=Something Bad Jesus Did=

[AK4]

IF_u_knew
since G.d gave us free will

Hog wash, read the scriptures and believe them!!! You dissapointment with this statement!!!

But thats for another thread

 

[AK4]

When I read Mathew you paraphrased and your version sounds much worse than what mathew actually wrote.

Please inform me of what i paraphrased. Im not willing to look it up right now. (if i am wrong). What is wrote is wrote so if i am wrong i am very willing to say i am. But am sure i am not!!!!

(i am real lazy right now to look it up myself)

 

[IF_u_knew]

Once again as someone already addressed you before in this thread you dont answer the question presented before you! Its no different than your mentor.

I will not answer for my "mentor" , but *I* personally was not answering a question you gave. I was simply giving my intent for pointing out what has become quite the obvious to me.

Truth is harsh.

Obviously since so many would rather throw out logic to embrace the following:

And your belief in free will show more of your ignorance.

It is not a belief.. it is a *fact* and not widely acknowledged because to accept that we have free will means that we are responsible for the state of the world; and G.d forbid we actually take responsibility for ourselves (in other words you are saying that G.d is the guilty party). Read Isaiah.. the creation process is not over; even Jesus acknowledged this (Matthew 5: 17-18).

You want to talk about Jesus start another thread. We are talking bout in this thread something else.

What planet did I end up on? The topic is "Something bad Jesus did".. you and others just do not like that I am able to actually see the logic when it comes to the Scriptures because it means that the state of your life is more in your hands than you would like to admit. Free will being hogwash? Seriously?

 

[waacman]

...Back to the OP...

I've been reading a book called Jesus through Middle Eastern Eyes by Kenneth E. Bailey. I think it sheds some much needed light on the situation with the Syro-Phoenician woman as far as culture goes. Bailey proposes that it indeed was a test for the woman, but also he adds that the disciples were being taught an important lesson. In short, Jesus does embarrass/humiliate this women, but in the end praises her for her great faith. Within this context of verses also lies an important lesson for his disciples; being that their very prejudices are laid out in front of them by Jesus to their own shame. Given Jesus's record of compassion/sympathy for all who suffer, the woman recognizes him as both "Lord" and the "Son of David" a Messianic title. Jesus then tests her, in which she passes and her daughter is healed that hour. I think that Jesus cared very much for this woman, for her daughter, and for his disciples. It probably shaped the way the disciples thought about women and gentiles. Jesus wasn't really saying that his ministry was just to the Jews. His very actions "speak" otherwise. This entire scene was not bad at all, but rather a very important lesson of what Jesus came to do. To save all of us.

 

[Ben Masada]

Hi Katie, it's interesting that you have mentioned above, now that I have just finished reading a biography of Albert Einstein.
When someone asked him if he believed in God, his answer was that all his life was trying to catch God at His work of Creation.
It does mean that the process of Creation is indeed not over, as Einstein the greatest of all Scientists in the History of the world attested to that.

Ben:

 

[Heneni]

Hi Katie, it's interesting that you have mentioned the above, now that I have just finished reading a biography of Albert Einstein.
When someone asked him if he believed in God, his answer was that all his life was trying to catch God at His work of Creation.
It does mean that the process of Creation is indeed not over, as Einstein the greatest of all Scientists in the History of the world attested to that.

Ben:

Interesting...thought perhaps he meant he was trying to find evidence of god in the creation, not trying to find god in the act of creating.

 

[blackout]

He withered a fig tree.

Should we all just go around "withering" everyone and everything
that doesn't produce fruit for us?

How rude!

Bad Jesus.

 

[blackout]

He said more stuff would be given to those who already have lots of stuff.

Why does Jesus give you two iPods and I don't get any?!

Is that fair Jesus?! lulz

 

[Ben Masada]

...Back to the OP...

Bailey proposes that it indeed was a test for the woman, but also he adds that the disciples were being taught an important lesson.

Ben: What this Bailey proposes is nothing new. It's in the heart of every Christian, even of those who have not read his book. A test! Why was the test bound by the reaction of the disciples? If they had not complained, that woman would have had some more miles to walk in her torment.

In short, Jesus does embarrass/humiliate this women, but in the end praises her for her great faith. Within this context of verses also lies an important lesson for his disciples; being that their very prejudices are laid out in front of them by Jesus to their own shame.

