love your enemy

[Erebus]

Is there any teaching higher than the teaching of Jesus to love your enemy?

If I love them, they're not my enemy.

 

[outhouse]

The stakes for living this way were just as high then as they are now.

Non sequitur to the quote we are discussing.

You would be dead if we used that quote to live by.

 

[outhouse]

If I love them, they're not my enemy.

Not really true.

Your love or not, does not change the status of those who would kill you. They still will kill you either way, meaning they are still your enemy.

 

[truelight Mike]

Does not have any historicity.



You have faith, which is fine. But lets not confuse faith with knowledge or history.



And you studied this deeper you would find the only reason you are alive today is because we have not turned our backs on our enemies.

You owe your life to those who did not use this text the way you interpret it.




Think what you want but factually only men wrote these words. And we often know exactly why, and they are all human based needs with human origins.

I still think it's from God. History says lots of early Christians died a defenseless death for what you say did not happen.
But it is your choice to believe what you want.
I see something higher in the teachings and life of Jesus than the philosophy of any man on earth.
In the words of Brother Peter, "You have the words of eternal life, where else would I go?"

 

[Erebus]

Not really true.

Your love or not, does not change the status of those who would kill you. They still will kill you either way, meaning they are still your enemy.

Yep, that's fair.

Statement retracted.

 

[outhouse]

History says lots of early Christians died a defenseless death for what you say did not happen.

What did I say did not happen?

Many Christians were persecuted, and I never claimed differently. I scholar I know wrote a good book on this and shows how much of the persecution grew in mythology and was over sensationalized. Reality is however and this is just my opinion. Many of the early Christians were persecuted much harder then we even know about. This would be Pauls time. If Paul was hired to do terrible things to Christians, many more like him were also hired.

If you can get Candida Moss's book you will enjoy it

I see something higher in the teachings and life of Jesus than the philosophy of any man on earth.

These are not the teachings of the Galilean man.

These are the teachings of Hellenist who found value in how the theology grew outside of Israel far away from Jesus life and teachings.

In the words of Brother Peter,

The disciple Peter as far we can tell wrote nothing, the text was attributed to him long after his life was over.

 

[truelight Mike]

HE did not write a single word ever.

Not only that EVERY author of the NT text, never witnessed or heard a single word Jesus ever said. Most wrote decades after his death from another part of the world by a completely different culture writing text for their own needs.

Jesus was an Aramaic Galilean Jew, he taught Judaism he learned from John.

He had no part in any NT theology other then being martyred after his death

Wow! Please tell me of your reputable sources so I can look into it!

 

[outhouse]

Wow! Please tell me of your reputable sources so I can look into it!

NT at Yale under Dale B Martin.

Harvard for Paul

Years of debating with scholars professors and authors, and teaching/lecture these topics at a college in Sacramento.

Development and composition
John Riches states, "Many scholars doubt that the Gospels were written by eye-witnesses as their attributions seem to suggest: there is too much evidence of reworking oral traditions and of straight borrowing from other Gospels to make this likely."[12] For example, the vast majority of material in Mark is also present in either Luke or Matthew or both, suggesting that Mark was a source for Matthew and Luke.

The four canonical gospels "were probably all written by the end of the first century".[13] But they did not yet at that time have a consistent narrative. "In 170 Tatian sought to find a solution by composing a single narrative out of Matthew, Mark, and Luke, with some additional oral material."[12]

The gospel passages themselves can be unclear, and some of the messages within are "straightforwardly ambiguous" and intended to be "metaphorical" or "poetic".[14]

However, scholars generally agree that Gospel of Peter is pseudepigraphical (bearing the name of an author who did not actually compose the text).[2]

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

how suppose to love the assaulter in that situation?

You are supposed to love the murderers while no one seems to love the murderees ...

I'm all for loving one's enemy for things like arguments or whatever ... something logic and reason and compassion can fix. Let's say someone shoplifted ... big deal, teach them differently and find out WHY they did it and deal with it from there. However, if people are getting tortured or killed, sorry ... those folks need to be stopped or there'll be no one left.

I admire Jesus' preachings, but there are times when he is too idealistic, such as when he wants us to give away every single item we possess. Must be nice for him to say so, since he bummed off everyone else...

Sadly not all professed believers take this position. They don't know that there are worse things than losing one's present life.

An example would be losing your life having not tried to fix the problem or save anyone or anything. The survivors all suffer because the martyr did nothing but die.

then the government may commit the unbiblical action and your Jesus has no problem with it? you imply Christianity has nothing to do with the state policies.
Christianity is not suitable as the divine system for the fitted state and has no place on the constitution and formal jurisprudence. Christianity doesn't govern the society in the wide domain such state, it is only prevail for silent individual.

The Romans were the invaders in Jesus' time. He tried to use morality to distract everyone from wanting to rebel against the Romans. I think it was less about morality and more about "don't anger the dragon or you'll get burned". After Jesus, they rebelled and Rome lay waste to the area.

While I understand what you're getting at and I agree the government you are referencing is in the wrong, there IS something to be said for taking the higher ground, at least in front of cameras. PR -- it's a wonderful thing and sometimes the only thing needed to win the war.

Jesus taught his disciples to pray for God's Kingdom to come and for God's will to be done on earth. (Matthew 6:9,10) I believe God's Kingdom government will forcibly remove all present governments. (Daniel 2:44) As Jesus said, "my kingdom is no part of this world." His Kingdom ruled from heaven will finally unite all mankind, IMO.

I agree, but how many have to suffer and die while we wait?

