John 15.10

[Elijah John]

“If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father's commandments, and abide in his love.�

John's Jesus speaks as though the Father's commandments were not given directly to the people but only directly to Jesus.

In the Synoptics, Jesus, by contrast said "if you would enter life, keep the commandments".

This is not the only place where John's Jesus is at odds with Jesus as presented in the Synoptics.

John's Jesus teaches the disciples to pray in Jesus name. The Synoptic Jesus, by contrast, only teaches to hallow the Father's name when praying.

For debate. In light of the above examples, do you believe the real Jesus taught direct access to God, as suggested in the Synoptics, or mediated access to God as suggested in the Gospel of John?

Also, I do believe there are other problems with harmonizing John 15.10 to other Bible teachings, namely the teachings of Paul. Can you detect these or other problems with John 15.10 as well?

[Elijah John]

I can't think of anything Paul says that is contradictory, or in need of harminization.

Jesus seems to be making salvation, "abiding in his love" conditional, continent on keeping (his) commandments. Note his use of the word "if".

Paul, on the other hand repeatedly teaches that we are saved by grace thought faith, not works or keeping the Law.

"Commandments" "Law" is there a difference?

[shnarkle]

In reply to 101G

The name of God is "YHVH" sometimes pronounced "Yahweh" sometimes "Jehovah".

"Jesus" or "Yahshua" is a theophonic name, which incorporates the name of God, but is not equivelient to the name of God. Any more than "Joshua" "Isaiah" "Jeremiah" "Elijah" etc are the names of God. But they too, all incorporate the name of God.

first thanks for the response, but NO, YHWH or YHVH is what he is and not who he is.

let me give an example to settle this now.

If i would ask you "WHAT" is the first woman NAME?"
if you answer "Eve" you would be in ERROR. and here's why. I asked "WHAT" is the name of the first woman, not "WHO" she is in Name. supportive scripture, Genesis 5:1 "This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him;
Genesis 5:2 "Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created". see, what she is a "Adam", now if i would have asked "Who" was the first woman in name". the correct answer is Eve.

knowing this YHWH or YHVH is what God is name, I AM the King, I AM the Redeemer, I AM, the savior, ect.... that's "WHAT" God is and not his name. but when one say "WHO" are you in name then then we know him by name as "WHO" God is JESUS.

so the man made name Jehovah is not God personal name as to "WHO" he is but what he is.

Even the bible bare this out.

I'm having a hard time following this argument. Part of the problem is the way you're constructing your sentences, e.g. "what God is name, etc."

God is not a what or a thing because "all things" are created through him. God is a who. Ultimately, according to Paul, God is the origin of things as well as the origin of being. Therefore God can't be anything.

[brianbbs67]

[Replying to post 4 by brianbbs67]

I agree Jesus taught based on the commandments. His difference is he softened them smoothed off the sharp edges. Healing on the sabbath, forgiving the adulteress, picking grain on the sabbath. Jesus put his spin on them, he said it was God's truth it was new understanding and Jesus was the only one saying it , the only one teaching it. For those who believed it was world changing insight. So much so that John called Jesus one with God.

None of the things you listed are against the commandments of God. Which is the law that benefits us. The law against us was the scroll on the outside of the Ark. Moses developed this with God's input because we had broken the law so much. We treid to play lawyer with Moses and God, so God and Moses got more specific. If we followed the God given commands of the Lord, the rest would not be necessary.

Jesus' point, and it is a valid one, was the Sadducees and Pharisees had added to Moses law to the point of legislating evryone into a box. This was all for control and personal gain. Not added by God. If almost everything is illegal, people will transgress "man's law" as it is biblcally called. Then you are subject to punishment and sacrifice must be given. Conveniently for the Priestly class, they had the only approved animals and path, as many believed. It had turned into a cottage industry accomplishing nothing and needlessly enslaving the masses and enriching the Priestly class.

And that's why Christ lost his mind at the money changers in his Fathers house. Church was a business, now. YHWH was not the focus.

[brianbbs67]

In reply to 101G

The name of God is "YHVH" sometimes pronounced "Yahweh" sometimes "Jehovah".

"Jesus" or "Yahshua" is a theophonic name, which incorporates the name of God, but is not equivelient to the name of God. Any more than "Joshua" "Isaiah" "Jeremiah" "Elijah" etc are the names of God. But they too, all incorporate the name of God.

first thanks for the response, but NO, YHWH or YHVH is what he is and not who he is.

let me give an example to settle this now.

If i would ask you "WHAT" is the first woman NAME?"
if you answer "Eve" you would be in ERROR. and here's why. I asked "WHAT" is the name of the first woman, not "WHO" she is in Name. supportive scripture, Genesis 5:1 "This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him;
Genesis 5:2 "Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created". see, what she is a "Adam", now if i would have asked "Who" was the first woman in name". the correct answer is Eve.

knowing this YHWH or YHVH is what God is name, I AM the King, I AM the Redeemer, I AM, the savior, ect.... that's "WHAT" God is and not his name. but when one say "WHO" are you in name then then we know him by name as "WHO" God is JESUS.

so the man made name Jehovah is not God personal name as to "WHO" he is but what he is.

Even the bible bare this out.

Setting all else aside for a moment, what version of the bible are you quoting? Just curious..

I checked the Torah and KJV and both indicate Man or Mankind, not Adam.

[shnarkle]

I can't think of anything Paul says that is contradictory, or in need of harminization.

Jesus seems to be making salvation, "abiding in his love" conditional, continent on keeping (his) commandments. Note his use of the word "if".

He says "if", but note also the word "abide" or "remain". They're already in his love. The love precedes and continues with the obedience.

Paul, on the other hand repeatedly teaches that we are saved by grace thought faith, not works or keeping the Law.

"Commandments" "Law" is there a difference?

I think if you look at each passage in context you'll find that they are both rejecting salvation by self justification. Jesus points out that one must exceed the meticulous observance of the scribes and Pharisees, yet he also points out that they're all damned because their observation of the commandments is in service to their egos rather than a systemic process by the power of the holy spirit. Jesus says one must be "born again" or "begotten from above". He's referring to a spiritual birth and when one is begotten or born, this is something that happens to someone. It isn't something that someone does themselves. It is something that God does which then results in obedience to the commandments.

Those who are made holy keep the commandments, while those who attempt to keep God's commandments will never attain holiness.