[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

B.C. Little League cancels God from historic Player Pledge

FBI Raid On Trump Will Make Him A Martyr

FBI raid of Trump home shows that 'equal justice' is a farce

Don’t Be Fooled—the Left Is Gaslighting Again

Democrats suddenly realize open borders are a disaster

As Media Turns on Biden, Don’t Forget Their Role in Creating Current Disaster

STUNNING! 80.0% of In-Person Voters in Maricopa County on Election Day Voted Republican – Only 23.4% Voted Democrat

Judge Strikes Down San Francisco Law Allowing Non-Citizens To Vote

Congress should not legalize marijuana

The Russian Embassy JusT Released A New Video Mocking The WesT ... ‘Time To Move To Russia’ --- Where There’s ‘TradiTional Values - ChrisTianiTy - No Cancel CulTure’

Biden's Title IX rule could mean your daughter's college roommate will be a man

How progressive groups like the ACLU make New York City more dangerous

Why Biden’s claims of US economic strength don’t add up — and Dems are looking to add more poison

Unborn life needs strong national protection

Biden’s border of death

Progressive prosecutors are being ousted, one by one.

Gingrich: "American Tsunami" Will Deliver GOP 5-6 Senate Seats, 40-70 House Seats

The GlobalisT EfforT ... To 'GeT Trump' --- Is Backfiring...Bigly!

Nancy and Paul Pelosi are trading large — with a wealth of hypocrisy

ElecTion Heroes ... Are STopping FraudulenT VoTing --- The PosTal Service Was In On IT

Nolte: Despite January 6 Kangaroo Court, Donald Trump Beats Joe Biden in 7 of 10 Rematch Polls

Mayor Adams’ wake-up on migrant flights

‘Woke’ Corporate Support of BLM Has Deadly Consequences

CNN Director: We Worked To Oust Trump, Use ‘Fear’ To Pass Climate Agenda

Documents show Bill Gates has given $319 million to media outlets to promote his global agenda

Is Liz Cheney toast?

Biden and The Destruction of Wisdom

How Progressive InsaniTy ... Has DesTroyed --- The DemocraTic ParTy

Judge blocks Biden admin's transgender school bathroom rule, athletes

Canada’s ‘expert’ panel recommends the mentally ill be candidates for euthanasia

Cat's reaction when she says “I use she/her pronouns”

The 2022 Referendum on Crime

Here’s Why The Media Don’t Want You To Know About The Massive Protests Going On Around The Globe

Multiple 'Raging' Crises: Failures of 'Progressive' Governance on Full Display This Week

Affluent white female Democrats push away Hispanic and working-class voters

The Global Vaccine NighTmare Has JusT Begun ... 3 billion vaccinaTed people --- have undiagnosed myocardiTis?

Kamala Harris ... Delivers Word Salad --- aT American Rescue Plan Workforce DevelopmenT SummiT

My Democratic abuelos raised me. Here's why I'm now a Republican running for Congress.

Sorry, Democrats: We're Stuck With Joe and Kamala | Opinion

Teaching Library

WOW!

Who's the naked chick with Naked Joe Biden

Did Joe Biden Pinch You (underage girl)

Whose in the bed behind Hunter Biden?

The Rise of Hispanic Religious Republicans

The numbers are in: red states are winning

The Epidemic Of Fatherless Boys Is Unraveling Our Society

Justice Clarence Thomas is ‘our greatest living American,’ despite constant attacks from the left, author says

We musT keep governmenT secular ... Though neiTher aTheisT --- nor anTi-religion.

Chinese immigrant, a witness to Mao's political purge, warning about indoctrination in public schools


Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Religion
See other Religion Articles

Title: The Economics of Jesus
Source: Jesus, as quoted in the Gospels, Acts and Revelation
URL Source: [None]
Published: Aug 11, 2015
Author: God
Post Date: 2015-08-11 22:54:03 by Vicomte13
Keywords: None
Views: 3892
Comments: 56

"You are my son, the beloved. In you I delight." - the Father (Mk 1:22, Lk 3:22) This is my son, the beloved, in whom I delight." - the Father (Mt. 3:17)

MORAL: God the Father establishes, out loud before a crowd, Jesus' sonship and his delight in him. What follows is delightful to God. (And what opposes the Son is not delightful to God.)

"Go away, Satan, for it is written YHWH your God shall you be worshipping, and to him alone shall you be offering divine service." - Jesus (Mt. 9:10) "Go away behind me, Satan! It is written YHWH your God shall you be worshipping, and to him alone shall you be offering divine service." - Jesus (Lk. 6:8)

MORAL: God alone is to be given divine service. Later, Jesus will return to the same theme when he says "You cannot serve both God and money."

"Take these things away from here and do not be making my Father's house a house for a merchant's store." (Jn 2:16)

MORAL: This is the first of two times that Jesus will reject commerce in the Temple grounds.

"He who is believing in him is not being judged, yes he who is not believing has been judged already, for he has not believed in the name of the only-begotten Son of God. Now this is the judging: that the light has come into the world, and men love the darkness rather than the light, for their acts were wicked. For everyone who is committing bad things is hating the light and is not coming to the light, lest his acts may be exposed. Now he who is doing the truth is coming to the light that his acts may be made manifest, for they have been wrought in God. (Jn 3:18-21)

MORAL: Those who don't do what Jesus says hate the light and the truth and is not coming to the light. Jesus will repeat this theme later when he asks what good it does to say you follow him if you do not do what he says to do.

"Repent! for near is the kingdom of the heavens!" (Mt 4:17) "Fulfilled is the era, and near is the kingdom of God. Repent, and believe in the good news!" (Mk 1:15)

MORAL: If you're resisting what Jesus has to say, stop it now, be quiet, give up your bad ideas, believe in the good news, and follow him.

"Are you not saying that still four months is it and the harvest is coming? Look! I am telling you lift up your eyes and gaze on the countrysides, for they are white for harvest already. And he who is reaping is getting wages and is gathering fruit for life of the eon, that both the sower and the reaper may likewise be rejoicing. For in the case is the saying true, that one is the sower and another is the reaper. I commission you to reap that for which you have not toiled. Others have toiled, and you have entered into their toil." (Jn 4:35-38)

"The spirit of YHWH is on me, on account of which he anoints me to bring the good news to the poor. He has commissioned me to heal the crushed heart, to herald to captives a pardon, and to the blind the receiving of sight; to dispatch the oppressed with a pardon, to herald an acceptable year of YHWH." (Lk.4:18-19)

MORAL: The Spirit of the Lord is upon Jesus to do what? To bring good news to whom? To pardon whom? The poor, the crushed of heart, the captives, the oppressed, the blind - the very people whom men look down upon with contempt. Who is not on that list? The contemnors, the creditors, the captors, the oppressors. This theme will be repeated again and again. Remember it every time you revile the poor. You're not on Jesus' side whenever you do that.

"Follow me!…No need have the strong of a physician, but those having an illness. I did not come to call the just, but sinners." (Mk 2:14,17) "Follow me, ,,, Those who are sound have no need of a physician, but those who have an illness. I have not come to call the just, but sinners, to repentance." (Lk 5:27,31) "Follow me!…"No need have the strong of a physician, but those having an illness. Now go, learn what this is: Mercy am I wanting, and not sacrifice. For I did not come to call the just but sinners." (Mt 9: 12- 13)

MORAL: Follow Jesus. Later, he will say "What good does it do you to follow me if you don't do what I say.

"Truly, truly I am saying to you that an hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall be hearing the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear shall be living. For even as the Father has life in himself, thus to the Son also he gives to have life in himself. And he gives him authority to do judging, seeing that he is a son of mankind. Marvel not at this, for coming is the hour in which all who are in the tombs shall hear his voice, and those who do good shall go out into a resurrection of life, yet those who commit bad things, into a resurrection of judging." (Jn 525-29)

MORAL: Jesus has the power to judge, and he will judge the dead based on what they DO. He has already said to FOLLOW HIM, and that he is looking for mercy, and is there to bring good news to the poor, the crushed of heart, the sick. And he's said that the harvest will be reaped by those who did not sow it. And he has warned that those who are doing bad things hate the light and won't come to it. We will see it made manifest in the pages to come that serving money is a bad thing, that the lack of care for the poor, downtrodden, prisoner, etc. - the people "the just" love to revile - will bring judgment and a bad end.

"Search the scriptures, for in them you are supposing you have life of eons, and those are they which are testifying concerning me, and you are not willing to come to me that you may have life. Glory from men I am not getting. But I know you, that you do not have the love of God in yourselves. O have come in the name of my Father, and you are not getting me. If another should be coming in his own name, his you will get. How can you believe, getting glory from one another, and are not seeking the glory which is from God alone.? Be not supposing that I shall be accusing you to the Father. He who is accusing you to the Father is Moses, on whom you rely. For if you believed Moses, you would believe me, for he writes concerning me. Now if you are not believing his writings, how shall you be believing my declarations." (Jn 5:39-47)

MORAL: Jesus here refers directly to the Scriptures written by Moses, the Torah, in which are contained all of the many precepts of God regarding everything, including provision for the poor, widow, orphan, and sick. You cannot reject the laws from God written down by Moses and yet believe Jesus. If you reject what God said through Moses in the Torah, you reject Jesus. You cannot believe in Jesus without accepting the writings of Moses. They are inextricably linked. What Moses writes about not killing, Jesus means that when he speaks of harm. What Moses writes about truth, Jesus means that when he speaks of truth. What Moses writes about economics and provision for the poor comes directly from God, and it is what Jesus enacts and means. The two are inseparable.

Regarding picking grain to eat while passing in a farmer's field, and healing on the Sabbath:

"Did you not read what David does when he hungers, and those with him, how he entered into the house of God and they ate the bread on the altar of YHWH, which he was not allowed to eat, neither those with him, except the priests only? Or did you not read in the law that on the sabbaths the priests in the sanctuary are profaning the sabbath and are faultless? Now I am saying to you that a greater than the sanctuary is here. Now if you had known what this is: Mercy am I wanting, and not sacrifice, you would not convict the faultless, for the Son of mankind is lord of the sabbath… What man of you will there be who will have one sheep, and if ever this should be falling into a pit on the sabbaths, will not take hold of it and raise it? Of how much more consequence, then, is a man than a sheep! So that it is allowed to be doing ideally on the sabbaths. …Stretch out your hand." (Mt. 12:3-13; substantially repeated in Mk 2:25-3:5 and Lk 6:1-11)

MORAL: To not work on the sabbath was a religious duty, a law of God, and yet even in the face of a religious duty, Jesus instructs that the duty of mercy to the sick and desperate is higher: "I desire mercy not sacrifice". Notice that his audience already knows and acknowledges that when they have an economic interest involved - one of their sheep in a pit - they may perform work on the sabbath to save their property (and to prevent its suffering). Yet they are hard-hearted when it comes to the plight of another man who is oppressed by illness, that work should be done to heal HIM on the sabbath, in contravention of the law of God. Jesus is saying that it is not contravention of the law of God to break the sabbath to do good, to heal. And note well that it is not theft for the hungry apostles, walking through the field, to pluck off heads of grain to eat either. So, when we read what Jesus further has to say about the poor, the oppressed, etc., we must remember God's view that acts of mercy supersede even the commandments of the law.

