by Elsewhere 33 Replies latest jw friends
Like how would WT dis'fing Jesus make a difference anyhow? They dont speak to him already! ... they shun just about everyone that speaks to Jesus, same way as they shun anyone who speaks to us who are dis'as or difd. He wouldnt even notice the difference.
So hey they dis'f him and then refuse to talk to the one they have never spoken to anyway...small change huh
Brummie
Windchaser,
None of the Apostles were forced to follow Jesus. They were not robots. Nor did they abandon their wives by so doing. The wives accompanied them. (We're not told if there were children involved, but if there were I rather doubt they were abandoned). In 1 Cor. 9:3-6 Paul states: "My defense against those who would pass judgment on me is this. Do we not have the right to eat and drink? Do we not have the right to take along a Christian wife, as do the rest of the apostles, and the brothers of the Lord, and Kephas? Or is it only myself and Barnabas who do not have the right not to work?" Yet while he had those rights, Paul chose not to exercise them (vs.12)
SS,
I see it just the opposite. He didn't view himself as coming to destroy the law, but to fulfill it. (Matt. 5:17-18) If there were any attacks, it were those made by the chief priests and Sanhedrin, upon Jesus. It was they who caused his death, not the opposite. See Matt. 26.
Why didn't God inaugurate Christianity in the beginning? I don't know. I'm not God. I can speculate. Perhaps the time was not right. And Christianity came when it was supposed to. {At least, historically that's what happened.} But I don't know for a fact. Nor do I presume to be more knowledgeable than God so that I can correct him. After all, it is the Potter who molds the clay, not the other way around.
Here is another DFing offence that Jesus committed:
*** John 2:15 ***
So, after making a whip of ropes, he drove all those with the sheep and cattle out of the temple, and he poured out the coins of the money changers and overturned their tables.
Pay Attention to Yourselves and to All the FlockUNIT 5 (a)
Fits of anger, violence. (Prov. 22:24, 25; Mal. 2:16; Gal.
5:20)
Kenn, okay, that's nice, the wives could go along. I still think Elsie has a point, I really like the one on top of his head.
Kennsington said: Nor do I presume to be more knowledgeable than God so that I can correct him. After all, it is the Potter who molds the clay, not the other way around.
Yeah, well, I'm not correcting him either (like I could-hah), I'm just thinking that this way seems a bit unloving, cruel, mean and sad. Maybe he should have left 'love' and 'justice' outta my brain when I was conceived, then I wouldn't be thinking this way.
Changing directions after 2000 yrs of going another way, has left a lot of confusion in its wake
I'm not sure what you mean there SS.
With regard to "why isn't all this clear"
It's quite clear that we are given to do as we want - you can easily find enough reason to say "it's all bullshit" - but it's no mistake that it's like that - Free Will - no one prooves it to you - it's not bought and sold - you can be the way that you choose, with plenty of room to think what you like, and live accordingly. (if you have your will and aren't sold into slavery)
paduan
Edited by - a paduan on 20 October 2002 21:49:0
Oh, Sixer, now, now.
I believe Jesus was gifted at communication. So gifted, in fact, that those in the religious power structure in Jesus' day could understand exactly what he was saying and exactly what he meant, which is why he ended up nailed to a cross.
You'd have to wonder - if they simply thought He was a nut, why mob Him and nail Him to a cross?
Ken
I see it just the opposite. He didn't view himself as coming to destroy the law, but to fulfill it. (Matt. 5:17-18)
There were many laws that jesus refused to endorse. Take for instance the well known story of the adulterous woman who was brought before him. The law said that they should be stoned. Yet he refused to condemn her, in rebellion against that law. There were many laws that demanded the death penalty for seemingly small things. Whether those who brought her ther were also guilty, is really irrelavant to carrying out the law if the law was just. In fact, if they were accomplices, he should have fulfilled the law of killing adulterers by charging them before the priests. Yet he was content to play in the dirt.
Generally, jesus advocated a peaceful reaction to lawbreakers. He did not advocate the fulfillment of laws.
If there were any attacks, it were those made by the chief priests and Sanhedrin, upon Jesus. It was they who caused his death, not the opposite. See Matt. 26.
The priesthood and sanhedrin were appointed by moses and aaron. They were doing their divine (according to the ot) duty. There was some corruption, but that was always there, from the beginning. Here is the command they were following when they took action against jesus.
Deuteronomy 17 12 The man who shows contempt for the judge or for the priest who stands ministering there to the LORD your God must be put to death. You must purge the evil from Israel.
Hosea 4 4 "But let no man bring a charge,
let no man accuse another,
for your people are like those
who bring charges against a priest.
Paduan
I am referring to the old testement system of laws, death, one chosen race better than everyone else. I am comparing that w the nt system, supposedly based one peace, love, faith. Why didn't god start teaching people that 1500 yrs sooner? The ot acting as a 'tutor leading to christ' didn't work at all. The ot engendered hate and discrimination. Hate engenders hate. Love engenders love. Therefore, god could have started teaching love 1500 yrs sooner, at least.
SS
It was the ot's fault as much as it is Jesus' fault today - not. It falls on those who do what they do - it may take courage, or even go against what is believed to be the wrath of God - like with Moses - certain things are simply right, no matter what's been stuck in your head.
Just as people avoided feeding on rock badger, so today they may cut of their foot or abandon their needy (but non-believing) parents. But, I have faith that if you have done what is kind, regardless of personal cost, "believe against hope", the revelation will be more alive.
-----------------------------------
"for the priest who stands ministering there to the LORD your God"
which priest? Deut 17:12 - for a strong witness of the sort 1 Cor 5:5
There's an org that appears to take this one literally - " But let no man bring a charge"
Does it mean - change your ways, or don't even rebuke anyone, or does it mean don't formally demand payment for sin before God, or, don't ever bear someone who would bring out a complaint?
It's up to us - that's free will.
paduan
Edited by - a paduan on 20 October 2002 23:54:7
LMAO @ Elsewhere's "Jesus needs to be DF'd"
LMAO @ Jesus' respons.
Thanks for the laugh.
