I’ve never met a scribe, so I’m not quite sure what the benchmark is.
Wasn’t His real message that we can’t do what is required, yet are expected to?
Ran, Good to hear from you! I find that Jesus, as well as Paul consistently declare that our “love” is the “benchmark” on which the law “hangs,” and which “fulfills” all of the commands, just as is illustrated in the Matt. 25 text you cited. Both Paul and Jesus see such obedience, not as a human achievement, but only possible through the gift of God’s grace that enables it. Yet nonetheless, they insist it is not only “expected,” but “required” and essential.
Thus, it appears that Jesus’ message was the opposite of your assertion that we cannot do what He called us to. Indeed, in both your text (Matt. 25), and the ones I cited, he declares that “your righteousness” and “keeping God’s commands” is precisely what is required, as well as what we will be judged concerning! For without such a righteous life, we cannot “enter God’s kingdom,” or “enter eternal life.” Such an obedient people appears consistently as God’s goal throughout the Biblical story.
Can you tell me what seems less than consistently plain about Jesus’ words?
Seems like my posts are too “left field” to even be responded to? sigh Oh well. Some advice then: Go and do the works of God (break oppression) and stop wasting time trying to establish correct religious doctrine (which is the leaven of the Pharisees).
Good day. 
I’m sorry you felt left out. I too can get frustrated when there’s no response to my own comments on isssues of “religious doctrine.” For my part, I couldn’t figure out which specifics I offered in the thread you were addressing. I perceived that you stated your own doctrinal approach, but I’m afraid that I was too dense to comprehend its’ meaning. Besides seeming a bit cryptic, I couldn’t locate any arguments or texts that you presented in its’ favor. Thus, I was unsure of how to respond. I do like your focus on opposing oppression.
Grace be with you,
Bob
For what it’s worth - I do think all of you are great folks. I just wish we could wake up and get beyond this part, that’s all. Sorry about the “Pharisee” reference but I’ll admit I have that part in me still to some degree but the more I see the doctrinal correctness debates the more I see dead religion.
Blessings…
Doctrine isn’t bad - you can’t really have a community without it. Otherwise, there’s just a lot of magic and esoteric stuff masquerading as doctrine - call it what you will. We are not called to be a bunch of individual reeds blowing in the wind, but His Church - that calls for agreement on the basics. e.g.: The Creeds!
Those people who just died in that sweat lodge lacked doctrine and ended up dead in their search for enlightenment while listening to some idiot who promised to make them rich. i.e. People without doctrine are sitting ducks.
Lastly, as Bob pointed out, it’s hard to understand each other if the basics aren’t agreed upon.
F.B., thanks for the note! I do think we agree that dead religion is epidemic and sad, and even that it is often characterized by endless arcane debates, instead of living in the light.
Ran Ran: At the same time I lean toward your reminder that there is a sense in which “doctrine” is vital. Insofar as ideas and how we think have consequences for how we live, such ‘doctrines’ can be worthy of being contested.
For example, as universalists, perhaps all three of us are united in thinking that it can be poisonous to our lives and attitudes if we assume that God has settled for a horrific division and rejection among humanity. Yet it’s not essential that we formulate everything the same way. My hope is that our interaction can play a role in helping each of us to be sharpened in thought, heart, and active love.
I think it’s been proven that ‘correct’ doctrine cannot keep people from going on tangents. I mean, really ranran, we have 6 point some odd billion people on the earth and most simply have enough common sense not to crawl into a small semi-airtight space (in the desert!) with a bunch of other people in order to get rich.
When we feel it’s SO necessary to be right and hope that everyone else can come to understand that rightness and see things from a single point of view, no good comes out of it IMO. We don’t have 30 plus thousand denominations all claiming to have true biblical doctrine for nothing. AISI - when folks are dogmatic in their view, especially while claiming historical orthodox interpretations as proof - that’s when abundant life becomes abundant religion.
If anything we should have learned by now that the majority are generally off base. So I guess it’s the manner in which you seem take a single view and refuse any other (even though the other view may also have strong scriptural support) that is a little off putting for me.
