Adamh
I just remembered, the passage your referring too is a known interpolation. Even the NWT says this in the small print that accompanies the story about the woman caught in adultery.
New blog post: Would Jesus Shun?
by adamah 27 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
Laika
Mp: were you ever a Jw? If you were you'd surely have heard 'this good news will be preached in all the earth' and 'go therefore and make disciples of all nations' several thousand times each, both from the book of Matthew.
And you said Jesus shunned everyone who wasn't Jewish, since scripture records him talking to non Jews you are simply wrong about this. And if you think actions speak louder than words why are you only pointing to words when Jesus actions never showed him shunning anyone?
-
mP
laika
If you were you'd surely have heard 'this good news will be preached in all the earth' and 'go therefore and make disciples of all nations' several thousand times each, both from the book of Matthew.
MP:
Give me the many, i know of one scripture but not many.
MT
And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.
ACTS
16:6 Now when they had gone throughout Phrygia and the region of Galatia, and were forbidden of the Holy Ghost to preach the word in Asia ,
MATT
10:5 These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not: 10:6 But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
15:22 And, behold, a woman of Canaan came out of the same coasts, and cried unto him, saying, Have mercy on me, O Lord, thou son of David; my daughter is grievously vexed with a devil. 15:23 But he answered her not a word. And his disciples came and besought him, saying, Send her away; for she crieth after us. 15:24 But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel. 15:25 Then came she and worshipped him, saying, Lord, help me. 15:26 But he answered and said, It is not meet to take the children's bread, and to cast it to dogs. 15:27 And she said, Truth, Lord: yet the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their masters' table. 15:28 Then Jesus answered and said unto her, O woman, great is thy faith: be it unto thee even as thou wilt. And her daughter was made whole from that very hour.
Anyway actions speed louder than words, jesus made no attempt to preach to non jews and never left judea or gallilee. Given Peter and others didnt think they should be preaching to non jews, i think pretty much summarises what Jesus taught them ? Are we to believe Peter just forgot about this one line in matthew or was there another message that jesus repeated more often and that they remembered ?
Laika
And if you think actions speak louder than words why are you only pointing to words when Jesus actions never showed him shunning anyone?
mP:
There is the example of the good Samaritan woman that he ignored and walked away.Show me a scropture where Jesus left Judea & Gallilee and preached to gentiles ? What possibly stopped him ?
-
Laika
Give me the many, i know of one scripture but not many.
I gave you 2 scriptures, Matthew 24:14 and Matthew 28:19. One of those was the last thing Matthew recorded in his book, demonstrating he thought it was important to preach the message worldwide.
Jesus came to preach to the Jews but he said he intended his message to be preached to everyone and wanted his disciples to spread it after his death, which they did, Paul was not the only Christian missionary you know.
There is the example of the good Samaritan woman that he ignored and walked away.
Where is this?
Remember you said Jesus shunned everyone who wasn't Jewish. Since the bible records him talking to non Jews this is wrong. QED.
-
adamah
Thanks to all for reading!
Hmmm, I guess I need to clarify some stuff in the article, since confusion abounds over the point I was trying to make. So thanks for 'beta-testing' the article, as it clearly needs a bit more work.
mP, I suspect you're missing the point of the article: it wasn't about who Jesus was PREACHING TO (in an attempt to gain new members), taxation, slavery, etc. all of which are way OT: it was limited to SHUNNING, the modern-day practice used by JWs in place of the ancient Jewish practice of PUNISHING fellow Jews by stoning to death ('cutting off', the ultimate form of social ostracism).
Judaism has NEVER felt the need to convert Gentiles INTO Judaism (which also explains why you never see a car-load of Hasaidic Jews pulling into your neighborhood and start knocking on doors), since Judaism then was (and still is) a 'members-only' religion in which members have to be "born-ins".
(Yes, I know: Gentiles CAN convert to Judaism, but it's highly discouraged for many reasons. Besides, Gentiles don't need to convert INTO Judaism, but are saved by God simply lead a righteous life based on following the Noachide Covenant (which is much less burdensome than following the 600-odd rules that Jews must follow to be considered as 'observant Jews'.)
Jesus was directing his Jewish Messianic message to the lost and scattered children of Israel, his fellow Jews who had been scattered throughout the surrounding Nations (via diaspora, largely as a result of repeated military conquering and exile to foreign lands of Assyria, Babylon, Greece, Persia, etc). His fellow Jews were considered "the congregation" that needed to be told their Jewish messiah had arrived.
The whole concept of Gentiles becoming Christians was a later introduction in the story which is actually documented in the NT, having been inserted by Hellenized Jews who lived outside Palestine (eg Egypt, Greece, Asia Minor: heck, Paul was the main exporter of Christianity to the Gentiles, so read the letters where Paul visited and wrote letters to, and those are the lands in question). So doctrines needed to be altered, since the message of Christianity was spreading like wildfire half a century after Jesus' death, while floating like a lead balloon amongst Jews. Hence the controversies over what Gentiles had to do to convert to Christianity: did they need to be circumcised, keep Sabbath, etc? Paul lowered the bar, whereas others wanted it to keep it Jewish, only.
But all of that pertains to RECRUITING: the article is/was about SHUNNING, which is directly analogous to modern-day congregational discipline as practiced amongst JWs, since that's their entire basis for doing it, claiming it's a more humane and merciful form of discipline vs stoning (which is prohibited by secular law).
