|
|
Post by otto on Oct 21, 2007 15:32:07 GMT -5
29And he said unto them, Verily I say unto you, There is no man that hath left , or brethren, or wife, or children, for the kingdom of God's sake, 30Who shall not receive manifold more in this present time, and in the world to come life everlasting. Do we really think that Jesus would keep swithing His commandments concerning what it would mean to follow Him in the way? Del I was just thinking about these verses today, and you post them. People often wonder if Peter had a wife....and likely Peter did, yet, in that day it was acceptable for people to leave there wife to enter the ministry. In todays world, it seems more acceptable to not to be married in the first place, yet I have heard of at least one person doing so.. People would get soundly criticized for leaving a wife today, I don't know??? just my opinion......  |
|
|
|
Post by nathanb on Oct 21, 2007 17:27:14 GMT -5
It would seem best to take the entire thought that Jesus is trying to get across in Luke 22, which includes verses 31-38 if we want to logically understand what Jesus is saying here. 31And the Lord said, Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat: 32But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and when thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren. 33And he said unto him, Lord, I am ready to go with thee, both into prison, and to death. 34And he said, I tell thee, Peter, the wildabeast shall not crow this day, before that thou shalt thrice deny that thou knowest me. 35And he said unto them, When I sent you without purse, and scrip, and shoes, lacked ye any thing? And they said, Nothing. 36Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one. 37For I say unto you, that this that is written must yet be accomplished in me, And he was reckoned among the transgressors: for the things concerning me have an end. 38And they said, Lord, behold, here are two swords. And he said unto them, It is enough. He tells Peter that Satan desired to deceive him. What was Satan trying to deceive him with? It would appear that the deceiver was trying to sow a thought in his mind that doing it as Jesus had asked him to was not all that important. Jesus made Peter admit that when he had done it as the Lord commanded every thing went fine. Of course Jesus already knew that Peter had decided to do it his own way and had taken a sword contrary to his commandments and will. So he was rebuking him to bring out the point that Peter was going in the wrong direct. He was no longer following Jesus in the way. He ended this rebuke by saying "it is enough". The New Englsh version puts it even stronger. "enough, enough!". Remember that this was just a few days after Jesus discourse with the rich young ruler whom Jesus told: Luke 18:22Now when Jesus heard these things, he said unto him, Yet lackest thou one thing: sell all that thou hast, and distribute unto the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, follow me. To which Peter observed and Jesus answered: Luke 18:28Then Peter said, Lo, we have left all, and followed thee. 29And he said unto them, Verily I say unto you, There is no man that hath left house, or parents, or brethren, or wife, or children, for the kingdom of God's sake, 30Who shall not receive manifold more in this present time, and in the world to come life everlasting. Do we really think that Jesus would keep swithing His commandments concerning what it would mean to follow Him in the way? Del
According to the book of Acts we read the apostles continue on the Itinerant, celibate and poverty ministry which Jesus began. |
|
|
|
Post by nathanb on Oct 21, 2007 17:58:53 GMT -5
29And he said unto them, Verily I say unto you, There is no man that hath left , or brethren, or wife, or children, for the kingdom of God's sake, 30Who shall not receive manifold more in this present time, and in the world to come life everlasting. Do we really think that Jesus would keep swithing His commandments concerning what it would mean to follow Him in the way? Del 1) Otto wrote: I was just thinking about these verses today, and you post them. People often wonder if Peter had a wife....and likely Peter did, yet, in that day it was acceptable for people to leave there wife to enter the ministry. ~~~ Nathan: According to I Cor. 9:5 Paul wrote: Don't we (Barnabas, Timothy, Silas, John Mark, etc) have the right to take a believing wife along with us? as well as OTHERS! apostles, as the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas (Peter).
Most of the early apostles were unmarried or staying celibate for the sake of the Gospel this way they could dedicate their lives without too much of the cares of this life to hinder them from serving Him.
According to Vaudois (A.D. 70-1800) Chuch history: The Pilgrim Church written by E.H. Broadbent (1920). Page 81-101.
The Vaudois apostles had NO property, or goods, or home or family; if they HAD these they LEFT! them. Their life was one of self-denial, hardship and danger.
