Bible Study Jesus Is Not Your Buddy.

[Paul Timothy]

Tenchi says it best .

We are not equals to God .a friend wouldn't ask you ,create a situation where you die for him.

Jesus asks that for some .behold I will send my prophets and saints to die and their blood will upon you pharisees ..

Tenchis point is that there is a point where we are to see God as one who is in control and at times it looks bad to us but to God has a plan to save others or get glory by our suffering .

Friendly Jesus isn't taught like that .

Because you are making a poor image of a friend Jesus.

The way you describe your friendly Jesus I don't care for either.

Your vision of a friend is much different from mine.

 

[Paul Timothy]

This is the logical of fallacy of Guilt by Association. There is nothing Islamic about the biblical descriptions I've offered.

What guilt was I inferring? I said that it sounded Islamic... and it does. Does that mean that the scriptures have an Islamic source... not at all.

Do you understand that I used the common phrase "sounds like" and not implied Islamic authorship?

The "Bride" of Christ is both figurative and corporate. I am not marrying Jesus; he is not my personal groom. That would suggest a homosexual relationship between Jesus and I, which is an abominable idea. The Church entire is the "Bride" of the Savior, not any single born-again believer. This is why it doesn't figure into the individual Christian's relationship to Christ.

So you do not understand the Bride/Bridegroom image. Why not just say you don't understand?

Closeness does not necessitate - or, in God's case, permit - irreverence, disrespect or casualness toward Christ. The Spirit of Christ, the Holy Spirit, dwells within each born-again person, as close as thought to them. But God says in His word that such closeness makes of us the temple of the Spirit, his habitation bought with the shed blood of Jesus. We don't become near-equals to Christ, back-slapping buddies because the Spirit of Christ lives within us, but a possession of God, bought with a price and obliged thereby to serve Him. (1 Corinthians 3:16-17; 1 Corinthians 6:19-20; Romans 6:13-21)

In my opinion you do become that kind close. You don't. We differ. Moving on.

Again, I haven't denied the intimacy God intends we should have with Him, only the irreverence, the lightness, with which believers try to engage Him. The idea of Christ as Head of the Church, however, describes a position of divine supremacy and pre-eminency over the Church, not a casual familiarity we're invited to have with him.

You be intimate with Christ in your way and allow.me the same.

See above. And you would do well to take your own advice here. There is almost no serious engagement with what I've written in your responses, only a sort of knee-jerk denial of the biblical truths I've pointed out.

Well you must not have made good at pointing things out.
Try more and see if they are worthy of more than a good knee jerk.

Not suppositions, but real-life experiences I've had repeatedly with believers whom I've discipled over the past thirty years (and whom I'm presently discipling). It's...interesting, though, that the very thing you're accusing me of here - just supposing a thing is so - you've done with me: You have just supposed that my remarks are mere suppositions. They're not. You had only to ask me if they were or not to find out. Instead, you've supposed your view of me here.

So say "in my experience..." but don't say "most Christians...". One shows you are drawing from a limited pool... the other accuses every Christian of being of like mind on the topic.

See above. If the "shoe" of my OP fits you, put it on. But, if it doesn't, move on.

What size is that shoe. I take a size 13 wide.

But people who want to respond to my OP are entirely free to do so in this thread - and they have. I've considered their remarks in the light of God's word and responded accordingly. Did you think the thread would be a one-way thing; that you could be entirely dismissive of my OP, which you were in your first post to this thread, and I should let your dismissiveness pass unremarked? Where would you take up this sort of thinking? As you can see, out of respect for the time and effort of those who've responded, I consider carefully what they write and offer as biblical and thoughtful a response as I can. Doing so doesn't require that I agree to what they write, however.

It wouldn't be any fun if you agreed with everyone that post something in response.

 

[jasonc]

Because you are making a poor image of a friend Jesus.

The way you describe your friendly Jesus I don't care for either.

Your vision of a friend is much different from mine.

In other words Jesus wouldnt ask us or suffer the gospel .

That this job ,house or marriage one hundred from now is what he wants most for us,not a testimony of saints that build up and raise up other saints.

One hundred years ago was the end of WW1 . Go visit a forgotten veteran grave and try to find his war story .you might find a unit ,a few photos .

