The Bigotry of the Christ

Now, this should come as no surprise to anyone that has an understanding of first century Judaism, but Jesus didn't want his message to be preached to anyone but other Jews. He specifically tells his apostles:

Matthew 10:5-6

These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not: But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

which is odd... because the rest of the NT's bigotry seems to be antisemitism...

Perhaps, Jesus didn't necessarily view the gentiles as "lost." Jesus made it quite clear that the Jews practiced a religion of that had "lost its way," throughout the NT.

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
because the rest of the NT's bigotry seems to be antisemitism...

Examples?

Also, what Christ stated was for the time, yes, but He Himself did go the way of the Gentiles (The woman at the well and the one who touched His garment come immediately to mind).

reply to post by madnessinmysoul


[quote[The Bigotry of the Christ

Now, this should come as no surprise to anyone that has an understanding of first century Judaism, but Jesus didn't want his message to be preached to anyone but other Jews. He specifically tells his apostles:

Matthew 10:5-6

These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not: But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.



which is odd... because the rest of the NT's bigotry seems to be antisemitism...

Some of what you are reading as "antisemitism" in the New Testament isn't. Christ tells us that there are those that "say they are Jews" but they are not:

Rev.2:9 I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty (but thou art rich), and I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan.

Also, those referred to as "Jews" are actually simply inhabitants of Judah. I am an Alabamian but I am also Scotch/Irish. So...those people being referred to could be any race but living in Judea, or they could be Jews.

Another consideration is that the "Jews" are of the tribe of Judah, along with the tribe of Benjamin and some of Levi that stayed with Judah when the split took place and the 12 tribes parted. The other tribes are not considered Jews at all but are the "house of Israel". The "nation" of Israel didn't come into being until 1948.

Christ was sent to the house of Israel:

Matthew 15:24. But He answered and said, "I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel."



......Whirlwind

Originally posted by junglejake

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
because the rest of the NT's bigotry seems to be antisemitism...

Examples?

the gospels of mark (the one the passion was based off of) and john...

Also, what Christ stated was for the time, yes, but He Himself did go the way of the Gentiles (The woman at the well and the one who touched His garment come immediately to mind).

well... part of my point is inconsistency in the bible.

each book seems to cater to a different audience... matthew seems to cater to an audience of potential christians that were currently jews.

Originally posted by SpeakerofTruth
Perhaps, Jesus didn't necessarily view the gentiles as "lost." Jesus made it quite clear that the Jews practiced a religion of that had "lost its way," throughout the NT.

perhaps... but wouldn't the jews be a bit less lost than pagans? i mean, it's clear that people worshiping jupiter, apollo, minerva, et all are a bit further from the monotheistic goal jesus seems to have set up... especially when you see how the religions were carried out.

aye, but this is the logical fallacy of special pleading.

Christ clearly said love your enemies and pray for them. He came for the gentiles which were pagan. He also says he wishes all men to come to the knowledge of the truth and be saved.

Because he created them and loves them to death.

peace.

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
the gospels of mark (the one the passion was based off of) and john...

Okay, I guess I meant specific examples...

well... part of my point is inconsistency in the bible.

each book seems to cater to a different audience...

Exactly! They were each written with a different focus because people are different. Each of the books, while relating relatively the same experiences, does so while drawing attention to the gospel writer's own personality and their experience. In so doing, everyone who reads can hear from God. You're different than I, and God can speak to us differently. Someone who's a very compassionate person might look to John and be moved, whereas someone else who's very analytical may look to Luke and be very moved. God knows His creation!

[edit on 9/8/07/08 by junglejake]

Originally posted by JesusisTruth

Christ clearly said love your enemies and pray for them. He came for the gentiles which were pagan. He also says he wishes all men to come to the knowledge of the truth and be saved.

yeah... then why did he specifically order his followers to go only to the children of israel?