They traveled in utmost simplicity, without money, without a second suit, their needs being SUPPLIED by the believers among them whom they ministered the Word.
The Vaudois apostles ALWAYS! went two and two and elder and a younger man, of whom the latter waited on his older companion. Their visits were highly esteemed, and they were treated with every token of respect and affection.
Many undertook serious medical studies that they might be able to care for the bodies of those they met with. The name "Friends of God" was often gvien to them.
Great care was used in commending men to such service, since it was felt that ONE devoted man was worth more than 100 who call to this ministry was LESS evident.
|
|
selah
Junior Member
Currently Reading 1 Samuel
Posts: 77
|
Post by selah on Oct 21, 2007 18:36:16 GMT -5
Luke 22
1-6 Judas' and the chief priests and teachers of the law conspire against Jesus
7-13 Preparation for the Passover
14-20 They share the emblems together
21-23 Discussion about the betrayer
24-30 Who is the Greatest
31-34 Announcement of Peter's sifting by Satan and his denial of Jesus
35-38 Change concerning what they were to take with them
They discussed a series of topics in this passage. I don't think the discussion of Peter's denial of Christ (Satan sifting him) has anything to do with verses 35-38.
It seems that when Jesus says, "It is enough," He's saying that two swords will be enough to acomplish the necessary fulfillment of prophecy as mentioned in verse 37 It is written: 'And he was numbered with the transgressors'; and I tell you that this must be fulfilled in me. Yes, what is written about me is reaching its fulfillment."
By carrying swords, these radical followers of Christ, will appear to fulfill the prophecy that he must be numbered with the transgressors. Jesus never intended that they use them for battle, although they misunderstood that. The weapons of warfare for the believer are of the Spirit.
Just thinking about these things.
Blessings,
Linda
|
|
|
|
Post by nancyeinspahr on Oct 21, 2007 19:14:47 GMT -5
Hi Nathan, Since it was possible for believers to misunderstand Jesus' words at that time, it's still possible now, right? Maybe the f&w, like other non-/denominations, have at times, missed what Jesus is trying to say. Maybe they've begun to handle things in a more earthly way, rather than according to God's Kindgom. The Spirit of God still speaks. And it is not ALWAYS through the written word either. Whatever He says will not contradict what's written. We need to determine what's written by the Spirit, and what is written helps us to determine the Spirit. Is it possible to "know" the Spirit without the written word? Yes, because He is God. He can reveal Himself however He wants to. Is it possible to "know" the written word without the Spirit? Only with the Kingdom understanding that comes by revelation of God, the Father. Blessings, Linda I agree, Linda, that revelation that comes through the Spirit is ongoing even in this our day........just the same as was recorded esp. in the NT. In mtg today the event of Jesus asking His disciples to find the place where they were to eat the passover with Him was spoken about. Mark 14:13 "And he sendeth forth two of his disciples, and saith unto them, go ye into the city, and there shall ye meet a man a pitcher of water: follow him. :14And wheresoever he shall go in, say ye to the goodman of the house, the Master saith, where shall I eat the passover with my disciples? :15 And he will shew you a large upper room furnished and prepared:" etc....... It was pointed out that that man who was likely a servant was in the right place at the right time with the right thing. How did that happen? It would have been through the working of the Spirit. In contrast Judas one of the 12, was in the situation with anything BUT the Spirit within his heart. I marveled this week too thinking of what Christ said to Peter when Jesus asked His disciples re: who do men say that I am? We've seen these verses posted recently. Matt 16:15 "He saith unto them, But who whom say ye that I am? :16And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Son of the living God, :17And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. :18And I say unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." Revelation from the Father being the key. Satan will never prevail against that which is from God or against anyone who is responding to that which is revealed from God in accordance to His will. There may be a battle, but Satan will not prevail. I am remembering too understanding what is recorded in 1Cor 14 when it was spoken on. :29"Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge. :30 If anything be revealed to another that sitteth by, let the first hold his peace. :32 And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets." And then Paul said: :36 "What? came the word out from you? or came it unto you only? :37 If any man think himself to be prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are th commandments of the Lord." Even as we consider how God's will has been from everlasting to everlasting is it not as he has raised up those to whom He reveals Himself? And that they have responded? And through the mix of it all His truth comes forth pure and good and right? nancye |
|
|
|
Post by nathanb on Oct 21, 2007 21:41:20 GMT -5
Luke 22 It seems that when Jesus says, "It is enough," He's saying that two swords will be enough to acomplish the necessary fulfillment of prophecy as mentioned in verse 37 It is written: 'And he was numbered with the transgressors'; and I tell you that this must be fulfilled in me. Yes, what is written about me is reaching its fulfillment." By carrying swords, these radical followers of Christ, will appear to fulfill the prophecy that he must be numbered with the transgressors. Jesus never intended that they use them for battle, although they misunderstood that. The weapons of warfare for the believer are of the Spirit. Just thinking about these things. Blessings, Linda
The transgressors! Jesus wasn't talking about Peter and his radical friends who had the swords but he was speaking of the TWO Thieves transgressors! which hang with him on Calvary's Cross.
