The Gospel Preached By Jesus

[WeSee]

When Jesus began His ministry he quoted from the Book of Isaiah: 
Luke 4 
16And He came to Nazareth, where He had been brought up; and as was His custom, He entered the synagogue on the Sabbath, and stood up to read. 17And the book of the prophet Isaiah was handed to Him. And He opened the book and found the place where it was written, 
18“THE SPIRIT OF THE LORD IS UPON ME, 
BECAUSE HE ANOINTED ME TO PREACH THE GOSPEL TO THE POOR. 
HE HAS SENT ME TO PROCLAIM RELEASE TO THE CAPTIVES, 
AND RECOVERY OF SIGHT TO THE BLIND, 
TO SET FREE THOSE WHO ARE OPPRESSED, 
19TO PROCLAIM THE FAVORABLE YEAR OF THE LORD.� 
20And He closed the book, gave it back to the attendant and sat down; and the eyes of all in the synagogue were fixed on Him. 21And He began to say to them, “Today this Scripture has been fulfilled in your hearing.�

Jesus clearly stated His purpose. The purpose for which He was anointed. The purpose for which He is the Christ (Christ means "anointed one" for those who are unaware): 
1) To preach His gospel - These are the words He spoke while preaching His gospel during His ministry. 
2) To give sight to the blind - To open the eyes of those blind to the will of God which is contained in His gospel. 
3) To set free the captives - To FREE those who abide in His word from the slavery of committing sin. To FREE those who abide in His gospel (See John 8). 

That's it in a nutshell. During His ministry, Jesus did exactly what He said He was going to do. This is the gospel preached by Jesus. 

There is no "total depravity of man" in the gospel preached by Jesus during His ministry. 
There is no "vicarious atonement for the forgiveness of sins" in the gospel preached by Jesus during His ministry. 
There is no "if you believe in the redemptive death and resurrection of Christ you will receive eternal life and live in the Kingdom" in the gospel preached by Jesus during His ministry. 
There is no "imputed righteousness" in the gospel preached by Jesus during His ministry.

Christianity has a different gospel based on the theology of Paul and others as its foundation.
Shouldn't Christianity have the gospel preached by Jesus during His ministry as its foundation?

[JehovahsWitness]

So when Jesus tells them to eat His body (flesh) and drink His blood, He is really speaking of them eating and drinking His words just as He does in John 6. 

LEVITICUS 17:14

For the life of every creature is its blood: its blood is its life

And the blood of animals represented their words too?

Leviticus has nothing to do with it.

Does God have anything to do with It? Did God not say blood represents life? Whose interpretation are we to believe? Yours or God's?

[Eloi]

[Replying to post 40 by WeSee]

Maybe I missed the real connection ... I don't consider a real connection something that you are interpreting.

As I said before: John did not think that the role of Jesus was to free people from commiting sins:

1 John 2:1 My little children, I am writing you these things so that you may not commit a sin. And yet, if anyone does commit a sin, we have a helper with the Father, Jesus Christ, a righteous one.

Do you think John was wrong?

It looks to me that you are trying to avoid some important things that me and others are mentioning about your idea.

[JehovahsWitness]

It is completely supported by Jesus' teachings. Go back through my posts. I have extensively quoted Jesus' teachings in regards to this.

No you have removed the words Jesus chose ("blood", "life" etc and seen fit to subsitute them for other words "words" , "freedom" etc). It's one thing to present your interpretation of words but another to literally replace them with words that have a different meaning. Perhaps you can explain this without substituting the words he saw fit to choose.

MATTHEW 20:28

Just as the Son of man came, not to be ministered to, but to minister and to give his life as a ransom in exchange for many.�

[WeSee]

So when Jesus tells them to eat His body (flesh) and drink His blood, He is really speaking of them eating and drinking His words just as He does in John 6. 

LEVITICUS 17:14

For the life of every creature is its blood: its blood is its life

And the blood of animals represented their words too?

Leviticus has nothing to do with it.

Does God have anything to do with It? Did God not say blood represents life? Whose interpretation are we to believe? Yours or God's?

My comment about Leviticus was in regard to your question:
"LEVITICUS 17:14

For the life of every creature is its blood: its blood is its life

And the blood of animals represented their words too?"

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 44 by WeSee]

I know. My question still stands.

LEVITICUS 17:14

For the life of every creature is its blood: its blood is its life

Did God not say blood represents life?

Whose interpretation are we to believe? Yours or God's?

Blood has never in scripture symbolized anything but a person's/animals life. There is nothing in Jesus ministry or in the bible that indicates blood represents words.

JW

[2timothy316]

All descendants of Adam die. That happens because we were all born after the sentence given to him because of his sin, so we inherited death for his cause; so we all die because we all inherited "sin" from Adam. Paul did not invent anything of this. In the times of Jesus's ministry, all his listeners knew the cause of humanity dying at the time of old age.

