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.
Only humans desiring to be "special" or "exclusive "would quibble over this. It means everyone, period. Playing "pit this scripture against another" games are exercises in human vanity and hubris . . reflecting a carnal mindset. Scriptures are for spiritual edification . . . not worldly or carnal. God loves us all and is no respecter of persons.
Quote:
Originally Posted by minidiaz
Jesus said he came to separate people based on their belief about him
in matthew 10, and according to 2 separate passages in Matthew he said he came ONLY for the lost sheep of Israel...Looks like Jesus in Matthew is teaching and endorsing tribalism...and even elitism in some passages.
The reason why i am submitting this is because there is evidence that Jesus isn't consistent if we apply our evolved sense of neighbor to his meaning... our world is much smaller than it was when Jesus was here.
I am well aware of why you would be submitting this. It isn't exactly a mystery. But it doesn't rebut my post in the slightest. Christ's disciples routinely misunderstood and misinterpreted Him and His teachings. They were carnal men with spiritually immature carnal minds and barely able to understand the "carnal milk" that was presented to them. But Christ's life, teachings and death were spiritually unambiguous and His revelation of the true nature of God leaves no room for doubt to the spiritually mature. You can play the scripture versus scripture game . . . but the truth is beyond such games when you use the spiritually mature "mind of Christ" to interpret (WWJT).
Jesus said he came to separate people based on their belief about him
in matthew 10, and according to 2 separate passages in Matthew he said he came ONLY for the lost sheep of Israel...Looks like Jesus in Matthew is teaching and endorsing tribalism...and even elitism in some passages.
The reason why i am submitting this is because there is evidence that Jesus isn't consistent if we apply our evolved sense of neighbor to his meaning... our world is much smaller than it was when Jesus was here.
Well, the law was for Israel too. Does that mean we are ok in ignoring what we know deep down is right what is contained within the law?. Loving your neighbor as yourself and loving your enemy is the spirit of the law.
Love does no harm to your neighbor therefore love is the fulfillment of the whole law.
I am well aware of why you would be submitting this. It isn't exactly a mystery.
yes we are on a forum discussing Jesus, the cornerstone of the christian belief system.
Quote:
But it doesn't rebut my post in the slightest. Christ's disciples routinely misunderstood and misinterpreted Him and His teachings. They were carnal men with spiritually immature carnal minds and barely able to understand the "carnal milk" that was presented to them.
Quote:
sorry but It means everyone, period.
can you please show me how you arrive to that conclusion? that is the point of this thread.
Quote:
But Christ's life, teachings and death were spiritually unambiguous and His revelation of the true nature of God leaves no room for doubt to the spiritually mature.
i'll put it like as unambiguously as i can. i have evidence that jesus is consistent about teaching tribalism and elitism.
with regard to the "true" nature of god...what is the criteria you use to determine that?
Quote:
You can play the scripture versus scripture game . . . but the truth is beyond such games when you use the spiritually mature "mind of Christ" to interpret (WWJT).
it isn't a game. it is a discussion. if you cannot participate...oh well.
Well, the law was for Israel too. Does that mean we are ok in ignoring what we know deep down is right what is contained within the law?. Loving your neighbor as yourself and loving your enemy is the spirit of the law.
Love does no harm to your neighbor therefore love is the fulfillment of the whole law.
can you explain how you came to the conclusion of loving your neighbor and your enemy has anything to do with replacing an unbelieving son with an enemy who is a fellow believer of christ's claims?
i'll put it like as unambiguously as i can. i have evidence that jesus is consistent about teaching tribalism and elitism.
with regard to the "true" nature of god...what is the criteria you use to determine that?
So, are you saying you think tribalism and elitism is a good thing? Is that why you're trying to get people to see your interpretation of Jesus' message to be the right one?
Do you not want people to treat everyone as neighbors, by loving and caring for each other?
can you explain how you came to the conclusion of loving your neighbor and your enemy has anything to do with replacing an unbelieving son with an enemy who is a fellow believer of christ's claims?
So, are you saying you think tribalism and elitism is a good thing?
no.
Quote:
Is that why you're trying to get people to see your interpretation of Jesus' message to be the right one?
i am presenting an argument that would have jesus as a teacher of tribalism and elitism which are supported by the words that are attributed to jesus with in the context of each passage. if you cannot present a counter argument...don't participate.
Quote:
Do you not want people to treat everyone as neighbors, by loving and caring for each other?
how i want people to treat each other is irrelevant and moot. i am presenting the argument that jesus didn't want his followers to treat non believers as themselves simply based on their disbelief.
why don't you read matthew 10:34-36 and explain to me how that is consistent with loving your neighbor?
i would imagine that a son would be closer than a neighbor, right?
i am presenting an argument that would have jesus as a teacher of tribalism and elitism which are supported by the words that are attributed to jesus with in the context of each passage. if you cannot present a counter argument...don't participate.
how i want people to treat each other is irrelevant and moot. i am presenting the argument that jesus didn't want his followers to treat non believers as themselves simply based on their disbelief.
can you counter that or not?
Testy much? Just trying to figure out where you're coming from. If people believe that all people (or all creatures) should be treated with love and care, and if they feel that Jesus' teachings/example in any way inspire them towards that end, why on earth would you want to argue them out of it?
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.
Just trying to figure out where you're coming from. If people believe that all people (or all creatures) should be treated with love and care, and if they feel that Jesus' teachings/example in any way inspire them towards that end, why on earth would you want to argue them out of it?