Mark 15:25-28 And it was the third hour, and they crucified Jesus. And the superscription of his accusation was written over, The king of the Jews. And with him they crucify TWO! thieves! the one on the right hand, and the other on the left.
And the Scripture was Fulfilled, which said, And he was numbered with the transgressors.
~~~ Peter and his radical friend who carried the swords could have hindered the Scriptures being fulfilled if they were able to persuade the rest of the disciples to take up swords/weapons to defend Jesus and fight every inches of the way and won.
I wouldn't be surprised that Satan had put some of these thoughts in Peter's head to thward God's plan as Del had mentioned in his post.
Jesus had to STOP them so he told his disciples "It is enough!" so other disciples would NOT follow Peter's example to buy more swords. One time Jesus said to Peter! get thee behind me, Satan... what you're saying is not from God.
~~~ Selah, I agree with you 100% about the weapons warfare for the disciples of Yesterday and today should be His Spirit.  |
|
|
|
Post by nathanb on Oct 21, 2007 22:11:02 GMT -5
" Nathan wrote: My point there's very little connection between Luke 10 instruction and Luke 22:36 about his later instruction, changed...." 1) Geoff said: The connection is pretty clear. It refers to the same practices. It specifically recalls the first set of instructions ("When I sent you out...") and follows on from them. Its clear that you cannot logically argue that something that deals with the same subject matter, and specifically recalls the earlier instrucitons has "no connection" with each other. |
|
selah
Junior Member
Currently Reading 1 Samuel
Posts: 77
|
Post by selah on Oct 21, 2007 22:30:24 GMT -5
Hi Nathan, Thanks for your thoughts. I wondered about that too. Looking into the passage in Mark, I read from the NIV text notes that verse 28 was actually not even part of the earlier and more reliable Greek manuscripts. However, some translations have still kept it as part of that passage. Another thought for me, was that it would seem odd for Jesus to throw that idea into the middle of their current discussion, if it was referring to the time of His crucifiction. Verses 35, 36 and 38 would all be related, while verse 37 would be kind of out of place. Most references I've seen like to think Jesus' "That is enough," has an element of finality to it; that He was curtly ending the discussion, like He was saying, "Enough already!" But, how do we know that? The disciples mentioned that they had two swords, and immediately following, Jesus said, "That is enough." Why couldn't that mean, "That's sufficient?" Like two swords will be enough. Also, the disciples were thought to be radicals, since they were considered to be transgressors of the law. Their association with Jesus also made them seem like rebels to the priests and teachers of the law. One reference to them said that they "turned the world upside down!" (KJV) Of course, these are just my thoughts on this, so I'm always open for more suggestions. Blessings, Linda |
|
selah
Junior Member
Currently Reading 1 Samuel
Posts: 77
|
Post by selah on Oct 21, 2007 23:20:10 GMT -5
Del wrote:
Hi Del,
Did Jesus command them not to take swords before? I checked Matt. 10 and Luke 10 and didn't see that there...but I might have missed it.
