I'm Pretty Sure That Jesus Wasn't Talking About This

[Brakelite]

All the musings and questions aside from the rest of your post, I will take this...

my beliefs are rooted in the Bible,

... On face value, and go from there. My question, why did Jesus teach pacifism, turning the other cheek etc?
In Hebrews, Paul says
KJV Hebrews 1:1-3
1 God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,
2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;
3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;

You mentioned that the NT appeared to you to contradict the old. Like for example regarding eye for an eye, and turning the other cheek. You also suggested a contradiction re marriage and family, from the old to the new.
I would like to suggest that every teaching in scripture is in some way, a reflection of the character of God. As the above scripture says, God spoke through his prophets... And then through His Son. It is the same God who is speaking. He is not a fickle changeable God who can't make up His mind. I don't believe there are contradictions between how He reveals His character from old to new testaments... Nor was He confused as to when His Son would return, in fact Jesus said, His Father knew, but hadn't informed His Son... Yet.
But Jesus wasn't guessing about His return. I think any apparent contradiction is in our understanding... Not in God's revelation. For example, I can't entirely agree with you that there was nothing in the NT about family and marriage, and I certainly disagree with you that Paul was recommending none should marry. I think in a Hebrew society which took marriage as a sacred event, Paul, because of the horrendous times in which they lived, persecution from Jews and Romans, as well as from other cultures in the Gentile Nations such as in Asia and the worshippers of Diana etc, he was simply encouraging those who didn't feel that marriage was for them, not to feel guilty or wrong.
There are numerous scriptures throughout the NT that exalted marriage and family. 1 Peter 3:1-7; Ephesians 5:27-33; Col. 3:18-25; 1 Tim. 3:1-13; Titus 2:1-8.

I remind you also of this...
KJV Matthew 24:36-39
36 But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only.
37 But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
38 For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark,
39 And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

Jesus fully expected that marriage and family would still be an integral part of human society when He came. This aside from the several parables where marriage was depicted as sacred and holy.

 

[Brakelite]

All the musings and questions aside from the rest of your post, I will take this...

... On face value, and go from there. My question, why did Jesus teach pacifism, turning the other cheek etc?
In Hebrews, Paul says
KJV Hebrews 1:1-3
1 God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,
2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;
3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;

You mentioned that the NT appeared to you to contradict the old. Like for example regarding eye for an eye, and turning the other cheek. You also suggested a contradiction re marriage and family, from the old to the new.
I would like to suggest that every teaching in scripture is in some way, a reflection of the character of God. As the above scripture says, God spoke through his prophets... And then through His Son. It is the same God who is speaking. He is not a fickle changeable God who can't make up His mind. I don't believe there are contradictions between how He reveals His character from old to new testaments... Nor was He confused as to when His Son would return, in fact Jesus said, His Father knew, but hadn't informed His Son... Yet.
But Jesus wasn't guessing about His return. I think any apparent contradiction is in our understanding... Not in God's revelation. For example, I can't entirely agree with you that there was nothing in the NT about family and marriage, and I certainly disagree with you that Paul was recommending none should marry. I think in a Hebrew society which took marriage as a sacred event, Paul, because of the horrendous times in which they lived, persecution from Jews and Romans, as well as from other cultures in the Gentile Nations such as in Asia and the worshippers of Diana etc, he was simply encouraging those who didn't feel that marriage was for them, not to feel guilty or wrong.
There are numerous scriptures throughout the NT that exalted marriage and family. 1 Peter 3:1-7; Ephesians 5:27-33; Col. 3:18-25; 1 Tim. 3:1-13; Titus 2:1-8.

I remind you also of this...
KJV Matthew 24:36-39
36 But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only.
37 But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
38 For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark,
39 And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

Jesus fully expected that marriage and family would still be an integral part of human society when He came. This aside from the several parables where marriage was depicted as sacred and holy.

And I would add...
KJV 1 Timothy 4:1-3
1 Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;
2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;
3 Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.

Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, forbidding to marry.
@Grailhunter
This would demolish your contention that Paul taught that celibacy was a preferable life-plan. In fact, he is here saying that anyone who taught such a thing had departed from the faith.

