Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The assumption....ideas...or speculations about what JESUS would do and would not do offered only in ad hominem SUBJECTIVE OPINION void of any conformation by the Word of God, are all moot in consideration of being defined as truth. Truth is found only in one place, THE WORD OF GOD, and we are admonished to be sanctified therein -- John 17:17, as clearly and quite unambiguously declared by the Christ Himself. If you want to KNOW what Jesus would do...there is only one source to confirm or answer the query with any intellectual honesty, the same source from which the question was asked...it must also be answered, if not we do not have truth, but rather the simple worthless opinion of someone that wants their individual doctrine to be considered as truth. Individual or private interpretation of the scriptures is strictly forbidden -- 2 Peter 1:19-21. What is the point in reasoning WITHOUT TRUTH? For a scriptural query to be answered in truth it must be accompanied by the TRUTH, in Book, Chapter and Verse.
One can PROVE anything when they begin with a false premise....hoping that no one notices the obvious. If I presented made up evidence that is found only in my thoughts void of scriptural conformation....I can then use that false premise to erect any type of structure that I wish to construct.
You see, when you start with false evidence, you cannot make a truth judgment of final conclusion....you have "dangling" truth....much like the misuse of sentence structure, you might get your point across establishing communication, but such is far from being CORRECT. Half/Truths = ONE WHOLE LIE. The conclusion can be true or false....but void of conformation and verification, it is useless in establishing the absolute truth.
The majority of the posts and retorts along this thread are .....just that......SUBJECTIVE OPINIONS. When you want to confirm what Jesus would do......go to the source and prove it. There is not one person now living in the 21st century that did not learn about Christianity void of the Holy Scriptures and the knowledge and wisdom found therein....no one was born with an inherent knowledge of God's revelation. After all it is the WORD of God...aka the Scriptures which are ALL inspired by God ( 2 Tim. 3:16).......from which All Christian Faith is derived and gestated -- Romans 10:17
Hence is anyone is to be persuaded of the TRUTH....the goal does not justify the means, there is a proper procedure that must be upheld. One must use TRUTH to persuade others of TRUTH. My Word is not truth...nor do I expect anyone to accept my word as truth, UNLESS...I present DEMONSTRABLE evidence of what I am propagating as being truth, this must be OBSERVABLE for everyone to TEST.....and the Holy Scriptures are very observable and very testable, as such.....they can establish TRUTH beyond a reason of a doubt. But my simple opinion void of any evidence is simply TALK that can be true or false.
And what would that be..."the word of god"? Don't bring your self serving book of fairy tales around me sport. If there was a god he would have pinched your head off like a pimple. If you were the last human on earth you would not be entrusted with said word. That is the word of Sean.The assumption....ideas...or speculations about what JESUS would do and would not do offered only in ad hominem SUBJECTIVE OPINION void of any conformation by the Word of God, are all moot in consideration of being defined as truth. Truth is found only in one place, THE WORD OF GOD, and we are admonished to be sanctified therein -- John 17:17, as clearly and quite unambiguously declared by the Christ Himself. If you want to KNOW what Jesus would do...there is only one source to confirm or answer the query with any intellectual honesty, the same source from which the question was asked...it must also be answered, if not we do not have truth, but rather the simple worthless opinion of someone that wants their individual doctrine to be considered as truth. Individual or private interpretation of the scriptures is strictly forbidden -- 2 Peter 1:19-21. What is the point in reasoning WITHOUT TRUTH? For a scriptural query to be answered in truth it must be accompanied by the TRUTH, in Book, Chapter and Verse.
One can PROVE anything when they begin with a false premise....hoping that no one notices the obvious. If I presented made up evidence that is found only in my thoughts void of scriptural conformation....I can then use that false premise to erect any type of structure that I wish to construct.
You see, when you start with false evidence, you cannot make a truth judgment of final conclusion....you have "dangling" truth....much like the misuse of sentence structure, you might get your point across establishing communication, but such is far from being CORRECT. Half/Truths = ONE WHOLE LIE. The conclusion can be true or false....but void of conformation and verification, it is useless in establishing the absolute truth.
The majority of the posts and retorts along this thread are .....just that......SUBJECTIVE OPINIONS. When you want to confirm what Jesus would do......go to the source and prove it. There is not one person now living in the 21st century that did not learn about Christianity void of the Holy Scriptures and the knowledge and wisdom found therein....no one was born with an inherent knowledge of God's revelation. After all it is the WORD of God...aka the Scriptures which are ALL inspired by God ( 2 Tim. 3:16).......from which All Christian Faith is derived and gestated -- Romans 10:17
Hence is anyone is to be persuaded of the TRUTH....the goal does not justify the means, there is a proper procedure that must be upheld. One must use TRUTH to persuade others of TRUTH. My Word is not truth...nor do I expect anyone to accept my word as truth, UNLESS...I present DEMONSTRABLE evidence of what I am propagating as being truth, this must be OBSERVABLE for everyone to TEST.....and the Holy Scriptures are very observable and very testable, as such.....they can establish TRUTH beyond a reason of a doubt. But my simple opinion void of any evidence is simply TALK that can be true or false.
THE WORD OF GOD
Ya right
Question: "What is the meaning of the Parable of the Good Samaritan?"
Answer: The Parable of the Good Samaritan is precipitated by and in answer to a question posed to Jesus by a lawyer. In this case the lawyer would have been an expert in the Mosaic Law and not a court lawyer of today. The lawyers question was, And behold, a certain lawyer stood up and tested Him, saying, "Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?" (Luke 10:25). This question provided Jesus with an opportunity to define what His disciples relationship should be to their neighbors. The text says that the scribe (lawyer) had put the question to Jesus as a test, but the text does not indicate that there was hostility in the question. He could have simple been seeking information. The way the question was asked does however give us some insight into where the scribes heart was spiritually. He was making the assumption that man must do something to obtain eternal life. Although this could have been an opportunity for Jesus to discuss salvation issues, He chose a different course and focuses on our relationships and what it means to love.
