable.

For example, consider the following word stitch: “Say what you mean, and mean what you say. But don’t say it mean.” The word “mean” unites all three phrases, but in each case a slightly different sense of the word “mean” is used.

Here, the Lord is not only being careful not to imply that even small infractions would land us in hell, but he is also being artful, resourceful and memorable by his use of a parallelism.

As for verse 20, we encounter a different teaching: “I tell you, unless your righteousness surpasses that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will not enter into the kingdom of heaven.”

Here we are dealing with the problem of minimalism. Though the Pharisees fancied themselves meticulous observers of the law, they were very minimalist in their application of it. Jesus said they were hypocrites because they followed exacting laws about small things, such as tithing, but neglected weightier matters of the law, such as justice and mercy (cf. Mt 23:23). It is one thing to pay tithes; this is good and required. But neglecting the poor and failing to feed and teach them is far more important to God.

Jesus will develop this teaching against minimalism in the verses that follow in the Sermon on the Mount. For example, he will teach that it is not enough to avoid murder; the command requires we let God banish vengeful hatred from our hearts. It is not enough to avoid acts of adultery; we must allow God to give us chaste minds and hearts. It is not enough to avoid excessive retaliation; we ought to avoid retaliation altogether.

Therefore, the message of verse 20 is a call to exceed the minimalist notions of the law. Grace equips us for more, and we are expected to attain more by that grace. The old law could not save. Only the “new law” of grace can save or make us sufficiently holy to enter heaven.

Thus verse 19 speaks of little things, verse 20 of weightier things.

[rwa265]

Catholics tend to focus so much on avoiding sin as if avoiding sin makes us right with God.

---

Do you not struggle to avoid sin? All Christians should focus on avoiding sin. Jesus told sinners to go and sin no more.

It is true that we ask that the Lord in His mercy keep us free from sin, but knowing that we will not always be kept free from sin, we ask Him to look not on our sins but on our faith.

So we do sin. And it does matter because it is not pleasing to God. What matters more though is that we delight in the law of God and hate the sin that we do. And God in His righteousness will forgive us.

I take great comfort in what Paul wrote in chapter 7 of his letter to the Romans:

12 Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.

13 Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful.

14 For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.

15 For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I.

16 If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is good.

17 Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.

18 For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not.

19 For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do.

20 Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.

21 I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me.

22 For I delight in the law of God after the inward man:

23 But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members.

24 O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?

25 I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.

Romans 7:12-25

[aMorePerfectUnion]

You do understand that someone who is in a cult, MUST believe as the cult leader demands. Faux facts are proffered and the acolyte MUST believe and affirm.

No actual real facts can be accepted because “dad said.”

When real facts are presented, the cult member must attack the messenger for insulting his cult daddy.

Incoming.

[MHGinTN]

*ducking*

[metmom]

Of course.

Anyone who is a believer will struggle with sin, which is why the stupid scenario that so many Catholics put forth that we think that once we’re saved we can sin with impunity is so ridiculous.

That aside, it seems that you missed the point of my post.

It’s not about struggling with sin. It’s about the mentality that if we avoid sin, we are made right with God.

It takes far more than that to make us right before God. It cost Him His Son.

[Luircin]

It’s called a ping list.

You can make your own if you want.

[ravenwolf]

But if James (who only mentions Christ twice, and never His death and resurrection) was teaching that the merit of works justifies one before God then he is contradicting both Moses and Paul

---

I do not see James as saying that the merit of works justifies any one before God, he was simply saying that if a person really had faith it would be shown in his works.

Jesus told us what our works should be in the parable of the sheep and goats, and also the good Samaritan, and that is what James said.

Again, Abraham was not counted as righteous because he said he had faith, he was righteous because her was willing to do what God told him to do.

Noah was not saved because he said i believe you Lord, he was saved because he did the works God told him to do, he built the ark.

“”
Likewise the Lord’s teaching on the sheep and goats does not mean the sheep enter into eternal life because their works actually obtained this, which would be as salvation under the Law,””

Probably true but the point is that the sheep who did the works went to heaven and the goats who did not the works went to hell.

I have to believe believers are saved by grace because if i have to depend on my works i am hell bound.

But it seems today that if a preacher trys to make the young girls understand that they should not take their pants down for any creep that comes along they are accused of preaching salvation by works which in most cases is nothing but a lie.

I learned all about being a tramp long before i ever listened to a preacher, we do not need preachers to tell us it is alright to sin, we can do that on our own.

[ravenwolf]

which the untaught and unstable distort, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction.

---

That is true, but i wonder if Peter added the above just to kind of pacify Paul, I think Paul was easily offended.

[editor-surveyor]

.
The church I comndemn didn’t write it, they hid it from the world, and in so doing saved it from destruction.

Yehova works in mysterious ways.

[editor-surveyor]

.
>> “Then provide us with the *original* Hebrew texts.” <<

We do not have an original MS of any Bible writings. I would think you would know that.

Yehova saved his word in his language for the end time when it matters most.

A a third century papyrus copy of the original gospel of John is hardly “made up.”

‘God’ took very kindly to the effort that real believers made to find his word.
.

[editor-surveyor]

.
Nothing you support and purvey is “genuine” by any stretch of the imagination.

I won’t waste my time clicking on the satan bait you posted. Yehova’s appointed servants are not refuted by arrogant deceivers.

Nobody has ever claimed to hava an original MS of any part of the Bible; please be honest on that.

[editor-surveyor]

.
The apostles, including Peter and Paul, definitely did not consider their letters to be scripture.

The three words “the rest of” were obviously added long after the apostles were dead. They considered Tanakh to be the scriptures.
.

[metmom]

You’ve provided nothing except empty claims.

Enjoy your Roodian induced fantasy.

[ealgeone]

Notice how the trolls tag the other trolls so they will know to come in and gang up on them.

You must have worked for the shillary campaign.

All of us "trolls" have far more in common and will support each other on these threads.

You have no support....kinda...like...shillary.

Oh, wait....you've got ebb.

You're really not good at this game.

[editor-surveyor]

I have posted many links to details.

Those that love the lies that have confounded ‘Christianity’ for 1600 years will of course ignore the real world.

Here is the most recent interview with Miles Jones, the world's foremost expert on ancient written languages

.

[Luircin]

Miles who?

An internet search turns up nothing whatsoever. Hardly a foremost expert.

Oh wait, the link is from a painfully biased source.

I should pay attention to this guy no one ever heard of instead of centuries of history why again?

[ealgeone]

Again, Abraham was not counted as righteous because he said he had faith, he was righteous because her was willing to do what God told him to do.

5And He took him outside and said, “Now look toward the heavens, and count the stars, if you are able to count them.” And He said to him, “So shall your descendants be.”

6Then he believed in the LORD; and He reckoned it to him as righteousness.

Genesis 15:5-6 NASB

[kosciusko51]

I would not delve into that supposition. Rather, I would take Peter at his word.

[boatbums]

Got an answer yet?

Nope! And not holding my breath either. ;o)

Funny how they can blather out the questions - as if ANY answer would be accepted or even considered - but then declare that they don't care what we think about anything anyway. I don't believe they know or appreciate the purpose for a Religion Forum thread here.

[ealgeone]

Yeah....little luther rarely answers.

[rwa265]

It is probably in the way you present it. It sounds like we can sin and still be right with God without any repentence for our sin.