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.
I should add that not only is this person wanting to disciple, he is also sanctified from his family. It is not clear where his family is a body of believers as the two can't yoke(believers vs. nonbeliever) no doubt though this individual has to give up everything to follow Jesus, he wants God first in his life and wants to teach and preach to others
That we are here arguing about the meaning of a quotation from Jesus raises the issue of why a divine entity would leave behind ambiguous instructions, subject to interpretation.
General US Grant was never seen by those who knew him as any sort of intellectual, but he was justly famous for the simplicity and clarity of his written orders. Grant had an ability to reduce exactly what he wished to have happen to short, unambiguous sentences.
Are we to conclude that Grant had some ability which Jesus lacked? If it is possible for a human being to write things in such a manner as to leave no room for misinterpretation, why would this ability be beyond a god?
Well, it wouldn't be, would it?
So what must we conclude about the absence of clarity from Jesus? If one argues that Jesus was divinely clear and it is the fault of those who followed and attempted to spread his message that we have ambiguities, then that places the entire New Testament into doubt, does it not? How would we know to trust any of it if we agree that the early Christians produced false depictions of what Jesus said and desired in this particular case?
That we are here arguing about the meaning of a quotation from Jesus raises the issue of why a divine entity would leave behind ambiguous instructions, subject to interpretation.
General US Grant was never seen by those who knew him as any sort of intellectual, but he was justly famous for the simplicity and clarity of his written orders. Grant had an ability to reduce exactly what he wished to have happen to short, unambiguous sentences.
Are we to conclude that Grant had some ability which Jesus lacked? If it is possible for a human being to write things in such a manner as to leave no room for misinterpretation, why would this ability be beyond a god?
Well, it wouldn't be, would it?
So what must we conclude about the absence of clarity from Jesus? If one argues that Jesus was divinely clear and it is the fault of those who followed and attempted to spread his message that we have ambiguities, then that places the entire New Testament into doubt, does it not? How would we know to trust any of it if we agree that the early Christians produced false depictions of what Jesus said and desired in this particular case?
I think it goes back to what another poster said. Unless someone followed him around with pad and paper, we can never say with any certainty that Jesus actually said any of this.
Maybe he was being sarcastic. Followed by a smack to the back of their heads.
What I understand to be the most important teaching of Jesus, is summed up as, "Love God and love others." There are things within the bible that point to the idea that the way one loves God IS by loving others. So, either the passage in question in this thread would need to be completely ignored, since it is in direct opposition to love, or one would have to find a different way to understand it than with a literal approach. Could the meaning I take away from that passage be at odds with what the original speaker or author meant if I approach it in that way? Absolutely. Doesn't matter to me, because I have no need to defend the book or the authors as infallible, only to take away from the writings those things that are helpful -- the same way I would treat any book that is meant to address our spirituality or psychological/emotional well-being.
In my experience, I had to be disentangled from the religion (a fundamentalist form of Christianity) that all of my family of origin embraces because that religion was harmful to me and distorted the way I viewed life and other people. The love of all people that was supposed to be (imo) at the core of that religion was obscured and warped by so many of the doctrines. And, beyond just the religion, there were some dysfunctional behaviors within my family that were really damaging.
So, to me, the passage being discussed here isn't talking about hating family, but about understanding that for some of us, in many ways the hold our family of origin has on us is unhealthy and, in that case, we need to break free of that hold. That can be really difficult to do, but it is necessary if one wants to grow and change. It doesn't mean we actually hate our family, nor even that we need to physically distance ourselves from them necessarily. But, in our minds, we have to be set free from whatever unhealthy attitudes have been bred into us through the dysfunction of our family of origin.
That's what I would take away from that bible passage.
That is another wonderful witness, Pleroo. These verses that contradict the Spirit of agape love who IS God are the work of men and subject to all the vagaries and agendas men are prone to. As Jerwade said in another thread the love of power agenda corrupted the power of love in Christ's Gospel. That is just one of the many agendas the "lying scribes" had. As I said elsewhere . . . the "hate" verses have always conjured up a picture in my mind of some old embittered Monk who hated his family and life . . . self-justifying it by transliteration. But there is no room for hate in our Spirits. It corrupts and harms US. We are to try to foster agape love . . . that is why Christ admonished us to love even our enemies. Anyone who truly understands agape love would never accept those verses that are outright contradictions of it.
Location: In a little house on the prairie - literally
10,202 posts, read 7,951,713 times
Reputation: 4561
Quote:
Originally Posted by katjonjj
I think it goes back to what another poster said. Unless someone followed him around with pad and paper, we can never say with any certainty that Jesus actually said any of this.
Maybe he was being sarcastic. Followed by a smack to the back of their heads.
Guess we should get rid of the red print in many bible then, right?
That is another wonderful witness, Pleroo. These verses that contradict the Spirit of agape love who IS God are the work of men and subject to all the vagaries and agendas men are prone to. As Jerwade said in another thread the love of power agenda corrupted the power of love in Christ's Gospel. That is just one of the many agendas the "lying scribes" had. As I said elsewhere . . . the "hate" verses have always conjured up a picture in my mind of some old embittered Monk who hated his family and life . . . self-justifying it by transliteration. But there is no room for hate in our Spirits. It corrupts and harms US. We are to try to foster agape love . . . that is why Christ admonished us to love even our enemies. Anyone who truly understands agape love would never accept those verses that are outright contradictions of it.
True 'dat. Especially the part about Jerwade's explanation. Why is that so hard to see?
Luke 14:26: If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.
There is no way in Hades that I'm going to start hating my family just because some scripture says so.
Are you?
And I suspect somebody is going to give us 18 paragraphs of why one should not take this literally and why it might be out of context.
It is at the end of a parable, it is in context, it's clear what it says, it's clear what it means, it's absolutely against anything that my morals would accept.
I love Jesus. I hate my family and my children. But I have the luxury of knowing what Jesus means.
I love Jesus. I hate my family and my children. But I have the luxury of knowing what Jesus means.
1 John 4:20 (King James Version)
20 If a man say, I love God, and hateth his brother, he is a liar: for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how can he love God whom he hath not seen?
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.
Followed by a smack to the back of their heads.
These verses that contradict the Spirit of agape love who IS God are the work of men and subject to all the vagaries and agendas men are prone to. As Jerwade said in another thread the love of power agenda corrupted the power of love in Christ's Gospel. That is just one of the many agendas the "lying scribes" had. As I said elsewhere . . . the "hate" verses have always conjured up a picture in my mind of some old embittered Monk who hated his family and life . . . self-justifying it by transliteration. But there is no room for hate in our Spirits. It corrupts and harms US. We are to try to foster agape love . . . that is why Christ admonished us to love even our enemies. Anyone who truly understands agape love would never accept those verses that are outright contradictions of it.