I don't understand why Luke 22:31-38 is seen as a rebuke or reprimand from Jesus. I don't seem to read it that way at all. He prophecies concerning Peter's upcoming test by Satan, but He doesn't appear to be angry or curt at all to me. The fact that He warns Peter of an upcoming battle with Satan seems more of a kindness.
In verse 32 He even says He prayed for Peter, and then says, "And when you have turned back, strengthen your brothers." Jesus knew Peter would be alright, that his faith would not fail after his temporary error, and gave that assurance.
I guess one can look at this as though Jesus was disgusted, and impatient ...but that's not how I see Him in this passage.
Blessings,
Linda
|
|
geoff
New Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by geoff on Oct 22, 2007 1:41:00 GMT -5
According to the book of Acts we read the apostles continue on the Itinerant, celibate and poverty ministry which Jesus began. This must be a different book of Acts that I read. I remember reading about some who were married (not all, but a mixture of married and single) And of some who stayed put in one place. (Some itinerants some fixed) I dont remember anything referring to celibacy other than ONE - Paul spoke of himself as if he were celibate. I dont remember much mention about poverty. In fact, I'm not sure i remember much about any clear distinction between preachers and laity - or that they made any distinction? |
|
|
|
Post by nathanb on Oct 22, 2007 9:46:30 GMT -5
Nathan said: According to the book of Acts we read the apostles continue on the Itinerant, celibate and poverty ministry which Jesus began. [/quote] 1) Geoff wrote: This must be a different book of Acts that I read. ~~~ Nathan: No it is the same book in Acts and the same Gospel we read, Geoff. 2) Geoff wrote: I remember reading about some who were married (not all, but a mixture of married and single) ~~~ Nathan: Yes, a few of the apostles were married (I Cor. 9:5) most of the apostles the 12, 72, Barnabas, Matthias, Luke, John Mark, Timothy, Silas, Titus, Demas, etc... were NOT married for the sake of the gospel.
Jesus was NOT married (Matthew 19:10-12) His disciples say unto him, if the case of a man be so with his wife it is NOT better to marry. But Jesus said unto them, "NOT every one can except this word, only those whom it is given.
But there are SOME eunuchs, because they were born that way from their mother's womb: and there are some eunuchs, who were made eunuchs of men: and there are eunuchs, who have made themselves! eunuchs's for the sake of the KINGDOM of Heaven. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.
Jesus, Matthias, and Barnabas, Paul's co-workers to the Gentiles nation such as Timothy, Titus, Luke, and John Mark, and many others were celibated for the sake of the Gospel.3) Geoff wrote: And of some who stayed put in one place. (Some itinerants some fixed) I dont remember anything referring to celibacy other than ONE - Paul spoke of himself as if he were celibate. I dont remember much mention about poverty. ~~~ Nathan: Can you show me the verses in the book of Acts the names of the Itinerant apostles STAYED fixed forever in one place. Jesus, Paul, Barnabas, Timothy, Titus, Silas, and other apostles were celibated for the sake of the Gospel. Do you disagree?
Poverty....
Matthew 19:16-26 A rich young ruler (a Pharisee, teacher of the Old Testament law) came and said unto him, ALL these things (10 commandments) have I kept from my youth: what LACK I yet?
Jesus said unto him, "If thou wilt be PERFECT! go and SELL that thou has, and GIVE to the poor, and thou shall have treasure in heaven and come and follow me." The young man heard that saying, he went away sorrowful for he had GREAT possessions.
Then In Matthew 19:27-29 Peter said to Jesus, "Lord, we have forsaken ALL (left their fishing business, homes, families) and follow thee, what shall we have therefore?
Jesus answered, "And every that has forshaken houses, brethren, sisters, or fathers, mothers, WIFE, children or lands for MY name's sake, shall receive 100 folds, and shall inherit everlasting.
In Acts 3:1-8 Peter said to the lame man at the Temple, "Silver and gold I have NONE! but such as I have I give thee: in the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth rise up and walk."
Acts 4:35-37 Barnabas (an apostle fellow-workers of Paul) a Levite, from the country of Cyprus, having land, SOLD it, and brought the money, and laid at the apostles' feet.