Ben: If that was not embarrassment or humiliation, Jesus had a weird way to uplift someone who needed his help. That praising of her faith, I see as the soothing over the wound he had opened. And for the lesson to his disciples, did he follow up on the whys and becauses? I didn't find it. "Their prejudices! Now, you lost me. Did the disciples and Jews in general have any prejudice about Gentiles being considered as dogs? I have never found a Jew in the whole of my life to consider Gentiles as dogs. Don't you think the Gospel writer was reflecting a Gentile attitude towards the Jews?

Whom was Jesus speaking to when he warned them not to throw what is holy to the dogs or their pearls before swine in Matthew 7:6? If you say that they were the disciples, so the attitude was a Gentile one towards the Jews. I you believe as I do, that it was to the crowds of Jews who were listening to him, so the attitude was his.You take your pick.

Given Jesus's record of compassion/sympathy for all who suffer, the woman recognizes him as both "Lord" and the "Son of David" a Messianic title.

Ben: The expression "son of David" is not a Messianic title in this context because it's very common to be used in Hebrew by anyone who is in a position to receive an extraordinary favor from another. The request is usually preceeded in Hebrew by "ben-David" in opposite to "ben-adam."

Jesus wasn't really saying that his ministry was just to the Jews. His very actions "speak" otherwise. This entire scene was not bad at all, but rather a very important lesson of what Jesus came to do. To save all of us.

Ben: If Jesus did not mean that his ministry was just to the Jews, you are digging another contradiction in the NT, because it's very clear in Matthew 15:24 that it was
ONLY to the House of Israel. I understand your attempt to re-write the text. After all, that's the NT credibility in question. "To save all of us!" Yes, Jesus himself said to the Samatitan woman that salvation was of the Jews in John 4:22, but not on an individual basis. Rather in the collective context of the People of Israel.

Ben: :rainbow1:

 

[Ben Masada]

Interesting...thought perhaps he meant he was trying to find evidence of god in the creation, not trying to find god in the act of creating.

I believe he was trying to find the Author of the evidences he already had in the things created. Isn't it what life is all about, to try to understand the essence of God?

Ben

 

[IF_u_knew]

Hi Katie, it's interesting that you have mentioned above, now that I have just finished reading a biography of Albert Einstein.
When someone asked him if he believed in God, his answer was that all his life was trying to catch God at His work of Creation.
It does mean that the process of Creation is indeed not over, as Einstein the greatest of all Scientists in the History of the world attested to that.

Ben:

I do not know how you perceive Einstein. I know that some view him as having knowledge but lacking Wisdom, I however can not perceive this of him; and it was due to his disposition (his character). Most men with minds like Einstein would undoubtedly go insane and yet he approached Life with such a peculiar curiosity uncommon amongst scientist (which speaks to me that he had understanding behind the knowledge).

I hold him in high regards because when I found myself in the midst of the questions that I was afraid to ask and the answers that I was receiving that were so unexpected, it was his "spirit" that I would draw on for strength to keep going. "The important thing is not to stop questioning. Curiosity has its own reason for existing," is among one of the many wise sayings that has been bound into my heart. (sorry for the sidetrack; but you mention Einstein and I get excited )

 

[AK4]

It is not a belief.. it is a *fact* and not widely acknowledged because to accept that we have free will means that we are responsible for the state of the world; and G.d forbid we actually take responsibility for ourselves (in other words you are saying that G.d is the guilty party). Read Isaiah.. the creation process is not over; even Jesus acknowledged this (Matthew 5: 17-18).


What planet did I end up on? The topic is "Something bad Jesus did".. you and others just do not like that I am able to actually see the logic when it comes to the Scriptures because it means that the state of your life is more in your hands than you would like to admit. Free will being hogwash? Seriously?

We are held accountable, but God takes responsiblity of His creation. No God is not guilty of ANY wrong doing. Was Job wrong when He knew God was responsible for what was happening to Him? Did he accused God of wrong doing? NO. God is responsible, we are accountable. All is of God. Why cant people just believe His Word?!! God creates evil. It says so plainly in His Word. Do people believe it? NO!

Yes its a creating process. You dont have to go all the to Isaiah to find this. It right there in Genesis 1 or 2. Find a correct translation (the concordant)and you will see that God is CREATING not created man into His image.

