Super-Rich vs class wars, death of democracy

[sammy the sage]

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/four-time-bombs-that-will-blow-up-wall-street-2011-03-01?pagenumber=2

This guy states WAY better than I; and unfortunely he seems to be TOTALLY right...

2 excepts:

One mega-millionaire sent me an email after reading my Jan. 4 column, “America’s worst 10 years start now.”

“Paul, you may well be right about the coming decade, but the rich exist in a different world from the one you write about. They live privileged lives in gated communities. Meet for holidays at the world’s elite resorts. The richest just aren’t worried about today’s economy like your readers. Their issues revolve around who’s the best masseuse, best Pilates teacher, best concierge medical doctor, which private school to choose, what investments they are making at this time, etc. Folks at the top are not concerned with the underlying deterioration of America, except in the abstract, because they aren’t directly affected. That’s why no amount of information from you will ever change things. To them, it’s irrelevant. Best wishes, always enjoy your stuff.”



1. Wealth gap: Super-Rich vs class wars, death of democracy
The gap: In one generation, America’s wealthiest 1% has exploded from 9% to 23% of America’s income, while middle-class income has stagnated. Even Buffett admits: “There’s class warfare, all right, but it’s my class, the rich class, that’s making war, and winning.”

But my rich friend tells the real story, of their social disconnect. The rich just don’t care. They live in a different world, live by a self-centered code lacking a moral compass. The public welfare is honored only if supported by tax benefits.

The wealth gap is widening and soon something unpredictable will ignite a Wall Street revolution.

[boxcar]

Here's the remedy for this universal and and ancient economic problem (for even Job himself was quite wealthy):

Heb 13:5-6
5 Let your character be free from the love of money, being content with what you have; for He Himself has said, "I will never desert you, nor will I ever forsake you," 6 so that we confidently say,

"The Lord is my helper, I will not be afraid.
What shall man do to me?"
NASB

So many here are obsessed with the wealth of others, which leads me to believe they're not very content with what they have. I also think that if these people expended their obsession energies in a more constructive fashion and in an entirely different direction, this world would be a much better place in which to live. Again, I have this passage in mind which I quoted earlier to TJ Dave:

Mark 14:7
"For the poor you always have with you, and whenever you wish, YOU can do them good...
NASB

Boxcar

[sammy the sage]

Here's the remedy for this universal and and ancient economic problem (for even Job himself was quite wealthy):

Heb 13:5-6
5 Let your character be free from the love of money, being content with what you have; for He Himself has said, "I will never desert you, nor will I ever forsake you," 6 so that we confidently say,

"The Lord is my helper, I will not be afraid.
What shall man do to me?"
NASB

So many here are obsessed with the wealth of others, which leads me to believe they're not very content with what they have. I also think that if these people expended their obsession energies in a more constructive fashion and in an entirely different direction, this world would be a much better place in which to live. Again, I have this passage in mind which I quoted earlier to TJ Dave:

Mark 14:7
"For the poor you always have with you, and whenever you wish, YOU can do them good...
NASB

Boxcar

Interesting coming from YOU...one the MOST STAUNCH defender's of this behavior in the past...

by that I mean being labeled as a pug/con...perhap's you realize now that SAID party is selling it's constuency down the river as well...

Remember...I bash/castigate BOTH sides EQUALLY...and it's REFRESHING to see some-one else FINALLY SEE the BIG picture...

[boxcar]

Interesting coming from YOU...one the MOST STAUNCH defender's of this behavior in the past...

by that I mean being labeled as a pug/con...perhap's you realize now that SAID party is selling it's constuency down the river as well...

Remember...I bash/castigate BOTH sides EQUALLY...and it's REFRESHING to see some-one else FINALLY SEE the BIG picture...

Mr. Sammy Sage, I've been a Christian for many moons. I strongly suspect that I saw the "BIG PICTURE", i.e. from the perspective of biblical perspective, long before you have come to realize the moral condition of political parties.