 

[Grailhunter]

... On face value, and go from there. My question, why did Jesus teach pacifism, turning the other cheek etc?
In Hebrews, Paul says
KJV Hebrews 1:1-3
1 God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,
2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;
3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;

NT appeared to you to contradict the old. Like for example regarding eye for an eye, and turning the other cheek. You also suggested a contradiction re marriage and family, from the old to the new.
I would like to suggest that every teaching in scripture is in some way, a reflection of the character of God. As the above scripture says, God spoke through his prophets... And then through His Son. It is the same God who is speaking. He is not a fickle changeable God who can't make up His mind. I don't believe there are contradictions between how He reveals His character from old to new testaments... Nor was He confused as to when His Son would return, in fact Jesus said, His Father knew, but hadn't informed His Son... Yet.[/QUOTE]

Ya I know change drives Fundamentalists nuts.
I did not say that God is fickled. Now if you are saying that God does not change His mind...start a thread stating that God does not change His mind...and I will prove you wrong.

You mentioned that the NT appeared to you to contradict the old.

Change is not contradiction. Contradiction is another topic. God's character does not change...I did not say that.
Change...as in, things change...that is part of the storyline of the Bible and history.
Christ took exception to the Mosaic Laws regarding divorce and eye for an eye. Another possible thread there.
Christ said...He did not know the time...but also said these things would occur before that generation passed. But I do like the guessing part.

But Jesus wasn't guessing about His return. I think any apparent contradiction is in our understanding... Not in God's revelation. For example, I can't entirely agree with you that there was nothing in the NT about family and marriage, and I certainly disagree with you that Paul was recommending none should marry.

This is another opportunity for a thread. You do not have to disagree with me on that. I did not say that there is nothing in the NT on marriage, because there is. There is just not a focus on the family and marriage...better to marry than to burn...the topic came up that, is it better not to touch a woman...there is more to it than that. As far as marriage Paul made it clear that he recommended celibacy. But I did not say he forbade any to marry.

I think in a Hebrew society which took marriage as a sacred event There are numerous scriptures throughout the NT that exalted marriage and family.

Do you think so. You might want to look into that.

The word exalt is an exaggeration. There are strictures that instruct...that is not exalting. Again I am going to point out the fact that nowhere in the Bible...Old or New Testament is there a scripture that states that a wedding is required. Things were a lot different than what most Christians have come to believe. Which is a topic in itself. The jews...there is not a word for wed or wedding in their language. But you might find it interesting to know that the Protestants were the first to require weddings, but that in itself dates the requirement. But even at that, that is a church decision, it is not biblical. Weddings slowly became a Christian custom, the first Christian wedding documented in history was in the 9th century. And the Church had nothing to do with it...Church involvement did not occur until centuries after that. Weddings were practiced as a custom.

A custom that was started by Gentile Christians and modeled after Roman weddings. That is why we have so many Pagan customs in modern weddings.

Jesus fully expected that marriage and family would still be an integral part of human society when He came. This aside from the several parables where marriage was depicted as sacred and holy.

You are probably going to come up empty handed on the New Testament using the words sacred and holy in regard to marriage. Then on the other hand I did not say that Christ expected marriages to end. But I will tell you that the early Church considered marriage a sin. The Catholic Church did not make marriage a sacrament until the 12th century. And the Protestants do not recognize sacraments.

..marriage is a crime against God, because it changed the state of virginity that God gave every man and woman at birth....Marriage was prostitution of the members of Christ, and married people ought to blush at the state in which they live.” Written by St. Ambrose

“He who ardently loves his own wife in an adulterer.”
Written by St. Jerome

Things were not as people think. But there were a lot things that the Holy Spirit taught Christianity after the close of the Bible.
We were taught that slavery was bad. That it is ok to defend yourself. That polygamy was bad. That women should have right to pick their husbands. That women were equal. Weddings is one of the most wonderful and beautiful things that the Holy Spirit taught us. I love weddings...the bigger the better. [/QUOTE]

 

[Grailhunter]

Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;
2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;

Truth is not of the devil. Truth is of God.

Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, forbidding to marry.

There is no part of this conversation that I say we should not marry...but marriage and weddings are not the same topic.
It has always been that the union forms the marriage. From the very beginning...God explained what formed a marriage.
Genesis 2:24
Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.
This is what causes a couple to be married. Always has and always will. In most states and countries and religions, if you do not consummate a marriage after the wedding...you can get the marriage annulled. The wedding is a custom to celebrate the marriage.

What I have said is the truth....Wheather you like or not...that in itself I find humorous. You can look it up for yourself. But if you want to live a fantasy....that is fine with me.
But do not insinuate that I do not like weddings, because I love weddings.
History bores people. Most people live their religion like it is the skin of an onion and usually got that from someone dumping it in their lap. If you want to know the truth you have to peel back the layers. If you want to know the truth, if you want to know the details you have to take the time to look it up.