Paul's testimony: Gal. 1:13,14 For ye have heard of my conversation in the time past in the Jews religion, how that beyond measure I persecuted the church of God, and wasted it. And PROFITED beyond many my equals in my own nation....
As an Itinerant apostle Paul wrote in I Cor. 4:9-13 Even unto this present hour WE (Barnabas, Timothy) both hunger, and thirsty and are naked, and are brutality treated, and have NO! certain dwelling place...4) Geoff wrote: In fact, I'm not sure i remember much about any clear distinction between preachers and laity - or that they made any distinction? ~~~ Romans 1:1, 7 Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ called to be an apostle, separated unto the Gospel of God. (Gal. 1:15-19) When it pleased God, who separated me from my mother's womb and called me by His grace, to reveal his Son in me, that I might PREACH Jesus among the heathen (Gentiles)....
Acts 9:10-22 Jesus said to Ananias (a disciple), "Go, thy way for Paul is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, kings, and the children of Israel. For I will show him how great things he must suffer for my name's sake."
Paul wrote in Romans 1:7 To ALL that in Rome, beloved of God, called to be SAINTS!....
~~~ According to the Vaudois (A.D. 70-1800) history: The Pilgrim Church book (1920).
SOME among the brethren devoted themselves entirely to travelling and ministering the Word, and were called "The Perfect" and in accordance with the Lord Jesus' words in (Matthew 19:21) to the rich young ruler, "If thou will be PERFECT! go and SELL that thou has, and give to the poor, and thou shall have treasure in heaven, and come and follow me."
The Vaudois apostles possessed NOTHING! had no home, literally acted upon this command. It was recognized that ALL are NOT called to such a path, and that the MAJORITY! of believers, while acknowledging that they and ALL they have belong to Christ, should serve Him while remaining in their families and continuing in their usual occupations.
Those whom they called "Perfect or Apostles" played an important part in their testimony. While the Church elders remained in their homes, and churches, the " Perfect or Apostles" travelled continually, visiting the churches.
A Distinction! was made between those called to be "Perfect or Apostles" and others of the followers of Christ, based on the fact that in the Gospel "SOME" were called to SELL ALL! that they had and follow Christ, while others of His disciples were equally called to serve Him in the surrounding in which He found them.
The Vaudois apostles had NO property, or goods, or home or family: if they had these the LEFT! them. Their life was one of self-denial, hardship and danger. They traveled in utmost simplicity, without money, without a second suit, their NEEDS being supplied by the believers among them whom they ministered the Word.
The Vaudois apostles ALWAYS went two and two, an elder and a younger man, of whom the latter waited on his older companion. Their visits were highly esteemed, and they were treated with every token of respect and affection.
Regular individual reading the Scriptures, regular daily family worship, and frequent Conferences were among the most highly-prized means of maintaining spiritual life. They valued EDUCATION! as well as spirituality, many ministered the Word among the Vaudois apostles had taken a degree at one of the Universities. Many undertook serious medical studies that they might be able to care for the bodies of those they met with.
The name "Friend of God" was often given to them.
|
|
|
|
Post by otto on Oct 22, 2007 12:28:46 GMT -5
According to the book of Acts we read the apostles continue on the Itinerant, celibate and poverty ministry which Jesus began. This must be a different book of Acts that I read. I remember reading about some who were married (not all, but a mixture of married and single) And of some who stayed put in one place. (Some itinerants some fixed) I dont remember anything referring to celibacy other than ONE - Paul spoke of himself as if he were celibate. I dont remember much mention about poverty. In fact, I'm not sure i remember much about any clear distinction between preachers and laity - or that they made any distinction? For Jesus to come along when He did, it seems incredulous that there would have been the needed unmarried itinerants, YET we see Jesus giving special reference to those that were married, by promising those that left their wives a great reward, not only in this life but that to come-{NOTICE : Jesus did not imply that they should divorce them, as that would amount to causing them to commit adultry} I think for these special apostles that left there wives then, it set a precedent for NOT getting married, from then on, as it certainly adds to the deal. As Paul said, it was better to remain as he was, so they could properly give the care needed to the church. |
|
|
|
Post by nathanb on Oct 22, 2007 12:59:32 GMT -5
1) Geoff wrote: This must be a different book of Acts that I read. I remember reading about some who were married (not all, but a mixture of married and single) And of some who stayed put in one place. (Some itinerants some fixed) I dont remember anything referring to celibacy other than ONE - Paul spoke of himself as if he were celibate. I dont remember much mention about poverty. In fact, I'm not sure i remember much about any clear distinction between preachers and laity - or that they made any distinction? 2) Otto: For Jesus to come along when He did, it seems incredulous that there would have been the needed unmarried itinerants, YET we see Jesus giving special reference to those that were married, by promising those that left their wives a great reward, not only in this life but that to come-{NOTICE : Jesus did not imply that they should divorce them, as that would amount to causing them to commit adultry} I think for these special apostles that left there wives then, it set a precedent for NOT getting married, from then on, as it certainly adds to the deal. As Paul said, it was better to remain as he was, so they could properly give the care needed to the church.