Originally posted by junglejake
Okay, I guess I meant specific examples...

well... with mark i say it's antisemitic as it places all the blame for the death of jesus on the jews... which is where a lot of modern antisemitism comes from, the belief that the jews killed jesus, as opposed to a small band of pharisees or a group of romans...

as for john...let me whip out my handy dandy online bible...
this should take a few minutes (though you won't realize that as you aren't reading as i'm typing)

John
5:16 And therefore did the Jews persecute Jesus, and sought to slay him, because he had done these things on the sabbath day.
5:18 Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God.
7:1 After these things Jesus walked in Galilee: for he would not walk in Jewry, because the Jews sought to kill him.
7:13 Howbeit no man spake openly of him for fear of the Jews.
8:44 Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it. (this is jesus talking to jews)
11:8 His disciples say unto him, Master, the Jews of late sought to stone thee; and goest thou thither again?
19:7 The Jews answered him, We have a law, and by our law he ought to die, because he made himself the Son of God. (again blaming the jews for the death of jesus... not the pharisees, all the jews)
19:12 And from thenceforth Pilate sought to release him: but the Jews cried out, saying, If thou let this man go, thou art not Caesar's friend: whosoever maketh himself a king speaketh against Caesar.
20:19 Then the same day at evening, being the first day of the week, when the doors were shut where the disciples were assembled for fear of the Jews, came Jesus and stood in the midst, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you.

Exactly! They were each written with a different focus because people are different. Each of the books, while relating relatively the same experiences, does so while drawing attention to the gospel writer's own personality and their experience. In so doing, everyone who reads can hear from God.

...but i'm also pointing out that the bible is inconsistent... in bigotry. there is bigotry there...

You're different than I, and God can speak to us differently. Someone who's a very compassionate person might look to John and be moved,

compassionate... except to jews...

whereas someone else who's very analytical may look to Luke and be very moved.

or someone who really doesn't like gentiles would look to matthew and be moved.

God knows His creation!

no, this is actually about how the early church formed around several different groups... those different groups used different texts... that's why we have those gnostic gospels and all the other non-canonical books.

yeah... then why did he specifically order his followers to go only to the children of israel?

Matt.10:5 These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, "go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not:
6.But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

Matt.15:24 But He answered and said, "I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel."

It wasn't yet time for the Gentiles so Christ sent them to teach the 10 tribes, the 10 "lost" tribes of Israel. As vs. 24 shows He also was sent for the lost sheep of those same tribes.

Those tribes are scattered throughout the world, thought to be the Christian nations of today. Christ and His disciples taught them and they in turn share His Word with the world.

Okay, I guess I meant specific examples...

well... with mark i say it's antisemitic as it places all the blame for the death of jesus on the jews... which is where a lot of modern antisemitism comes from, the belief that the jews killed jesus, as opposed to a small band of pharisees or a group of romans...

Many still do place blame on the Jews for His death and it is wrong. Two things to consider is that the "Jews" could mean of the tribe of Judah and could also mean those that are living in Judea, of any race or creed. Were those that killed Christ just called Jews because of where they lived or were they actually of the tribe of Judah, one of the 12 tribes of Israel?

Another consideration is that the high priest, Caiaphas, was appointed by Rome, not God as he should have been. He and his elders, "and all the council, sought false witness against Jesus, to put Him to death; (Matt.26:59)

Christ wants us to know who those "Jews" actually are. He only approves of 2 of 7 churches in Rev., and those 2 churches teach the truth of who they are.

Rev.3:9 Behold, I will make them of the synagogue of Satan, which say they are Jews, and are not, but do lie; behold, I will make them to come and worship before thy feet, and to know that I have loved thee.

as for john...let me whip out my handy dandy online bible...
this should take a few minutes (though you won't realize that as you aren't reading as i'm typing)

John 5:16-18, 7:1, 13, 8:44, 11:8, 19:7, 12, 20:19

The word Jews, as listed in those scriptures, must also have the above explanations as to who they are. Of the tribe of Judah or inhabitants of Judea or - true Jews of the tribe of Judah, or those appointed by Rome?

