"You must do nothing to come to Jesus" vs "This is what you must do now"

[LLC]

but I see little evidence that Jesus’ opponents recognized that they “knew” what they did was wrong, or recognized that throttling him was evil (it appears they shared Paul’s sense that they were “blameless”).

Bob, I believe you underestimate the reality of the situation. Yes, they knew exactly what they were doing. They had become an oppressive religious state, loving power and wealth more than God. I’d say they loved their enemies a bit too much.

And it seems clear to me that Jesus did offer friendship to those who were evil.

Jesus said this: You brood of vipers! Many will say in that day Lord, Lord have we not prophesied in your name…And I will declare to them "I never knew you, depart from Me you who practice lawlessness.
Just a question:
Do you think that those who kept slaves in the South didn’t know what they were doing?

[Bob_Wilson]

Jesus opponents knew exactly what they were doing. They had become an oppressive religious state, loving power and wealth more than God.

Just a question:
Do you think that those who kept slaves in the South didn’t know what they were doing?

LLC, we do seem to differ on the capacity of evil to sear the human conscience. Just as Paul thought he was “blameless” in his ‘zeal for God’ in killing Christians, I see no evidence that those who sought Jesus’ death thought their enterprise was any less righteous. Indeed, your assumption that they “knew exactly” that “they had become an oppressive religious state” appears to deny the reality that evil enables them to believe that they were the oppressed chosen people who needed to stamp out blatant law breakers like Jesus, and so show their love for God in order to gain His favor and deliverance.

And yes, I likewise see many who supported slavery as not sharing your view of what they were doing at all, but deeply convinced it was a righteous institution. All one needs to do is to see which side quoted the most Scripture as endorsing its’ practice and how they repeatedly cite what a favor slavery provides to needy African primitives. What makes you so sure that people can’t often rationalize what they do, or be as Jesus said, “those who know not what they do”?

[Holy-Fool-P-Zombie]

Well, I’m reading through the Patheos Catholic and Evangelical newsletters today. This one struck me, since it’s from the Evangelical newsletter. Let me quote a couple, of interesting paragraphs from it:

A Scriptural Argument For Infant Baptism

When approaching any study of a section of scripture, regardless of the amount of the text, it’s a good idea to gather the context of the letter or book. Who wrote it? Why did they write? Who was it to? Basic questions, like these, serve us in understanding what is being said. Without context, we can get quickly get led astray and draw wild conclusions.

One of my favorite examples of how easily the point can be missed when the context is lost comes from a friend of mine who observed a Daily Inspirational Verse Calendar at a relative’s house (pictured). We have all seen these; each day there is new verse for you to read and meditate on. In this case the verse reads “ If thou therefore wilt worship me, all shall be thine ,” from Luke 4:7.

This verse, by itself and with no context, sounds quite powerful and awe inspiring indeed. Yet, if we take a moment to explore the context, we learn that it is actually Satan speak here as he is tempting Jesus in the wilderness! That GREATLY changes how you might interpret and apply this verse. Context is critical.

[maintenanceman]

When approaching any study of a section of scripture, regardless of the amount of the text, it’s a good idea to gather the context of the letter or book. Who wrote it? Why did they write? Who was it to? Basic questions, like these, serve us in understanding what is being said. Without context, we can get quickly get led astray and draw wild conclusions

Who, what, where, why, when…

[LLC]

I see no evidence that those who sought Jesus’ death thought their enterprise was any less righteous

Luke 16:14 "The Pharisees who were lovers of money, heard all these things and ridiculed Him.
Jer. 6:13 "For the least of them even to the greatest of them, everyone is given to covetousness.

The Ten Commandments and the Golden Rule are pretty clear. The book of Proverbs seems pretty plain and straight forward.

who needed to stamp out blatant law breakers like Jesus, and so show their love for God in order to gain His favor and deliverance.

They were seeking favors from their wealthy, powerful friends. They didn’t care about God. That’s why their priesthood was taken away.
John 12:43 For they loved the approval of men, more than the approval of God."

And yes , I likewise see many who supported slavery as not sharing your view of what they were doing at all, but deeply convinced it was a righteous institution

I suppose this would be a case of the blind leading the blind. In any event, America was founded on the belief that all men are created equal and are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights; among them are life, LIBERTY and the pursuit of happiness.

It seems you want to make excuses for man’s behavior, as if God gave us no brains.

[Bob_Wilson]

I see no evidence those who sought Jesus’ death thought their enterprise was not righteous

Luke 16:14 "The Pharisees who were lovers of money, heard all these things and ridiculed Him.
Jer. 6:13 "For the least of them even to the greatest of them, everyone is given to covetousness.