What follows is repeated by Jesus in different places - on the plain, on the mount - and slightly varying forms. It is the crux of his moral and economic argument, and his statement demanding that you do as he says to do, and as he does - or else. We will focus on the economic components:

"Happy are the poor, for yours is the kingdom of God. Happy are those hungering now, for you shall be satisfied. Happy are those lamenting now, for you shall be laughing. Happy are you whenever men should be hating you, and whenever they should be severing from you and reproaching you and casting your name out as wicked, on account of the Son of Mankind. You may be rejoicing in that day, and frisk, for look! your wages are vast in heaven, for according to the same manner did their fathers to the prophets. Moreover, woe to you who are rich, for you are collecting your consolation! Woe to you who are filled now, for you shall be hungering! Woe to you who are laughing now, for you shall be mourning and lamenting! Woe to you whenever all men may be saying fine things of you, for according to the same manner did their fathers to the false prophets. But to you who are hearing I am saying: Love your enemies. Be doing ideally to those who are hating you. Bless those who are cursing you. Pray concerning those who are traducing you. To him who is beating you on the cheek, be tendering the other also. And you should not be preventing him who is taking away your cloak from taking your tunic also. Now you, be giving to everyone who is requesting, and from him who is taking away what is yours be not demanding it. And, according as you are wanting that men may be doing to you, you also be doing to them likewise. And if you are loving those loving you, what thanks is it to you? For sinners are also doing the same. And if you should ever be lending to those from whom you are expecting to get back, what thanks is it to you? For sinners are also lending to sinners, that they may get back the equivalent. Moreover, be loving your enemies, and be doing good, and be lending, expecting nothing from them, and your wages will be vast in the heavens, and you will be sons of the Most High, for he is kind [even] to the ungrateful and wicked. Become, then, full of pity, according as your Father is also full of pity. And be not judging, and under no circumstances may you be judged; and be not convicting, and under no circumstances may you be convicted: be releasing, and you shall be released; be giving, and it shall be given to you: a measure ideal, squeezed down and shaken together and running over, shall they be giving into your bosom. For the same measure with which you are measuring will be measured to you again. … For an ideal tree is not producing rotten fruit; again, neither is a rotten tree producing ideal fruit. For each tree is known by its own fruit. For not from thorns are they culling figs, neither from a thorn bush are they picking grapes. The good man out of good treasure of his heart is bringing forth that which is good, and the wicked man out of the wicked treasure of his heart is bringing forth that which is wicked, for out of the superabundance of the heart his mouth is speaking. Now why are you calling me 'Lord! Lord!' and are not doing what I am saying? Everyone coming to me and hearing my words and doing them - I shall be intimating to you whom he is like. Like is he to a man building a house, who digs and deepens, and places the foundation on a rock. Now, at an inundation occurring, the river bursts through to that house, and it is not strong enough to shake it, because it is ideally built. Now he who hears, and does not, is like a man building a house on the earth without a foundation, to which the river bursts through, and straightaway it collapses; and the crash of that house came to be great." (Jesus' Sermon on the Plain; Lk:20-38, 43-49)

MORAL: It speaks for itself. Look to who Jesus speaks first. Look to whom he next gives dire warnings of divine war. Look at the standard of judgment: as you measured, so shall it be measured out to you. Look what he said about lending, about releasing. And look at what he said about the need to actually do what he said. To call him Lord and to do not what he said is useless. He will not bless that.

Read it again and contemplate it in light of what has come before. Jesus is revealed to be the Son of God by God directly. He rebukes Satan for suggesting service to anything but God. He calls upon people to cease sinning, to cease following THEIR ways but to turn back to God, and to do that, he says to follow him. He says flatly that those who follow him will reap what they did not sow. To the mind of the man not following God this may seem wrong, but who made the grain grow and the field? God. And God gives to whom he will, and God gives to his beloved Son, and to those who follow him.

And to whom does Jesus bring his message? The ill, the oppressed, the downtrodden. Whom does he say are blessed and happy? The impoverished. But whom does he warn already have all they will have? The rich. Class warfare! No, there is no warfare: human arms are too short to box with God. Not warfare, judgment. Doom. And a way out: follow him, by doing what he SAID. Now read the Sermon the Plain to see what he SAID, all of those things pertaining to money, to economics, to lending, to pity - and remember what he says about those who claim he is Lord but who don't do what he says.

And remember where he speaks of the law of Moses, for he will uphold that again. Jesus here is speaking to poor Jews on a plain in the countryside. He warns the rich that they will be losers if they do not do the economic things he has said, their ruin will be great, but rulers are not Jesus' audience here. Rulers were Moses' audience, though, and Moses had much to say from God to them.

When we return later to the Torah, then, to see the laws for the officials, we must remember that Jesus has ratified and upheld all of that law, and indeed quoted that very law to rebuke Satan. Therefore, we are fools, defying God, if we simply wave our hand and pretend that all of those laws don't apply to us - so that we don't have to measure out and lend in our private capacity, but also as God directed the people and the King as Israel before. Jesus has already upheld what Moses said before, and he will do it again.

There is no escape from any of this.

If you are one who says he believes in Jesus, why are you resisting him? Is it that your desire to serve money is greater than your trust that God will really provide as he said? Repent of that and follow Jesus, or admit you do not believe, and cannot and will not believe because you do not trust and will serve money instead. Be cold or hot, but not lukewarm. Because if you are lukewarm and cry out "Lord! Lord!" Lord, I believe in you, you already have your answer, right there from Jesus: "Why are you calling me 'Lord, Lord' and not doing what I am saying?"

So repent, and follow, and stop kicking at the goad.

This is a good place to break for today. Tomorrow we will resume on the Mount, and Jesus will extend his remarks and beat us each over the head with these same ideas again. If you are trying to avoid what he says, or divert it into something that you don't HAVE to do, that's true, you DON'T have to repent and follow him. You CAN do as you please. Just realize that he has told you that if you call on him as Lord, it does you no good at all unless you do as he says and bear good fruit, that he judges by good or bad deeds, just as he said, and that while you can evade obedience, you cannot evade judgment at the end of it all.

Repent and follow, Come to the light, don't hide in the darkness. Change your mind so that it matches what Jesus has said in this sermon.

He will say a great deal more on the subject, and if you love God and learning you will bask in the light. If you are resisting and rebelling at what he has said above poor and rich, about lending and serving and loosening debts, you're trying to serve something other than God. Repent and follow Jesus. Bear better fruit.

More tomorrow.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

#1. To: Vicomte13 (#0)

The Economics of Jesus

Is there any evidence Jesus had a grasp of simple algebra, supply and demand, or the multiplier effect. If not, he had no knowledge whatsoever of economics.

rlk  posted on  2015-08-11   23:11:33 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#2. To: rlk (#1)

Is there any evidence Jesus had a grasp of simple algebra, supply and demand, or the multiplier effect. If not, he had no knowledge whatsoever of economics.

He created economics.

"When Americans reach out for values of faith, family, and caring for the needy, they're saying, "We want the word of God. We want to face the future with the Bible.'"---Ronald Reagan

redleghunter  posted on  2015-08-11   23:12:42 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#3. To: rlk (#1)

Is there any evidence Jesus had a grasp of simple algebra, supply and demand, or the multiplier effect. If not, he had no knowledge whatsoever of economics.

Given your belief, there is no need for you to trouble yourself any further with this thread, then.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-08-11   23:20:21 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#4. To: A K A Stone (#3)

Ping.

This goes in order of events, from the very beginning of Jesus' ministry to the end. All four Gospels are included in parallel. Every word that Jesus says is not included - that would be somewhat longer. But every word he says about economics, or key things that he or his Father says about Jesus' authority and the authority of the Torah, specifically (which is where God spoke to Kings - Jesus was speaking to peasants and prostitutes, not kings).

Once I am through it, I will bring in Torah and Prophets who say the same things - to the King directly.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-08-12   1:15:41 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#5. To: redleghunter (#2)

Is there any evidence Jesus had a grasp of simple algebra, supply and demand, or the multiplier effect. If not, he had no knowledge whatsoever of economics.

He created economics.

Prove it without resorting to reference to mythology or unsubstantiated personal belief.

rlk  posted on  2015-08-12   14:23:39 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#6. To: rlk (#5)

Prove it without resorting to reference to mythology or unsubstantiated personal belief.

You do not believe the TaNaKh (OT) and NT are God's inspired Words. So you from the gate throw out the objective evidence. Then by throwing out personal belief and experience you throw out of evidence millions of people who have knowledge of God.

So right back at you. Where's your proof or evidence there is no uncreated Creator/Designer? Start there.

"When Americans reach out for values of faith, family, and caring for the needy, they're saying, "We want the word of God. We want to face the future with the Bible.'"---Ronald Reagan

redleghunter  posted on  2015-08-12   16:56:38 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#7. To: redleghunter (#6) (Edited)

You do not believe the TaNaKh (OT) and NT are God's inspired Words. So you from the gate throw out the objective evidence. Then by throwing out personal belief and experience you throw out of evidence millions of people who have knowledge of God.

Experience takes place in the real physical world, not in the minds of some hysterical morons. Belief does not require sceintific investigation or corroboration which, although it may be attractive, makes it suspect.

Millions of beople believed the world was flat at one time. That didn't make it so.

rlk  posted on  2015-08-12   23:57:11 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#8. To: rlk (#7)

Experience takes place in the real physical world, not in the minds of some hysterical morons. Belief does not require sceintific investigation or corroboration which, although it may be attractive, makes it suspect.

Millions of beople believed the world was flat at one time. That didn't make it so.

Christ was manifest in the physical world. So no imagination there. Again you try to impeach the evidence without even considering it.

Yes, by observation most once thought the world was flat. But if they closely studied the OT they would know this would be inaccurate. As they would now knowing by modern evidence the world is not flat. That example does not help your assertions.

"When Americans reach out for values of faith, family, and caring for the needy, they're saying, "We want the word of God. We want to face the future with the Bible.'"---Ronald Reagan

redleghunter  posted on  2015-08-13   7:36:47 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#9. To: redleghunter, A K A Stone, Too Conservative (#8)

To return to the subject matter, in the opening post, we proceeded from the beginning of Jesus' ministry in order up to the Sermon on the Plain, focusing on what Jesus had to say about economics. Much of the early material concerned the Father establishing Jesus' authority, and Jesus upholding the Torah.

On the plain, Jesus specifically addressed who would be blessed, and who would be cursed, and God's blessings skewed to the poor, while his curses skewed to the rich. We ended with Jesus making the stern point: if you don't actually do what he says, you are not really his follower, and it does you no good to call on him and say that you are. Christ is not a smorgasbord: he gave a narrow path, with many components. They parallel the Torah very closely. The ritual of the Torah may be gone with the Temple, but the moral law of the Torah remains in force and applies to Christians, just as Jesus said. To say and do otherwise is not to follow him. Even if you say you do, if you don't do what he says, HE does not consider you to be his follower, because you don't do what he said. You built your house on sand, and down it goes in the flood.