Jesus will answer the question using what is called the Socratic method; i.e. answering a question with a question, He said to him, "What is written in the law? What is your reading of it?" (Luke 10:26). By referring to the Law, Jesus is directing the man to an authority they both would accept as truth, the Old Testament. In essence He is asking the scribe what does Scripture say about this and how does he interpret it. Jesus thus avoids an argument and puts Himself in the position of evaluating the scribes answer instead of the scribe evaluating His answer. This directs the discussion towards Jesus intended lesson. The scribe answers Jesus question by quoting Deuteronomy 6:5 and Leviticus 19:18. This is virtually the same answer that Jesus had given to the same question in Matthew 22 and Mark 12.
In verse 28, Jesus affirms that the lawyers answer is correct. Jesus reply tells the scribe that he has given an orthodox (proper Scripturally) answer, but then goes on in verse 28 to tell him that this kind of love requires more than an emotional feeling; it would also include orthodox practice as well; he would need to practice what he preached. The scribe was an educated man and realized that he could not possibly keep that law nor would he have necessarily wanted to. There would always be people in his life that he could not love. Thus he tries to limit the laws command by limiting its parameters and asked the question, who is my neighbor? The word neighbor in the Greek means someone who is near, and in the Hebrew it means someone that you have an association with. This interprets the word in a limited sense, referring to a fellow Jew and would have excluded Samaritans, Romans, and other foreigners. Jesus then gives the parable of the Good Samaritan to correct the false understanding that the scribe had of who his neighbor is, and what his duty is to his neighbor.
The Parable of the Good Samaritan tells the story of a man traveling from Jerusalem to Jericho and while on the way he is robbed of everything he had including his clothing, and is beaten to within an inch of his life. That road was treacherously winding and was a favorite hideout of robbers and thieves. The next character Jesus introduces into His story is a priest. He spends no time describing the priest and only tells of how he showed no love or compassion for the man by failing to help him and passing on the other side of the road so as not to get involved. If there would have been anyone who would have known Gods law of love it would have been the priest. By nature of his position he was to be a person of compassion desiring to help others. Unfortunately love was not a word for him that required action on the behalf of someone else. The next person to pass by in the parable of the Good Samaritan was a Levite, and he does exactly the same thing that the priest did; he passed by without showing any compassion. Again he would have known the law, but he also failed to show the injured man compassion.
The next person to come by was the Samaritan, the one least likely to have shown compassion for the man. Samaritans were considered a low class of people by the Jews since they had intermarried with non-Jews and did not keep all the law. Therefore, Jews would have nothing to do with them. We do not know if the injured man was a Jew or Gentile, but it made no difference to the Samaritan, he did not consider the mans race or religion. The Good Samaritan saw only a person in dire need of assistance and assist him he did, above and beyond the minimum required. He would dress the mans wounds with wine (to disinfect) and oil (to sooth the pain). He put the man on his animal and took him to an inn for a time of healing and paid the innkeeper with his own money. He then went beyond common decency and told the innkeeper to take could care of the man and he would pay for any extra expenses on his return trip. The Samaritan saw his neighbor as anyone who was in need.
Because the good man was a Samaritan Jesus is drawing a strong contrast between those who knew the law and those who actually followed the law in their lifestyle and conduct. Jesus now asks the lawyer if he can apply the lesson to his own life with the question, So which of these three do you think was neighbor to him who fell among the thieves?" (Luke 10:36). Once again the lawyers answer is telling of his personal hardness of heart. He cannot bring himself to say the word Samaritan, he refers to the good man as he who showed mercy. His hate for the Samaritans (his neighbor) was so strong that he couldnt even address him in a proper way. Jesus then tells the lawyer to go and do likewise, meaning that he should start living what the law tells him to do.
By ending the encounter in this manner Jesus is telling us to follow the Samaritans example in our own conduct; i.e. we are to show compassion and love for those we encounter in our everyday activities. We are to love others (vs. 27) regardless of their race or religion; the criteria is need. If they need and we have the supply then we are to give generously and freely, without expectation of return. This is an impossible obligation for the lawyer, and for us. We cannot always keep the law because of our human condition; our heart and desires are mostly of self and selfishness. When left to our own we do the wrong thing, failing to meet the law. We can hope that the lawyer saw this and came to the realization that there was nothing he could do to justify himself, that he needed a personal savior to atone for his lack of ability to save himself from his sins. Thus the lessons of the parable of the Good Samaritan are three-fold: (1) On the one hand we are to set aside our prejudice and show love and compassion for others. (2) Our neighbor is anyone we encounter, we are all creatures of the creator and we are to love all of mankind as Jesus has taught. (3) Keeping the law in its entirety with the intent to save ourselves is an impossible task; we need a savior and this is Jesus.
There is another possible way to interpret the Parable of the Good Samaritan; and that is as a metaphor. In this interpretation the injured man is all men in their fallen condition of sin. The robbers are Satan attacking man with the intent of destroying their relationship with God. The lawyer is mankind without the true understanding of God and His Word. The priest is religion in an apostate condition. The Levite is legalism that instills prejudice into the hearts of believers. The Samaritan is Jesus who provides the way to spiritual health. Although this interpretation teaches good lessons and the parallels between Jesus and the Samaritan are striking, this understanding draws attention to Jesus that does not appear to be intended in the text. Therefore we must conclude that the teaching of the Parable of the Good Samaritan is simply a lesson on what it means to love ones neighbor.
Bible Questions Answered
Question: "What is the meaning of the Parable of the Sheep and Goats?"