Any way this is not a free will thread so i wont show you scriptures that destroy this doctrine that you believe in.

 

[ayani]

Ben ~

actually, the Apostles *did* preach that He is the Messiah.

though not recorded in the Bible, the Apostle Thomas went on a mission trip to India in 53 A.D. remarkably, the first people He encountered there were Jews living in Cochin, and the first thing He let them know what that Messiah had come, from Nazareth, in Judah. so Jesus was preached to be the Messiah, and reading Acts, it is clear that Peter / Cephas was firm in showing this to his brethren.

and remember, the Gentiles are brought into God's kingdom through the fulfillment of Jewish prophecy. were it not for Jesus' being the Jewish Messiah, well, the Gentiles would still be in darkness. so the Gentiles, whether they know it or not, do have to go to the Jewish people in order to know God, and His Messiah. someone seeking information of Jesus may not go to a rabbi to study Hebrew, but they will have to acknowledge the God of Israel, of Abraham, Issac, and Jacob in order to recognize Jesus for who He is- the Son of this Almighty God.

i agree that a servant is still a human being. yet the simile used by Jesus essentially compared the Canaanite people to pet dogs in the house. pet dogs are not children, any more than resident Canaanite or Philistine peoples residing in the Promised Land are Hebrews. in other words, these peoples were not children of God in the unique, chosen way that the Israelites were, and are. they were His people, yet they did not know Him, or turn to Him.

Jesus does look upon this woman with mercy, and grant her request. what gave her this mercy, was her faith. and her insistence that even aliens and historic enemies living in the Holy Land should have something of God's promise and healing for His people. Jesus agrees with her, and heals her daughter totally. this woman would have known where she stood in relation to the People of Israel, and where she stood in their own understanding of her ancestors. as she is speaking to the Jewish Messiah, He tells her that it is not right to give Israel's promise to aliens in the land, as that would be as throwing the children's food first to the dogs. yet she insists that even dogs in the house get some food, even leftovers. He agrees, sees her faith, and gives her, not leftovers, but the full healing of her daughter.

we don't know who this woman is, or what her stance had been towards Israel, and its God. what we do know is that her daughter was healed, fully, by the Messiah who came first for His own people, and also as a light to the Gentiles.

 

[AK4]

oh to join in on the Einstein thing real quick check these quotes out from him

an article, the caption was ‘Causation.’

Causation - “Every Cause has a Effect; every Effect has its Cause; everything happens according to law; Chance is but a name for law not recognized; there are many planes of causation, but nothing escapes the law.” This is a scientific writing.
“The Principle of Cause and Effect-embodies the truth that law pervades the universe; that nothing happens by Chance.”
All true and a lot of scientist have come to that conclusion. Not the least of which was Albert Einstein.
“Chance is merely a term, indicating that a cause existed, but not recognized or perceived. That phenomenon is continuous and without break or exception.”

and

“That is hardly a new thought (the German philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer said), as Einstein paraphrased it, that a human can very well DO what he wants, but cannot WILL what he wants.”

and just to add to my last post---

Mark Hallett, (researcher with the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Strokes) said, “If Free will does exist, it’s a perception, not a power or a driving force. People experience free will. They have the sense they are free.”
It’s a feeling, nothing but a feeling.
“The more you scrutinize it, the more you realize you don’t have it.”
In other words, he said we feel like we have it, we feel like we have this thing called free will. I mean you get up in the morning, you say I’ll have coffee and reach over an have that to eat. This is all free, see. Why is it free? Because we PERCEIVE it to be free. When you look at it carefully though, what does this scientist say, the more you look at it and scrutinize it, you realize you don’t have it. It doesn’t exist, it’s a figment of your imagination, it’s an allusion, it’s an idol of the heart. It’s something you wish you had and you want to have and whether you do or you don’t, you’re going to say you do. That’s what it is, it’s an allusion at best.

 

[IF_u_knew]

“That is hardly a new thought (the German philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer said), as Einstein paraphrased it, that a human can very well DO what he wants, but cannot WILL what he wants.”