This next passage contains much of the marrow of Jesus' economic teaching, his explicit linkage of his own teachings to the law. It overlaps the Sermon on the Plain in some of the content, though the words are often expressed differently. It was certainly given in a very different place. This one says it was given on a mountain. The other says it was given on a plain. So we have two sermons of Jesus containing the same moral message. This is what Jesus actually walked around teaching. And it mostly concerns economics.

Jesus was speaking to common people, like you and me. He still is. Matthew, at 4:23-6:1) records what he said.

"Happy, in spirit, are the poor, for theirs is the kingdom of the heavens. Happy are those who mourn now, for they shall be consoled. Happy are the meek, for they shall be enjoying the allotment of the land."

Let's pause for a second. Jesus has just blessed the impoverished. And Jesus has just specifically said that it is the meek, the peaceful and retiring, who will be allotted THE LAND. He hs speaking of the physical earth, not JUST the kingdom of the skies. The land will be allotted (by God) to the peaceful. Those who TAKE the land by force and dominate it by force will lose the land, and it will be given to the poor, the meek and the landless.

"Happy are those who are hungering and thirsting for righteousness, for they shall be satisfied."

Recall: righteousness is what Jesus calls righteousness. He has already implied righteousness to poverty and meekness and suffering, above. and in the Sermon on the Plain. And he has implied wickedness to wealth and domination on the Plain, and will do so again shortly on the Mount.

"Happy are the merciful, for they shall be shown mercy. Happy are the clean in heart, for they shall see God. Happy are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God. Happy are those persecuted on account of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of the heavens. Happy are you whenever they should be reproaching and persecuting you and falsifying, saying every wicked thing against you on my account. Rejoice and exalt, for your wages are vast in the heavens. For that they persecute the prophets before you."

People have never liked to hear what God has to say about money. They want it to be easier than it is. Just believe God is, and you're good. That is what the Jews wanted to believe, and many Christians. Jesus says no. Some Christians say that everything that was in the law of God, all of those moral restrictions, were all abolished by the Cross. Jesus says no very specifically to that argument. He puts it to death.

"You should not infer that I came to demolish the law or the prophets. I came not to demolish but to complete. For truly I am saying to you, until the sky and the earth should be passing by, one iota or one serif may by no means be passing by from the law until all should be occurring. Whoever, then, should be annulling one of the least of these precepts, and should be teaching men thus, the least in the kingdom of the heavens shall he be called."

If you teach that the law of God does not apply to Christians because of the blood of the Cross, you are directly defying the express words of Christ on the subject. Did the sky and the land end with the crucifixion? No. Therefore not one word of the law ended either. It ALL applies, and if you teach it doesn't, you shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven. Want to be least in God's kingdom? Then teach that. Repent and accept Jesus at his word.

More later.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-08-15   15:05:29 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#10. To: Vicomte13 (#9) (Edited)

blessings skewed to the poor, while his curses skewed to the rich.

An excellent recipe for pious pretentious Marxism when applied indiscrimantly and without serious further analysis. It opens the door to legitimizing resentment, jealousy, assumption of guilt, and punitive action toward those who work harder and more effectively than you do, which is right up your ally. You seek to be the center of attention and importance by shouting and raising a pious whip against productive members of society with one hand and a bible in the other.

Jesus was an economic asshole. So are you.

rlk  posted on  2015-08-15   16:16:57 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#11. To: rlk (#7)

You do not believe the TaNaKh (OT) and NT are God's inspired Words. So you from the gate throw out the objective evidence. Then by throwing out personal belief and experience you throw out of evidence millions of people who have knowledge of God.

Experience takes place in the real physical world, not in the minds of some hysterical morons. Belief does not require sceintific investigation or corroboration which, although it may be attractive, makes it suspect.

Millions of beople believed the world was flat at one time. That didn't make it so.

Hysterical Moron here to rlk.

I know this may come as a shock to you, but you might want to mosey on over to Wikipedia, and checked the myth of a flat earth.

The myth of the flat Earth is the modern misconception that the prevailing cosmological view during the Middle Ages in Europe saw the Earth as flat, instead of spherical.
During the early Middle Ages, virtually all scholars maintained the spherical viewpoint first expressed by the Ancient Greeks. From at least the 14th century, belief in a flat Earth among the educated was almost nonexistent, despite fanciful depictions in art, such as the exterior of Hieronymus Bosch's famous triptych The Garden of Earthly Delights, in which a disc-shaped Earth is shown floating inside a transparent sphere.
According to Stephen Jay Gould, "there never was a period of 'flat earth darkness' among scholars (regardless of how the public at large may have conceptualized our planet both then and now). Greek knowledge of sphericity never faded, and all major medieval scholars accepted the Earth's roundness as an established fact of cosmology." Historians of science David Lindbergand Ronald Numbers point out that "there was scarcely a Christian scholar of the Middle Ages who did not acknowledge [Earth's] sphericity and even know its approximate circumference".
Historian Jeffrey Burton Russell says the flat-earth error flourished most between 1870 and 1920, and had to do with the ideological setting created by struggles over evolution. Russell claims "with extraordinary [sic] few exceptions no educated person in the history of Western Civilization from the third century B.C. onward believed that the earth was flat", and credits histories by John William Draper, Andrew Dickson White, and Washington Irving for popularizing the flat-earth myth.

Error, indeed, is never set forth in its naked deformity, lest, being thus exposed, it should at once be detected. But it is craftily decked out in an attractive dress, so as by its outward form, to make it appear to the inexperienced … more true than truth itself—Irenaeus, Against Heresies

GarySpFC  posted on  2015-08-15   18:34:11 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#12. To: rlk (#10)

Jesus was an economic asshole. So are you.

At least you know where you stand. You're not lukewarm. You're cold as ice against him. He's an asshole, according to you, so even if (I would say "though", but I am speaking from your perspective), you despise him.

I appreciate your comments, actually. I'm sure Jesus does not, but I do. Not, of course, because I think it's a good thing to call the King an "asshole" when he can hear you - I think that's pretty unwise, all in all, although he's been called much worse than that - but because you, a non-believer, see clearly what Jesus is saying here.

You don't like the content - you despise Jesus for having that viewpoint - but you don't deny that he is saying exactly what he is saying.

Some Christians also dislike what Jesus says about economics. But because they are Christians and want to love Jesus, they cannot take your approach. You acknowledge what Jesus clearly says, and then reject him in part BECAUSE of that he clear message. To you, he wasn't the Son of God, and what he said was just pious pretentious Marxist assholery. You acknowledge, though, that he clearly said what he clearly said.

Christians cannot despise Jesus, and therefore have to accept what he said as coming from God. But it offends the economic beliefs and values of many of them, so what they do is certainly less aggressive than what you do, but it is also less bracingly honest. Instead, they go fuzzy, they go unfocused. They refuse to stare directly at the words, as spoken and repeated, and accept that Jesus really means exactly what he says. Because that would mean that their socio-economic beliefs are wrong, bad, and have to go for them to please God.

But they don't like Jesus' economics, so they ignore them. They focus on something else Jesus said, something that makes following him seem simpler, or different. Something that lets them effectively erase Jesus' economics, or reduce them to a time, place and manner thing.

And that's dishonest. Really, what it is, is serving money and not serving God. If you stay on this thread further, you will see Jesus say flatly "You cannot serve both God and money". People who disregard what Jesus said about money do so in order to serve money, because serving Jesus on the matter is a bridge too far for them (demonstrating the literal truth of what Jesus said about being unable to serve both).

So, although I'd suggest, for your own sake, that you take a more courteous, and polite tone when addressing the deity on his own words, I myself, as a man, do appreciate your direct honesty about what Jesus actually SAID.

Obviously Jesus was not a "Marxist". Marx would not live until 1800-odd years after Jesus spoke. But obviously what Jesus had to say about the poor and the rich is disturbing to a lot of sensitivities. I appreciate you acknowledging that Jesus really is saying what he literally said, and that you're offended by what he has to say, because you perceive it as Marxism. Therefore, to you, Jesus is an asshole, because obviously that sort of thinking is stupid and wrong.

Christians, though, have the problem that however disagreeable they find the words and concepts (and many DO find what Jesus has to say about economics quite alarming), they cannot dismiss the speaker whose lips pronounced the words.

Indeed, that is the purpose of this very thread, to reach them; to reach them using Jesus own words, relayed in extenso without close clipping and chopping. Jesus didn't have just a few things to say about economics. He had a lot to say about it, and he firmly upheld the Law of God that came before through Moses, which has a lot more detailed things to say than Jesus. Jesus' economics builds on that law.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-08-15   22:03:36 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#13. To: Vicomte13, GarySpFc, A K A Stone, liberator (#9)

Thanks for the work Vic.

Reading the full context of the Gospels points us to the ultimate characteristics of a giving and caring Christian----Love.

"When Americans reach out for values of faith, family, and caring for the needy, they're saying, "We want the word of God. We want to face the future with the Bible.'"---Ronald Reagan

redleghunter  posted on  2015-08-16   0:31:41 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#14. To: rlk (#10)

If you disagree with Vic, then you are not in keeping with the third principle of the Bushito code:

III. Benevolence or Mercy:

A man invested with the power to command and the power to kill was expected to demonstrate equally extraordinary powers of benevolence and mercy: Love, magnanimity, affection for others, sympathy and pity, are traits of Benevolence, the highest attribute of the human soul. Both Confucius and Mencius often said the highest requirement of a ruler of men is Benevolence.

"When Americans reach out for values of faith, family, and caring for the needy, they're saying, "We want the word of God. We want to face the future with the Bible.'"---Ronald Reagan

redleghunter  posted on  2015-08-16   2:17:31 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#15. To: redleghunter (#14)

Love, magnanimity, affection for others, sympathy and pity, are traits of Benevolence, the highest attribute of the human soul.

But not to the point where one becomes a rug for people to wipe their feet on.

rlk  posted on  2015-08-16   5:22:09 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#16. To: Vicomte13 (#12) (Edited)

Marx would not live until 1800-odd years after Jesus spoke. But obviously what Jesus had to say about the poor and the rich is disturbing to a lot of sensitivities.

Marx was alive when Jesus spoke. To a being who supposedly has the power and intellect of a god, all things past and future are familiar to him and real. The passage of time becomes an irrelevancy.

rlk  posted on  2015-08-16   5:39:10 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#17. To: GarySpFC (#11) (Edited)

During the early Middle Ages, virtually all scholars maintained the spherical viewpoint first expressed by the Ancient Greeks.

The shape and circumference of the earth was measured quite accurately by Aerostothenes(sp) a Greek living in northern Africa at about 250 B. C. It was lost for many centuries after the decline of Greece. His work was much later found in libraries conquered by islam and preserved. Columbus was not a sailer. He was a rather poor mathematician who novely suspected the Earth must be round and drastically re-miscalculated the circumference of the Earth from scratch and supposition. When he hit North America thought it must be India and gave the people he found there the name Indians not realizing that his calculations were off by 10,000 miles.

rlk  posted on  2015-08-16   6:10:51 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#18. To: rlk (#17)

You clearly implied Christians are ignorant, when in fact you didn't even realize you were quoting myth. Christian scholars have never taught that the earth is flat.