The Ten Commandments and the Golden Rule are pretty clear.

It seems you want to make excuses for man’s behavior, as if God gave us no brains.

LLC, I perceive that I present an interpretation of texts and you often just again repeat your own contrary belief without engaging my evidence. Here you do offer supposed counter texts, but they do not address my claim at all or begin to show that the Pharisees were not blind or self-righteous, or knew that seeking Jesus’ death was evil.

It’s as if you are seeking to prove that the Pharisees were evil, loved money and were covetous. But no one disputes that!! Our debate is over whether evil goes even deeper than that.

The OT’s supposed ‘golden rule’ was not clear because Leviticus defines it in context as applying to their own kind. And the ten commandments law against killing did not clearly rule out killing someone perceived as a blasphemer. For the Law required killing many Jews for far less.

What we are debating is whether the apostles are correct that evil can make people “blind, deceived, and dead in trespasses in sin.” And whether Jesus held that those who killed him are those “who know not what they do.” As I said, my own observation of human ability to rationalize evil makes me doubt that Jesus and the apostles are nuts here.

I think you exalt sinful human ‘brains’ too much.

[Paidion]

It is very important to distinguish between the verb “love” and “have love feelings toward.”
Love is not an emotion; it is helpful action.

To have love feelings toward an enemy does no good whatever. But to pray for them, or help them if they are in need can do a great deal of good, one of which may lead them to cease hating you—to cease being your enemy.

[Paidion]

The Golden Rule in Eight Religions

Christianity So whatever you wish that others would do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets. (Matthew 7:12)

Confucianism Do not do to others what you would not like yourself. Then there will be no resentment against you, either in the family or in the state. (Analects 12:2)

Buddhism Hurt not others in ways that you yourself would find hurtful. (Udana-Varga 5,1)

Hinduism This is the sum of duty; do nothing to others what you would not have them do to you. (Mahabharata 5,1517)

Islam No one of you is a believer until he desires for his brother that which he desires for himself. (Sunnah)

Judaism What is hateful to you, do not do to your fellowman. This is the entire Law; all the rest is commentary. (Talmud, Shabbat 3id)

Taoism Regard your neighbor’s gain as your gain, and your neighbor’s loss as your own loss.(Tai Shang Kan Yin P’ien)

Zoroastrianism That nature alone is good which refrains from doing another whatever is not good for itself. (Dadisten-I-dinik, 94,5)

[LLC]

The OT’s supposed ‘golden rule’ was not clear because Leviticus defines it in context as applying to their own kind.

Bob, As Moses says, love the STRANGER.
Love your neighbor-one who lives close or borders directly on; a fellow human being.
Do not murder means don’t murder

What we are debating is whether the apostles are correct that evil can make people “blind, deceived, and dead in trespasses in sin.” And whether Jesus held that those who killed him are those “who know not what they do.”

I’m not understanding your point. Do not covet is one of the Ten Commandments. The Pharisees were obviously not obeying this Law. As I said before, It’s not that people don’t know the words of God, it’s that they don’t obey.

As Paidion points out here:

To have love feelings toward an enemy does no good whatever.

From what I understand, love is a strong affection or deep devotion to someone. No Jesus was not telling you to love your enemy. His teaching was not new.
As it says in the Old Testament, do not bear a grudge or seek vengeance.
Proverbs 25:21 " If your enemy is hungry give him food to eat and if he is thirsty give him water to drink."

[Bob_Wilson]

The OT’s golden rule defines it in context as applying to their own kind.

(1) No, Love your neighbor=one who lives close; a fellow human being.
(2) And, Do not murder means don’t murder

We’re debating if Jesus said those who killed him are those “who know not what they do.”

(3) No, Do not covet is one of the Ten Commands. The Pharisees were not obeying this.
(4) And, Jesus was not telling you to love your enemy.

LLC, on each of your points, we differ on exegesis (and how Jews read their texts)

On reference 1, Leviticus 19:17,18 make clear that “neighbor” does NOT mean a close by or ‘fellow human being;’ it specifies an “Israelite among you.”

On 2, Jews did not interpret killing blasphemers as “murder.” The Law demanded it, and they can perceive killing a false prophet as righteous (much less that they knew killing Jesus was evil)

On 3, again, no one doubts Pharisees coveted. But that’s irrelevant to proving that they recognized killing Jesus as coveting. As Paul puts it, they were able to construe such killing as “zeal for God.”