I agree with this... and I do not see how it interferes with free will. It is only to say that we can not control our circumstances, but we can control how we respond to those circumstances... remember, we are individuals but we are also a collective. Since the first action, it has always been a matter of reaction. That does not negate our free will and it is in this realization.. that we are collective... that we come to see the truly profound effect of our reactions and how they may impact the circumstance of the whole. What Einstein is in essence saying is that we deal in reality, not the mystical.

We are held accountable, but God takes responsiblity of His creation. No God is not guilty of ANY wrong doing. Was Job wrong when He knew God was responsible for what was happening to Him? Did he accused God of wrong doing? NO. God is responsible, we are accountable. All is of God. Why cant people just believe His Word?!! God creates evil. It says so plainly in His Word. Do people believe it? NO!

Job had a very profound experience. It was this: that in actuality, we are more in control than we realized. It is evidenced in the following verses:
Job 13:
15 Though he slay me, yet will I trust in him: but I will maintain mine own ways before him.
16 He also shall be my salvation: for an hypocrite shall not come before him.

21 Withdraw thine hand far from me: and let not thy dread make me afraid.
Job 16:
2 I have heard many such things: miserable comforters are ye all.
3 Shall vain words have an end? or what emboldeneth thee that thou answerest?
4 I also could speak as ye do: if your soul were in my soul's stead, I could heap up words against you, and shake mine head at you.
5 But I would strengthen you with my mouth, and the moving of my lips should asswage your grief.
6 Though I speak, my grief is not asswaged: and though I forbear, what am I eased?
7 But now he hath made me weary: thou hast made desolate all my company.

He is addressing his friends who are scolding, comforting, and trying to counsel him away from being honest before G.d and with himself. Job is in the midst of the void of
uncertainty that he threw himself out into and learning to see the right hand of G.d rather than blindly trusting what he was always taught. That is what the book of Job is about.
Oh.. and yes, G.d is ultimately in control of the circumstances.. however, He also makes it clear that He will give us what it is we are seeking. So, this is not negating free will,
but actually is a show of what our purpose is. It is the brilliant guidance of G.d. It is up us to take advantage of it and seek Him and His ways in all honesty, for if we seek otherwise,
that is what we will get.. and considering we are still babes, most of us, it is best to trust the process rather than looking for excuses to escape responsibility. (my 2 cents, of course)

If you are concerned about the thread being off topic, then hold your peace.

 

[Don Penguinoini]

Did jesus exist?

 

[ayani]

Did jesus exist?

historically, yes.

we can ascertain that a Jewish teacher named Yashua / Jesus, who worked great signs and claimed to be the Messiah, lived and taught in Judah some 2,000 years ago, and that He was crucified by Roman authorities.

that much is verifiable not only through the Bible, but through non-Christian historical records of the same time period, both Jewish and Roman.

 

[IF_u_knew]

that much is verifiable not only through the Bible, but through non-Christian historical records of the same time period, both Jewish and Roman.

I was wondering, could you share this with me? The reason I ask is that the only evidence I have seen is the writings of Josephus.. whose existence is as much in question as well, from the research I have done. Of course, I could be wrong; which is why I ask. I do see a Jeshua mentioned in the Tanakh, but he was from the line of the Levites. Other than that, all I have been able to go on is the NT... and that version of Jesus only fits one person from that time period, though, he was an Egyptian and not actually named Jesus.

 

[waacman]

Ben: What this Bailey proposes is nothing new. It's in the heart of every Christian, even of those who have not read his book. A test! Why was the test bound by the reaction of the disciples? If they had not complained, that woman would have had some more miles to walk in her torment.[endQuote]

I don't really understand what your asking when you ask "Why was the test bound by the reaction of the disciples?" Jesus ministry was focused on training these men (the disciples) to continue what he had been teaching and preaching during the time he was with them. I don't agree that the disciples relieved that woman of her situation by pointing her out to Jesus in exasperation. I think they were really trying to get rid of her, hence their demand in Luke 15:23. I don't know if that is a worthy answer to your question or not. Please let me know : )

Ben: If that was not embarrassment or humiliation, Jesus had a weird way to uplift someone who needed his help. That praising of her faith, I see as the soothing over the wound he had opened. And for the lesson to his disciples, did he follow up on the whys and becauses? I didn't find it. "Their prejudices! Now, you lost me. Did the disciples and Jews in general have any prejudice about Gentiles being considered as dogs? I have never found a Jew in the whole of my life to consider Gentiles as dogs. Don't you think the Gospel writer was reflecting a Gentile attitude towards the Jews?[endQuote]