Error, indeed, is never set forth in its naked deformity, lest, being thus exposed, it should at once be detected. But it is craftily decked out in an attractive dress, so as by its outward form, to make it appear to the inexperienced … more true than truth itself—Irenaeus, Against Heresies

GarySpFC  posted on  2015-08-16   7:23:26 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#19. To: rlk (#15)

Love, magnanimity, affection for others, sympathy and pity, are traits of Benevolence, the highest attribute of the human soul. But not to the point where one becomes a rug for people to wipe their feet on.

Where in the literature in Bushito is this clause spelled out?

Where does it say such in the Bible.

You are providing your own interpretation. Based on what authority? Do you deem yourself a self proclaimed infallible authority?

"When Americans reach out for values of faith, family, and caring for the needy, they're saying, "We want the word of God. We want to face the future with the Bible.'"---Ronald Reagan

redleghunter  posted on  2015-08-16   14:36:41 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#20. To: redleghunter (#19)

Where in the literature in Bushito is this clause spelled out?

In the licensing of Samurai to carry swords. Bushito is, or was, the code of conduct of the Japanese warrior police force.

rlk  posted on  2015-08-16   21:10:26 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#21. To: redleghunter, A K A Stone, GarySpFc, Too Conservative (#19)

We left Jesus on the Plane. Let's rejoin him on the Mount, where he again reiterates a very similar message. We have two sermons of Jesus to large crowds in different places. The two sermons are the two most extensive of Jesus' public preaching that are recorded for us. THIS is what Jesus was walking around saying to people.

The Sermon on the Mount is a bit longer than the Sermon on the Plain. As we are discussing the economics of Jesus, in some parts I will skip a portion of the sermon, that doesn't pertain to the subject matter. I will not, however, skip anything that is necessary for context.

I will also leave in everything that pertains to the three main themes we have seen develop so far: (1) To follow Jesus means to do what he says. (2) Jesus upholds the law and says it will be in force until the end of the world, and warns against teaching that it won't be. This is important because a substantial part of the law is economic. (3) Jesus blesses the poor and meek, and proclaims woe upon the rich.

It's late. I'll type out the pertinent portions of the Sermon on the Mount tomorrow.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-08-16   23:38:31 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#22. To: redleghunter, A K A Stone, GarySpFc, Too Conservative (#21)

Relevant Portions of Jesus' "Sermon On the Mount " (mt 4:23-8:1)

"Happy, in spirit, are the poor, for theirs is the kingdom of the heavens. Happy are those who mourn now, for they shall be consoled. Happy are the meek, for they shall be enjoying the allotment of the land. Happy are those who are hungering and thirsting for righteousness, for they shall be satisfied. Happy are the merciful, for they shall be shown mercy. Happy are the clean in heart, for they shall see God. Happy are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God. Happy are those persecuted on account of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of the heavens. Happy are you whenever they should be reproaching and persecuting you and, falsifying, saying every wicked thing against you, on my account. Rejoice and exult, for your wages are vast in the heavens. For thus they persecute the prophets before you.

You are the salt of the earth. Nw, if the salt should be made insipid, with what will it be salted? For nothing does it still avail except to be cast outside, to be trampled by men.

You are the light of the world. A city located upon a mountain cannot be hid. Neither are they burning a lamp and placing it under a peck measure, but on a lampstand, and it is shining to all those in the house. Thus let shine your light in front of men, so that they may perceive your ideal acts and should glorify your Father who is in the heavens.

You should not infer that I come to demolish the law or the prophets. I came not to demolish, but to fulfill. For truly I am saying to you - till heaven and earth should be passing by, one iota or one serif may by no means be passing by from the law till all should be occurring. Whosoever, then, should be annulling one of the least of these precepts, and should be teaching other men thus, the least in the kingdom of the heavens shall he be called. Yet whoever shluld be doing and teaching them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of the heavens. " - Jesus

Before we move past this, we are going to look directly at it. First, Jesus has lighted a lamp here, and I am holding it up before you all: his words, direct, not mind. I am letting my light shine in front of men, you, and that light is the words of Jesus themselves, presented verbatim in the most literal form of word-for- word, consistent translation (by "consistent" I mean that each time that word appears in the Greek, it is translated by the same word in English, in this translation).

By doing this for you, I am performing an ideal act, and as the result of my acts here, you should be glorifying your Father in heaven. Jesus said the words, and I am reminding you of them, and I am doing so in a particular context, the very context in which he spoke them. With whom does this sermon begin? To whom is it addressed? The rich? The comfortable? The prosperous? The secure? The self-righteous? No. The poor, the suffering, the meek, those who hunger and thirst for righteousness. (And what is righteousness? Jesus has told us: to do the Father's will, by following him.)

Here, Jesus tells us point blank something else about following the Father and him: the law that God laid out before, in the Torah, is fully in force until the end of the physical world. Not until the cross. Not until the resurrection. Until the earth and sky pass away. Jesus modified many things that are in that law: he made all foods clean, he explained the purpose of the sabbath, he pronounced doom on the Temple and its priests, and God removed them, making it physically impossible for Jews to continue to perform the ritual sacrifices even if they wanted to. Yet even in those cases the law did not pass away. Rather, God made it impossible to obey, so that he, in turn, would not be obliged to fulfill the land promise inherent in the Sinai Covenant (which was not a covenant for eternal life, but for a farm in Israel).

Our atheistic reader her has called Jesus a Marxist and other epithets. Jesus is God. To the extent that what Marx said corresponds with what Jesus said, and in some places it does, Marx was right and in keeping with the Law. Where Marx departed from the law and taught killing to achieve an economic objective, he left Jesus and YHWH behind, disregarded many precepts, and became lost.

Jesus speaks of people reviling those who follow him on account of him. How many times on this very board have I been reviled as a "Marxist", a "socialist" and other words intended to express disgust and revulsion, specifically because I uphold every iota and serif of the economic law of God? Indeed, that is WHY I am reviled, BECAUSE I insist on God's full law in economics, just as others insist (correctly) that it applies to sexual behavior.

It does not bother me too much to be called names for simply speaking the unaltered words of God. Jesus promises a blessing to me for enduring that. But men who call themselves Christians should hold their tongues, lest they be before God salt of the earth that has lost its savor, and men who teach other men to disregard precepts of the law.

Indeed, we should all be learning the words of the law and of Jesus, and then applying them, all of them. And where they make us uncomfortable, acknowledge that that is because of our sinfulness, not because "Jesus was a Marxist". I quote Jesus and YHWH extensively and verbatim specifically so that it is HIM delivering the hard words of the law, not me.

So, we should stop being hostile to each other, and do what he says. Why? Because:

"I am saying to you that, if ever your righteousness should not be superabounding more than that of the scribes and the Pharisees, by no means may you be entering into the kingdom of the heavens.

You hear that it was declared to the ancients "You shall not murder". Yet whoever should be murdering shall be liable to the judging. Yet I am saying to you that everyone who is angry with his brother shall be liable to the judging. Yet whoever may be saying to his brother, 'Raca!' [empty-headed], shall be liable to the Sanhedrin. Yet whoever may be saying 'Stupid!' shall be liable to the Gehenna of fire. If, then, you should be offering your approach present to the altar, and there you should be reminded that your brother has anything against you, , leave your approach present there in front of the altar and go away. First be placated toward your brother and then, coingm be offering your approach present."

So let us pause then. Are you a Christian? Is Christ the son of God, begotten of the virgin Mary by God the Father? Yes? Are you baptized in water and begotten again by the Spirit of God, the Holy Spirit? Yes? Then we are brothers to Jesus, and sons of the Father, and we are brothers to each other. Let us not, then, strive bitterly with one another because we find ourselves at odds with God's laws, and with each other. By our nature we always have sin tugging at us, and we are always out of joint in some way with God and his laws. We must strive to get back in synch with God. And in the process we must make peace with one another.

Indeed, BEFORE we proceed on with the law, we MUST MAKE PEACE WITH ONE ANOTHER. Otherwise we are not listening to Jesus. This recounting of the law, of the economics of Jesus, is a present, to the world, from Jesus and the Father, but let's leave it before the altar and turn to address the hard words we have leveled at one another. And repent of them. And stop doing that. Then we can return to this altar and proceed forward at peace with each other, and to hear what the Teacher teaches us from the Father.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-08-17   20:27:26 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#23. To: redleghunter, A K A Stone, GarySpFc, Too Conservative (#22)

"Happy, in spirit, are the poor, for theirs is the kingdom of the heavens. Happy are those who mourn now, for they shall be consoled. Happy are the meek, for they shall be enjoying the allotment of the land. Happy are those who are hungering and thirsting for righteousness, for they shall be satisfied. Happy are the merciful, for they shall be shown mercy. Happy are the clean in heart, for they shall see God. Happy are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God. "

To whom is the kingdom of the heavens? The rich? The proud? The powerful? No: the poor.

To whom is the consolation of God? Those who have their reward already? No: those who mourn.

To whom is the ownership of the land? The strong? The conquerors? Those willing to fight for it and take it and dominate others to hold it? No: the meek.

Who will be shown mercy by God? The judgmental? The stern? The rigid? The haughty and merciless? No: the merciful. Indeed, each man shall be measured by the measure by which he measured, according to Jesus. The unforgiving will not be forgiven their sins. The merciless and stern will be treated mercilessly and sternly by God. Those who show mercy, who forgive, will likewise be shown mercy and forgiven by God.

Who are called the sons of God? Those who proclaim brotherhood with Christ through their religion? Those who strive and seek to dominate in matters of faith? No: the peacemakers. They shall be called the sons of God.

This is all to be taken absolutely literally, without turning to the left or to the right.

When history - American, European, Asian, African, Amerindian - is considered, men are violent conquerors, dominators of each other, merciless, proud. But God promises that the land will not be theirs, but the meek, and that his consolation will be with those who are broken and mourn on account of them.

But what if you are a haughty man, arrogant, proud, in favor of violence against those whom you deem unworthy; judgmental, merciless, and scorning the very idea of meek? Then you have set your face against God, and you do not walk with Jesus, and you will not be called a son of God. Jesus' complaint is against you, everything he preaches is against you. What should you do then? Your whole mind has been at odds with what he wants. You cherish the things he condemns and look down on those things that Jesus has said God cherishes. What then for you? He has a complaint against you, and he tells you what to do:

"You be humoring your plaintiff quickly while you are with him on the way, lest at some time the plaintiff may be giving you up to the judge, and the judge to the deputy, and you should be cast into jail. Truly I am saying to you: by no means may you be coming out thence till you should be paying the last quadrans."

Our arms are too short to box with God. God has a plan for life, including economic life, which is contrary to how we live and what we want. He makes that plan abundantly clear through his Law - and not a letter of that will pass away until the end of the world - and through Jesus' words and example. What are we to do? Stop resisiting God! Stop kicking at the goad! Hear the word of the Lord, listen to it, repent of everytihng in your belief system that contradicts a word of it, submit completely to the Law as given, make peace with God and walk with Jesus, a pace behind and to the left, and in step. Stop fighting God's will.