Answer: In studying the Parable of the Sheep and Goats (Matthew 25:31-46), lets take a look at just what a parable is. Websters New World Dictionary, Second College Edition, defines the parable as; a comparison; a short simple story, usually of an occurrence of a familiar kind, from which a moral or religious lesson may be drawn. However, Jesus explained the parable in a little different way. In Luke 8:9-10 He taught; His disciples asked Him (Jesus) what this parable meant. He said the knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of God has been given to you, but to others I speak in parables so that seeing they may not see; though hearing they may not understand.
This quotation from Isaiah 6:9-10 does not express a desire that some would not understand, but simply states the sad truth that those who are not willing to receive Jesus message will find the truth hidden from them. Jesus spoke in parables because of the spiritual dullness of the people and He compares His preaching in parables to the ministry of Isaiah, which, while it gained some disciples (see Isaiah 8:16), was also to expose the hard-hearted resistance of the many to Gods warning and appeal. God does not want anyone to perish (see 1 Timothy 2:3-4 and 2 Peter 3:9).
After a casual reading of the sixteen verses that make up the Parable of the Sheep and Goats (Matthew 25:31-46), it seems that these verses suggest that salvation is the result of good works. The group of persons compared to the sheep were the ones that acted in charity in giving to the needy food, drink, clothing, who exhibited hospitality, and who visited the sick and those in prison. The goats seem to have done nothing in regard to these things. This resulted in salvation for the sheep and damnation for the goats. The casual reading seems to make it very clear and concise that salvation comes from good works. However, this is clearly not the meaning of the Parable of the Sheep and Goats.
All Scripture proves itself right and non-contradictory when compared with the totality of Scripture. This is what is referred to in 2 Timothy 2:15 as rightly dividing the word of truth. Scripture does not contradict Scripture, and the Bible clearly and repeatedly teaches that salvation is by faith through the grace and mercy of God and not by good works (see John 1:12, Acts 15:11, Romans 3:22-24, Romans 4:4-8, Romans 7:24-25, Romans 8:12, Galatians 3:6-9, and Ephesians 2:8-10, to mention a few).
A closer examination of the Parable of the Sheep and Goats reveals much, much, more. In the very first verse of the parable Matthew, immediately establishes the Kingship and authority of Christ in using the title that Christ so often used in identifying Himself as the Son of Man (see John 5:27 and Daniel 7:13-14). The Sheep are placed at His right hand. This is a place of honor and shows that the Sheep are esteemed by Christ. Compare this with Matthew 22:64, Luke 22:69, Acts 7:55 and Hebrews 1:13 where Christ is at the right hand of the Father. The Goats are placed on the left. Testimony is given, judgment is made, and reward and punishment are the result.
There are many things in these verses that could be examined in depth and at length. We could look at whether or not this is part of the Great White Throne Judgment, the judgment of the dead mentioned in Revelation 20:11, or the judgment of those who survived the Great Tribulation and are still alive at the return of Christ. We could look at just who the Brethren are referred to in vv. 40 and 45. Does this parable have to do with the treatment of Israel by the other nations of the world? We could look at the doctrines of predestination or election prompted by verse 34, or the question of the eternality of hell referred to in verse 46.
While the examination of these issues is certainly worthwhile, none of them pertain to what is the main thrust of the Parable of the Sheep and Goats. What is God trying to reveal to us in these verses? Note that both of the groups represented by the Sheep and the Goats where not aware of their actions in relation to the judgment conferred upon them and both asked When did we do these things? And this question, in itself, is very revealing as to the condition of the heart of those involved.
In these verses we are looking at man redeemed and saved, and man condemned and lost. Salvation takes place at the moment we receive Jesus Christ, by grace through faith, as our Savior. In this giving of yourself, you become a child of God (see John 1:12-13). 2 Corinthians 5:17 tells us that; if anyone is in Christ he is a new creation, the old has gone, the new has come. But what is it, exactly, that makes us a new creation. We are still in this flesh (see Romans 7:14-25), we are still in this world (see James 4:4), and have no doubt, we are still sinners (see 1 John 1:8).
The change or transformation that takes place in us at the moment of conversion is the fact that we are sealed by God in the person of the Holy Spirit (see Ephesians 1:13-14), resulting in salvation. Salvation means that we are brought to the place where we are able to receive something from Christ, namely, forgiveness of sins (see Acts 26:17-18). Our sin debt to God is then cancelled by the atoning death of Christ on the cross, who, at salvation, becomes our Lord. He paid the price for our sin since we could not (see 1 Corinthians 6:19-20 and Hebrews 10:27-28). From this moment on, when the Father looks at us, He chooses to see His Son indwelling us by the Spirit as opposed to seeing our own sinful flesh, and it is only in this manner that our works become acceptable to Him. These works are not being offered by our sinful flesh, but by the power of the Spirit that resides in us.
At salvation our duty as Christians is to become Disciples of Christ. Our duty is to become like Him (see Romans 8:29, 2 Corinthians 3:18, and Colossians 2:6-7). Galatians 5:22 tells us that the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, gentleness, faithfulness, and self control. These are the characteristic traits that Jesus Christ exhibited throughout His life, and a Christian will grow in this fruit in direct proportion to the cooperation that he gives the Holy Spirit working in his life. Good works in a Christians life are the direct overflow of these characteristic traits, and are only acceptable to God because of the relationship that exist between servant and Master, the saved and their Lord, the Sheep and their Shepherd (see Ephesians 2:10).
So the core message of the Parable of the Sheep and Goats is that good works will result from our relationship to the Shepherd, to Christ. Followers of Christ will produce good works, will treat others with kindness, will deal with others as if they were Christ. Those who reject Christ live in the opposite manner. While goats can indeed do acts of kindness and charity, their hearts are not truly in them for the right purpose to honor and worship God.
.
Good points, Care. I'm not even convinced anyone is forced to pay taxes anyway...no one holds a gun to anyone's head and forces them to earn income or be an American.I wonder how Jesus felt about forcing us to pay for wars and nuclear weapons and Bunker busters and torture?