As far as your question goes did Jesus ever follow up the whys and becauses? I don't think he needed to. During that time period in the Middle East women were not held in high esteem. Self-respecting men did not talk to women in public let alone foriegn women. Bailey is saying in his commentary that Jesus had crossed a huge culteral barrier by breaking his silence to even talk to the woman. He had done this on other occasions as well (i.e. the woman at the well, the woman caught in adultery ready to be stoned). Bailey sets up the situation in which Jesus speaks to this woman, shows where his diciples prejudices lead to, than almost sets the woman up on a pedistal(sp?) as a pillar of great faith. Bailey puts the whole situation like this:

"Jesus is irritated by the diciples attitude regarding women and Gentiles. The woman's love for her daughter and her confidence in him impress Jesus. He decides to use the occasion to help her and challenge the deeply rooted prejudices in the hearts of his disciples. In the process he gives the woman a chance to expose the depth of her courage and faith." pg 222 Jesus through Middle Eastern Eyes.

I think I'm still missing details, but if you don't understand what Bailey is trying to say let me know, I'll try to further explain it, if i can.

Ben: The expression "son of David" is not a Messianic title in this context because it's very common to be used in Hebrew by anyone who is in a position to receive an extraordinary favor from another. The request is usually preceeded in Hebrew by "ben-David" in opposite to "ben-adam."[endQuote]

She was a Syro-Phoenician. I don't think she would have been talking in Hebrew though. Possibly Aramaic or Greek?

Ben: If Jesus did not mean that his ministry was just to the Jews, you are digging another contradiction in the NT, because it's very clear in Matthew 15:24 that it was
ONLY to the House of Israel. I understand your attempt to re-write the text. After all, that's the NT credibility in question. "To save all of us!" Yes, Jesus himself said to the Samatitan woman that salvation was of the Jews in John 4:22, but not on an individual basis. Rather in the collective context of the People of Israel.[endQuote]

If Jesus ministry was only to the House of Israel, why did he heal Gentiles as well? Perhaps Jesus didn't really mean that in Matt 15:24, was he playing to once again to the prejudices of his disciples? In esssence he was setting the disiples up the whole time. The guys (the disciples) still believed that Jesus WAS ONLY for the Jews. Jesus here in manner says "NOPE" and goes to show them otherwise by not only healing the woman's daughter, but relieves the woman's pain of watching her go through her daughter's agony.

When Jesus said "salvation was of the Jews" I understand that to mean that Jesus(being salvation) was "out of" or "from" the Jews. Could you clarify further how you understand it? : )

 

[ayani]

I was wondering, could you share this with me? The reason I ask is that the only evidence I have seen is the writings of Josephus.. whose existence is as much in question as well, from the research I have done. Of course, I could be wrong; which is why I ask. I do see a Jeshua mentioned in the Tanakh, but he was from the line of the Levites. Other than that, all I have been able to go on is the NT... and that version of Jesus only fits one person from that time period, though, he was an Egyptian and not actually named Jesus.

there is Josephus, and you're right in saying that parts of His testimony are disputable. that he wrote about Jesus is undisputed, but a couple of things he included in this paragraph of his raised some eyebrows.

for one, Josephus writes that Jesus is the Messiah. now, as non-Messianic Jew, he probably wouldn't be writing this. he also writes that Jesus appeared on the third day, restored to life. again, we'd expect this to be written by a faithful Christian, not by a non-Christian Jew. so you have Jesus' Messiah-ship and resurrection as likely pencil-ins, yet what is clearly in Josephus' style and to be expected of him in that paragraph is the report of Jesus' works and crucifixion, and the recognition of Him as a "wise man", a teacher.

another non-Biblical account of Christ comes from the Roman historian Tacitus, who writes in 115 A.D. that a group known as Christians follow a man named "Christus" who suffered the severest penalty of Roman law (crucifixion) and whose following was greatly influential.

other Roman sources from the early Christian era report that Christians followed a man, Christus, who was crucified under Pilate, and that these Christians hold firm to their faith even under torture and persecution, and that the movement was popular with slaves, and with diverse peoples in Roman society. also noted was the Christian tendency towards honesty, kindness, and a preference for martyrdom instead of apostacy.