Indeed, "If your right eye is snaring you, wrench it out and cast it from you, for it is expedient for you that that one of your members should perish and not your whole body be cast into Gehenna. And if your right hand is snaring you, strike it off and cast it from you, for it is expedient for you that one of your members should perish and not your whole body pass away into Gehenna."

This is what is at stake. They eyes are greedy, the hands are grasping. But when they desire what exceeds God's grant, and when they grab and hold what exceeds God's permission, they are a snare. Cripple yourself, physically, rather than remain haughty in your pretension and be thrown into Hell. Or better still, repent! Turn away. Stop sinning, Follow Jesus and obey the law. Stop resisting the law. God would prefer you maim yourself physically - very literally - than that you should defy him and he throw you physically - very literally - into the fire of Gehenna. If you don't take what he says about maiming yourself literally to avoid sin, then unfortunately you risk having the sentence carried out on you very literally. And which is worse? To literally tear your eye out and be half-blind, or to succumb to the lust of the eyes and to burn? Jesus answered that. Now, tearing out your eyes and cutting off your hands is extreme, even crazy. Crazier, though, is to persist in defying God. Don't cut off your hand and tear out your eyes. Rather, repent and follow Jesus, and stop resisting God.

That includes ceasing to fight God's economic law. It is every bit as much a part of God's law as his law of sex. Don't resist it. Don't ignore it. Don't deride others for teaching it. Don't teach others to disregard it. Repent, submit and obey. The meek shall inherit the land and the kingdom of the skies. The resistant and the haughty shall inherit woe and fire.

Why :oathkeepers"? Why "solemn oaths", pledges of service to institutions that exceed the pledges of service that God himself wants? No!

"Again, you hear that it was declared to the ancients 'You shall not be perjuring, yet you shall be paying to YHWH your oaths.' Yet I am saying to you absolutely not to swear, neither by heaven, for it is the throne of God, nor by the earth, for it is a footstool for his feet, nor by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the great king. Nor by your head should you be swearing, for you are not able to make one hair white or black. Let your word be 'Yes, yes.' 'No, no.' Now, what is in excess of these is of the wicked one."

If you think that solemn oaths are of importance, you are correct - they are sins, they are inspired by the wicked one, and they are contrary to the expressed commandment of Jesus. Oathkeeping is not good, for the taking of oaths is not good. And the demand that men swear oaths is evil. There is one standard of truth, and it always applies.

God requires a complete rethink about the world and the institutions by which men interact with one another. If an oath is required, there is a fundamental wickedness at the heart of that institution. For God himself has said not to swear oaths to anybody or anything. If some humans, then, demand that oaths be sworn, they are compelling a service that exceeds divine service. It is evil. Yes and No must suffice for man. To demand more is to engage in an evil act.

Do your traditions say otherwise? Then your traditions are evil. Jesus just said so. Do not resist, repent! Repent, and submit to the will of God. Stop sinning in this way, and stop demanding that other men sin in this way in exchange for something. Anything further is from the wicked one. If you refuse to accept this, you are setting your face against God. Stop it.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-08-18   1:20:34 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#24. To: Vicomte13 (#23) (Edited)

"Happy, in spirit, are the poor, for theirs is the kingdom of the heavens.

What are you quoting from? It isn't the Bible.

This is what the Bible actually says.

Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

So whatever you quoted from substituted "happy" for "blessed".

Big difference. Didn't want you to remain ignorant of that fact.

A K A Stone  posted on  2015-08-18   1:56:16 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#25. To: Vicomte13 (#23)

To whom is the kingdom of the heavens? The rich? The proud? The powerful? No: the poor.

Wrong.

It is to those who believe that Christ is the messiah sent by God. Then they ask forgiveness for their sins.

A K A Stone  posted on  2015-08-18   1:59:35 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#26. To: Vicomte13 (#23)

Happy are the merciful, for they shall be shown mercy.

Again and all through you use the word "happy".

Shame on you for not letting the readers that it is actually "blessed".

The readers may not have ever known that if I hadn't pointed it out.

Happy is not synonomoud with blessed.

A K A Stone  posted on  2015-08-18   2:02:10 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#27. To: Vicomte13 (#22)

he explained the purpose of the sabbath,

Jesus kept the sabbath. Why don't Catholics and other Christians?

A K A Stone  posted on  2015-08-18   2:05:13 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#28. To: Vicomte13 (#22)

Yet I am saying to you that everyone who is angry with his brother shall be liable to the judging.

That is unbiblical. Jesus isn't "liable to the judging".

Ephesians 4:26

A K A Stone  posted on  2015-08-18   2:12:22 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#29. To: A K A Stone (#28)

That is unbiblical. Jesus isn't "liable to the judging".

Ephesians 4:26

You say "That is unbiblical" to a DIRECT QUOTE OF JESUS CHRIST.

And you pit Paul against Christ himself.

"Yet I am saying to you that everyone who is angry with his brother shall be liable to the judging." - Jesus Christ.

Those are words that proceeded forth directly out of the mouth of God. They were not "inspired by God" through mind of men. They were SPOKEN by God incarnate.

Jesus trumps Paul.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-08-18   7:52:35 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#30. To: A K A Stone (#27)

Jesus kept the sabbath. Why don't Catholics and other Christians?

Because they don't want to obey God and take a day of complete rest from work.

God has mandated that 1/7th of our days should be days of leisure. He provided the example himself, both at the beginning and in Jesus.

One does not have the "option" of being a "hard worker" and choosing to work all seven days. That is sin.

The earliest written record of the move from Satuday to Sunday is the 29th Canon of the Synod of Laodicaea, circa 363 AD.

"Christians must not judaize by resting on the Sabbath, but must work on that day, rather honouring the Lord's Day; and, if they can, resting then as Christians. But if any shall be found to be judaizers, let them be anathema from Christ."

The Church's motivation in claiming to make this change is obvious: Judaizers - people claiming that Christians had to become Jews (become circumcised, keep kosher, perform the ablutions, etc.) were numerous in the Eastern Church, and by prohibiting Christians from resting on the Sabbath, the Church was forcing people to choose between keeping the Jewish custom or keeping the new Church custom.

The Church would have claimed, as it still does, that its power to do such things was granted by Jesus when he gave the power of the keys, to loose and to bind, to Peter and the Apostles. "What you loose on earth shall be loosed in Heaven; what you bind on earth shall be bound in Heaven", thus said Jesus.

I would say that this assertion of authority is a gross exaggeration of the power Christ actually conveyed: he was talking about loosing and binding sins.

Most Christians would disagree with my view.

Moving the Sabbath (which means "rest") from Saturday to Sunday is itself a questionable thing, but the really offensive thing about the move is the next part, where it speaks of the need to REST on that day, and says "if they can, resting then as Christians."

Obviously in a slave empire such as ancient Rome, there were millions of Christian slaves who COULD NOT rest if they wanted to, because they were slaves under the lash of their masters.

However, by the time of the Council of Laodicaea, the Christian Church was already the official Church of the empire. The Sabbath Rest is not OPTIONAL. Certainly slaves who CANNOT rest must not be told that it's not a sin to fail to rest if they are driven, but the Church should have used its authority to command Christian owners just as God did: you SHALL NOT compel anybody in your charge to work on the day of rest. It is a sin to do so.

Christians don't keep the Sabbath in two ways - the external: Saturday is the 7th Day, and that is the day God set aside, but even more important - the functional: God gave man and the beasts under man's dominion the day of rest because he knows we need REST. To move the day is one thing, of symbolic memorial importance, but to diminish the commandment to REST is an even greater thing: God does not give the authority to owners to compel man or beast to work on the day of rest. And he does not give anybody permission to work all seven days. Men cannot compel others to work 7 out of 7 - it is sin. And men are not permitted THEMSELVES to work 7 out of 7 either - it is also sin.

Your time is not your own: it is God's. And God has directed that one day of seven be spent resting, not employed in labor. He gives this to all for their benefit. And for the man who PREFERS to work 7 out of 7, he is nevertheless constrained by God to rest for a day, lest by working he should gain an advantage over the others and thereby compel them to also feel the need to work on the Sabbath.

So, DID the Christians have the authority or the right to move the Sabbath day, specifically to distinguish themselves from the Jews? I would say that they did not. But most importantly, Christians had not authority or right to SOFTEN the Sabbath. The Church should have commanded Christians of authority to give those subject to them the weekly rest, be it Saturday or Sunday. To MOVE the day was an act of lese majeste: GOD set aside the 7th day and made IT sacred; who are men, for some transient cause, to arrogate unto themselves the change?

But having decided to exercise their authority in leadership to do so, to tell slaves and suborinates to take the rest IF THEY CAN, but to not also command the owners and masters to GIVE the rest, as a matter of divine commandment, under pain of anathema for defiance - that was moral failure on the part of the Council of Laodicaea and the Church.

For what did God do? He made a day of full rest, for all, including women (no having to light fires to cook), including slaves, including farm animals. A day to rest and recover, a full day off. And he made it a sin, on pain of death, to break that Sabbath to work. Jesus made it plain that breaking the Sabbath to save people and animals, to alleviate suffering, this was not really a break of the Sabbath, for it gives rest to the suffering, and it is not employment. But to WORK on the Sabbath at gainful employment, or to compel others to do so: THAT is sin. It was sin under the law, and not a letter of the law has passed away.

The best answer is that Christians are forbidden to do anything to earn money on the Sabbath. They are to not work, and they are to rest. If Christians, following their tradition, choose to move the day of rest of Sunday, then perhaps that is within their power to have done so, but that day, then, must be one of rest, and not work.

Stores may not be open seven days a week. Men are not permitted to earn money seven days a week. One day of complete rest for one's self and for everybody under one's control is required.

It is licit to do good on the Sabbath. It is not "doing good" to do something and demand payment for it. That is doing work.

So, why don't Catholics and other Christians keep the Saturday Sabbath or, following their tradition, the Sunday Sabbath? Why do they work seven days a week, and compel others to work on those days? Because they are sinners, defiant of God. That's why.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-08-18   8:51:16 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#31. To: Vicomte13 (#29)

"Yet I am saying to you that everyone who is angry with his brother shall be liable to the judging." - Jesus Christ.

That isn't what it says.

It says everyone who is angry without cause.

You're Bible has errors. It leaves out words and changes them.

That is the point.

Jesus himself was angry.

You also don't put verses in. Makes it harder when you don't quote the Bible. Makes it look like youa re.

A K A Stone  posted on  2015-08-18   8:56:05 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#32. To: A K A Stone (#26)

Again and all through you use the word "happy".

Shame on you for not letting the readers that it is actually "blessed".

The word is "Makarioi". It is the word "makar", which means "happy". Of course, in Greek, as in Latin, or French, "happy", "lucky", and "blessed" are the same thing. It is a word that refers to bliss and good fortune.