The Bible doesn't teach "that you have to let people walk all over you so every time you defend yourself you are "sinning"."
Early Christians used the Laws and courts to defend their rights. But they never used violence.

It helped a great deal if you were a Roman citizen, like Paul. Stand up for your beliefs? Nope ... whine about how your Roman rights are being threatened and try to avoid jail...

We also know the Hellenistic NT authors were writing to and for a Roman audience, they did NOT want o be identifies as rebellious Jews or trouble makers. SO there was quite the need to paint the movement as a peace loving movement so the Romans would not crush them.

That makes sense. We see that in Oregon now, though FINALLY we started putting a stop to that nonsense.

 

[truelight Mike]

NT at Yale under Dale B Martin.

Harvard for Paul

Years of debating with scholars professors and authors, and teaching/lecture these topics at a college in Sacramento.

Development and composition
John Riches states, "Many scholars doubt that the Gospels were written by eye-witnesses as their attributions seem to suggest: there is too much evidence of reworking oral traditions and of straight borrowing from other Gospels to make this likely."[12] For example, the vast majority of material in Mark is also present in either Luke or Matthew or both, suggesting that Mark was a source for Matthew and Luke.

The four canonical gospels "were probably all written by the end of the first century".[13] But they did not yet at that time have a consistent narrative. "In 170 Tatian sought to find a solution by composing a single narrative out of Matthew, Mark, and Luke, with some additional oral material."[12]

The gospel passages themselves can be unclear, and some of the messages within are "straightforwardly ambiguous" and intended to be "metaphorical" or "poetic".[14]

However, scholars generally agree that Gospel of Peter is pseudepigraphical (bearing the name of an author who did not actually compose the text).[2]

I'm ok with the authors not being eye-witnesses. I have no idea how the story of Jesus went from oral to written. Who knows how many people were involved.
I'm not one to say that the Bible is without flaw even. But the records of what Jesus said are similar enough that you can get the idea of what he was saying. And you can compare with other early 1st and 2nd century writings like the Didache and the Shepard of Hermas that repeat the same things we have in our Bibles today.

I am not necessarily concerned with the quarrel about proving whether or not a man historically existed or not 2000 years ago. If He did not, He sure did cause a stir for not existing.

What grabs me is the teachings.
When I hear "love your enemies" something inside me says that is right and that is truth something inside me says that is the way that God wants me to live.
If my friend Bob would have said Mike you should love your enemy I would have thought wow Bob, that sounds like a holy way to live. that sounds like the right way to live my life.

It's truth no matter who said it. It's just truth.
I feel the same way with Jesus' other teachings. (Look at Matthew 5,6&7) And I see truth in the way that Jesus lived and died.

FYI - the Gospel of Peter is not in the Bible

 

[outhouse]

But the records of what Jesus said are similar enough that you can get the idea of what he was saying

Dude I wish they were. But reality is, what amounts to his enemies wrote about him.

The reason I study this is to get as close to the real words as possible. I have a passion for the truth here.

I am not necessarily concerned with the quarrel about proving whether or not a man historically existed or not 2000 years ago

I promote that he did exist.

When I hear "love your enemies" something inside me says that is right and that is truth something inside me says that is the way that God wants me to live.

And that's fine. But context is key to these authors teachings. It was not meant to be used out of context. It is a very small part of teachings meant not to viewed as large piece of the pie.

I feel the same way with Jesus' other teachings. (Look at Matthew 5,6&7) And I see truth in the way that Jesus lived and died.

I think these are close to what may have happened. I do think he was a teacher for the poor and oppressed village peasants.


But these were not the violent actions he committed in the temple.

 

[use_your_brain]

Jesus taught his disciples to pray for God's Kingdom to come and for God's will to be done on earth. (Matthew 6:9,10) I believe God's Kingdom government will forcibly remove all present governments. (Daniel 2:44) As Jesus said, "my kingdom is no part of this world." His Kingdom ruled from heaven will finally unite all mankind, IMO.

you merely rely on the prayers in overcoming the government problems? has prayer ever worked to begin with?

 

[rusra02]

The question is why He needs to forcibly remove those governments, if His will is done on earth. Did He will them, and now no more?

Ciao

- viole

The chaos we see today, much the result of human governments, is not God's will. It reflects the misrule of God's chief opposer Satan, I believe. (1 John 5:19)

 

[rusra02]

you merely rely on the prayers in overcoming the government problems? has prayer ever worked to begin with?

It is not prayers, but God's Kingdom government that will end all human governments; that is what the Bible promises, IMO. (Revelation 11:18)

 

[Forgemaster]

The Bible doesn't teach "that you have to let people walk all over you so every time you defend yourself you are "sinning"."
Early Christians used the Laws and courts to defend their rights. But they never used violence.

I believe the term used was "turn the other cheek"

 

[Fool]

I believe the term used was "turn the other cheek"

the kingdom of love is at hand. most ignore that.


the kingdom has always existed but some men refuse to accept it and enact it.

 

[viole]

The chaos we see today, much the result of human governments, is not God's will. It reflects the misrule of God's chief opposer Satan, I believe. (1 John 5:19)

Are you telling us that Satan's will is more successful than God's will?

Ciao

- viole

 

[outhouse]

that is what the Bible promises

And cannot do what it stated.

 

[use_your_brain]

It is not prayers, but God's Kingdom government that will end all human governments; that is what the Bible promises, IMO. (Revelation 11:18)

will? It sounds the Christians rely on the prophecy instead of the realistic solving problem. In the other word, Christianity has no idea how to deal with the recent human problems.

 

[JustWondering]

Are we supposed to love our enemy before or after we take them down?

My opinion would be after.