How Can These Two Verses be Compatible? (Torah, Gospel, preacher)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
But if you cause one of these little ones who trusts in me to fall into sin, it would be better for you to have a large millstone tied around your neck and be drowned in the depths of the sea. Matthew 18:6
Quote:
Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. Matthew 5:19
"Little one" is not a child obviously because we cannot cause a child to fall into sin--they are innocents. "Little ones" means a new Christian who recently began to believe on Jesus and is susceptible to falling away if taught wrong practices. So in the first verse Jesus is warning mature Christians or heathens the deadly seriousness of teaching a baby Christian to turn away from Him. But in verse 18:6 Jesus is saying that you can still get to heaven---albeit you will be called least there--if you teach others to break commandments, which is obviously leading Christians astray and a clear violation of verse 5:19. Verse 18:6 suggests eternal torment while verse 5:19 suggests universal redemption. But more than that, to my way of reading them they are totally incompatible. So tell me how does one teach others to sin and still get to heaven?
In Matthew 5: 19-20.... The statement in verse 19 say that people ``will be only least in the kingdom of heaven,`` which may sound like the watered down interpretation of universalism may hold up.....But when you hear verse 20 Jesus said ...``for I say to you , That except your righteousness will exceed the righteousness of the scribes and the Pharisees, you will in no case enter the kingdom of heaven``... which would sound more of the eternal judgment of Jesus ..... Also when anointed preacher teach error and lead people to break the commandment do get a pass in the earth and the Lord Jesus will protect these preachers throughout their lives , but ask believers to pray of these preachers for Jesus purpose as they can remain under the deception for years and Jesus will never cross their tolerances.... Only Lord Jesus is called to judge His believers
In Matthew 5: 19-20.... The statement in verse 19 say that people ``will be only least in the kingdom of heaven,`` which may sound like the watered down interpretation of universalism may hold up.....But when you hear verse 20 Jesus said ...``for I say to you , That except your righteousness will exceed the righteousness of the scribes and the Pharisees, you will in no case enter the kingdom of heaven``... which would sound more of the eternal judgment of Jesus ..... Also when anointed preacher teach error and lead people to break the commandment do get a pass in the earth and the Lord Jesus will protect these preachers throughout their lives , but ask believers to pray of these preachers for Jesus purpose as they can remain under the deception for years and Jesus will never cross their tolerances.... Only Lord Jesus is called to judge His believers
The Pharisees hadn't an nth of righteousness in Jesus' eyes. So a person with 1% of righteousness could exceed the Pharisee's righteousness and therefore get into heaven even though (s)he was still 99% unrighteous. That's how I read verse 19. That still makes a strong case for universalism, though I didn't intend this thread to be a ET vs. UR thread.
An interesting translation of the verse gives a similar reading that the OP voices:
At that time the disciples came to Jesus asking,
"Who is the greatest in the Kingdom of heaven?"
Calling a child, he put him in the middle of them, and said,
"I solemnly tell you that unless you turn and become again like children, you will not enter the Kingdom of heaven. Therefore whoever humbles himself like this child is the greatest in the Kingdom of heaven. Whoever receives one such child in my name receives me, but whoever causes one of the most insignificant believers to sin, then for him it would be better to have a great millstone about his neck, and to be drowned in the ocean depths. Alas for a world filled with occasions for sin! Such occasions must necesarrily arise, but alas for the man through whom they arise!
(Matthew 18:1-7, AB)
The passage appears to build upon Peter's pre-eminence among the Disciples and their bickering concerning why this is so. William F. Albright writes "By the question they have asked, the disciples demonstrate their lack of understanding of the nature of the Kingdom. It is only those who know that they cannot possibly earn God's grace who can fully respond to it - in the same way that children know that they can never earn free gifts (The Gospel of Matthew: A New Translation With Introduction and Commentary, p. 216, New York: Doubleday, 1971). Another Matthean reference makes use of the same concept of the "insignificant believers":
"Whoever receives you receives me, and in receiving me receives him who sent me. Whoever receives the Prophet because he is the Prophet will be rewarded by the Prophet, and so he who receives the Righteous One because he is the Righteous One will be rewarded by the Righteous One. So, whoever gives to one of the most insignificant of these a mere cup of water because he is my disciple will not, I tell you truly, lose his reward."
(Matthew 10:40-42, ibid)
I would not agree at all that 18:6 suggests "eternal torment" one bit, for the imagery is quite clear and to the point; so I see no contradiction there with ideas of "universal redemption". The references in Matthew Chapter 5 concern the Mosaic Law - or Torah. Most of Chapter 5 is dedicated to Jesus reinterpreting the Law, but he makes it clear throughout the Gospel of Matthew that he never intended to do away with the Law - merely interpret it, lessen some of it, make other aspects harsher, etc. Contextually, leading up to the verse in question, and answering those who think that Christianity should involved a Pauline rejection of Torah observance, Jesus has this to say:
"Do not suppose that I came to destroy the Law or the prophets. I did not come to destroy, but to fulfill. I solemnly tell you that until heaven and earth pass away not a single letter of the Law shall pass away until all has been fulfilled. Whoever therfore sets aside any prescriptions of the Law and teaches men accordingly shall be called least in the Kingdom of heaven. But whoever keeps and teaches it shall be called great in the Kingdom. For I tell you that unless you are more righteous than the scribes of the Pharisees you will certainly not enter the Kingdom of heaven."
(Matthew 5:17-20, ibid)
The Pharisees and Scribes were well-known for keeping the Law to an extreme degree (though the Pharisees were also well-kown for lessening some of the more harsher laws to help the common person), so Jesus tells his listeners that anyone who wishes to get into the Kingdom must keep the Law even more than the Pharisees. And THAT is a tall order. One must remember Matthew's jewish perspective, and his disagreement with Paul on whether the Law was required or not. Matthew's Jesus is pro-Law, judging from this verse.
I'm still not sure what the contradiction is between the two passages, taken in context?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