And here is something else that might interest you: I have known throughout my lifetime, more than few very wealthy people. In fact, to this day I still do. But thankfully by God's grace, I can honestly say that I have never begrudged anyone of their wealth -- of their possessions. Never. And here's why: The scriptures, in numerous places, makes it abundantly clear that wealth for most people will be their eternal undoing. Their riches will be the snare that will keep them separated from God for all eternity. So, I should be envious of the rich? I should be jealous of their wealth? Will their riches save them on judgment day? Will they be able to buy their way into heaven with their wealth?

I can also say, along with the apostle that I have known how to cope when I have had plenty and when I have had little. I do not trust or rely upon any man to supply my needs. I rely on my Lord and Savior; for he is faithful to his promises. As the apostle wrote:

Phil 4:11-13
11 Not that I speak from want; for I have learned to be content in whatever circumstances I am. 12 I know how to get along with humble means, and I also know how to live in prosperity; in any and every circumstance I have learned the secret of being filled and going hungry, both of having abundance and suffering need. 13 I can do all things through Him who strengthens me.
NASB

Thanks be to God, I haven't suffered hunger very often but I do know what it means "to get along with humble means and...how to live in prosperity".

This is why I can't relate to this class warfare or class envy garbage. My obsession is with the riches that await me in the eternal kingdom. Plus I cannot relate to "fighting for the poor" with other people's money in this world, which is so easy to do. But when it comes to ministering to the poor with our own green....well, that's something else, again, in too many cases.

Lastly, I have defended people's rights to property and to earn as much as they want. Wealth in and of itself is not evil. It's the love for it that is.

Boxcar

Boxcar

[JustRalph]

Damn! I didn't know Steve Jobs was in the bible............

http://jeffreyhill.typepad.com/.a/6a00d8341d417153ef01287737f5ce970c-800wi
































alright alright........it was a just a joke Boxy...........

[Hank]

Mr. Sammy Sage, I've been a Christian for many moons. I strongly suspect that I saw the "BIG PICTURE", i.e. from the perspective of biblical perspective, long before you have come to realize the moral condition of political parties.

And here is something else that might interest you: I have known throughout my lifetime, more than few very wealthy people. In fact, to this day I still do. But thankfully by God's grace, I can honestly say that I have never begrudged anyone of their wealth -- of their possessions. Never. And here's why: The scriptures, in numerous places, makes it abundantly clear that wealth for most people will be their eternal undoing. Their riches will be the snare that will keep them separated from God for all eternity. So, I should be envious of the rich? I should be jealous of their wealth? Will their riches save them on judgment day? Will they be able to buy their way into heaven with their wealth?

I can also say, along with the apostle that I have known how to cope when I have had plenty and when I have had little. I do not trust or rely upon any man to supply my needs. I rely on my Lord and Savior; for he is faithful to his promises. As the apostle wrote:

Phil 4:11-13
11 Not that I speak from want; for I have learned to be content in whatever circumstances I am. 12 I know how to get along with humble means, and I also know how to live in prosperity; in any and every circumstance I have learned the secret of being filled and going hungry, both of having abundance and suffering need. 13 I can do all things through Him who strengthens me.
NASB

Thanks be to God, I haven't suffered hunger very often but I do know what it means "to get along with humble means and...how to live in prosperity".

This is why I can't relate to this class warfare or class envy garbage. My obsession is with the riches that await me in the eternal kingdom. Plus I cannot relate to "fighting for the poor" with other people's money in this world, which is so easy to do. But when it comes to ministering to the poor with our own green....well, that's something else, again, in too many cases.

Lastly, I have defended people's rights to property and to earn as much as they want. Wealth in and of itself is not evil. It's the love for it that is.

Boxcar

Boxcar

"I like your Christ.I do not like your Christians.Your Christians are so unlike your Christ."