 

[Riverwalker]

When He was talking about letting people slap us and just stand there and take it, I don't think He meant for us literally to become punching bags,.. so if that's why you guys don't believe in self-defense then that's just crazy in my mind.

In the Judaic times of Jesus , slapping a man on the cheek was an insult (like YOU MORON!) not an assualt. Jesus never intended us to be physically abused. He even told His apostles to arm themselves,

 

[Grailhunter]

In the Judaic times of Jesus , slapping a man on the cheek was an insult (like YOU MORON!) not an assualt. Jesus never intended us to be physically abused. He even told His apostles to arm themselves,

That does apply to this topic...for a few reasons...
1. Christ is not just talking about pacifism
2. He is talking about not resisting...people can take what they want from you.
3. The Apostles applied this.
4. Post biblical Christians believed this.

 

[Jacob28]

NT appeared to you to contradict the old. Like for example regarding eye for an eye, and turning the other cheek. You also suggested a contradiction re marriage and family, from the old to the new.
I would like to suggest that every teaching in scripture is in some way, a reflection of the character of God. As the above scripture says, God spoke through his prophets... And then through His Son. It is the same God who is speaking. He is not a fickle changeable God who can't make up His mind. I don't believe there are contradictions between how He reveals His character from old to new testaments... Nor was He confused as to when His Son would return, in fact Jesus said, His Father knew, but hadn't informed His Son... Yet.

Ya I know change drives Fundamentalists nuts.
I did not say that God is fickled. Now if you are saying that God does not change His mind...start a thread stating that God does not change His mind...and I will prove you wrong.



Change is not contradiction. Contradiction is another topic. God's character does not change...I did not say that.
Change...as in, things change...that is part of the storyline of the Bible and history.
Christ took exception to the Mosaic Laws regarding divorce and eye for an eye. Another possible thread there.
Christ said...He did not know the time...but also said these things would occur before that generation passed. But I do like the guessing part.



This is another opportunity for a thread. You do not have to disagree with me on that. I did not say that there is nothing in the NT on marriage, because there is. There is just not a focus on the family and marriage...better to marry than to burn...the topic came up that, is it better not to touch a woman...there is more to it than that. As far as marriage Paul made it clear that he recommended celibacy. But I did not say he forbade any to marry.



Do you think so. You might want to look into that.

The word exalt is an exaggeration. There are strictures that instruct...that is not exalting. Again I am going to point out the fact that nowhere in the Bible...Old or New Testament is there a scripture that states that a wedding is required. Things were a lot different than what most Christians have come to believe. Which is a topic in itself. The jews...there is not a word for wed or wedding in their language. But you might find it interesting to know that the Protestants were the first to require weddings, but that in itself dates the requirement. But even at that, that is a church decision, it is not biblical. Weddings slowly became a Christian custom, the first Christian wedding documented in history was in the 9th century. And the Church had nothing to do with it...Church involvement did not occur until centuries after that. Weddings were practiced as a custom.

A custom that was started by Gentile Christians and modeled after Roman weddings. That is why we have so many Pagan customs in modern weddings.



You are probably going to come up empty handed on the New Testament using the words sacred and holy in regard to marriage. Then on the other hand I did not say that Christ expected marriages to end. But I will tell you that the early Church considered marriage a sin. The Catholic Church did not make marriage a sacrament until the 12th century. And the Protestants do not recognize sacraments.

..marriage is a crime against God, because it changed the state of virginity that God gave every man and woman at birth....Marriage was prostitution of the members of Christ, and married people ought to blush at the state in which they live.” Written by St. Ambrose

“He who ardently loves his own wife in an adulterer.”
Written by St. Jerome

Things were not as people think. But there were a lot things that the Holy Spirit taught Christianity after the close of the Bible.
We were taught that slavery was bad. That it is ok to defend yourself. That polygamy was bad. That women should have right to pick their husbands. That women were equal. Weddings is one of the most wonderful and beautiful things that the Holy Spirit taught us. I love weddings...the bigger the better. [/QUOTE][/QUOTE]
Women are not equal or the same as Men.

 

[Grailhunter]

Women are not equal or the same as Men.

Did not say they were the same.
I still say they are equal. Now if you want to get into the definition of equal in this context...have at it.

 

[Jacob28]

Did not say they were the same.
I still say they are equal. Now if you want to get into the definition of equal in this context...have at it.

No aspect of women can be shown to be equal to that of men.

 

[Grailhunter]

No aspect of women can be shown to be equal to that of men.