On 4’s Jesus “not saying to love your enemies,” He says in Mt 5:43, “I tell you, love your enemies (and do good to them) so that you may be children of your Father.” If we can’t agree that “love your enemies” was trying to convey “love… your… enemies,” our way of reading such texts sharply differs.

[LLC]

On reference 1 , Leviticus 19:17,18 make clear that “neighbor” does NOT mean a close by or ‘fellow human being;’ it specifies an “Israelite among you.”

Bob, Moses makes clear in Deut. 10:19 " Therefore love the stranger, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt."
stranger-foreigner, outsider, alien
As Paidion pointed out this law was in a lot of other religions as well.
The fact that they weren’t doing this was to their own fault.

On 2 , Jews did not interpret killing blasphemers as “murder.” The Law demanded it, and they can perceive killing a false prophet as righteous (much less that they knew killing Jesus was evil)

As I said before, the Lev. law was false from the beginning. Moses recognized this and that’s why they weren’t a part of Israel and they weren’t the rulers. Yes, they knew what they were doing. As Jesus said they were a brood of vipers, cunning snakes. Cunning-skilled in deception, clever

On 3 , again, no one doubts Pharisees coveted. But that’s irrelevant to proving that they recognized killing Jesus as coveting. As Paul puts it, they were able to construe such killing as “zeal for God.”

Love means zeal, enjoyment, attachment, delight, devotion etc.etc. and that’s exactly what they were doing, loving a false god and not the God of Israel.

[Bob_Wilson]

LLC, Your responses do not refute my contentions.

On 1, no one denies the OT says to love strangers; but that doesn’t prove that Pharisees did not easily think Jesus was a false prophet who qualified for execution under God’s Law.

On 2, you essentially confirm my argument that OT Law provided a basis for them believing they knew it was justified. You just argue that Biblical Law they went by is false. I personally reject it too, but that’s irrelevant to what they believed.

On 3 & 4, I never disputed that crucifiers loved a false god. But noting that you and I recognize that does nothing to show that they knew it was wicked, nor show that Jesus does not actually say that his followers were to “love your enemies” (Mt 5:43).

In short, I don’t see how any of your observations address any actual contention here.

[Holy-Fool-P-Zombie]

As I said before, the Lev. law was false from the beginning. Moses recognized this and that’s why they weren’t a part of Israel and they weren’t the rulers. Yes, they knew what they were doing. As Jesus said they were a brood of vipers, cunning snakes. Cunning-skilled in deception, clever

What was the purpose of the Levitical Law?

[LLC]

On 1, no one denies the OT says to love strangers; but that doesn’t prove that Pharisees did not easily think Jesus was a false prophet who qualified for execution under God’s Law.

Bob, it was not God’s law. It was man’s, just as Jesus, the prophets and his apostles state. For example, the slave laws of the South did not come from God, they were the makings of men.

But noting that you and I recognize that does nothing to show that they knew it was wicked

I don’t think man lives in total darkness. If this were so, we would be like animals who devour their prey and have no knowledge of this being right or wrong. On the contrary God has given all men a “light”. We may try to hide from it, cover it up, run from it etc. but we cannot escape it.

nor show that Jesus does not actually say that his followers were to “love your enemies” (Mt 5:43).

No offense, but you and I will have to disagree. I think love is too strong of a word here. As I mentioned before, I’m not going to love someone who likes to torture, rape, and murder others. I don’t delight in them or have any warm feelings of affection for them. To me it means nothing more than what was already previously stated in the verses of the Bible. Do not hold a grudge,hate them in your heart, or seek vengeance, but wait on the Lord. And as Jesus said, in that day He will say depart from Me you workers of lawlessness.

[Bob_Wilson]

You did not show Jesus does not actually say that his followers were to “love your enemies” (Matthew 5:43).

No offense, but I will have to disagree. I think love is too strong of a word here.

LLC, You don’t appear to recognize that you repeatedly reinforce my contentions.
Here, my interpretation was that Jesus is portrayed as actually using such strong words.

When you repeatedly insist that everyone ‘knows’ what you believe you know, you seem to incorrectly assume that everyone handles texts like you do. E.g. on our central dispute, you seem to assume that the Pharisees all knew that the parts of the OT that you like are true, but that the Levitical law that they used to justify killing Jesus was bogus. But there’s no evidence for that. They actually used such texts to endorse their actions and their seared conscience.

Here, you appear to agree with my contention that the text does have Jesus commanding that you “love” your enemies, but then assume that we all know that his own word usage here is “too strong.”
But not everyone assumes that Jesus didn’t use the right words. As I’ve said, he challengingly spells out how love for evil enemies constitutes doing good toward them, and seeking their ultimate welfare.

