Contrasting the Father and the Son

Originally posted by kirksey957
Given a choice between seeing some of my pigeons whipped and my money overturned and being struck down for spilling my seed on the ground, I'll take the first choice.

i dont approve of whipping pidgeons at all, and that spilling of seed business could easily be misinterpreted by some dirt track minds

Originally posted by whodey
So the Son is compassionate and the Father is not? Try telling that to the money changers Christ drove out with a whip from the temple. 😛 I think depends on ones perspective as to who is compassionate and who is not.

Please quote and cite the NT passage where it says that Jesus brandished a whip at the temple.

Thank you.

Originally posted by josephw
Bunk.

Most guys don't get mellower after they get married and have a few kids? I've seen it happen a lot. What is your vast experience on this matter?

Originally posted by no1marauder
Please quote and cite the NT passage where it says that Jesus brandished a whip at the temple.

Interestingly enough, none of the Synoptic Gospels report a whip during the 'Cleansing of the Temple'
(in this version of the Jesus narrative, the purging takes place at the end of Jesus' ministry).

However, in the Johannine version, Jesus empties the Temple at the beginning of His ministry and
uses 'a whip [made out] of cords/ropes [phiragellion ek schoinion] (2:15). None of them report
anything about 'anger,' although many infer it from the context.

Nemesio

Originally posted by no1marauder
Most guys don't get mellower after they get married and have a few kids? I've seen it happen a lot. What is your vast experience on this matter?

6 kids. I think I mellowed with age. But I still like a good fight!

Originally posted by Nemesio
Interestingly enough, none of the Synoptic Gospels report a whip during the 'Cleansing of the Temple'
(in this version of the Jesus narrative, the purging takes place at the end of Jesus' ministry).

However, in the Johannine version, Jesus empties the Temple at the beginning of His ministry and
uses 'a whip [made out] of cords/ropes [phiragellion ...[text shortened]... hem report
anything about 'anger,' although many infer it from the context.

Nemesio

True enough; the passage says this though (ASV):

2:15 and he made a scourge of cords, and cast all out of the temple, both the sheep and the oxen;;

Nothing about taking a whip to the money changers, as whodey stated.

whodey: Try telling that to the money changers Christ drove out with a whip from the temple.

I take the context to mean that he used the scourge to move along the beasts, not to threaten the people. If this is being read as an indication that Jesus might have not believed in non-violence, it makes many other Gospel passages problematic.

Originally posted by no1marauder
True enough; the passage says this though (ASV):

2:15 and he made a scourge of cords, and cast all out of the temple, [b]both the sheep and the oxen;;

Nothing about taking a whip to the money changers, as whodey stated.

whodey: Try telling that to the money changers Christ drove out with a whip from the temple.

...[text shortened]... Jesus might have not believed in non-violence, it makes many other Gospel passages problematic.[/b]

Interesting. It seems even clearer in the Greek, which reads something like—

“...all [he] drove out from the sacred area both the sheep and the cattle, and of the money-changers spilled/scattered the coin and the tables overturned.”

“All” is in the accusative case, as are “sheep” and “cattle” (being the objects of the driving out); “money-changers” is in the genitive case, signifying that the coin is theirs.

Originally posted by eamon o
is it a sort of good cop / bad cop theme?

Wow. That's brilliant. I think you've hit the nail on the head. Or at least close to it.

The next time I see a "WWJD?" sticker I think I'll go whip the people who own the car.

Originally posted by no1marauder
I take the context to mean that he used the scourge to move along the beasts, not to threaten the people. If this is being read as an indication that Jesus might have not believed in non-violence, it makes many other Gospel passages problematic.[/b]

Fair enough. However, whether he was physically chasing out the money changers or simply chasing out their livestock signifies an act of aggression towards the money changers in my mind. Either act was an attempt to throw them out. Perhaps you would like some direct quotes from Christ himself as to whether or not he was a pacifist?

Matthew 11:12 And from the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven suffers violence, and the violent take it by force.