If you prefer to see the word "Blessed" for makarioi, then by all means read the word as "blessed". If that further reinforces for you the authority of what Jesus is saying, then good - that is precisely the point. Jesus is God, so when I read that he proclaims happiness to the poor, woe to the rich, and you read that he proclaimes blessedness to the poor, but a curse upon the rich, we are seeing the same thing, using different words.

The words I am using are simply more exactly correct in Greek, but they amount to the same thing, given who is pronouncing the happiness/blessedness and woe/curse.

Jesus did not speak English. He probably wasn't speaking Greek either.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-08-18   9:32:43 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#33. To: Vicomte13 (#32)

The words I am using are simply more exactly correct in Greek, but they amount to the same thing,

They don't mean the same thing.

Say happy means blessed in greek.

It doesn't in english.

Not a good translation.

Which is why I stick to the best translation. KJV.

A K A Stone  posted on  2015-08-18   9:43:13 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#34. To: A K A Stone (#31)

That isn't what it says.

It says everyone who is angry without cause.

You're Bible has errors. It leaves out words and changes them.

That is the point.

Jesus himself was angry.

You also don't put verses in. Makes it harder when you don't quote the Bible. Makes it look like youa re.

The Bible says: ego de lego hymin hoti pas ho orgizomenos to adlepho autou enochos estai te krisei.

If you prefer,

"I however say to you that everyone [that] being angry with the brother of him liable will be to the judgment"

Or the Bible, according to the Eastern Orthodox Patriarchal Text (selected as official by the Patriarch of Constantinople in 1904) says "•³ὼ ´ὲ »έ³É ὑ¼ῖ½ ὅĹ Àᾶ ὁ ὀÁ³¹¶ό¼µ½¿Â Äῷ ἀ´µ»Æῷ ±ὐÄ¿ῦ µἰºῆ ἔ½¿Ç¿Â ἔÃı¹ Äῇ ºÁίõ¹‡", adding the word "µἰºῆ", meaning "feignedly", "vainly", "groundlessly", or "without cause".

The Latin Vulgate (c 400 AD) reads: "ego autem dico vobis quia omnis qui irascitur fratri suo reus erit iudicio"

Which is to say "I however say to you, that all who are angry with his brothers shall be in danger of judgment".

The oldest manuscripts do not contain the word "µἰºῆ" - "feignedly" - "without cause" is in the manuscript that is behind the KJV translation.

This was a subject of discussion among the ancients. The great biblical scholar and translator St. Jerome (in the late 300s/early 400s) wrote “In some codices ‘without cause’ is added; however in the authentic codices the statement is unqualified and anger is completely forbidden, for if we are commanded to pray for those who persecute us, every occasion for anger is eliminated. ‘Without cause’ then should be deleted, since the anger of man does not work the justice of God.”

His view was that "without cause" was an addition to some manuscripts and not authentic, and he said why.

Cassian, writing in the same period, says “The words ‘without a cause’ are superfluous, and were added by those who did not think that anger for just causes was to be banished: since certainly nobody, however unreasonably he is disturbed, would say that he was angry without a cause. Wherefore it appears to have been added by those who did not understand the drift of the Scripture.”

Tyndale, the great Biblical translator into English, whose text forms the Basis for most English Bibles, has no "without cause" there. Nor does Wycliffe, first translator into English.

The Greek texts that were translated for the KJV did have "eike" in them, so the KJV reads "without cause".

So, you say I don't quote the Bible. I do. Maybe you do. Or maybe you're putting a word in, because your tradition tells you to.

Is the word in the Bible or not? Who is the authority on such things?

To me, what Jerome and Cassian say makes sense, and the fact that Jerome and Origen, the greatest scholars of Scripture in an era when the great libraries were still up within the very same Roman Empire, both tell us that the word is not there originally...and the fact that it's not there in the oldest manuscripts...and the fact that the Church did not consider the word to be truly there...tell me that Jesus did not say that word.

Moreover, given what Jesus will go on to say about turning the other cheek, about meekness, about forgiving, what Jesus said would all seem to fit as a piece.

But let us suppose that the Patriarchal Text of the Eastern Orthodox, and the Textus Receptus, which do contain the work "µἰºῆ" - "eike" - and are the true record of what Jesus said.

If Jesus did say that word, then what did he say?

"He said Yet I am saying to you that everyone who is angry with his brother without cause shall be liable to the judging."

Why are you angry at me? You are angry at me because I am quoting Jesus and YHWH, demonstrating that you should change your views to bring them in line with what Jesus said.

You are angry with me about that, so you are calling me a Marxist, which is false. You are saying that I am not quoting the Bible, which is not true. On the case of eike, there is a legitimate difference of opinion about the authenticity of that word, and I have sided with the vast bulk of authority modern and ancient.

Martin Luther translated the Bible. He did not think that "without cause" was original. His translation reads: "Ich aber sage euch: Wer mit seinem Bruder zürnt, der ist des Gerichts schuldig."

"But I say to you, whoever is angry with his brother, who is subject to judgment."

Still, if you need to see your tradition, only, in the only words that you will accept as authentic, I will walk the extra mile with you. Is it the KJV that I must use? Will you accept that text as authoritative and final?

I know that the KJV translators use a variety of different words to translate the same word, and that this does not give the clarity of the word-for-word literal translations that I prefer, but if the literal language looks deceptive to you, then I will use the text that you need to see. Is that the KJV, or is it some other translation. You tell me the only translation you will accept, and I will use that. The translations all say the same basic things, and God says so very much about economics, lays out such a complex and intertwined law (which Jesus upholds by word and by example), that it doesn't matter which translation we use.

You'll still be angry at me for presenting the economics of God, because you don't like the economics of God. And that is being angry with me in vain, without good cause. You should stop that.

You will not like what God has to say about money. But you should. To the extent you don't, you have identified a place where you are at war with God. Hear his word and change. That's the purpose of this thread.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-08-18   11:01:34 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#35. To: A K A Stone (#33)

Say happy means blessed in greek.

It doesn't in english.

Not a good translation.

Why would English translators be correct to take a Greek word and bifurcate it into two English words, when there is only one word in Greek? How would they know that "God intended" this meaning or that?

Although it is not the "best translation", I will nevertheless use the KJV because that is the only one you will accept.

So, I shall go back to the beginning of this whole enterprise and start over, repeating every word from Jesus using the KJV language.

You want one mile? I'll give you two.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-08-18   12:50:47 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#36. To: redleghunter, A K A Stone, GarySpFc, Too Conservative (#35)

Stone will have the KJV, therefore, that is what we will use.

Here, I go back to the first and subsequent posts that contained the words of Jesus or the Father, and republish the same texts, but this time in KJV format.

For those who wish to compare, the original published text was a mechanical translation. A mechanical translation in which each separate Greek word is rendered by a single corresponding English word each and every time that Greek word appears in the original text, and in which each English word in the lexicon has only one single Greek homologue. A mechanical translation makes the text itself a concordance, as one need only search the text for an English word, and every time that word appears in English it corresponds to the same Greek word. In this way, translator's bias is rendered almost moot. The only place where the translator really has any discretion is in the selection of the English word that corresponds to the Greek. But having made that selection, thereafter the translation is always consistent. So, if one disagrees with the translator's choice, one can simply search, find the English word, and then globally replace it in the text with the preferred word.

For example, Stone objects to rendering of the Greek word "markaryos" as "happy", insisting that it should be rendered as "blessed". He does so, because the use of the word "Happy" instead of "Blessed" stands out in certain famous traditional passages. It is a simple matter, then, to globally find the world "Happy" in English, and replace it globally with "Blessed" everywhere in the Biblical text, because the same Greek word appears in all places that "Happy" appears.

Now, some might object, asserting that in some places the word means "happy", and some places the word means "blessed". To assert such a think is to claim special revelation to one's self or one's translator, for there is only one Greek word for the thing that is expressed as two things in English, and the choice to render it "happy" in some places, and "blessed" in others has no basis in the actual Scripture or the original language, but is simply a theological choice of the translator to create, in English, a distinction and a potential theological difference where none whatever exists in the actual Greek Bible.

To me, this is important, because adding nuance that is not in fact there is, to my eyes, adding to Scripture - and has no basis.

A comparable example are the words "sky" and "heaven". There is in Hebrew precisely one word, and in Greek also. In English, is there a difference between "sky" and "heaven"? Yes. Does that difference exist in Hebrew, Greek, Latin or French? No. "Our Father who is in the Sky, holy is your name..." is the way that the Lord's Prayer begins in the original Greek, in Latin and in French.

If I say it that way in English - that God is in the sky - does that offend your sensitivities? Yes? Because you think that there is a difference between the mere physical sky and "heaven", another dimensional plane? Well, perhaps there is, and perhaps there is not. But the fact is that in ancient Hebrew and Greek - in the ACTUAL BIBLE - no such distinction exists, or CAN exist, because there is only one word: "hashamayim" in Hebrew, "ouranos" in Greek. One word, no nuance. In English there are two words, and there is nuance, but this nuance is an addition to the Christian theology added by English. It is not actually IN the Scripture at all. And maybe it is just entirely made up. For the translators - or you as an English speaker - to positively assert that there IS a difference between "heaven", where God is, and the sky above your head is to claim a special revelation, that you "know" there is a difference, because your language has two words, and you have come to think of these as two different things. But the Bible only has one word, in both testamenta. In the Bible, the distinction that you think exists doesn't exist at all, in either original language. God is in the Sky. Our Father, who is in the Sky. The stars are also in the Sky. One word. One single word. Not two. And no hint of two meanings either. Perhaps there is more than one sky - a second and a third sky, perhaps, with God in the third sky beyond the other two.

I'm dwelling on this a bit to make you each think about what you believe and what you think you know. Just because you are "sure" of it, and just because your tradition says it is so, and just because your language contains a distinction or a nuance, doesn't mean that what you believe is real, or true, or has any actual significance. It could simply be made up, and addition, an embellishment that isn't actually inspired. To positively assert, for example, that words one prefers that appear in some manuscripts but not others, are "actual Scripture" while the texts that don't contain those words are "not complete" is to assert special revelation that you do not, in fact, possess. No matter how passionate you are about your preferred text, if God has not come down and spoken to you face-to-face and told you that a particular manudscript is THE right one, you do not know that it is.

The mechanical translation I was using was translated from the Codex Vaticanus, the oldest (almost) complete text of the Scriptures. There was no picking and chosing in that case. Likewise, the KJV New Testament came from a manuscript, the textus receptus. The mechanical translation I would prefer to use for the Hebrew scriptures is the Leningrad Codex of the Massoretic Text.

It is easy to get lost in the weeds of scholarship, and debate such things that have no resolutions. But rather than debate that I am simply coming all the way over to the other side's position. I will use the KJV, and only the KJV, because then we don't have to have any more of this discussion or argument on this thread, and we can focus on (that version) of what Jesus said about economics.

There will be place where I know that the translation is muddled and imperfect - where things have been added and where they have been left out from what I believe the most authoritative manuscripts say - but that will only affect things at the margins. The main points will all be there.

KJV it is.