For some reason the focus of repubs seems to be the word FORCE, we are FORCED to pay for the poor...
if the only issue is force, then why not complain about ALL OTHER THINGS we are forced to pay, like the BANKER'S DEBT and nukes...
Would Jesus disagree to those as well because they are so called FORCED on us through taxation?
Why only throw the tizzy fit about being FORCED only when it comes to taking care of the neediest?
This is why i am uncertain that this "thing" is only about FORCE....
And yes the government is inefficient and many don't want them to have more money yah dee dah...
BUT IF THIS WERE THE CASE, why aren't there thread after thread on the government stealing our money when it comes to unnecessary wars, and enough nukes in our ammo to blow up the entire world 100 TIMES or MORE?
It's hard to get a true handle on this being about the inefficiencies of government or FORCE when it seems that helping the POOR is the only time Christians complain vehemently about it...?
Care
there are 2 examples from 2 different parables of Jesus that show us what we are suppose to be like....the TRUTH is not in the Word...the Truth is what is in our hearts...then the actions will follow.
anyway, here is the first, i'll post the next lesson/parable in my next post, both from the same link/source...
of course this is a Theologian's opinion or explanation of the parables, that i happen to agree with....and which do relate to Ravi's original question...
YOU can make up your own minds i suppose, but i think it is pretty clear where our hearts should be, if they are with Christ.
And this does not diminish the concern with gvt having too much power...which i can understand....but i do not believe for the most part, feeding or caring for the needy, in any part of our lives, gives more power to some ''higher ups on earth'', i believe giving taxes for weapons or for Banks or for more nukes gives MORE power to the gvt and the elite of elites.
care
Question: "What is the meaning of the Parable of the Good Samaritan?"
Answer: The Parable of the Good Samaritan is precipitated by and in answer to a question posed to Jesus by a lawyer. In this case the lawyer would have been an expert in the Mosaic Law and not a court lawyer of today. The lawyer’s question was, “And behold, a certain lawyer stood up and tested Him, saying, "Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?" (Luke 10:25). This question provided Jesus with an opportunity to define what His disciples relationship should be to their neighbors. The text says that the scribe (lawyer) had put the question to Jesus as a test, but the text does not indicate that there was hostility in the question. He could have simple been seeking information. The way the question was asked does however give us some insight into where the scribes heart was spiritually. He was making the assumption that man must do something to obtain eternal life. Although this could have been an opportunity for Jesus to discuss salvation issues, He chose a different course and focuses on our relationships and what it means to love.
Jesus will answer the question using what is called the Socratic method; i.e. answering a question with a question, “He said to him, "What is written in the law? What is your reading of it?" (Luke 10:26). By referring to the Law, Jesus is directing the man to an authority they both would accept as truth, the Old Testament. In essence He is asking the scribe what does Scripture say about this and how does he interpret it. Jesus thus avoids an argument and puts Himself in the position of evaluating the scribes answer instead of the scribe evaluating His answer. This directs the discussion towards Jesus’ intended lesson. The scribe answers Jesus’ question by quoting Deuteronomy 6:5 and Leviticus 19:18. This is virtually the same answer that Jesus had given to the same question in Matthew 22 and Mark 12.
In verse 28, Jesus affirms that the lawyer’s answer is correct. Jesus’ reply tells the scribe that he has given an orthodox (proper Scripturally) answer, but then goes on in verse 28 to tell him that this kind of love requires more than an emotional feeling; it would also include orthodox practice as well; he would need to “practice what he preached.” The scribe was an educated man and realized that he could not possibly keep that law nor would he have necessarily wanted to. There would always be people in his life that he could not love. Thus he tries to limit the law’s command by limiting its parameters and asked the question, “who is my neighbor?” The word neighbor in the Greek means someone who is near, and in the Hebrew it means someone that you have an association with. This interprets the word in a limited sense, referring to a fellow Jew and would have excluded Samaritans, Romans, and other foreigners. Jesus then gives the parable of the Good Samaritan to correct the false understanding that the scribe had of who his neighbor is, and what his duty is to his neighbor.
The Parable of the Good Samaritan tells the story of a man traveling from Jerusalem to Jericho and while on the way he is robbed of everything he had including his clothing, and is beaten to within an inch of his life. That road was treacherously winding and was a favorite hideout of robbers and thieves. The next character Jesus introduces into His story is a priest. He spends no time describing the priest and only tells of how he showed no love or compassion for the man by failing to help him and passing on the other side of the road so as not to get involved. If there would have been anyone who would have known God’s law of love it would have been the priest. By nature of his position he was to be a person of compassion desiring to help others. Unfortunately love was not a word for him that required action on the behalf of someone else. The next person to pass by in the parable of the Good Samaritan was a Levite, and he does exactly the same thing that the priest did; he passed by without showing any compassion. Again he would have known the law, but he also failed to show the injured man compassion.
The next person to come by was the Samaritan, the one least likely to have shown compassion for the man. Samaritans were considered a low class of people by the Jews since they had intermarried with non-Jews and did not keep all the law. Therefore, Jews would have nothing to do with them. We do not know if the injured man was a Jew or Gentile, but it made no difference to the Samaritan, he did not consider the man’s race or religion. The “Good Samaritan” saw only a person in dire need of assistance and assist him he did, above and beyond the minimum required. He would dress the man’s wounds with wine (to disinfect) and oil (to sooth the pain). He put the man on his animal and took him to an inn for a time of healing and paid the innkeeper with his own money. He then went beyond common decency and told the innkeeper to take could care of the man and he would pay for any extra expenses on his return trip. The Samaritan saw his neighbor as anyone who was in need.