Oh my!

 

[Jacob28]

Oh my!

Yes, I agree. You do focus on the "my" of your own feelings.

 

[Brakelite]

Truth is not of the devil. Truth is of God.



There is no part of this conversation that I say we should not marry...but marriage and weddings are not the same topic.
It has always been that the union forms the marriage. From the very beginning...God explained what formed a marriage.
Genesis 2:24
Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.
This is what causes a couple to be married. Always has and always will. In most states and countries and religions, if you do not consummate a marriage after the wedding...you can get the marriage annulled. The wedding is a custom to celebrate the marriage.

What I have said is the truth....Wheather you like or not...that in itself I find humorous. You can look it up for yourself. But if you want to live a fantasy....that is fine with me.
But do not insinuate that I do not like weddings, because I love weddings.
History bores people. Most people live their religion like it is the skin of an onion and usually got that from someone dumping it in their lap. If you want to know the truth you have to peel back the layers. If you want to know the truth, if you want to know the details you have to take the time to look it up.

Okay. I do get where you are coming from. And I have half way considered this myself in the past, and can go along with your perspective to a point. But I would like you to consider something.
In Revelation we are told of a marriage supper. In several parables Jesus speaks of wedding feasts. In Hebrew culture it was customary for the bridegroom to join with his bride and then go to collect his guests and take them in for the celebration. This scenario is repeated a number of times in scripture, the parables rejecting the same order of events. The marriage supper of the Lamb is no different. Jesus is joined with His bride... The kingdom/ new Jerusalem... Then returns to the earth for the guests... His church... To take them to heaven to enjoy the banquet.
Okay. So you don't like weddings. You don't like the formal ceremony. But I suggest that if you were to study deep enough, you would discover that the joining of the Son in marriage with His bride is very much a formal celebrated event, with His Father as the ministering celebrant.
The only reason I'm discussing this with you is that when reading your posts I got the impression you were against marriage itself, not just "weddings'. I apologize for misunderstanding

 

[Grailhunter]

Okay. So you don't like weddings. You don't like the formal ceremony. But I suggest that if you were to study deep enough, you would discover that the joining of the Son in marriage with His bride is very much a formal celebrated event, with His Father as the ministering celebrant.
The only reason I'm discussing this with you is that when reading your posts I got the impression you were against marriage itself, not just "weddings'. I apologize for misunderstanding

You are not dump. But you need to go back and read all those posts because I made it very clear that I like weddings. I am a hopeless romantic. If I have any craziness in my life it is because I am too romantic. I watch the Hallmark Channel all the time, and you know that is all about romance and weddings. I am also a big supporter of the feminine voice in Christianity.

You need to look at yourself. I am not saying that to be insulting. You have a phenomenon going on in your head a very common phenomenon. It is worth study and self analysis so you do not fall victim to it all the time. Do you think I am telling you that you are crazy? NO. How do people get so certain about things, without checking them out. This topic is a perfect example! How many people believe that weddings were going on in the Old and New Testament? That weddings were just a normal way people got married...like it was happening all the time. How many people have this in their heads? I would say that most to the extreme believe this. Who did this? How did it happen? That in itself is a worthy study. And I do not have an answer.

But the other side of this is that when the truth is provided for them, they freak! They go into denial and want to shoot the messenger! Most will not verify the information, it is not a matter of knowledge, they dislike it so so much that it infuriates them. They do not want it that way. They want to believe what they want to believe. So don't take this as an insult to you, this is wide spread, you are not alone, and you are in the majority. But you have been duped. And there are a lot of topics in Christianity that are like this. Part of this is Fundamentalism. Trying to understand the Bible only, which was written in a different era, without any back ground of the culture, history, or time period.

Even something as obvious as the Mosaic Law, people will get offended, if certain laws are brought up. "Oh no, God would never do that!" Well He did. They want to apply Christian concepts and morals to the Old Testament. It does not always work out. Way different time period. They will get all offended and huffy and think that me or someone is trying to say something bad about God.
That is not true. They get on their soap box and try to defend God and the Old Testament. LOL The fact is, that in no way, do the scriptures insult God. Truth does not insult God. And it is not wrong to bring up the facts.

It takes a lot to understand Old and New Testament period and most are not going to put forth the effort to dig that deep. So no, I never say bad things about God and certainly quoting the scriptures do not insult God. Truth does not insult God. So I love God and I love weddings, the bigger the better, the bigger the ring the better, the more beautiful the dress the better, the bigger the cake the better, fancy decorations and a lot of guests and everything and everyone doting on the bride!