Your arguments in this very thread are perfect examples of what I’m taking about. Jesus KNEW He would be rescued from death so why do you have to split hairs over whether Christ was literally ‘abandoned’ or not? What I have seen is that He was experiencing the sense of separation and seeming abandonment by God for all mankind AND speaking from that non-vantage point in proxy for all mankind. I don’t at all believe the traditional view that God had to turn away and forsake Jesus because of Jesus’ sins, (that is, the ones He TOOK upon Himself) or that Jesus said “Why have you forsaken me?” because He believed He had been forsaken even though He was briefly under the hour power of darkness. and was temporarily “given over” to it.
So, from one point of view He was abandoned and from another point of view He was not.
Does this make any sense to you?
I admit that I am attracted to opposing views as they sharpen me. I even like posting in hell fire forums to try and understand thought processes which are foreign to my own. For the most part though I do believe that rigid doctrine kills but the Spirit gives life.
Love to all…
There’s strong scriptural support for almost any opinion. I tend to stay with clear simple statements. “Jesus saved me.” and then defend it without weakening the statement.
No. That’s like saying he didn’t really die. He was ‘crucified, died and was buried’. Very simple. ‘Temporary’ is beside the point.
‘Formulations’ and confessions are two different things. The Apostle’s Creed was confessed by the first century church which was universalistic. It’s a fine creed. If a person can’t confess it - they are not a christian. Period. That doesn’t doom them to hell - it just means that they are not a member of his church. God knows their heart, but it’s entirely fitting that his church knows what they confess. It’s not the place for chaos. It’s the same Paraclete teaching the church since the beginning - be careful what you condemn.
THE APOSTLES CREED
I believe in God, the Father Almighty,
maker of heaven and earth.
And in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord,
who was conceived by the Holy Spirit,
and born of the virgin Mary,
suffered under Pontius Pilate,
who was crucified, died and was buried.
He descended into hell.
and on the third day He rose again from the dead.
He ascended into heaven
and sits at the right hand of the Father.
From thence He will come to judge the living and the dead.
I believe in the Holy Spirit,
the holy catholic Church,
the communion of saints,
the forgiveness of sins,
the resurrection of the body,
and the life everlasting. AmenThat’s fine with me since being a “Christian” has never been required by God. Period.
The commission to His Church is to spread the Gospel. Can anyone but a christian do that? There are other gospels but they are not spread by christians.
Bob, we have seen what every jot and tittle of the Law when expected of a generation leads to, namely, 70ad. Don’t ask for that on humanity. We deserve death, we are all accomplices. No one is innocent. The Holy Spirit comes to judge us on our guilt - not our sins to drive us to Christ. You seem intent on reducing that need for Christ. I’m totally screwed without Him and I lead a disciplined life - big deal.
Methinks you have possibly missed the real message in a mire of religious creedal thinking. I don’t say that to insult you bro, just a frank assessment from my vantage point. Almost immediately the message got lost in dogma. But yet the work of Jesus goes on, mostly outside the confines of creedal Christianity.
I realize there is about a 99.99999 % (or higher) chance that you won’t accept this now but… seeds can grow. 
Peace to you ranran…
Thank God that humanity is totally un-screwed because of Christ!!! BTW - we do still ‘get’ death. You do understand that, right?
What work? And which Christ?
I haven’t participated in this thread so far but have been reading a lot on this issue lately. I strongly recommend two papers by Derek Flood on his site www.sharktacos.com, ‘Penal Substitution vs Christus Victor’ and ‘How can a loving God send people to Hell’. The PS v CV paper has really helped me and is the best and clearest work on the atonement that I’ve read for a long time. The Hell paper is also good stuff.
The work is to visit, clothe and feed Jesus’ brothers (take a wild guess who that is. HINT: It’s not just people labeled as “Christians”).
The Christ who is the Son of God AND Son of man. (Hint: He is a multi-membered body and isn’t confined to creedal Christianity, at all) 
That’s true - but the goal is one accord - one agreement within his church - not 30 thousand disagreements. How do you do that without creeds?