Because the good man was a Samaritan Jesus is drawing a strong contrast between those who knew the law and those who actually followed the law in their lifestyle and conduct. Jesus now asks the lawyer if he can apply the lesson to his own life with the question, “So which of these three do you think was neighbor to him who fell among the thieves?" (Luke 10:36). Once again the lawyer’s answer is telling of his personal hardness of heart. He cannot bring himself to say the word Samaritan, he refers to the “good man” as “he who showed mercy.” His hate for the Samaritans (his neighbor) was so strong that he couldn’t even address him in a proper way. Jesus then tells the lawyer to “go and do likewise,” meaning that he should start living what the law tells him to do.
By ending the encounter in this manner Jesus is telling us to follow the Samaritans example in our own conduct; i.e. we are to show compassion and love for those we encounter in our everyday activities. We are to love others (vs. 27) regardless of their race or religion; the criteria is need. If they need and we have the supply then we are to give generously and freely, without expectation of return. This is an impossible obligation for the lawyer, and for us. We cannot always keep the law because of our human condition; our heart and desires are mostly of self and selfishness. When left to our own we do the wrong thing, failing to meet the law. We can hope that the lawyer saw this and came to the realization that there was nothing he could do to justify himself, that he needed a personal savior to atone for his lack of ability to save himself from his sins. Thus the lessons of the parable of the Good Samaritan are three-fold: (1) On the one hand we are to set aside our prejudice and show love and compassion for others. (2) Our neighbor is anyone we encounter, we are all creatures of the creator and we are to love all of mankind as Jesus has taught. (3) Keeping the law in its entirety with the intent to save ourselves is an impossible task; we need a savior and this is Jesus.
There is another possible way to interpret the Parable of the Good Samaritan; and that is as a metaphor. In this interpretation the injured man is all men in their fallen condition of sin. The robbers are Satan attacking man with the intent of destroying their relationship with God. The lawyer is mankind without the true understanding of God and His Word. The priest is religion in an apostate condition. The Levite is legalism that instills prejudice into the hearts of believers. The Samaritan is Jesus who provides the way to spiritual health. Although this interpretation teaches good lessons and the parallels between Jesus and the Samaritan are striking, this understanding draws attention to Jesus that does not appear to be intended in the text. Therefore we must conclude that the teaching of the Parable of the Good Samaritan is simply a lesson on what it means to love one’s neighbor.
Bible Questions Answered
there are 2 examples from 2 different parables of Jesus that show us what we are suppose to be like....the TRUTH is not in the Word...the Truth is what is in our hearts...then the actions will follow.
anyway, here is the first, i'll post the next lesson/parable in my next post, both from the same link/source...
of course this is a Theologian's opinion or explanation of the parables, that i happen to agree with....and which do relate to Ravi's original question...
YOU can make up your own minds i suppose, but i think it is pretty clear where our hearts should be, if they are with Christ.
And this does not diminish the concern with gvt having too much power...which i can understand....but i do not believe for the most part, feeding or caring for the needy, in any part of our lives, gives more power to some ''higher ups on earth'', i believe giving taxes for weapons or for Banks or for more nukes gives MORE power to the gvt and the elite of elites.
care
Question: "What is the meaning of the Parable of the Good Samaritan?"
Answer: The Parable of the Good Samaritan is precipitated by and in answer to a question posed to Jesus by a lawyer. In this case the lawyer would have been an expert in the Mosaic Law and not a court lawyer of today. The lawyer’s question was, “And behold, a certain lawyer stood up and tested Him, saying, "Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?" (Luke 10:25). This question provided Jesus with an opportunity to define what His disciples relationship should be to their neighbors. The text says that the scribe (lawyer) had put the question to Jesus as a test, but the text does not indicate that there was hostility in the question. He could have simple been seeking information. The way the question was asked does however give us some insight into where the scribes heart was spiritually. He was making the assumption that man must do something to obtain eternal life. Although this could have been an opportunity for Jesus to discuss salvation issues, He chose a different course and focuses on our relationships and what it means to love.
Jesus will answer the question using what is called the Socratic method; i.e. answering a question with a question, “He said to him, "What is written in the law? What is your reading of it?" (Luke 10:26). By referring to the Law, Jesus is directing the man to an authority they both would accept as truth, the Old Testament. In essence He is asking the scribe what does Scripture say about this and how does he interpret it. Jesus thus avoids an argument and puts Himself in the position of evaluating the scribes answer instead of the scribe evaluating His answer. This directs the discussion towards Jesus’ intended lesson. The scribe answers Jesus’ question by quoting Deuteronomy 6:5 and Leviticus 19:18. This is virtually the same answer that Jesus had given to the same question in Matthew 22 and Mark 12.
In verse 28, Jesus affirms that the lawyer’s answer is correct. Jesus’ reply tells the scribe that he has given an orthodox (proper Scripturally) answer, but then goes on in verse 28 to tell him that this kind of love requires more than an emotional feeling; it would also include orthodox practice as well; he would need to “practice what he preached.” The scribe was an educated man and realized that he could not possibly keep that law nor would he have necessarily wanted to. There would always be people in his life that he could not love. Thus he tries to limit the law’s command by limiting its parameters and asked the question, “who is my neighbor?” The word neighbor in the Greek means someone who is near, and in the Hebrew it means someone that you have an association with. This interprets the word in a limited sense, referring to a fellow Jew and would have excluded Samaritans, Romans, and other foreigners. Jesus then gives the parable of the Good Samaritan to correct the false understanding that the scribe had of who his neighbor is, and what his duty is to his neighbor.