To have a break in the narrative, I'll start the repost of the Scripture in the message that follows.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-08-18   16:59:59 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#37. To: A K A Stone, Vicomte13 (#33)

They don't mean the same thing.

Say happy means blessed in greek.

It doesn't in english.

Not a good translation.

Which is why I stick to the best translation. KJV.

From Strongs via blueletterbible.org:

makários, mak-ar'-ee-os; a prolonged form of the poetical ¼άº±Á mákar (meaning the same); supremely blest; by extension, fortunate, well off:—blessed, happy(X -ier).

I bolded 'well off' as important above. Jesus is clearly explaining a spiritual standing as He was to Nicodemus in John chapter 3. Also clearly, as we see in Luke chapter 6 these are attributes for Kingdom living. Those who seek Christ Jesus obey His Voice.

Bottom line? Blessings for the ekkelsia who follow Christ in word and deed.

http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G3107&t=KJV

"When Americans reach out for values of faith, family, and caring for the needy, they're saying, "We want the word of God. We want to face the future with the Bible.'"---Ronald Reagan

redleghunter  posted on  2015-08-18   17:36:38 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#38. To: redleghunter, A K A Stone, GarySpFc, Too Conservative (#36)

Reprise of the texts thus far, through the Sermon on the Plain, using the King James Version.

22 And the holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape like a Doue vpon him, and a voice came from heauen, which said, Thou art my beloued sonne, in thee I am well pleased. (Lk 3:22; also Mt 3:17 and Mk 1:11)

3 And when the tempter came to him, hee said, If thou be the sonne of God, command that these stones bee made bread. 4 But he answered, and said, It is written, Man shall not liue by bread alone, but by euery word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God. (Mt 4:3-4; also Lk 4:3)

6 And the deuil said vnto him, All this power will I giue thee, and the glory of them; for that is deliuered vnto me, & to whomsoeuer I will, I giue it. 7 If thou therefore wilt worship me, all shalbe thine. 8 And Iesus answered and said vnto him, Get thee behinde me, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him onely shalt thou serue. (Mt 4:6-8; also Lk 4:9-10)

13 And the Iewes Passeouer was at hand, & Iesus went vp to Hierusalem 14 And found in the Temple those that sold oxen, and sheepe, and doues, and the changers of money, sitting. 15 And when he had made a scourge of small cordes, he droue them all out of the Temple, and the sheepe & the oxen, and powred out the changers money, and ouerthrew the tables, 16 And said vnto them that sold doues Take these things hence, make not my fathers house an house of merchandize. 17 And his disciples remembred that it was written, The zeale of thine house hath eaten me vp. (Jn 2:13-17)

18 He that beleeueth on him, is not condemned: but hee that beleeueth not, is condemned already, because hee hath not beleeued in the Name of the onely begotten Sonne of God. 19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loued darknesse rather then light, because their deedes were euill. 20 For euery one that doeth euill, hateth the light, neither commeth to the light, lest his deeds should be reproued. 21 But hee that doeth trueth, commeth to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God. (Jn 3:18-21)

17 From that time Iesus began to preach, and to say, Repent, for the kingdome of heauen is at hand. (Mt 4:17; Mk 1:15)

34 Iesus saith vnto them, My meat is, to doe the will of him that sent mee, and to finish his worke. 35 Say not ye, There are yet foure moneths, and then commeth haruest? Behold, I say vnto you, Lift vp your eyes, and looke on the fields: for they are white already to haruest. 36 And hee that reapeth receiueth wages, and gathereth fruite vnto life eternall: that both he that soweth, and he that reapeth, may reioyce together. 37 And herein is that saying true: One soweth, and another reapeth. 38 I sent you to reape that, whereon ye bestowed no labour: other men laboured, and yee are entred into their labours. (Jn 4:34-38)

16 And hee came to Nazareth, where he had bene brought vp, and as his custome was, he went into the Synagogue on the Sabbath day, and stood vp for to reade. 17 And there was deliuered vnto him the booke of the Prophet Esaias, and when he had opened the Booke, he found the place where it was written, 18 The Spirit of the Lord is vpon mee, because hee hath anointed mee, to preach the Gospel to the poore, he hath sent mee to heale the broken hearted, to preach deliuerance to the captiues, and recouering of sight to the blinde, to set at libertie them that are bruised, 19 To preach the acceptable yeere of the Lord. 20 And he closed the booke, and hee gaue it againe to the minister, and sate downe: and the eyes of all them that were in the Synagogue were fastened on him. 21 And hee began to say vnto them, This day is this Scripture fulfilled in your eares. (Lk 4:16-21)

25 Uerily, verily I say vnto you, The houre is comming, & now is, when the dead shall heare the voice of the Sonne of God: and they that heare, shall liue. 26 For as the Father hath life in himselfe: so hath he giuen to the Sonne to haue life in himselfe: 27 And hath giuen him authority to execute iudgement also, because he is the Sonne of man. 28 Marueile not at this: for the houre is comming, in the which all that are in the graues shall heare his voice, 29 And shall come foorth, they that haue done good, vnto the resurrection of life, and they that haue done euill, vnto the resurrection of damnation. 30 I can of mine owne selfe doe nothing: as I heare, I iudge: and my iudgement is iust, because I seeke not mine owne will, but the will of the Father, which hath sent me. (Jn 5:25-30)

39 Search the Scriptures, for in them ye thinke ye haue eternall life, and they are they which testifie of me. 40 And ye will not come to me, that ye might haue life. 41 I receiue not honour from men. 42 But I know you, that ye haue not the loue of God in you. 43 I am come in my Fathers name, and ye receiue me not: if another shall come in his owne Name, him ye will receiue. 44 How can ye beleeue, which receiue honour one of another, & seeke not the honour that commeth from God onely? 45 Doe not thinke that I will accuse you to the Father: there is one that accuseth you, euen Moses, in whom ye trust? 46 For had ye beleeued Moses, ye would haue beleeued me: for he wrote of me. 47 But if ye beleeue not his writings, how shall ye beleeue my words? (Jn 5:39-47)

1 At that time, Iesus went on the Sabbath day thorow the corne, & his Disciples were an hungred, and beganne to pluck the eares of corne, and to eate. 2 But when the Pharises saw it, they said vnto him, Behold, thy Disciples doe that which is not lawfull to doe vpon the Sabbath day. 3 But he said vnto them, Haue yee not read what Dauid did when hee was an hungred, and they that were with him, 4 How he entred into the house of God, and did eate the shew bread, which was not lawfull for him to eate, neither for them which were with him, but, only for the Priests? 5 Or haue yee not read in the law, how that on the Sabbath dayes the Priests in the Temple profane the Sabbath, and are blamelesse? 6 But I saye vnto you, that in this place is one greater then the Temple. 7 But if yee had knowen what this meaneth, I will haue mercy, and not sacrifice, yee would not haue condemned the guiltlesse. 8 For the sonne of man is Lord euen of the Sabbath day. 9 And when hee was departed thence, he went into their Synagogue. 10 And behold, there was a man which had his hand withered, and they asked him, saying, Is it lawfull to heale on the Sabbath dayes? that they might accuse him. 11 And hee said vnto them, What man shal there be among you, that shall haue one sheepe: and if it fall into a pit on the Sabbath day, will hee not lay hold on it, and lift it out? 12 How much then is a man better then a shepe? Wherfore it is lawfull to doe well on the Sabbath dayes. 13 Then saith he to the man, Stretch forth thine hand: and hee stretched it forth, and it was restored whole, like as the other. 14 Then the Pharises went out, and held a counsell against him, how they might destroy him. 15 But when Iesus knew it, hee withdrew himselfe from thence: and great multitudes followed him, and he healed them all (Mt 12:1-15)

THE SERMON ON THE PLAIN (Lk 6:20-49)

20 And hee lifted vp his eyes on his disciples, and said, Blessed be yee poore: for yours is the kingdome of God. 21 Blessed are yee that hunger now: for yee shall be filled. Blessed are yee that weepe now, for yee shall laugh. 22 Blessed are yee when men shall hate you, and when they shall separate you from their company, and shal reproach you, and cast out your name as euill, for the Sonne of mans sake. 23 Reioice yee in that day, and leape for ioy: for behold, your reward is great in heauen for in the like maner did their fathers vnto the Prophets. 24 But woe vnto you that are rich: for yee haue receiued your consolation. 25 Woe vnto you that are full: for yee shall hunger. Woe vnto you that laugh now: for yee shall mourne and weepe. 26 Woe vnto you when all men shall speake well of you: for so did their fathers to the false Prophets. 27 But I say vnto you which heare, Loue your enemies, doe good to them which hate you, 28 Blesse them that curse you, & pray for them which despitefully vse you. 29 And vnto him that smiteth thee on the one cheeke, offer also the other: and him that taketh away thy cloake, forbid not to take thy coat also. 30 Giue to euery man that asketh of thee, and of him that taketh away thy goods, aske them not againe. 31 And as yee would that men should doe to you, doe yee also to them likewise. 32 For if yee loue them which loue you, what thanke haue ye? for sinners also loue those that loue them. 33 And if ye doe good to them which doe good to you, What thanke haue ye? for sinners also doe euen the same. 34 And if ye lend to them of whom ye hope to receiue, What thanke haue ye? for sinners also lend to sinners, to receiue as much againe. 35 But loue yee your enemies, and doe good, and lend, hoping for nothing againe: and your reward shall bee great, and ye shalbe the children of the Highest: for hee is kinde vnto the vnthankfull, and to the euill. 36 Be ye therefore mercifull, as your Father also is mercifull. 37 Iudge not, and ye shall not bee iudged: condemne not, and ye shall not be condemned: forgiue, and ye shall be forgiuen. 38 Giue, and it shall bee giuen vnto you, good measure, preassed downe, and shaken together, and running ouer, shall men giue into your bosome: for with the same measure that ye mete withall, it shall bee measured to you againe. 39 And hee spake a parable vnto them, Can the blinde leade the blinde? Shall they not both fall into the ditch? 40 The disciple is not aboue his master: but euery one that is perfect shalbe as his master. 41 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brothers eye, but perceiuest not the beame that is in thine owne eye? 42 Either how canst thou say to thy brother, Brother, let mee pull out the mote that is in thine eye: when thou thy selfe beholdest not the beame that is in thine owne eye? Thou hypocrite, cast out first the beame out of thine owne eye, and then shalt thou see clearly to pul out the mote that is in thy brothers eye. 43 For a good tree bringeth not foorth corrupt fruit: neither doeth a corrupt tree bring foorth good fruit. 44 For euery tree is knowen by his owne fruit: for of thornes men doe not gather figs, nor of a bramble bush gather they grapes. 45 A good man out of the good treasure of his heart, bringeth foorth that which is good: and an euill man out of the euill treasure of his heart, bringeth foorth that which is euill: For of the abundance of the heart, his mouth speaketh. 46 And why call ye mee Lord, Lord, and doe not the things which I say? 47 Whosoeuer commeth to me, and heareth my sayings, and doeth them, I will shew you to whom he is like. 48 He is like a man which built an house, and digged deepe, and layd the foundation on a rocke. And when the flood arose, the streame beat vehemently vpon that house, and could not shake it: for it was founded vpon a rocke. 49 But he that heareth, and doeth not, is like a man that without a foundation built an house vpon the earth: against which the streame did beate vehemently, and immediatly it fell, and the ruine of that house was great.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-08-18   18:01:00 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#39. To: All (#36)

"It is amusing. It is awful. It is artificial." - King James II, commenting on the newly-constructed St. Paul's cathedral in London. Late 1600s.