Mohandas Gandhi

[Dave Schwartz]

Interesting coming from YOU...one the MOST STAUNCH defender's of this behavior in the past...

by that I mean being labeled as a pug/con...perhap's you realize now that SAID party is selling it's constuency down the river as well...

Remember...I bash/castigate BOTH sides EQUALLY...and it's REFRESHING to see some-one else FINALLY SEE the BIG picture...

Sammy, are you under the mistaken impression that the rich are all republicans?

When are the people of this country going to realize that neither side gives two craps about "us?"


Dave

[bigmack]

Rich are always Republicans. :lol:

8 of the top 10 wealthiest Congressmen are Dems.

7 of the top 10 wealthiest Senators are Dems.

The areas of highest wealth in the US are by far represented by Dems.

Keep debunking those myths.

[hcap]

Here's the remedy for this universal and and ancient economic problem (for even Job himself was quite wealthy):

Heb 13:5-6
5 Let your character be free from the love of money, being content with what you have; for He Himself has said, "I will never desert you, nor will I ever forsake you," 6 so that we confidently say,

"The Lord is my helper, I will not be afraid.
What shall man do to me?"
NASB

So many here are obsessed with the wealth of others, which leads me to believe they're not very content with what they have. I also think that if these people expended their obsession energies in a more constructive fashion and in an entirely different direction, this world would be a much better place in which to live. Again, I have this passage in mind which I quoted earlier to TJ Dave:

Mark 14:7
"For the poor you always have with you, and whenever you wish, YOU can do them good...
NASB
It absolutely amazes me that your view of the corruption and vileness of the human condition dies not apply to anyone NOT poor or helpless.

You miss the good in people below the poverty line, and are blind to the sinning above. The wealthy are not all good and the poor not all bad, but most damage done is proportionate to the leverage of money and those most able to enact their will on society. Welfare Queens are the straw dog apologists for "SOCIALIZED" corporations erect to pull a slight of hand. Blaming those least likely to harm society to mislead where the fault actually resides.

You are preaching those that have little are the greedy ones. And you sound as though your are the owner of a brutal sweatshop circa 1910 lecturing this little child.....

"Yes dear please stop complaining for it is written in the bible to be content with your meager lot in life. Back to work before I suspend your bathroom privileges!"

http://www.greencheeseparty.com/images/corporations/child_labor.jpg

[HUSKER55]

If I make a mouse trap and I profit $1 per trap and I sell 1 million traps and you make a trap but only sell 10,000 of them, why should I have to give you anything?

[boxcar]

"I like your Christ.I do not like your Christians.Your Christians are so unlike your Christ."


Mohandas Gandhi

May I suggest that you're self-deceived. You neither like Christ or his disciples.
But even if you did "like" Jesus, that would not be enough to save you. Believing on him and loving him, however, would.

Boxcar

[boxcar]

It absolutely amazes me that your view of the corruption and vileness of the human condition dies not apply to anyone NOT poor or helpless.

I have continually said that "all have sinned and have fallen short of the glory of God", have I not? So, how have I missed or misapplied anything? Oh, wait...I get it...I've missed it, according to your warped world view, because I don't pound and pummel the rich into the ground like you do and try to impose my Christian values on them, is that it? (Muslims do that with their values, I do not!) I've missed it because I don't dictate to them what they should do with their wealth. I've missed it because I don't berate them or denigrate them by telling them how evil they are.

You miss the good in people below the poverty line, and are blind to the sinning above. The wealthy are not all good and the poor not all bad, but most damage done is proportionate to the leverage of money and those most able to enact their will on society. Welfare Queens are the straw dog apologists for "SOCIALIZED" corporations erect to pull a slight of hand. Blaming those least likely to harm society to mislead where the fault actually resides.