The Parable of the Good Samaritan tells the story of a man traveling from Jerusalem to Jericho and while on the way he is robbed of everything he had including his clothing, and is beaten to within an inch of his life. That road was treacherously winding and was a favorite hideout of robbers and thieves. The next character Jesus introduces into His story is a priest. He spends no time describing the priest and only tells of how he showed no love or compassion for the man by failing to help him and passing on the other side of the road so as not to get involved. If there would have been anyone who would have known God’s law of love it would have been the priest. By nature of his position he was to be a person of compassion desiring to help others. Unfortunately love was not a word for him that required action on the behalf of someone else. The next person to pass by in the parable of the Good Samaritan was a Levite, and he does exactly the same thing that the priest did; he passed by without showing any compassion. Again he would have known the law, but he also failed to show the injured man compassion.
The next person to come by was the Samaritan, the one least likely to have shown compassion for the man. Samaritans were considered a low class of people by the Jews since they had intermarried with non-Jews and did not keep all the law. Therefore, Jews would have nothing to do with them. We do not know if the injured man was a Jew or Gentile, but it made no difference to the Samaritan, he did not consider the man’s race or religion. The “Good Samaritan” saw only a person in dire need of assistance and assist him he did, above and beyond the minimum required. He would dress the man’s wounds with wine (to disinfect) and oil (to sooth the pain). He put the man on his animal and took him to an inn for a time of healing and paid the innkeeper with his own money. He then went beyond common decency and told the innkeeper to take could care of the man and he would pay for any extra expenses on his return trip. The Samaritan saw his neighbor as anyone who was in need.
Because the good man was a Samaritan Jesus is drawing a strong contrast between those who knew the law and those who actually followed the law in their lifestyle and conduct. Jesus now asks the lawyer if he can apply the lesson to his own life with the question, “So which of these three do you think was neighbor to him who fell among the thieves?" (Luke 10:36). Once again the lawyer’s answer is telling of his personal hardness of heart. He cannot bring himself to say the word Samaritan, he refers to the “good man” as “he who showed mercy.” His hate for the Samaritans (his neighbor) was so strong that he couldn’t even address him in a proper way. Jesus then tells the lawyer to “go and do likewise,” meaning that he should start living what the law tells him to do.
By ending the encounter in this manner Jesus is telling us to follow the Samaritans example in our own conduct; i.e. we are to show compassion and love for those we encounter in our everyday activities. We are to love others (vs. 27) regardless of their race or religion; the criteria is need. If they need and we have the supply then we are to give generously and freely, without expectation of return. This is an impossible obligation for the lawyer, and for us. We cannot always keep the law because of our human condition; our heart and desires are mostly of self and selfishness. When left to our own we do the wrong thing, failing to meet the law. We can hope that the lawyer saw this and came to the realization that there was nothing he could do to justify himself, that he needed a personal savior to atone for his lack of ability to save himself from his sins. Thus the lessons of the parable of the Good Samaritan are three-fold: (1) On the one hand we are to set aside our prejudice and show love and compassion for others. (2) Our neighbor is anyone we encounter, we are all creatures of the creator and we are to love all of mankind as Jesus has taught. (3) Keeping the law in its entirety with the intent to save ourselves is an impossible task; we need a savior and this is Jesus.
There is another possible way to interpret the Parable of the Good Samaritan; and that is as a metaphor. In this interpretation the injured man is all men in their fallen condition of sin. The robbers are Satan attacking man with the intent of destroying their relationship with God. The lawyer is mankind without the true understanding of God and His Word. The priest is religion in an apostate condition. The Levite is legalism that instills prejudice into the hearts of believers. The Samaritan is Jesus who provides the way to spiritual health. Although this interpretation teaches good lessons and the parallels between Jesus and the Samaritan are striking, this understanding draws attention to Jesus that does not appear to be intended in the text. Therefore we must conclude that the teaching of the Parable of the Good Samaritan is simply a lesson on what it means to love one’s neighbor.
Bible Questions Answered
See what I mean? When you start with a FALSE PREMISE.....such as subjectively stating that THE WORD is not the SCRIPTURES. When all Christians derive their faith from hearing the WORD -- Romans 10:17. Just where does one hear the word today...if not from the Holy Scriptures? Are you even attempting to suggest that GOD TALKS TO YOU...personally, and shows you the respect that He promised that He shows EQUALLY TO EVERYONE? And if He does talk to you....why do you not write NEW SCRIPTURE with that inspiration....as YOU NOW have the authority according to the word of God, AS ALL SCRIPTURE is inspired of God -- 2 Tim. 3:16-17? And just where are YOUR SIGNS AND WONDERS...that confirm all divine revelations from God -- John 20:30-31, Heb. 2:1-4, Mark 16:20...just how many people have you raised from the dead, healed of blindness from birth, lameness..etc. Document such and we all can logically and with reason conclude that GOD TALKS TO YOU...personally. I do not know about you but I am COMMANDED not only to worship in Spirit....but also...TRUTH -- John 4:24. Is there truth to be found when you cannot confirm what you pretend....we are to simply take your word for such SUPERNATURAL ABILITY...defeating the very purpose of the miraculous.....CONFORMATION?
But...that same Holy Spirit of Truth trough the inspired words of the Apostle informed us that when the PERFECT LAW OF LIBERTY..aka the New Testament Doctrine was delivered in its entirely...all such SUPERNATURAL revelation would cease, and all that would remain would be Faith, Hope, and Charity, the 3 fundamental gifts of the Spirit -- 1 Cor. 13.
And Later Peter informed us, as in the past tense, "As His (God's) divine power has GIVEN (past tense) to us ALL THINGS that pertain to life and godliness, THROUGH THE KNOWLEDGE of HIM who called us by GLORY AND VIRTUE." -- 2 Peter 1:3.
Also, the Christ Himself declared the Holy Spirit of TRUTH would deliver ALL TRUTH to the Apostles that He personally chose -- John 16:13 With JUDE 1:3 informing us that the CHRISTIAN FAITH....was ONCE DELIVERED to the SAINTS of the 1st century.