Matthew 10:34 Think not that I am come to send peace on earth; I come not to send peace, but a sword. For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. And a man's foes shall be in his own household. He that loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me, and he that loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. And he that takes not his cross and follows after me, is not worthy of me. He that finds his life will lose it and he that loses his life for my sake will find it.

Granted, I do not think Christ was talking about a literal sword, rather, he was talking in terms of spiritual violence. The number one commandment is to love the Lord your God with all your heart, therefore, one must put Christ above all others. After all, he is the one who put your loved ones in your life. Thus to love the created more than their Creator is flawed thinking to say the least. I am not prepared to say, however, that Christ saw physical violence as immoral as long as it achieved a spiritual goal of the Father. After all, Christ's crucifixian seems pretty violent and Christ said that that is why he came into the world and that man did not take his life, rather, he laid it down willfully because the Father willed it. Likewise, perhaps the violence suffered by people in the Old Testament was spiritual in nature even though it crossed the bounds of physical violence in the natural realm.

Originally posted by eamon o
do you think its a positive thing that the greedy people are labelled as jews? does it not help to continue the anti semitic tradition?

Weren't the money changers Jewish? I'm labelling them as Jews because they were Jews, not because they were greedy.


Weren't the money changers greedy? I'm labelling them as greedy because they were greedy, not because they were Jews.

Originally posted by whodey
Fair enough. However, whether he was physically chasing out the money changers or simply chasing out their livestock signifies an act of aggression towards the money changers in my mind. Either act was an attempt to throw them out. Perhaps you would like some direct quotes from Christ himself as to whether or not he was a pacifist?

Matthew 11:12 And fro ...[text shortened]... iritual in nature even though it crossed the bounds of physical violence in the natural realm.

whodey: Likewise, perhaps the violence suffered by people in the Old Testament was spiritual in nature even though it crossed the bounds of physical violence in the natural realm.


LMAO!!! Do you really believe crap like this?

Originally posted by no1marauder
whodey: Likewise, perhaps the violence suffered by people in the Old Testament was spiritual in nature even though it crossed the bounds of physical violence in the natural realm.


LMAO!!! Do you really believe crap like this?

From the Christian perspective God's overall goal after the fall of man was to bring the Messiah into the world for the redemption of mankind. Therefore, he worked through a man called Abraham to bring into existence a nation who would, in turn, produce the Messiah. All of these pursuits were spiritaully motivated even though fighting extended from the spiritual realm into our physical realm and it continues today.

Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
Weren't the money changers Jewish? I'm labelling them as Jews because they were Jews, not because they were greedy.


Weren't the money changers greedy? I'm labelling them as greedy because they were greedy, not because they were Jews.

ive no idea whether they were jewish or not, but thats the way the story went apparently. in the future people might label the germans fascist because thats the way the history books recorded it.
the trouble is that the word jewish becomes synonomous with greedy, dont you see, my point is that the power of the written word is not to be underestimated, one needs to be wary of taking things literally when a pinch of salt is required

Originally posted by whodey
Yes, but perhaps it is better than going blind. 😛

Anyhew, one must then ask, "Who gave us the Son?" Was it not the Father?

I don't want to appear rude, but I have to ask:

Are they different?

Originally posted by whodey
From the Christian perspective God's overall goal after the fall of man was to bring the Messiah into the world for the redemption of mankind. Therefore, he worked through a man called Abraham to bring into existence a nation who would, in turn, produce the Messiah. All of these pursuits were spiritaully motivated even though fighting extended from the spiritual realm into our physical realm and it continues today.

Your Christianity is a Man-centered death cult. The idea that some 3 O God created the vast universe just so he could have inferior creatures grovel before him for all eternity is bizarre. And the idea that to do this he had to somehow manifest some aspect of himself onto this insignificant blue ball so it could die and magically come back to impress creatures that are infinitely less to him than an amoeba is to us is plain weird.

Ask the Midianites or the folks at Jericho how "spiritual" their treatment was in the Old Testament.