However, with his example, Jesus threw a rock at the practice of stoning instead, the model that was later used by rabbis during Talmudic times (AFTER Jesus' death) to come up with the alternative of shunning (since Jews were forbidden and/or seriously constrained from practicing Judaism, including imposing religious law (halakhah) on their fellow Jews, by their non-Jewish overlords). Shunning was the alterative which mortal rabbis came up with, although Jesus denounced the prior practice of stoning, the MODEL upon which shunning is based!
Now, every JW knows Jesus spent a considerable amount of time decrying the practices of Pharisees as "man-made laws", but shunning is a PRIME example of such a man-made law; it was developed AFTER his death by the same group of rabbis who advocated observing the Pharisee oral traditions, the precursors of rabbinical Judaism who conceived of shunning!
So by refusing to stone the adulteress, Jesus was sending a powerful message about a practice he clearly DIDN'T endorse; and in OTHER scriptures, Jesus vehemently denounced man-made traditions that were treated as if they were actually inserted into God's word; that certainly would apply to practices that Jesus not only came to "fulfill", but those that were devloped AFTER he died. Combine those two well-known principles of Jesus, and you have Jesus denouncing shunning. THAT was the point I was trying to make.
DeW said-
Adamah... what I was wondering more then the theological things you wrote: what the hell was Jesus writing in the sand!!! I mean: with all respect for Jesus but if I read something like that it seemed to me he was bored or something...
It's interesting how Jesus ignored the crowd who wanted to stone her, acting as if they didn't exist, but only continued to draw/write on the ground.
You'd think THAT would be a pretty big hint to those who claim to be modern-day followers of Jesus about the practice of stoning/shunning, since Jesus unofficially shunned the crowd (i.e. without attempting to influence others to join him in shunning) the very ones who wanted to stone her?
It's no WONDER JWs don't want to see it, since JWs are actually proving the evidence themselves of being the type of group that Jesus condemned ("you shall know them from their works").
Adam
-
DATA-DOG
The slavery bit is getting old. Anyone who had a job back then was a slave/servant of someone, except the Emperor. If you have a job today, you have a Master. There is nothing wrong with telling people to be a good worker/servant/slave in the Greek language. Be a crappy worker or Doctor and see how long you have a job. If you want to be the Master, then start your own Hospital or business, otherwise you have a "master."
-
Narcissistic Supply
Yes please cut off your nose to spite your face and leave it at the door.
That is all.
-
adamah
Data dog said-
Anyone who had a job back then was a slave/servant of someone, except the Emperor. If you have a job today, you have a Master.
Well, Jesus DID imply it was perfectly OK with him for a master to dash a slave to death with a knife for disobeying his orders (in the parable of the faithful and wise slave). Now you'd agree THAT'S a bit extreme, and certainly exceeds the bounds of the modern-day 'employer/employee' relationship?
Adam
-
DATA-DOG
Not every Bible commentator believes that verse should be taken literally. It may mean no more than being cast away from the congregation/saints/elect. Your statement would be true if your premise of those verses being literal were true. I am sure there were terrible Master back then. So that illustration would certainly pain a vivid picture. That's all it was, an illustration.
-
adamah
At the risk of hijacking my own thread, LOL!
Datadog said-
Not every Bible commentator believes that verse should be taken literally. It may mean no more than being cast away from the congregation/saints/elect. Your statement would be true if your premise of those verses being literal were true. I am sure there were terrible Master back then. So that illustration would certainly pain a vivid picture. That's all it was, an illustration.
Well, OF COURSE it's an illustration: MOST NT scholars agree that it's a PARABLE, a fictionalized account using imaginary characters designed to illustrate some particular moral lesson. (The JWs are the only ones who try to convert a parable into a prophecy, to attempt to just their power grab of Jesus' assets.)
But that's EXACTLY WHY the parable of the 'faithful and wise servant' is so damning: Jesus didn't HAVE to include the detail of the master killing and dismembering the slave; he could've just as easily have said that the master SOLD the slave, or gave him some other non-lethal non-cruel punishment (eg made him stand in the corner, or required him to work an extra hour, gave him a verbal lashing, guilt-tripped him; he could have even set him free <gasp!>). The fact remains, Jesus referred to the murder/dismemberment of the slave in such gory detail, and in such a matter-of-fact manner, to suggest that the concept of the master being entitled to do with his slave as he wishes (since the slave "IS his money", as Exodus says) wasn't even a question in Jesus' mind.
Jesus was absolutely OK with slavery, the buying and selling of humans, since by all accounts Jesus was a strictly observant Jew who abided by the dictates of the Torah, which repeatedly endorsed slavery, and so does Jesus. Even though Christians CLAIM that Jesus came to dispense with the dictates of the 'Law of Moses', he actually said this, in Matthew 5:17-18:
17 “Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill.18 “For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished.
Jesus was referring to fulfilling the Books of the Prophets (Nevi'im), the second main division of the Hebrew Bible (Tanakh) that contained the Messianic prophecies (by Isaiah, etc); it was preceded by the Torah, the collection of scriptures known as the "LAW of Moses"; The Nevi'im it was followed by the Ketuvim (writings). Jesus was absolutely OK with the practice of slavery (which was found in "the Law"), and hence why you cannot find a single scripture where Jesus DENOUNCED slavery.
And don't forget that the first benefactors of the abolition of slavery were the Jews, released from their captivity in Babylon circa 500 BC by the Persian ruler, Cyrus the Great (who was a follower of Zoroaster, the first religion in the World which made abolition of slavery as a principle of faith). But even after that fine example provided by Cyrus/Darius, the Hebrews resumed the practice of slavery within 200 yrs, after the Persians were routed by the Greeks, and the "Chosen People" took right up where they left off in the buying and selling of other human beings.
Adam