When you begin with a false premise that cannot be confirmed in the word of God....You can build upon that false premise anyway that you wish. But, one thing is for sure.....THE TRUTH DOES NOT CONTRADICT ITSELF. ALL the scriptures must agree...if they are a product of the same spirit as self professed -- 2 Tim. 3:16. Are we not to consider the SUM..aka TOTAL of ALL GODS precepts to find everlasting truth? -- Ps. 119:160
Either you have been indoctrinated and deceived into lying......or the WORD OF GOD is found propagating untruths. Who should we conclude is the AUTHORITY.....YOU or the word of GOD?
there are 2 examples from 2 different parables of Jesus that show us what we are suppose to be like....the TRUTH is not in the Word...the Truth is what is in our hearts...then the actions will follow.
anyway, here is the first, i'll post the next lesson/parable in my next post, both from the same link/source...
of course this is a Theologian's opinion or explanation of the parables, that i happen to agree with....and which do relate to Ravi's original question...
YOU can make up your own minds i suppose, but i think it is pretty clear where our hearts should be, if they are with Christ.
And this does not diminish the concern with gvt having too much power...which i can understand....but i do not believe for the most part, feeding or caring for the needy, in any part of our lives, gives more power to some ''higher ups on earth'', i believe giving taxes for weapons or for Banks or for more nukes gives MORE power to the gvt and the elite of elites.
care
See what I mean? When you start with a FALSE PREMISE.....such as subjectively stating that THE WORD is not the SCRIPTURES. When all Christians derive their faith from hearing the WORD -- Romans 10:17. Just where does one hear the word today...if not from the Holy Scriptures? Are you even attempting to suggest that GOD TALKS TO YOU...personally, and shows you the respect that He promised that He shows EQUALLY TO EVERYONE? And if He does talk to you....why do you not write NEW SCRIPTURE with that inspiration....as YOU NOW have the authority according to the word of God, AS ALL SCRIPTURE is inspired of God -- 2 Tim. 3:16-17? And just where are YOUR SIGNS AND WONDERS...that confirm all divine revelations from God -- John 20:30-31, Heb. 2:1-4, Mark 16:20...just how many people have you raised from the dead, healed of blindness from birth, lameness..etc. Document such and we all can logically and with reason conclude that GOD TALKS TO YOU...personally. I do not know about you but I am COMMANDED not only to worship in Spirit....but also...TRUTH -- John 4:24. Is there truth to be found when you cannot confirm what you pretend....we are to simply take your word for such SUPERNATURAL ABILITY...defeating the very purpose of the miraculous.....CONFORMATION?
But...that same Holy Spirit of Truth trough the inspired words of the Apostle informed us that when the PERFECT LAW OF LIBERTY..aka the New Testament Doctrine was delivered in its entirely...all such SUPERNATURAL revelation would cease, and all that would remain would be Faith, Hope, and Charity, the 3 fundamental gifts of the Spirit -- 1 Cor. 13.
And Later Peter informed us, as in the past tense, "As His (God's) divine power has GIVEN (past tense) to us ALL THINGS that pertain to life and godliness, THROUGH THE KNOWLEDGE of HIM who called us by GLORY AND VIRTUE." -- 2 Peter 1:3.
Also, the Christ Himself declared the Holy Spirit of TRUTH would deliver ALL TRUTH to the Apostles that He personally chose -- John 16:13 With JUDE 1:3 informing us that the CHRISTIAN FAITH....was ONCE DELIVERED to the SAINTS of the 1st century.
When you begin with a false premise that cannot be confirmed in the word of God....You can build upon that false premise anyway that you wish. But, one thing is for sure.....THE TRUTH DOES NOT CONTRADICT ITSELF. ALL the scriptures must agree...if they are a product of the same spirit as self professed -- 2 Tim. 3:16. Are we not to consider the SUM..aka TOTAL of ALL GODS precepts to find everlasting truth? -- Ps. 119:160
Either you have been indoctrinated and deceived into lying......or the WORD OF GOD is found propagating untruths. Who should we conclude is the AUTHORITY.....YOU or the word of GOD?
You still don't get it Ralph....and I am a little surprised.
In THIS PARABLE the Priest and the Levite KNEW THE WORD of God, they even had it memorized along with being leaders of their proverbial Church or their Theocratic government.
The Samaritan man, DID NOT know the proverbial Word, BUT he KNEW what was RIGHT in his heart....he followed the one law that Jesus said if it was followed, it was the will of God...the Golden Rule of how to treat ones neighbor, and WHO ones neighbor is.....
Jesus is saying.... though the Samaritan man was from a lowly tribe, who supposedly broke all rules of their church, their religion, by marrying outside of their religious tribes, among other things...were NOT a religious and holy tribe of people according to those who supposedly were....he could have been a LIBURRRAL....but his HEART and his ACTIONS showed what was in his heart...
the Holy Spirit was in him...UNLIKE those that knew the Word by heart and preached the Word....The Levite and the Priest knew the ''words'' of the Word, but they were not IN THEM....they were not filled with the Holy Spirit just by knowing the words....yet the Samaritan man knew not the Word via his mouth, but the Word was WITH IN him.
Care
Jesus was the ultimate welfare man, he fed 5000 loafers. Though he did ask each one to document that they went out and looked for God that week.
See what I mean? When you start with a FALSE PREMISE.....such as subjectively stating that THE WORD is not the SCRIPTURES. When all Christians derive their faith from hearing the WORD -- Romans 10:17. Just where does one hear the word today...if not from the Holy Scriptures? Are you even attempting to suggest that GOD TALKS TO YOU...personally, and shows you the respect that He promised that He shows EQUALLY TO EVERYONE? And if He does talk to you....why do you not write NEW SCRIPTURE with that inspiration....as YOU NOW have the authority according to the word of God, AS ALL SCRIPTURE is inspired of God -- 2 Tim. 3:16-17? And just where are YOUR SIGNS AND WONDERS...that confirm all divine revelations from God -- John 20:30-31, Heb. 2:1-4, Mark 16:20...just how many people have you raised from the dead, healed of blindness from birth, lameness..etc. Document such and we all can logically and with reason conclude that GOD TALKS TO YOU...personally. I do not know about you but I am COMMANDED not only to worship in Spirit....but also...TRUTH -- John 4:24. Is there truth to be found when you cannot confirm what you pretend....we are to simply take your word for such SUPERNATURAL ABILITY...defeating the very purpose of the miraculous.....CONFORMATION?
