Watch this video and then consider Kim Davis....

[irosie91]

so far-----having read the NT------I am not convinced that Jesus actually said that.
It is out of character -------it suggests that he advocated submission to roman
authority. If Jesus actually advocated submission to Roman authority---he would not have chased the money changers from the temple courtyard. Which is it-----
"pay your unjust tax tribute to rome" ----or "resist roman corruption in Jerusalem"??????

We are taught the temple tax was for the Jewish priesthood, not the Romans.... the money changers were Jewish.

Pharisees were trying to trick Jesus in to supporting a war against the ruling Romans and Jesus would have no part of it....thus keep a separation of church and state...render unto Caesar what is Caesar's....

You're jumbling several parables into one.

The reason Jesus destroyed the vender's tables was because he was emotional about returning to the Temple for the first time in years....and saw the merchants making money off of the people who were just trying to worship God.

He blew a gasket.

yes, you are right, i was talking about 2 different verses and combining them, because I was replying to Rosie, who was using both of these scriptures to express why she wasn't so certain Jesus even said give unto Caesar what is his....

the money changers and animals for sacrifice sellers were making a profit off of worshipers, true...this angered him, because of the evil in their hearts.... if they had been simply selling and exchanging money, without realizing what they were doing to harm others, he would have used REASONing with them, but HE saw that they knew what they were doing and didn't care....they were hypocrites, like many Jews at the time that came to the temple 3 times a year to give their animal sacrifice as a requirement. They gave their animal sacrifice for forgiveness of sins and as they walked away they continued to sin, being the same ole adulterers and sinners that encompassed them....

is what I was taught about it....

plus, HE knew that He would be the final Lamb sacrificed.

whoever taught you did not make much sense------he attacked merchants doing
a job because he knew that he was the "final lamb"??? You seem to have
been taught by a very dull hypocrite. Did he object to the Good Humor man with
the ice cream truck because he made a profit selling popsicles?

here's someone better with words than I on it....

However, Jesus’ action in the Court of the Gentiles was more than simply an angry outburst against corruption. How do we know that? As He cleanses the area, Jesus quotes a phrase from the prophet, Jeremiah: “Will you steal, murder, commit adultery, swear falsely, burn incenses to Baal, and…then come and stand before Me in this house, which is called by My Name, and say, ‘We are delivered!’—only to go on doing all these abominations? Has this house… become a den of robbers in your eyes?” (Jer 7:9-11) Here, the judgment against God’s people is not simply doing business where they shouldn’t have; rather, it was their great hypocrisy and presumption in believing that simply by keeping Temple rituals, God would deliver them against the threat of their enemies, even though they lived in great covenant infidelity. In Jeremiah’s day, as in Jesus’ day, God’s charge against His people was their empty religion—maintaining their liturgies with hearts far from Him. The fact that the Court of the Gentiles, which was supposed to be a place of prayer and evangelization, had become a “marketplace” was emblematic of Israel’s terrible spiritual desolation.

In His cleansing of the Temple, Jesus prophetically demonstrates that the Temple was no longer a place of true encounter with God, for Jews or Gentiles. It was destined to be eclipsed and replaced. That is why, when the Jews questioned Jesus’ authority for His action, He enigmatically predicts a destruction—but not of the Temple building. No, He referred to His own Body as “this Temple.” He spoke of His death and resurrection as the “sign” of His authority to bring an end to animal sacrifice (which is why He drove out the animals) and to open encounter with God to all the nations (restoring the true meaning of the Court of the Gentiles). Unlike a “zealot,” who unleashes violence on others, Jesus’ “zeal” for His Father’s house would consume Him, leading to His own death on he Cross.

I'm not asking you to believe any of this, you can believe whatever you like Rosie!!!

the court yard of the temple------was not "the court of the gentiles"------it was simply something like the YARD-----it was within the temple gates. The "court yard" of the Gentiles was actually a GALLERY specifically for non jews to experience the
activities of the temple services. My understanding of the circumstances of the
attack by Jesus on the "money changers" is based on the HISTORIC fact of the tensions between the PHARISEES and the Romans which is well documented--and the tensions between the Pharisees and the Sadducees who were shills of the romans. AND the outcome which was the crucifixtion of Jesus for
SEDITION AGAINST ROME. The romans did not kill jews as a favor to Pharisees as you have been taught-----in fact, the overwhelming majority of the
tens of thousands of people that they crucified were Pharisees. Jesus walked like a Pharisee-----talked Like a Pharisee, and despised Sadducees like a Pharisee and despised the money changers in the temple YARD like a Pharisee----He was entombed in the family tomb of a prominent Pharisee in Jerusalem and his
followers were Pharisees --------you do not have to believe that he was a Pharisee----------you can believe utterly idiotic thing you wish. I was not TAUGHT
to believe anything-------I have had no schooling in any religion

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

Player Page : Do Muslims believe sharia law supersedes the Constitution? : CenturyLink

I am a Christian and, while I understand her faith and her stance, we have to also consider whether she is putting her faith and responsibility as a government official above the US Constitution AND I she is, is she correct

What is different from what she did with a Muslim that says Sharia law is above the US Constitution? FOX never went there, as long as I watched the video. What do you think?

Any Christian that supports Democrats is a hypocrite.

It's true.

Concerning their support of Abortion, homosexual marriage and such I agree. If someone is still a registered Democrat and decides to follow Jesus Christ I support them in their faith to the utmost.

Yes.....but voting for Democrats means that you are facilitating the murder of the unborn, and homosexual-marriage. It's like asking for forgiveness during confession and repeating the same sins......it's totally invalid.

Well, I agree with you and I would not vote for a Democrat. I am talking about a Democrat that becomes a Christian - I would support them in following their faith in Christ, same for a Muslim converting to Christianity, whoever would come to Christ - I'd support them in following their faith and speak up for them if they needed help.

 

[mudwhistle]

Player Page : Do Muslims believe sharia law supersedes the Constitution? : CenturyLink

I am a Christian and, while I understand her faith and her stance, we have to also consider whether she is putting her faith and responsibility as a government official above the US Constitution AND I she is, is she correct

What is different from what she did with a Muslim that says Sharia law is above the US Constitution? FOX never went there, as long as I watched the video. What do you think?

Any Christian that supports Democrats is a hypocrite.

It's true.

Concerning their support of Abortion, homosexual marriage and such I agree. If someone is still a registered Democrat and decides to follow Jesus Christ I support them in their faith to the utmost.

Yes.....but voting for Democrats means that you are facilitating the murder of the unborn, and homosexual-marriage. It's like asking for forgiveness during confession and repeating the same sins......it's totally invalid.

Well, I agree with you and I would not vote for a Democrat. I am talking about a Democrat that becomes a Christian - I would support them in following their faith in Christ, same for a Muslim converting to Christianity, whoever would come to Christ - I'd support them in following their faith and speak up for them if they needed help.

As long as they support "THESE" Democrats........they're not true Christians. They cannot reconcile their beliefs with the Democratic Party platform.