I do that as a hobby .I buried my fil and I have photos of his navy days and no names or places .

That was in mid 50s.

Now in his distance relatives as his ggf had a large family I found pastors and churches built and baptism and testimonies .good stuff .their church might not stand but there deeds do before God .

Love (hold)this life and you loose it and be ready to give up this life and surely you will keep it.

Not all are called .Jesus and God is approachable but the idea of a personal Jesus as my husband isn't in the bible .

I lost my job last week .I thought I was meant to have the USPS job .God let that happen .I may not get a job that l left before I went to usps.i learned despite painting my Nissan and it's body work that there are blessings in this.my Nissan wasntb driveable .

The Jesus you like is foreign to Paul .Paul learned to be joyful in blessings and in lack.

God let him suffer .your idea of that isn't that he will .tenchi.teaches what my pastor says.jesus is out friend but their is a reverence and in no wise is Jesus a homie .

Peer? How do I know God to where someone,a being that is infinite,all knowing and present as such .God's thoughts are above us the bible tells us not much outside of what He says we need to know.

I can ask my fellow nco ,why he ordered his troops to do that and learn .I can call him equal.for I was an NCO.

God I can't approach him and demand why he let my young sister be mentally challenged,why my dad , grandpas die from dementia.dad believed ,the other two I don't know .

All died forgetting their families .horrible way to die .

Tenchi isn't saying at all that Jesus isn't approachable ,a person who doesn't care ,meet our needs,only that God may have plans that only He can see out and we think we have plans and life plans .

I quote a non reformed chaplain .I made my plans and presented it to God ,he laughed ..

 

[Paul Timothy]

In other words Jesus wouldnt ask us or suffer the gospel .

That this job ,house or marriage one hundred from now is what he wants most for us,not a testimony of saints that build up and raise up other saints.

One hundred years ago was the end of WW1 . Go visit a forgotten veteran grave and try to find his war story .you might find a unit ,a few photos .

I do that as a hobby .I buried my fil and I have photos of his navy days and no names or places .

That was in mid 50s.

Now in his distance relatives as his ggf had a large family I found pastors and churches built and baptism and testimonies .good stuff .their church might not stand but there deeds do before God .

Love (hold)this life and you loose it and be ready to give up this life and surely you will keep it.

Not all are called .Jesus and God is approachable but the idea of a personal Jesus as my husband isn't in the bible .

I lost my job last week .I thought I was meant to have the USPS job .God let that happen .I may not get a job that l left before I went to usps.i learned despite painting my Nissan and it's body work that there are blessings in this.my Nissan wasntb driveable .

The Jesus you like is foreign to Paul .Paul learned to be joyful in blessings and in lack.

God let him suffer .your idea of that isn't that he will .tenchi.teaches what my pastor says.jesus is out friend but their is a reverence and in no wise is Jesus a homie .

Peer? How do I know God to where someone,a being that is infinite,all knowing and present as such .God's thoughts are above us the bible tells us not much outside of what He says we need to know.

I can ask my fellow nco ,why he ordered his troops to do that and learn .I can call him equal.for I was an NCO.

God I can't approach him and demand why he let my young sister be mentally challenged,why my dad , grandpas die from dementia.dad believed ,the other two I don't know .

All died forgetting their families .horrible way to die .

Tenchi isn't saying at all that Jesus isn't approachable ,a person who doesn't care ,meet our needs,only that God may have plans that only He can see out and we think we have plans and life plans .

I quote a non reformed chaplain .I made my plans and presented it to God ,he laughed ..

TL DR

 

[Tenchi]

What guilt was I inferring? I said that it sounded Islamic... and it does. Does that mean that the scriptures have an Islamic source... not at all.

The fallacy of Guilt by Association attempts to smear an opponent's view by associating it with a disreputable person or position - in the case of your fallacious remark: Islam. It's actually entirely irrelevant that you find some sort of parallel or commonality between what I pointed out from Scripture and Islam. What is relevant - to the matter of my OP, at least - is the Bible's depiction of Christ that I laid out. Insinuating that what the Bible says about Christ is faulty or flawed because it seems to you to parallel Islam has no real bearing on what the Bible actually says about Christ. Regardless of the negative insinuations you want to make in this regard, the Bible says what it says.