But I would have you without from concern. He that is UNMARRID is concern about the things that belong to the Lord, how he may please the Lord: but he that is married! cares for the things that are of the world, how he may please his wife.
For there difference also between a wife and a virgin. The unmarried womn cares for the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and in spirit: but she that is marreid cares for the things of the world, how she may please her husband.
And this I speak for your own profit: NOT that I may cast a snare upon you, but fro that which is comely, and that ye may attend upon the LORD without DISTRACTION. |
|
geoff
New Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by geoff on Oct 22, 2007 14:16:52 GMT -5
Nathan said
Jesus, Matthias, and Barnabas, Paul's co-workers to the Gentiles nation such as Timothy, Titus, Luke, and John Mark, and many others were celibated for the sake of the Gospel.
I think to mix Jesus in with this lot of mortals is misleading, though there's no dispute from my point of view that he was celibate.
But for the others, I don't see any evidence that they were celibate. Some might have been, but we have no definitive scripture to show this.
Quotes like...
As an Itinerant apostle Paul wrote in I Cor. 4:9-13 Even unto this present hour WE (Barnabas, Timothy) both hunger, and thirsty and are naked, and are brutality treated, and have NO! certain dwelling place...
(and I note that YOU added the word "itinerant" in there), do not prove celibacy or homelessness. Sure Paul was commenting that at that time they had no home, It doesn't imply or indicate a permanency of that state.
I note that in As an Itinerant apostle Paul wrote in 1Co 4:16 I urge you, then, be imitators of me., Paul asks all those to whome he addressed his letter to imitate him in the things he was saying. If we follow your reasoning then Paul asked ALL beleivers to be homeless and celibate??
If it were the case that the apostles were to follow all these instructions, and that today we have people doing just that, then they'd be doing it all. But I don't see that the apostles, let alone anyone since did all these things. After all they're human, they err.
Take nothing for their journey... Mark 6:8
Take no scrip (bag/baggage)... Matt 10:10, Luke 9:3, 70-Luke 10:4
Take no money... Mark 6:8, Matt 10:9, Luke 9:3, Luke 10:4
Carry no shoes... Matt 10:10, Luke 10:4
Wear sandals... Mark 6:9
Not to take or have two coats... Matt 10:10, Luke 9:3, Mark 6:9
Go not from house to house... Luke 10:7
and
Can you show me the verses in the book of Acts the names of the Itinerant apostles STAYED fixed forever in one place. Jesus, Paul, Barnabas, Timothy, Titus, Silas, and other apostles were celibated for the sake of the Gospel. Do you disagree?
You have "moved the goalposts" with your question.
You added "forever" into the question. No-one stays in the same place "forever". So to truthfully answer your question I must say "no I can't", but that doesn't make my original statement wrong, as you asked a question beyond what I said.
But Paul himself, perhaps the most itinerant of them all stayed long periods in one place.
Act 18:11 And he stayed a year and six months, teaching the word of God among them.
Lets examine some of your quotaions
Matthew 19:16-26 A rich young ruler (a Pharisee, teacher of the Old Testament law) came and said unto him, ALL these things (10 commandments) have I kept from my youth: what LACK I yet?
