A Question for Christians

Ok - I haven't had a response to my query about this, so I will have to deal with what I understand of this posting.

I don't know what you mean about context. If I say, 'You won't get through that door carrying that enormous parcel', that doesn't depend on context. It seems to me to be a simple statement of fact. I realise that Jesus used allegory on many occasions. I wouldn't say this was one of them.

I really don't see what you are getting at in the second comment. I don't use leetspeak, so I don't understand that reference. And you seem to be saying, unfortunately, that I deludedly see myself as more intelligent than others. I am very disappointed if this is what you mean - particularly as you have known me a long time, both on the forums and inworld. That is certainly not what I think. For your information, I did have a better intellect when I was younger, but unfortunately a series of comas has had its toll, and I have lost something like 25 IQ points since then. In fact I respect the intellect of many people on these forums, and realise there are many on here far more intelligent than me.

I was asking a question, and that is never a sign of pride.

I do hope that is not what you meant, because it would affect my view of you. I had hoped you had more perspicacity than that.

According to the dictionary it's..

In accordance with virtue or morality: a righteous judgment.

Kendra, I suggest you read the entire verse.

That quote is kind of taken out of context. The message spoken to me when I read the entire thing is this:

You can not jump on gods band wagon so to speak. If you hold loyalty more to material things here on eart than you do to gods will, you will not go to heavan. He is not saying you can not be a rich man or woman, he is saying remember who has blessed you with such a life and be willing to help others.

Edit: Take the story of David for instance. Here is a guy who was on his way to being a king. Suddenly everything was ripped from him. He spent years locked up in dungeons and being mistreated, all because of actions that were not true.

Yet he rolled with the punches. He stayed faithful to god, and in the end, god will for David was done.

The passage in Mark is much the same:

--------
17 As he was setting out on a journey, a man ran up, knelt down before him, and asked him, "Good teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?"
18 Jesus answered him, "Why do you call me good? No one is good but God alone.
19 You know the commandments: 'You shall not kill; you shall not commit adultery; you shall not steal; you shall not bear false witness; you shall not defraud; honor your father and your mother.'"
20 He replied and said to him, "Teacher, all of these I have observed from my youth."
21 Jesus, looking at him, loved him and said to him, "You are lacking in one thing. Go, sell what you have, and give to (the) poor and you will have treasure in heaven; then come, follow me."
22 At that statement his face fell, and he went away sad, for he had many possessions.
23 4 Jesus looked around and said to his disciples, "How hard it is for those who have wealth to enter the kingdom of God!"
24 The disciples were amazed at his words. So Jesus again said to them in reply, "Children, how hard it is to enter the kingdom of God!
25 It is easier for a camel to pass through (the) eye of (a) needle than for one who is rich to enter the kingdom of God."
26 They were exceedingly astonished and said among themselves, "Then who can be saved?"
27 Jesus looked at them and said, "For human beings it is impossible, but not for God. All things are possible for God."
28 Peter began to say to him, "We have given up everything and followed you."
29 Jesus said, "Amen, I say to you, there is no one who has given up house or brothers or sisters or mother or father or children or lands for my sake and for the sake of the gospel
30 who will not receive a hundred times more now in this present age: houses and brothers and sisters and mothers and children and lands, with persecutions, and eternal life in the age to come.
31 But many that are first will be last, and (the) last will be first."
(NAB)
-------

I would agree with Ty, Jesus is saying that if you are not willing to drop all thought of material possession and gain and follow him, how could you enter the kingdom of God?
The first part seems pretty straightforward.

But then there is this:
-----
27 Jesus looked at them and said, "For human beings it is impossible, but not for God. All things are possible for God."
-----

and this:
------
31 But many that are first will be last, and (the) last will be first."
------

I don't know what these mean. I could posit some similar sentiments from Buddhism but that might not really apply.

That's interesting, since some have theorised that during the time before his ministries, Jesus was studying Buddhism. There are a lot of similarities in the teachings after all.

Chip you should not make me laugh out loud at work like that my co-workers already think I'm a bit nuts.

Please don't take this the wrong way, but I think that you can ease up on the genetic engineering a bit. I doubt you or I have much to worry about on the heaven thingie.

.

Yeah, you're probably right, but it never hurts to have a backup plan!

If you're a Calvinist, a reformist or a derivative, thereof, the needle is allegorical to the unmerited grace of God. In essence, no works or wealth or stuff can get you through the door, and furthermore, those impediments (i.e., the cord or camel (and btw, the reason camel is mentioned is that camels hair was used for thread back then)) may result in one's making a decision not to "follow Christ." In my old age, I am learning that it is dangerous to take every word of the Bible literally. Few of us understand the principles of literary analysis, and fewer still know how to dissect and interpret ancient texts.

I'm a latecomer to the thread, and won't be staying, but there's my two cents.

I understood that camels don't come into it at all. Apparently it goes back to the Greek, where a word (straining my memory now, I think it was 'kamelos') actually means thread, but was mistranslated. It might be that the Greek word actually relates to camels, if they used their hair, but it was thread that was meant.

Here is the Third Noble Truth, which I think expresses much the same sentiment. Jesus was speaking in the context of Hebrew literature, but it looks like the same idea to me:

2. The origin of suffering is attachment.

The origin of suffering is attachment to transient things and the ignorance thereof. Transient things do not only include the physical objects that surround us, but also ideas, and -in a greater sense- all objects of our perception. Ignorance is the lack of understanding of how our mind is attached to impermanent things. The reasons for suffering are desire, passion, ardour, pursue of wealth and prestige, striving for fame and popularity, or in short: craving and clinging. Because the objects of our attachment are transient, their loss is inevitable, thus suffering will necessarily follow. Objects of attachment also include the idea of a "self" which is a delusion, because there is no abiding self. What we call "self" is just an imagined entity, and we are merely a part of the ceaseless becoming of the universe.