Do you understand that I used the common phrase "sounds like" and not implied Islamic authorship?

I didn't say you had implied Islamic authorship. If you understood the fallacy of Guilt by Association, you'd not be asking me this question. Isn't it interesting, though, that here - again - you are guilty of the very thing of which you're accusing me: not understanding. Maybe you could try thinking through what I'm saying instead of reflexively attempting to counter everything I write.

So you do not understand the Bride/Bridegroom image. Why not just say you don't understand?

??? You haven't established your assertion here in the slightest. In fact, from what you've written so far, you're the one who doesn't seem to understand (again) the Bride-Bridegroom metaphor. Try going off the attack for a minute so that you can consider my remarks and then offer a response to them rather than to your distorted, prejudiced version of my remarks.

In my opinion you do become that kind close. You don't. We differ. Moving on.

Well, this is one way to handle being unable to rebut another's position... It's not a very useful or thoughtful way, though. This is often the result of trying to answer facts with opinion.

You be intimate with Christ in your way and allow.me the same.

??? Allow? I have no idea what you mean, here. How do my words prevent you from doing as you like concerning Christ? I don't have to allow you anything; I have no control over you.

Well you must not have made good at pointing things out.

Non sequitur.

Try more and see if they are worthy of more than a good knee jerk.

No, you try thinking through what I've written.

So say "in my experience..." but don't say "most Christians...". One shows you are drawing from a limited pool... the other accuses every Christian of being of like mind on the topic.

Nope. "Many" and "every" are not synonymous. And it is obviously implied that I'm speaking only from my own limited frame of reference, which is exactly why I didn't use words like "every" and "all" in reference to what I've observed among professing Christians. As I said, you should take a deep breath, set aside your defensiveness for a minute or two, and actually consider what I'm writing. It would help prevent these Strawman representations of what I wrote.

It wouldn't be any fun if you agreed with everyone that post something in response.

"Fun"? That may be your goal in writing, but it isn't mine.

 

[for_his_glory]

I didn't say you had implied Islamic authorship.

Then why are you pressing this. Paul Timothy only said it sounds like, but never implied that is was Islamic authorship. You are making a mountain out of a very small mole hill. Let it go and move on please.

 

[Paul Timothy]

The fallacy of Guilt by Association attempts to smear an opponent's view by associating it with a disreputable person or position - in the case of your fallacious remark: Islam. It's actually entirely irrelevant that you find some sort of parallel or commonality between what I pointed out from Scripture and Islam. What is relevant - to the matter of my OP, at least - is the Bible's depiction of Christ that I laid out. Insinuating that what the Bible says about Christ is faulty or flawed because it seems to you to parallel Islam has no real bearing on what the Bible actually says about Christ. Regardless of the negative insinuations you want to make in this regard, the Bible says what it says.

And your "Guilt by Association" idea fails... because I did not attempt to smear anyone's view.
I pointed out a similarity without malice nor nefarious intent.
You assume that I am insinuating something when it is all in your own imagination.

I didn't say you had implied Islamic authorship. If you understood the fallacy of Guilt by Association, you'd not be asking me this question. Isn't it interesting, though, that here - again - you are guilty of the very thing of which you're accusing me: not understanding. Maybe you could try thinking through what I'm saying instead of reflexively attempting to counter everything I write.

Then maybe I misunderstood your vague wording.
Why should I understand something I don't encounter with any regularity?

??? You haven't established your assertion here in the slightest. In fact, from what you've written so far, you're the one who doesn't seem to understand (again) the Bride-Bridegroom metaphor. Try going off the attack for a minute so that you can consider my remarks and then offer a response to them rather than to your distorted, prejudiced version of my remarks.

You really have not described the Bride/Bridegroom relationship correctly nor fully.
This happens when a person has faulty assumptions or lack of knowledge.
Further reading of a faulty premise does not create a correct ending.

Well, this is one way to handle being unable to rebut another's position... It's not a very useful or thoughtful way, though. This is often the result of trying to answer facts with opinion.

You stated your opinion and I mine. We differ. Moving on.

??? Allow? I have no idea what you mean, here. How do my words prevent you from doing as you like concerning Christ? I don't have to allow you anything; I have no control over you.