But...that same Holy Spirit of Truth trough the inspired words of the Apostle informed us that when the PERFECT LAW OF LIBERTY..aka the New Testament Doctrine was delivered in its entirely...all such SUPERNATURAL revelation would cease, and all that would remain would be Faith, Hope, and Charity, the 3 fundamental gifts of the Spirit -- 1 Cor. 13.
And Later Peter informed us, as in the past tense, "As His (God's) divine power has GIVEN (past tense) to us ALL THINGS that pertain to life and godliness, THROUGH THE KNOWLEDGE of HIM who called us by GLORY AND VIRTUE." -- 2 Peter 1:3.
Also, the Christ Himself declared the Holy Spirit of TRUTH would deliver ALL TRUTH to the Apostles that He personally chose -- John 16:13 With JUDE 1:3 informing us that the CHRISTIAN FAITH....was ONCE DELIVERED to the SAINTS of the 1st century.
When you begin with a false premise that cannot be confirmed in the word of God....You can build upon that false premise anyway that you wish. But, one thing is for sure.....THE TRUTH DOES NOT CONTRADICT ITSELF. ALL the scriptures must agree...if they are a product of the same spirit as self professed -- 2 Tim. 3:16. Are we not to consider the SUM..aka TOTAL of ALL GODS precepts to find everlasting truth? -- Ps. 119:160
Either you have been indoctrinated and deceived into lying......or the WORD OF GOD is found propagating untruths. Who should we conclude is the AUTHORITY.....YOU or the word of GOD?
You still don't get it Ralph....and I am a little surprised.
In THIS PARABLE the Priest and the Levite KNEW THE WORD of God, they even had it memorized along with being leaders of their proverbial Church or their Theocratic government.
The Samaritan man, DID NOT know the proverbial Word, BUT he KNEW what was RIGHT in his heart....he followed the one law that Jesus said if it was followed, it was the will of God...the Golden Rule of how to treat ones neighbor, and WHO ones neighbor is.....
Jesus is saying.... though the Samaritan man was from a lowly tribe, who supposedly broke all rules of their church, their religion, by marrying outside of their religious tribes, among other things...were NOT a religious and holy tribe of people according to those who supposedly were....he could have been a LIBURRRAL....but his HEART and his ACTIONS showed what was in his heart...
the Holy Spirit was in him...UNLIKE those that knew the Word by heart and preached the Word....The Levite and the Priest knew the ''words'' of the Word, but they were not IN THEM....they were not filled with the Holy Spirit just by knowing the words....yet the Samaritan man knew not the Word via his mouth, but the Word was WITH IN him.
Care
The problem with this example is, the Good Samaritan did the good work HIMSELF.
He didn't go to the government and say "Hey, there's this guy laying out by the road, you should form a committee and get a law passed to help him."
You still don't get it Ralph....and I am a little surprised.
In THIS PARABLE the Priest and the Levite KNEW THE WORD of God, they even had it memorized along with being leaders of their proverbial Church or their Theocratic government.
The Samaritan man, DID NOT know the proverbial Word, BUT he KNEW what was RIGHT in his heart....he followed the one law that Jesus said if it was followed, it was the will of God...the Golden Rule of how to treat ones neighbor, and WHO ones neighbor is.....
Jesus is saying.... though the Samaritan man was from a lowly tribe, who supposedly broke all rules of their church, their religion, by marrying outside of their religious tribes, among other things...were NOT a religious and holy tribe of people according to those who supposedly were....he could have been a LIBURRRAL....but his HEART and his ACTIONS showed what was in his heart...
the Holy Spirit was in him...UNLIKE those that knew the Word by heart and preached the Word....The Levite and the Priest knew the ''words'' of the Word, but they were not IN THEM....they were not filled with the Holy Spirit just by knowing the words....yet the Samaritan man knew not the Word via his mouth, but the Word was WITH IN him.
Care
The problem with this example is, the Good Samaritan did the good work HIMSELF.
He didn't go to the government and say "Hey, there's this guy laying out by the road, you should form a committee and get a law passed to help him."
but Missourian, if the good Samaritan worked for the gvt and on official business and only had gvt resources to use to help the man when he came upon him, should he have passed the man by....?
i don't get this repetitive statement on the guy doing it himself, isn't government, people?
The problem with this example is, the Good Samaritan did the good work HIMSELF.
He didn't go to the government and say "Hey, there's this guy laying out by the road, you should form a committee and get a law passed to help him."
but Missourian, if the good Samaritan worked for the gvt and on official business and only had gvt resources to use to help the man when he came upon him, should he have passed the man by....?
i don't get this repetitive statement on the guy doing it himself, isn't government, people?
Let's keep the hypothetical to a minimum.
As to the second part of your question, the answer is because just supporting these current bills is NOT helping the poor. The only people who will truly be doing Jesus' work are the rich who knowing this bill will cost them personally still support it.
That makes this thread moot.
If the bill said "Every American will pay $100 every year to help those in need", and every American supported that, and the insurance companies would make their contribution by covering those poor people at cost with no profit. THAT would likely make Jesus very happy.
Now, how many Americans would support THAT bill?
Those would be the one that I believe would be doing the Lord's work...not the ones who are happily spending OTHERS money.
No needless government bureaucracy and power grab, no profits for insuance companies. Everyone is happy.
So, do you think the Missourian Bill would pass?