.........Whirlwind

reply to post by whirlwind


your entire reply rests on the logical fallacy known as "special pleading"
you say that jesus told the apostles to only go to the tribes of israel because he didn't think they gentiles were ready... where did you get that from?
you pulled it out of thin air, when you add an explanation from nowhere it's known as special pleading.

your entire reply rests on the logical fallacy known as "special pleading"
you say that jesus told the apostles to only go to the tribes of israel because he didn't think they gentiles were ready... where did you get that from?
you pulled it out of thin air, when you add an explanation from nowhere it's known as special pleading.

I disagree in that "my entire reply rests" on the part you find fault with.

When I said, " It wasn't yet time for the Gentiles so Christ sent them to teach the 10 tribes, the 10 "lost" tribes of Israel. As vs. 24 shows He also was sent for the lost sheep of those same tribes. I was taking it from Luke 21:24.

That verse states .......until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled. It is logical to me that if in Luke He tells us the times of the gentiles are not yet fulfilled and in Matthew that He was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel, I read that as the reason - their time had not come.


Perhaps I'm wrong and there is another meaning but regardless I don't believe my entire previous reply rested on that. If you still find fault with it please disregard those words - "it wasn't yet time for the gentiles".


........Whirlwind

reply to post by whirlwind


you're still using special pleading, the source in luke would be special pleading because you're attaching things when they aren't attached. luke wasn't written in the context of matthew, luke was written in a separate context for a separate audience. the books were only put into a compendium through actions not approved of by the authors of the respective books.

you're still using special pleading, the source in luke would be special pleading because you're attaching things when they aren't attached. luke wasn't written in the context of matthew, luke was written in a separate context for a separate audience. the books were only put into a compendium through actions not approved of by the authors of the respective book

Thank you for that explanation and I will keep it in mind. However, they are both telling the same story, about the same Christ. It seems logical to be able to join the stories about the same subject, Gentiles.

But again, if my wording bothers you there, please remove it and still consider the remaining thought.


.........Whirlwind

reply to post by whirlwind


stories about the same character don't always form a consistent story... hell, in most mythologies there are the differences you find in the christian mythos.

stories about the same character don't always form a consistent story... hell, in most mythologies there are the differences you find in the christian mythos.

The stories of Christ are not myth and I find them to be very consistent. Mythology on the other hand is hogwash. Very often a corrupted version of God's story.

You will find what appear to some to be inconsistencies in God's Word but often, after deeper study, discover that they are not at all.

At least, that is what I have found.........Whirlwind

Originally posted by whirlwind
The stories of Christ are not myth and I find them to be very consistent.

ok... prove that they are historical accounts. provide me evidence to verify the existence of the main character.

the thing is... i know you can't. there is absolutely NO evidence to support the existence of jesus as a historical figure

Mythology on the other hand is hogwash.

the follower of one myth calling the other myth hogwash?
how ironic...

...Mythology is often thought of as "other peoples" religions...Religion can be defined as mis-interpreted mythology
-Joseph Campbell

Very often a corrupted version of God's story.

yes, because mythologies that came about hundreds to thousands of years before YOUR religion are corrupted versions of YOUR myths...

You will find what appear to some to be inconsistencies in God's Word but often, after deeper study, discover that they are not at all.

you know... there are outright contradictions.

like.. the last words of jesus
or... the death of judas.

and then there are far more complex theological contradictions... like the contradiction over whether or not there is an unforgivable sin.

edit: fixed a quote

[edit on 9/11/07 by madnessinmysoul]

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
ok... prove that they are historical accounts. provide me evidence to verify the existence of the main character.

What have you done to challenge your beliefs? The books you've read -- have they all been putting forward why Christianity is false? Thew websites you visit -- do they talk about the evidence and interpretation of the evidence that supports why the Bible is false?

I know you come here, and I know you read the responses, but they're brief, and no one here I know of is a Biblical scholar who has spent their time to the point where we're knowledgeable enough to be able to publish a book.

