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.
Call me deaf, dumb and as blind as the Israelites Jesus was preaching to, but I just don't get it.
In Matthew 15:24 Jesus says, "I wasn't sent to anyone except the lost sheep of the House of Israel" translated, "I was sent by My Father only to help My fellow Jews".
Yet Jesus pretty much refuses to teach them the truths of the kingdom of God because they are spiritual imbeciles. Jesus says in Mark 4:10-12 "When he was alone, the Twelve and the others around him asked him about the parables. 11 He told them, “The secret of the kingdom of God has been given to you. But to those on the outside [the Jews outside Jesus' circle of disciples and apostles] everything is said in parables 12 so that, ‘they may be ever seeing but never perceiving, and ever hearing but never understanding; otherwise they might turn and be forgiven!”
In other words, "I'm sent only to save the House of Israel, but I tell everything to them in parables because I don't want them to understand anything I say; otherwise if they did understand they would turn from their sins and be forgiven. And that's exactly what I don't want because they are dead spiritually."
Jesus appears to be standing on a principle: if you're too stubborn and spiritually dead to learn then He won't teach you. But in the next breath He says, "I came to save the Jews."
So he came to save the Jews, but He refuses to save the Jews.
It's posts liked this one that really make me wish I had expertise in koine, because I no longer trust any argument based upon English translations, especially the KJV. Especially after 1500 years of distortion of the message of Jesus.
Never mind that some folks twist themselves into knots to come up with bizarre points of view.
Nevertheless, it's true - Jesus said unless our righteousness exceeded that of the Pharisees, we won't enter into the kingdom; but it wasn't our righteousness at all He was referring to, it was His.
And that's a major stumbling block to people. (Romans 9)
Oops, is quoted saying one thing but means the other. right little elmer?
Paul knows (in his letters), he was a saint far above mere Jesus' lowly holiness... wasn't Jesus a murderer too before he claimed to turn from his sins due to personal revelation and call to power and prestige?
*Needless to say, or otherwise, the questions were rhetorical devises to help readers think about how absurd your post was. Trust Jesus not Paul, right?
Last edited by LuminousTruth; 07-16-2014 at 03:47 AM..
Call me deaf, dumb and as blind as the Israelites Jesus was preaching to, but I just don't get it.
In Matthew 15:24 Jesus says, "I wasn't sent to anyone except the lost sheep of the House of Israel" translated, "I was sent by My Father only to help My fellow Jews".
Yet Jesus pretty much refuses to teach them the truths of the kingdom of God because they are spiritual imbeciles. Jesus says in Mark 4:10-12 "When he was alone, the Twelve and the others around him asked him about the parables. 11 He told them, “The secret of the kingdom of God has been given to you. But to those on the outside [the Jews outside Jesus' circle of disciples and apostles] everything is said in parables 12 so that, ‘they may be ever seeing but never perceiving, and ever hearing but never understanding; otherwise they might turn and be forgiven!â€
In other words, "I'm sent only to save the House of Israel, but I tell everything to them in parables because I don't want them to understand anything I say; otherwise if they did understand they would turn from their sins and be forgiven. And that's exactly what I don't want because they are dead spiritually."
Jesus appears to be standing on a principle: if you're too stubborn and spiritually dead to learn then He won't teach you. But in the next breath He says, "I came to save the Jews."
So he came to save the Jews, but He refuses to save the Jews.
Go figure.
You forget...The Kingdoms of Judah AND Israel...The one's that Yeshua was speaking Parables to were both, however, He seemed to always conclude with, "to those who have ears, let them hear..."....Which is an idiom for "to whom the message is sent, let them hear..."...The message was not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel, so those would be the ones who would have ears to hear...The Parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus was about Judah, who had five brothers...
Oops, is quoted saying one thing but means the other.
Paul knows (in his letters), he was a saint far above mere Jesus' lowly holiness... wasn't Jesus a murderer too before he claimed to turn from his sins due to personal revelation and call to power and prestige?
You forget...The Kingdoms of Judah AND Israel...The one's that Yeshua was speaking Parables to were both, however, He seemed to always conclude with, "to those who have ears, let them hear..."....Which is an idiom for "to whom the message is sent, let them hear..."...The message was not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel, so those would be the ones who would have ears to hear...The Parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus was about Judah, who had five brothers...
"let them hear..." ...what they want to hear, right?
Why not just be a good teacher and actually educate people?
Now you are saying that it was one mere tiny "the message" and not "I, Jesus," who was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel who "had ears to hear" and yet he let loose upon their ears the useless double-edged sword of interpretable stories, but he would "explain himself" to his 12/close disciples?
The Parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus was not the teaching of the Doctor only for the Sick.
For seeing they will not see? Doesn't that apply to anything you want it to? Because of this flaw in his (the character of Jesus as portrayed in that gospel story) argument, it isn't very convincing.
"let them hear..." ...what they want to hear, right?
Why not just be a good teacher and actually educate people?
Now you are saying that it was one mere tiny "the message" and not "I, Jesus," who was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel who "had ears to hear" and yet he let loose upon their ears the useless double-edged sword of interpretable stories, but he would "explain himself" to his 12/close disciples?
The Parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus was not the teaching of the Doctor only for the Sick.
For seeing they will not see? Doesn't that apply to anything you want it to? Because of this flaw in his (the character of Jesus as portrayed in that gospel story) argument, it isn't very convincing.
I think the disciples had about as much idea what Jesus taught in parables as those in the crowds listening to him. It is also interesting that Jesus taught in parables for the best part and not from the scriptures(yes i know he quoted scripture) .
I believe the ability to understanding the parables is born out of desire to them, and why should the secret things of God not be hidden from those who have no desire to know them preferring to cling on to their deep seated mis conceptions about God?. For these same folk would take what is hidden and leaven it in the same way they did with the oracles of God and mishandle that which is life and turn into a ministry of death.
So those who think quoting scriptures is understanding them you are off by a country mile.
Last edited by pcamps; 07-16-2014 at 04:53 AM..
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.