When Jesus talked about freedom, he is not talking about freedom of "commiting sins", but about freedom of sins inherited, the ones that causes death to every human, or the ones we can not avoid because the results of that inherited original sinful state.

We do not reach a conclusion on an issue by isolating a passage from the rest of the Bible. Jesus said many things about the reason for his ministry. I could not quote everything here, for I would have to quote the gospels almost entirely.

When Jesus talked about freedom, he is not talking about freedom of "commiting sins", but about freedom of sins inherited, the ones that causes death to every human, or the ones we can not avoid because the results of that inherited original sinful state.

And then there's what Jesus actually said which I quoted earlier:
John 8
"34Jesus answered them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who commits sin is the slave of sin."
" 31 ...If you abide in My word, then you are truly disciples of Mine; 32and you will know the truth, and the truth will make you free.�

An honest student of the Bible will be an exegete, allowing the text to speak for itself. Eisegesis easily lends itself to error, as the would-be interpreter attempts to align the text with his own preconceived notions. Exegesis allows us to agree with the Bible; eisegesis seeks to force the Bible to agree with us.

What you have done here by placing the sentences in a different order and even omitting entire verses to get a result you want is not how the Bible should be used. This method is called eisegesis. If you are interested in learning more about eisegesis and exegesis a guy made a pretty good video explaining the difference in the two and why one is preferred over the other.
https://www.gotquestions.org/exegesis-eisegesis.html

What you have done here by placing the sentences in a different order and even omitting entire verses to get a result you want is not how the Bible should be used.

I only omitted verses and reversed the order to highlight the point Jesus was making. If you think that you can make a solid case that it wasn't the point that Jesus was making, the floor is yours.

Your point according to post 20 your point is:

Those who abide in His word are made FREE from the slavery of committing sin.

Now, let me make sure I'm clear on your point. Are you saying that if a person is following the word of Jesus they are free of sin right now. That there are people in the world right now free from all sin. And a bonus question, do you have no sin in you?

[2timothy316]

Folks can debate if they wish but without the Bible to back you up then it's just opinion.

Realistically when you come down to it, all anyone has is their own opinion regarding interpretation of the Bible.

Sorry you feel that way.

I have found there is only one right way to interpret the Bible and that is letting the Bible interpret the Bible. Taking the personal feelings, religious tradition, and trained dogma out of the interpretation equation. In other words, I do not use my own opinion to interpret the Bible. If that is what you use than like it does to so many others, the Bible is going to appear to be a useless dead letter and the opinion is going to be star of the show and not the Bible.

I've known others to make similar claims, but, try as they might, the end result is ALWAYS opinion.

I can do it all the time every time. I sometimes answer in scripture only adding none of my own words. Plus they will be in order and not rearranged. You'll read it and either agree with the Bible alone or not.

[WeSee]

[Replying to post 40 by WeSee]

Maybe I missed the real connection ... I don't consider a real connection something that you are interpreting.

As I said before: John did not think that the role of Jesus was to free people from commiting sins:

1 John 2:1 My little children, I am writing you these things so that you may not commit a sin. And yet, if anyone does commit a sin, we have a helper with the Father, Jesus Christ, a righteous one.

Do you think John was wrong?

It looks to me that you are trying to avoid some important things that me and others are mentioning about your idea.

I think Jesus was right. I think the gospel preached by Jesus during His ministry was right. That's the topic of this thread. Please reread the first post.

[2timothy316]

[Replying to post 40 by WeSee]

Maybe I missed the real connection ... I don't consider a real connection something that you are interpreting.

As I said before: John did not think that the role of Jesus was to free people from commiting sins:

1 John 2:1 My little children, I am writing you these things so that you may not commit a sin. And yet, if anyone does commit a sin, we have a helper with the Father, Jesus Christ, a righteous one.

Do you think John was wrong?

It looks to me that you are trying to avoid some important things that me and others are mentioning about your idea.

I think Jesus was right. I think the gospel preached by Jesus during His ministry was right. That's the topic of this thread. Please reread the first post.

This is where eisgesis interpretation goes off the rails. Ignoring other Bible passages. The same writer of the Gospel of John is the same writer of 1 John 2:1. Did John fall away from the truth between writing his gospel and his other letter? Are you making the rest of the Bible out of bounds? Certainly you're aware that Jesus didn't write down a single letter in the Bible.

[Eloi]

What I can see, there are three points in your post:

1) all reference about a ransom necessity for inherited sin is not a Christian teaching, it did not come from Jesus teachings;

2) it was Paul who invented that idea and Christians should not believe on it;

3) the real role Jesus played on human salvation was to free them from "commiting sins" and that's it.

All of it have been refuted in the past comments.

Jesus talked about his paper on human salvation: Mat. 20:28.

The idea of a ransom for humans comes very far back, and it is mentioned in the Hebrew Scriptures: Is. 53:11; Psal. 49:6-10.

Paul was not the only Christian in the first century who talked about the value of Jesus's blood with reference to forgiveness of sins: 1 John 2:1.