So, he didn't like it?

For the KJV excerpts, I used the actual KJV, not the modern re-edit. All of those archaic spellings and forms are jarring, and they are not here and there. Nearly every word is different. We can indeed read it, not without difficulty, not without making adjustments. And that's just for the spelling.

The punctuation is also archaic. The KJV style of writing would get a D on a 7th grade writing assignment for run-on sentences, random capitalization, strange use of punctuation, lack of proper use of quotations, and just general wrongness.

Again, these are matters of form, but they are jarring, and punctuation makes a different. The lack of question marks in some places renders questions into statements and really changes meaning - that is, if the original meaning can be assumed at all.

My point in quoting King James II , three quarters of century after the KJV, is that when you read that, straight, it has meaning. All of those words have clear meaning in English today. And every one of those words means something different, often a counter-sense.

We can look up those words and discover their meaning…maybe. But we should remember that even the first dictionaries weren't printed for a century afterwards.

The translators of 1611 were not using dictionaries and scholarly tomes such as we have today. They did not have concordances and dictionaries with which to look things up. They had faith and tradition, they "knew" what it said, because they all knew what it said in Latin, and they carried with them the overlay of what they already knew it said, and what their theology told them it MEANT, as they "translated" "from Hebrew" and "from Greek". What they did was closer to a comparison of the Latin to the Greek, and to the Hebrew.

Even if one takes the position that a particular translation was divinely inspired and therefore error free, one has to recognize the limitations of any translation. And a four-hundred year old translation made by men in a different culture and a language that is really very different from ours (though readable, with effort) must be approached carefully. The words they chose meant something to them, but those very same words mean different things today, in many cases.

"It is amusing. It is awful. It is artificial."

If that were in the KJV, and I wrote "It is pleasant. It is stunning. It is artistic" somebody would scream that I was changing Scripture. But I would not be. That is what those words MEAN. That is what James said. He used words that today say "It's funny looking. It's terrible. It's fake." In their original form, read today, they seem to be a criticism. We sense that it's probably not a criticism, so we seek other words.

If we're going to use the KJV, and we will, we have to be careful about what the words mean.

Example: in English, grace and charity are literally the same word. They are two forms of the same word. Grace is the Germanic English pronunciation of the Greek word "charis". "Charite" is the French pronunciation of that same word. In Middle English, Old English Germanic and Norman French parallels were frequently used. Charity and grace sound different. And we might have devised creative theologies that distinguish the two, but those are examples of man-made traditions. The truth is that they are one and the same, identical, word - the Greek word "charis" pronounced in two different dialects. Any distinction between "grace" and "charity" that exists in modern theology is made up out of whole cloth.

The same is true of any difference between "sky" and "heaven", as we've already seen.

I don't want to dwell too much on this, but I want to point it out, because we've already seen that happen with the word that is translated as "Happy", or "Blessed" in the KJV.

We've seen the objection that "Happy" is a CHANGE of Scripture, that "Blessed" is the proper word. And we've seen a dense, detailed modern dictionary entry that spells out an exquisite concept, that "marakoi" - the Greek word, means "divinely blessed", far beyond merely "happy".

This is all made up out of earnest latter day tradition-making.

Truth: there is the Greek word happy - which is the one that is in the Bible, and then there is a superlative Greek word that means just about the equivalent of "divinely blessed". That word is "eudaimon" - "good spirit". Aristotle wrote a long discourse about the difference between mere marakoi happiness and the divine spiritual blessing of eudaimonia.

But that stronger Greek word - eudaimonia - divinely blessed - spiritually blessed - never once appears in the Scriptures. It's THE Greek word for that, and neither Jesus, nor Paul, nor any of the others, ever uses it. They used the word that means "happy", and "happy" is, in fact, the meaning of that Greek word they used in an ancient Greek context.

Now, we can further theologize that "happiness" when Jesus refers to it, most certainly "must" mean "spiritually blessed". After all, the word "blessed" appears in the KJV. Yes, it does. Blessed. Beati in Latin. Go look up what that meant in 1600.

I point this out, because what has really happened is that the regular language of 1611, because it archaic and SEEMS lofty, has BECOME lofty words to us. When we see "Thee" and "Thou" we think of those as nobler forms. But again, actually they are the opposite. French still has the "thee" form, it is the second person singular. It is used exclusively to address one's children, one's pets, one's pals, and people towards whom one means to be demeaning. The formal form of address is "vous" - which is also the plural. It is "you" in English.

Children may address their parents as "tu/thee", but someone else's parents are "vous/you".

When we address God as "Thee" and "Thou" and "Thy", we are not addressing God formally, and we are not addressing him with a term of respect. We are in fact addressing him with a term of familiarity, of close friendship…or, if we are not close, with contempt. When a thug is in custody in Paris facing a beating, he addresses the officers who hold is face in his hands as "you". They address him scornfully as "thou". If he addresses them as "thou", he will be beaten.

In fact, Quakers were severely beaten and many were killed in 1600s England because they did not believe in honorifics, and therefore addressed everybody as their Christian brethren, as "thou" and "thee". And for this many were beaten to within inches of their lives, for "Thou" is reserved for children, subordinates, spouses, pals, pets, farm animals…and - curiously - God.

There is a creeping respectability that happens in English. Old words appear nobler. That is why "blessed" appears something higher than "happy", although the Greek word used by Jesus is the word "happy", not the word spiritually blessed.

I return to this because I want to make a point about what I am doing. By moving to the KJV language, what we have in fact done is vastly amplify, in your eyes, all of the arguments I am going to make.

Before, I was using the words in English that actually are what the Greek words MEAN. But this was unacceptable. I was called out for changing the Bible by "demoting" "Blessed" to "merely" "Happy". But it is really time that has ELEVATED our perception of the English use of "blessed" which mean "happy" in 1600, to the equivalent of what the Greeks meant by eudaimonia…which is not actually the word that Jesus used.

Because I am ultimately making a point about what Jesus commanded by going through what he said, we will be wading through a great number of such words. By going to the KJV, what we are doing (unknown to you at this point), is vastly elevating the level of authority of what Jesus had to say. "Happy" - which he actually said, will become "Blessed" - eudaimonia in your eyes. "Charity" will become "Grace" - a loftier thing from God. All of this will tremendously enhance the argument I am going to make - before your eyes - but I feel the need to tell you that this is a false impression. It is because you have taken archaic words that meant important things, but not grandiose things, and followed their elevation in use in English.

Indeed, that elevation of old language is why the KJV is really an awful, awful choice for our use here.

I am pleased with it, for it turns what is merely good into something that is utterly (and literally) God- awful.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-08-18   22:27:18 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#40. To: redleghunter, A K A Stone, GarySpFc, Too Conservative (#38)

So, having settled on the KJV, let's now actually focus on what it says regarding economics. From the excerpts above, we can go straight to the Sermon on the Plain for the meatiest of the statements.

And hee lifted vp his eyes on his disciples, and said, Blessed be yee poore: for yours is the kingdome of God. Blessed are yee that hunger now: for yee shall be filled. Blessed are yee that weepe now, for yee shall laugh.

So, who is blessed by God, economically speaking? The poor, the hungry, the weeping.

But woe vnto you that are rich: for yee haue receiued your consolation. Woe vnto you that are full: for yee shall hunger. Woe vnto you that laugh now: for yee shall mourne and weepe.

But who is cursed by God with curses of woe? The rich, the full, those who laugh now.

God particularly notes that the rich, right now, have the consolation they are going to get: their money. They can expect no more than this. Things will only get worse for them. We know this because later Jesus will tell them "You can serve both God and money."

We've spoken before about anger at a brother, and certainly we can reply through Jesus, because there is an economic component in his response.

But I say vnto you which heare, Loue your enemies, doe good to them which hate you, Blesse them that curse you, & pray for them which despitefully vse you. And vnto him that smiteth thee on the one cheeke, offer also the other: and him that taketh away thy cloake, forbid not to take thy coat also.

Indeed, this is a lead-in to the commandment to give and to lend. Christians should not have money piled up, for all around them are people: family, friends, fellow Christian brothers and sisters, who could be greatly assisted out of their own debts and trials if that money were lent to them.

Giue to euery man that asketh of thee, and of him that taketh away thy goods, aske them not againe. And as yee would that men should doe to you, doe yee also to them likewise. For if yee loue them which loue you, what thanke haue ye? for sinners also loue those that loue them. And if ye doe good to them which doe good to you, What thanke haue ye? for sinners also doe euen the same. And if ye lend to them of whom ye hope to receiue, What thanke haue ye? for sinners also lend to sinners, to receiue as much againe. But loue yee your enemies, and doe good, and lend, hoping for nothing againe: and your reward shall bee great, and ye shalbe the children of the Highest: for hee is kinde vnto the vnthankfull, and to the euill. Be ye therefore mercifull, as your Father also is mercifull. Iudge not, and ye shall not bee iudged: condemne not, and ye shall not be condemned: forgiue, and ye shall be forgiuen. Giue, and it shall bee giuen vnto you, good measure, preassed downe, and shaken together, and running ouer, shall men giue into your bosome: for with the same measure that ye mete withall, it shall bee measured to you againe.

And to those who would apply severe judgment to the poor, and to those who would ask to borrow because of their trials, God replies

And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brothers eye, but perceiuest not the beame that is in thine owne eye? Either how canst thou say to thy brother, Brother, let mee pull out the mote that is in thine eye: when thou thy selfe beholdest not the beame that is in thine owne eye? Thou hypocrite, cast out first the beame out of thine owne eye, and then shalt thou see clearly to pul out the mote that is in thy brothers eye.

Many people don't like any of what Jesus has had to say about the poor, or the rich, or the obligation of the latter to lend to the former, or about not judging the poor and the downtrodden. They want to judge. They feel it is their right to do so. Of course, those who think of themselves as "Christians" have a problem. Their problem is Jesus. He told them to do what they do not want to do, and to stop thinking the way they want to thing, and to stop judging as they want to judge. And for those who resist him on these things, he says:

And why call ye mee Lord, Lord, and doe not the things which I say? Whosoeuer commeth to me, and heareth my sayings, and doeth them, I will shew you to whom he is like. He is like a man which built an house, and digged deepe, and layd the foundation on a rocke. And when the flood arose, the streame beat vehemently vpon that house, and could not shake it: for it was founded vpon a rocke. But he that heareth, and doeth not, is like a man that without a foundation built an house vpon the earth: against which the streame did beate vehemently, and immediatly it fell, and the ruine of that house was great.

Don't build your house on a foundation of earth. Build it on rocke. Repent.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-08-19   13:23:10 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  



      .
      .
      .

Comments (41 - 56) not displayed.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com