So I'm curious. How convinced are you that you're right? Are you convinced enough to where you could read a book or two that presents a rebuttal to those other books you've read?

reply to post by junglejake


i'm not convinced that i'm right.. i'm just not convinced that you're right.

i'm not just spouting off points from books, pamphlets, or websites.... there just really doesn't seem to be any historical backing to show that jesus existed as a historical figure.

reply to post by madnessinmysoul


I hear you, and understand what you're saying. I, too, don't just regurgitate what I read by try to apply it to the information I've managed to retain through this life. I hope you didn't think I was trying to say you're just spitting out what you're reading.

What I am asking, though, is if you're confident enough in your opinion, or willing enough to challenge yourself and read something contrary to what you believe.

Originally posted by whirlwind
The stories of Christ are not myth and I find them to be very consistent.

Madness -
ok... prove that they are historical accounts. provide me evidence to verify the existence of the main character.

the thing is... i know you can't. there is absolutely NO evidence to support the existence of jesus as a historical figure

Madness....time itself changed because of His life here on earth. The first prophecy of the Bible, Gen. 3:15 is about Christ and part of that prophecy came to pass 2,000 years ago. The other half will happen soon.

Do you believe that His disciples could have started a movement that Christianity has grown into if he was just a myth? He was and is very real. As far as "proof" that He lived - can you "prove" that Socrates or Plato were real? Were the Pharoah's of Egypt real? Yes they had books written about their sayings or carvings imprinted on walls but Can You Prove they were real? Christ also had a book that has stood the test of time written about Him and it shows how Divinely inspired it is.

The argument you put forth of needing to prove His existence is silly. How can you even prove your great great grandfather was real?

WW - Mythology on the other hand is hogwash.

Madness -
the follower of one myth calling the other myth hogwash?
how ironic...

Mythology is a convoluted, confusing mess (to me). If one wants to study it that is terrific but to compare it to reality, to history, to what the very existence of our souls depends on is a non-sequiter. There is no comparison.

..Mythology is often thought of as "other peoples" religions...Religion can be defined as mis-interpreted mythology
-Joseph Campbell

If it is one's religion then it is misplaced. Also, Christianity is not religion but rather a way of life.

yes, because mythologies that came about hundreds to thousands of years before YOUR religion are corrupted versions of YOUR myths...

That isn't true. Consider this....Cain, when thrown out of the garden, Cain knew his wife; and she conceived, and bare Enoch; and he builded a city, and called the name of the city, after the name of his son, Enoch.

What was that city? Could it have been Babylon where all the mythology came from? Babylon just means bable, confusion and that is what mythology is. A corruption of the creation story and who better to corrupt it then the one thrown out.

WW - You will find what appear to some to be inconsistencies in God's Word but often, after deeper study, discover that they are not at all.

Madness -
you know... there are outright contradictions.

like.. the last words of jesus
or... the death of judas.

and then there are far more complex theological contradictions... like the contradiction over whether or not there is an unforgivable sin.

I'll take your last one first. There is an unforgiveable sin but it can only be committed by one of God's Elect. At the end of days His elect will stand before Satan who has come to earth pretending to be Christ - and he will fool many who don't know the truth. The sin is in not allowing the Holy Spirit to speak through you.

Luke 12:10 And whosoever shall speak a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but unto him that blasphemeth against the Holy Ghost it shall not be forgiven.

11.And when they bring you unto the synagogues, and unto magistrates, and powers, take ye no thought how or what thing ye shall answer, or what ye shall say:

12.For the Holy Ghost shall teach you in the same hour what ye ought to say.

Only God's elect have the right to do this and only they can be condemned with no forgiveness. Others have been blinded to the truth for their protection but what the Spirit says through the elect will open the eyes of many others. The seeds that have been planted will germinate at that time.

As far as the "last words of Jesus or death of Judas" being contraditions please be more explicit. What do you mean?


..............Whirlwind