Jesus said unto him, "If thou wilt be PERFECT! go and SELL that thou has, and GIVE to the poor, and thou shall have treasure in heaven and come and follow me." The young man heard that saying, he went away sorrowful for he had GREAT possessions.
Jesus asked this ONE man to sell all. There's nothing in these verses to say th instruction applied to others. In fact I wonder if Jesus was not even being literal, rather illustrating that this man placed more store on his possessions in this life that eternal life, and showed that to the man by asking this. The man didn't obey. Jesus would have known he would not obey. It was no precedent.
Then In Matthew 19:27-29 Peter said to Jesus, "Lord, we have forsaken ALL (left their fishing business, homes, families) and follow thee, what shall we have therefore?
These verses follow on from the previous (above). They continue Jesus theme of putting less importance on earthly possessions that heavenly. It is you that added what you think they left. The original says
Mat 19:27 Then Peter said in reply, "See, we have left everything and followed you. What then will we have?"
This was directed perhaps at all believers, as it addresses the question first put by the rich man...
Mat 19:16 And behold, a man came up to him, saying, "Teacher, what good deed must I do to have eternal life?"
There's nothing in the verses to show that these things applied only to the disciples.
Jesus answered, "And every that has forshaken houses, brethren, sisters, or fathers, mothers, WIFE, children or lands for MY name's sake, shall receive 100 folds, and shall inherit everlasting.
Mat 19:29 And everyone who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or children or lands, for my name's sake, will receive a hundredfold and will inherit eternal life. ESV
Its interesting that you wrote the word "wife" in capitals (to emphasise it). Its not shown in most translations except the KJV. I wonder why the later translations, with their better knowledge of translations, and better access to early versions than the KJV left that out?
But anyway, this is still answering the question of the rich young man. I think it is symbolic of putting value not on earthly, or even on family matters but on heavenly.
It certainly was not given as an instruciton here.
In Acts 3:1-8 Peter said to the lame man at the Temple, "Silver and gold I have NONE! but such as I have I give thee: in the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth rise up and walk."
This does not show that Peter was always penniless, only that he was that day. And it could be that even so, Peter was trying to show that money cannot buy salvation, and was making that point.
Acts 4:35-37 Barnabas (an apostle fellow-workers of Paul) a Levite, from the country of Cyprus, having land, SOLD it, and brought the money, and laid at the apostles' feet.
What happened to the money after he laid it there. Did the penniless apostles walk away and leave it there? I think not. If so, then why did not Barnabas just throw it away. He was giving it to them. And after he did so, they HAD THE MONEY.
Paul's testimony: Gal. 1:13,14 For ye have heard of my conversation in the time past in the Jews religion, how that beyond measure I persecuted the church of God, and wasted it. And PROFITED beyond many my equals in my own nation....
This has nothing to do with money.
Look at this translation...
Gal 1:13 For you have heard of my former life in Judaism, how I persecuted the church of God violently and tried to destroy it.
Gal 1:14 And I was advancing in Judaism beyond many of my own age among my people, so extremely zealous was I for the traditions of my fathers.
The word "Profit" in the KJV extract means "became better as a result of" ("advanced" in the ESV)
Your quotations about the Vaudois are a red herring in this context.
So, it seems there's little evidence to show that the disciple were to be celibate, or itinerant.
Sure, some were.
But equally, many were not.
There was a mixture.
Case not proven.
|
|
|
|
Post by wondering too on Oct 22, 2007 14:38:11 GMT -5
[quote author=geoff board
Jesus answered, "And every that has forshaken houses, brethren, sisters, or fathers, mothers, WIFE, children or lands for MY name's sake, shall receive 100 folds, and shall inherit everlasting.
Mat 19:29 And everyone who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or children or lands, for my name's sake, will receive a hundredfold and will inherit eternal life. ESV
Its interesting that you wrote the word "wife" in capitals (to emphasise it). Its not shown in most translations except the KJV. I wonder why the later translations, with their better knowledge of translations, and better access to early versions than the KJV left that out?[/quote]
Why was this verse changed and altered by other translations?
|
|