Pardon the use of English and not American language arts.
Maybe you are used to engaging with American language and have forgotten the use of polite English in discussion.

Non sequitur.

Actually my comment was directly on point.
If you think the point is off then explain how.

No, you try thinking through what I've written.

No.

Nope. "Many" and "every" are not synonymous. And it is obviously implied that I'm speaking only from my own limited frame of reference, which is exactly why I didn't use words like "every" and "all" in reference to what I've observed among professing Christians. As I said, you should take a deep breath, set aside your defensiveness for a minute or two, and actually consider what I'm writing. It would help prevent these Strawman representations of what I wrote.

Implied things are where you get into trouble. Start of with the disclaimer and I would not have commented.

"Fun"? That may be your goal in writing, but it isn't mine.

I see no other goal in your writing.
I am just trying to keep the ball on the pitch.

 

[for_his_glory]

Tenchi and Paul Timothy please move past this as it is not worth a heavy debate, but only leads to animosity between the two of you. Thank you.

 

[Paul Timothy]

Tenchi and Paul Timothy please move past this as it is not worth a heavy debate, but only leads to animosity between the two of you. Thank you.

What criterion are you using to weigh the value of this debate?
How could this debate be classified as "worth a heavy debate"?
Please provide the exact guidelines that separate worthless debate from worthy debate.

 

[Tenchi]

Then why are you pressing this. @Paul Timothy only said it sounds like, but never implied that is was Islamic authorship. You are making a mountain out of a very small mole hill. Let it go and move on please.

Please read my remarks carefully.

 

[Tenchi]

I don't feel any animosity toward Paul Timothy. My discussion with him is just like hundreds of other such exchanges I've had over the years with Christians. Our exchange is not especially difficult or sour - at least, not to me. Maybe I should use smiley faces or something...

 

[for_his_glory]

And why are you getting involved?
I have said what I said. I have been questioned about what I said. I have responded to the question.

If you want me to drop it... then do not bring it up.
If you bring it up... I will not drop it.

Simple.

Then you also need to let it go instead of continually responding to Tenchi about this causing more animosity. I will no longer respond to this, but to moderate the actions between the two of you on this issue.

 

[for_his_glory]

 

[Paul Timothy]

Then you also need to let it go instead of continually responding to Tenchi about this causing more animosity. I will no longer respond to this, but to moderate the actions between the two of you on this issue.

No animosity.
Please stop projecting.

 

[for_his_glory]

away, have a blessed day.

 

[kdm1984]

OP, are you Reformed/Calvinist? They tend to be the most outspoken against "Jesus is your buddy" type Christians.

The "Jesus is your buddy" type of folks are most common in Nondenominational churches, I've found. The sorts of people who always say, "It's not a religion, it's a ruhhh layy shun ship!"

These types are on the Internet, but less often, and usually don't do well in theological debate, as they approach God from a more relational/emotionalistic point of view. There's no "reasoning" them into your position. Reformed/Calvinists usually try that approach, but it falls on deaf ears, because the relational sorts don't use that approach.

There was a time when I tried to argue with everyone on the Internet, so I ran into Reformed types all the time. I even used Scripture! But I try to do less arguing these days. It still happens, but I've found that people usually already have their minds made up, and it seems like a waste of time, maybe even a violation on my part of Titus 3:9.

FWIW, I'm Lutheran, and we don't do the "Jesus is your buddy" thing. I saw it all the time when I went to Calvary Chapel (Nondenominational) though, from 2013-2017.

 

[Paul Timothy]

OP, are you Reformed/Calvinist? They tend to be the most outspoken against "Jesus is your buddy" type Christians.

The "Jesus is your buddy" type of folks are most common in Nondenominational churches, I've found. The sorts of people who always say, "It's not a religion, it's a ruhhh layy shun ship!"

These types are on the Internet, but less often, and usually don't do well in theological debate, as they approach God from a more relational/emotionalistic point of view. There's no "reasoning" them into your position. Reformed/Calvinists usually try that approach, but it falls on deaf ears, because the relational sorts don't use that approach.