But still the fact is that wedding ceremonies came from Pagan origins. And our modern Christian weddings still has a lot of those Pagan customs and rituals embedded in the ceremony. And I am not being critical of that! That is just fine. The Gentiles...Pagan converts to Christianity, took over the helm of the Church very early on. They came from several regions and brought a lot of their customs into Christianity. They converted to Christianity, but they did not abandon a lot of their customs. You can see that in a lot of our holidays and the rituals within the holidays...as time went on they were Christianized. But the bottom line is that Christian weddings are a custom, not a biblical requirement. In the Old and New Testament, couples formed a marriage by having sex. That is just the way it is. So that is the facts and you can check it out. So the one thing to know, is that just because the majority believes something, that does not mean it is true.

In Revelation we are told of a marriage supper. In several parables Jesus speaks of wedding feasts. In Hebrew culture it was customary for the bridegroom to join with his bride and then go to collect his guests and take them in for the celebration. This scenario is repeated a number of times in scripture, the parables rejecting the same order of events. The marriage supper of the Lamb is no different. Jesus is joined with His bride... The kingdom/ new Jerusalem... Then returns to the earth for the guests... His church... To take them to heaven to enjoy the banquet.

Now you hit on another interesting topic. If you read all of the scriptures concerning the relationship between Christ and the Church, a lot of them are presented as parables. And these parables are referencing something known as the Jewish Wedding Feast. But you will not find that phrase in the Old Testament. There were customs and celebrations in the Old Testament, but not weddings and they were not defined as a ceremony in the Old Testament and they were not required...some people in the OT celebrated marriages...that is all there is to it. As a whole if the Jews were following any process in the OT, it involved a procession that ended up taking the bride to the groom's home where they consummated the marriage. In some cases the guests were there when they joined. It was called the bridal chamber and was built just for the event. In modern Jewish weddings it is symbolically represent by a canopy called the Chuppah

This topic is huge and worth study. I said it before I do not have the room here to give it justice. But in short...after the Persians conquered the Babylonians, the Jew were under their rule...not entirely a negative...you can read about the Persians helping the Jews to build another Temple in the Bible. But it is what happens during the 400 years between the Testaments that is interesting. And again this is a long story and affects many things. But in relation to weddings, the Persians were known for their elaborate and beautiful weddings. It looks like the Jews were impressed by the way they celebrated weddings.. So they came up with their own, but unlike the Christians they included biblical characters and events in there weddings, with no reference to Paganism. You can see this in modern Jewish weddings and it was known as the Jewish Wedding Feast.

Now after Alexander the Great conquer Persia, the Jews fall under the rule of the Greeks. They hated each other. And then the Romans Empire develops and the Jews have one conflict after another with the Romans...horrible...tens of thousands killed and thousands crucified and this hatred festers. So the Jews start to distance themselves from anything Pagan, Including the Jewish Wedding Feast because the concept came from the Persians and it was not directed by God in the OT. So in Christ's time it was not very popular. But then about a century or so after the destruction of the Temple in 70 ad, the Talmud starts talking about the Jewish Wedding Feast again. And the Jews have been celebrating it ever since. So this is what Christ and John are referencing this from. But still, Christ nor the Apostles ever said that weddings were a requirement and Christians eventually model their weddings after Roman weddings. And that is just fine...I have no complaints.

Then there is a long story about why the Christians never embraced any aspect of the Jewish Wedding Feast.

 

[quietthinker]

That was quiet a rave Grailhunter ...and some stuff to reflect on. By the way, are you a woman?

 

[Grailhunter]

That was quiet a rave Grailhunter ...and some stuff to reflect on. By the way, are you a woman?

LOL

 

[quietthinker]

LOL

??

 

[amadeus]

??

Grailhunter
Well-Known Member
Male, 64, from FARMINGTON
Profile Page Media Page Start a Conversation Follow Ignore
Member Since:

Jun 19, 2019

Messages:

6,021

Likes Received:

3,329

Trophy Points:

113

Media:

1
Grailhunter was last seen:

Viewing forum list, 3 minutes ago

 

[April_Rose]

Umm,.. why did you just copy and paste @Grailhunter's information? :/

 

[amadeus]

Umm,.. why did you just copy and paste @Grailhunter's information? :/

Quickthinker posted ?? apparently with regard to the question as to which gender Grailhunter was.

 

[April_Rose]

Quickthinker posted ?? apparently with regard to the question as to which gender Grailhunter was.

Oh okay that explains it I have him on ignore.