Your points might be more effective if you’d say up front that you are not necessarily debating what the text teaches, since you see some of it as false and perverse, and others of it as using words that are wrongly too strong. Then, you could defend your conviction that your own sensibilities are superior to such texts (and I might again defend you in doing that).

[maintenanceman]

How To Live Under An Unqualified President by John Piper

Are you into the new math? “7x more likely to violently die” does not equate to a “freaking 1000% more safe.” Like Paidion, I’d add it up as around 700% less safe.

I’m not 100% sure this was for me but if so, Bob, you are not taking the BIG - Long term view of freedom in the USA as opposed to the rest of the world. The very idea of an armed citizenry was to insure that law abiding citizens were not only taking part in civic duties but were able to derail the government when and if they decided to do bad things to the citizens.

[maintenanceman]

It is possible that somehow the site put my response in a different thread. They alerted me to it and to be honest they gave me two choices and I took one. Might have been the wrong one.

Sorry if it was so. But my answer to Bob is thus the same.

[Bob_Wilson]

The very idea of an armed citizenry was to insure that citizens were able to derail the government when they decided to do bad things to the citizens.

This should be on the ‘Unqualified President’ thread., but yes, I’m familiar with the desire to be able to take on the gov’t’s armed forces and law enforcement personnel if they do bad things.

If that’s what the founders meant by having a militia, it’s too bad Rome’s gov’t didn’t have a 2nd amendment. Then the disciples might have derailed their evil attempt to crucify Jesus.

[LLC]

you seem to assume that the Pharisees all knew that the parts of the OT that you like are true, but that the Levitical law that they used to justify killing Jesus was bogus. But there’s no evidence for that.

Bob, Matthew 12:14 says, “But the Pharisees went out and conspired to kill Jesus.
Mark 3:6 Then the Pharisees went forth and began to plot with the Herodians to kill Jesus.
John 11:53 So from that day on they plotted to kill Him.
Matthew 26:4 And they conspired to arrest Jesus and kill Him covertly.”

Plot- A plan made in secret to do something illegal or harmful.
Conspire-Make secret plans to commit an unlawful or harmful act.
Covert-secretly

Again, Yes these people knew what they were doing. They knew that they were not obeying the Laws of God. Jesus was exposing them and convicting them of their sin, and so they had to do away with Him.
Do not cheat, lie, bear false witness, covet, murder etc.etc. Love others as yourself
These things are not hard to understand.

Matthew 23:23 “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you pay tithe of mint and anise and cumin, and have neglected the weightier matters of the law: justice faith and mercy.”
Matt. 23:25 'Woe to you scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you cleanse the outside of the cup and dish, but inside you are full of extortion and self-indulgence."
Matt.23:14 " Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you devour widow’s houses, and for a pretense make long prayers."

Here, you appear to agree with my contention that the text does have Jesus commanding that you “love” your enemies, but then assume that we all know that his own word usage here is “too strong.”

It doesn’t sound like Jesus is loving these people. In fact, He seems to be cursing them here in Matt. 23:32-33 “Fill up then, the measure of your fathers’ guilt. Serpents, brood of vipers! How can you escape the condemnation of hell?”
Matt.23:

[Bob_Wilson]

[quote=“LLC, post:324, topic:13931, full:true”]Matthew 23:23

(1) Bob, Matthew 12:14 says, “But the Pharisees went out and conspired to kill Jesus.”
These people knew what they were doing. They knew that they were not obeying the Laws of God.

(2) Matt.23:14 " Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you devour widow’s houses."
[/quote]

It doesn’t sound like Jesus is loving these people. In fact, “Brood of vipers! How can you escape the condemnation of hell?” Matt.23
[/quote]

LLC, On your first argument, I see you offer no evidence here that the Pharisees recognized (“knew”) that plotting the death of one they saw as a false prophet did not fulfill the Law of God. Not any more than Paul had recognized that plotting Christians’ deaths was contrary to righteous “zeal for God.” As he spells out, such actions were “ignorant.” You underestimate how deceptive evil can be.

I think your second contention that Jesus violated his own teaching to love evil enemies reveals how you see him, but misunderstands agape. You cite how Jesus rebuked the Pharisees for their evil and strongly warned them of the painful consequences of their deeds. I would think genuine love for them would demand no less than the great risk of confronting their disastrous course and seeking to sober them about what their deep evil is sowing.

I believe Jesus reflects the nature of God which as the apostle John says, always “IS love.”