There was a time when I tried to argue with everyone on the Internet, so I ran into Reformed types all the time. I even used Scripture! But I try to do less arguing these days. It still happens, but I've found that people usually already have their minds made up, and it seems like a waste of time, maybe even a violation on my part of Titus 3:9.

FWIW, I'm Lutheran, and we don't do the "Jesus is your buddy" thing. I saw it all the time when I went to Calvary Chapel (Nondenominational) though, from 2013-2017.

The inability to "rationally argue" someone to change their minds usually comes from a weak theology.
Using "scriptures" that are taken out of context and refusing to accept correct context is usually the hang up.
Why can it be a both and type situation?
Why can Jesus not be your buddy and be the King at the same time?
Can God not be Abba and the Almighty at the same time?
Why the big fight?

 

[kdm1984]

The inability to "rationally argue" someone to change their minds usually comes from a weak theology.
Using "scriptures" that are taken out of context and refusing to accept correct context is usually the hang up.
Why can it be a both and type situation?
Why can Jesus not be your buddy and be the King at the same time?
Can God not be Abba and the Almighty at the same time?
Why the big fight?

I was addressing OP, but I'll address some of your points.

Everyone accuses those outside of their views of having weak theology.

Everyone accuses those outside of their views of taking Scripture out of context.

If I had a dollar for every theological argument I've seen on the Internet where I saw those claims, I could probably start a business.

For example, my dad came to a lot of unorthodox conclusions when he and my mom left the WELS church in the 1990s. Did they think they were taking Scripture out of context when they came to the conclusions they did? Of course not. They thought everyone else was doing that.

They got to the point where they really thought they had figured out that the world would end in 2008. They said, Jesus said we can't know the day or the hour, but perhaps we can figure out the month or year. They didn't get the month, but they were quite certain that 2008 was the end because Israel became a nation in 1948 and a generation was about 60 years.

2008 came and went, and here we are.

Do you think anyone would have convinced them otherwise back in the 1990s? No, and they didn't want to hear it, so they left the church and became hyper-individualists who developed their own theology.

When I explained this on another Christian forum where the lead members were HUGE on individualism, they kind of danced around it, and tried to find examples in the Bible where individualism was good.

 

[Paul Timothy]

I was addressing OP, but I'll address some of your points.

Everyone accuses those outside of their views of having weak theology.

Often times with good reason.

Everyone accuses those outside of their views of taking Scripture out of context.

Again... with good reason... often.

If I had a dollar for every theological argument I've seen on the Internet where I saw those claims, I could probably start a business.

Did any of those claims be shown to be true?

For example, my dad came to a lot of unorthodox conclusions when he and my mom left the WELS church in the 1990s. Did they think they were taking Scripture out of context when they came to the conclusions they did? Of course not. They thought everyone else was doing that.

I see no examples here yet.

They got to the point where they really thought they had figured out that the world would end in 2008. They said, Jesus said we can't know the day or the hour, but perhaps we can figure out the month or year. They didn't get the month, but they were quite certain that 2008 was the end because Israel became a nation in 1948 and a generation was about 60 years.

Congratulations... not an actual example.
Just some anecdotes.

2008 came and went, and here we are.

Do you think anyone would have convinced them otherwise back in the 1990s? No, and they didn't want to hear it, so they left the church and became hyper-individualists who developed their own theology.

So people didn't want to hear something... that does not rise to showing the opposing theology was any more solid.

When I explained this on another Christian forum where the lead members were HUGE on individualism, they kind of danced around it, and tried to find examples in the Bible where individualism was good.

Individualism may be good or bad. So?
The point still stands that weak theology and poor context is where most persons differ.
So make sure your theology is solid and your context, true.

 

[kdm1984]

Often times with good reason.

Again... with good reason... often.

Did any of those claims be shown to be true?

I see no examples here yet.

Congratulations... not an actual example.
Just some anecdotes.

So people didn't want to hear something... that does not rise to showing the opposing theology was any more solid.

Individualism may be good or bad. So?
The point still stands that weak theology and poor context is where most persons differ.
So make sure your theology is solid and your context, true.

I'll hope the congratulations you gave to me was of the most humble attitude in correction.

Nonetheless, I was showing an example of how bad theology (in the case of my parents) led to some issues, but how few people actually take correction.

I will take your correction, however, and leave this forum.