Nope, I haven't. I'm comfortable being judged by the standard I judged you.

Closer, but still not quite right.

Jesus spoke in allegory and metaphor quite often. Just a handful of verses before 24, he talked about removing either "planks"or "beams" (Depending on your translation) from peoples eyes. Do you really think he was talking about PLANKS in peoples EYES, "no fudging, no getting round it"?

Nor can you take it out of context with any pretention of being accurate, both the historical context and the textual, both of which you are doing.

I really hate to agree with Jauani, but... "yeah because context is never relevant and there is no room for allegory in religion!"

Ultimately the exact translation isn't relevent... the meaning is fundamentally the same either way: Moola != Heaven, Admit One

selardor

here is a question for you. would it be accurate to state that according to your interpretation of the bible, jesus' message was that human beings cease living as a society and just waste away until they die?

the logical conclusion based on your semi literal interpretation. if any amount of possessions would be considered wealth by your definition, and a person with some wealth would be rich in comparion to a person with no wealth, then all people would have to abandon all possessions, even a spear or an article of clothing, until everyone dies from winter cold or draught or rabies.

do you think this is jesus' message? or perhaps he was being allegorical?

Yes, but in the case you mention, there is no doubt at all that he is speaking metaphorically. People don't have planks in their eyes. But people are rich. In the first case he is using hyperbole to make an effective point. In the second he is making a simple statement: rich people don't get into heaven.

I'm willing to accept that it might be my fault, but I am used to looking for allegorical and metaphorical content in writing - it was part of my profession for many years. I just don't see it here. The reason the passage is so striking to me, is that usually Jesus does speak indirectly. In this particular verse, despite the initial similie, he seems to me to be making a simple, direct statement, which is why it is so powerful.

ok the short and sweet answer, you can't buy your way into heaven.

Jewish hyperbole, culturally appropriate. Try reading Josephus

..but billy yes you can..look!!

http://www.reachingforheaven.com/

Sorry, I can't accept that. If he had meant that he would have said it, IMO. What he is saying is nothing about buying anything or paying for anything - he's saying if you are rich you don't get in. I haven't seen anything that convinces me otherwise.

What I *do* see is that it is a statement which might make many Christians uncomfortable, and that there is a motive for coming up with a different interpretation.

I can't help the fact that despite all of our efforts to explain it to you, you still don't get it.

it's a good thing you aren't christian then. you don't have to accept that.

Selador, you are 100% right.

You took a quote from the bible put it before us all, and out come the bible apologist about it being wrong since it's a literal translation.

Why the hell does their so called god talk in riddles and say things only to counter what was said 2 verses later. And then when you take the words at face value (like LOTS of people do) we get the argument about not taking the bible literally and how it isn't meant to be taken literally.

Bullshit.

It's a freaking book, supposedly divinely inspired by the "creator of the universe". But yet you can't read it directly because its full of obfuscation and riddles?

Once again, the bible is reinterpreted, bent, and twisted to gain understanding about a simple statement that contradicts itself. It seems that is the only way to understand the bible is to bend it to your own interpretation.

Briana Dawson

Nor will you, because you don't want to be convinced otherwise. Your complete dismisal of 25 and 26 following it, the clearly allegorical nature of other sections of Matthew 19, basic Christiany theology (That man can not escape sin by his own acts ever, that that lies only in the domain of God), or the mountains of historical context that shaped the book of Matthew. No, it looks like you think you have Christians by the shorthairs and can smack them around as "willfully chosing to misinterperate and ignore" and such.

For the record, I'm an English major - the amount of rejection of context and style that your doing would make any of my professors weep, and would get me a blazing red F on a paper about the subject. I don't like to pull out the academic credentials, I feel its amazingly stupid on the interwebs, but lest you think your dealing with some half-educated mountain hillbilly who's blind faith in the bible comes from what he was taught in sunday school, I feel the need to point this out... and since you raised the subject by claiming to deal with this type of stuff on a regular basis, I figure it's fair game.



As demonstrated thusly.

But fine. You're going to completely brush this aside too, but heres a couple of other things.

19:17 : He answered him, "Why do you ask me about the good? There is only One who is good. 13 If you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments."

This is six lines before, in response to a question from a follower about what must be done to enter heaven. Compare it now to 19:24, which clearly is at least metaphorical because of the reference to a camel/rope and a needle: There is absolutely nothing fancy about this line.

There is only One who is good.: Man is not Good. Man is sinful.

If you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments.: One must follow the commandments to enter Heaven... but "Thou shalt be a pauper" is not a commandment, last I checked.

Compare this to what is said on 19:26...

19:26 : Jesus looked at them and said, "For human beings this is impossible, but for God all things are possible."

Same basic message as before: God is Salvation, not mortal works.

No, he isn't. You agree with him 100%. And therein lies the difference.



He "took a quote from the bible" out of context ten ways from sunday. I don't have to appologise for squat, not my mistake.

What he is doing is akin to saying "The declaration of independence clearly says "All men are created equal", so I don't have to give equality to women!", while ignoring all the multitudinous problems with making such an absurd claim.

The rest of your post I'm not going to bother respond to, it's just the same stuff you've been saying for... well, forever, and it isn't really worth debating again.