How ironic! All your objections to my biblical arguments are straw dogs! My approach to the poor and the wealthy alike is thoroughly biblical; for nowhere in all the bible -- from Genesis to Revelation -- will you find God sanctioning surrogate charity givers or surrogate benefactors or surrogate contributors to the poor through the taxation process of any government. God loves only one kind of giver -- a cheerful one --one's who give from the heart because he or she wants to. For it is written:

2 Cor 9:7
Let each one do just as he has purposed in his heart; not grudgingly or under compulsion; for God loves a cheerful giver.
NASB

Is not the above Pauline text consistent with Mk 14:7 -- IF YOU wish, YOU can do them good?

You and all libs of your ilk are entirely self-deceived because you believe that you're doing so much good for humanity with your phony surrogate-based charity which only plays into the hands of wicked, godless, money-loving, power-hungry governments around the world. As moral busybodies, you libs mount your high moral horse and preach to others what they should do with their money. Or preach to others that there's a certain point when they have earned enough money -- and any income beyond that they don't need, etc.

Just imagine for a moment, if you will, that some pastor in a church somewhere adopted the liberal strategy for separating church members from their money for "noble causes", of course. :rolleyes: You would be the first to be offended and call such a preacher a charlatan, wouldn't you? Or imagine a preacher standing up in his pulpit dictating to the congregation how much money is enough for them! Or dictating to the members how much money they "should" be sticking into the offering basket to help the "poor", etc. I'm sure you'd consider such a preacher to be really Christ-like, wouldn't you? :rolleyes:

Here is how Christ dealt with the rich. Read and learn from the Son of God:

Luke 18:18-30
18 And a certain ruler questioned Him, saying, "Good Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?" 19 And Jesus said to him, "Why do you call Me good? No one is good except God alone. 20 "You know the commandments, 'Do not commit adultery, Do not murder, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Honor your father and mother.'" 21 And he said, "All these things I have kept from my youth." 22 And when Jesus heard this, He said to him, "One thing you still lack; sell all that you possess, and distribute it to the poor, and you shall have treasure in heaven; and come, follow Me." 23 But when he had heard these things, he became very sad; for he was extremely rich. 24 And Jesus looked at him and said, "How hard it is for those who are wealthy to enter the kingdom of God! 25 "For it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God." 26 And they who heard it said, "Then who can be saved?" 27 But He said, "The things impossible with men are possible with God." 28 And Peter said, "Behold, we have left our own homes, and followed You." 29 And He said to them, "Truly I say to you, there is no one who has left house or wife or brothers or parents or children, for the sake of the kingdom of God, 30 who shall not receive many times as much at this time and in the age to come, eternal life."
NASB

As the text says, this ruler who approached Christ was "extremely rich" (v.23). And he was also extremely self-righteous and as equally self-deceived! The underlying purpose for him seeking Christ out was to receive affirmation from the Master -- to hear from Jesus' lips that he was a righteous man. But after this ruler boldly told Christ how righteous he was, i.e. "all these things I have kept from my youth", Jesus, in his own inimitable fashion, told him what he still lacked. This was a man, who obviously, loved his wealth. So, Jesus in one succinct sentence in v.22 told him what it was that he still lacked. And when this extremely rich ruler heard this, all his hopes for hearing positive affirmation from Jesus on how righteous he was were thrown down to the dust on the ground. His hopes were dashed! His high hopes and expectations for having a positive encounter with Jesus were tuned into extreme sadness.

In Mark's version of this encounter, Mark added that Jesus "felt a love for him" (Mk 10:21).

There's so much we could take away from this passage, but time will only permit this one observation: Jesus, in a sense, did condemn this self-righteous, self-deceived ruler by pointing out his love for money, but he didn't do it maliciously, with hatred, by demonizing him, by degrading him, by denigrating him or by making him out to be the most evil, greedy bottom feeder on the planet. But these are the tactics you people on the Left use with the rich. In your mind, Mr. Hcap, the rich, generally, are the scourge of the world -- completely overlooking or forgetting that "all have sinned and have fallen short of the glory of God" (Rom 3:23). And that includes everyone who is not wealthy. The Left continually set themselves up as holier-than-thou, sanctimonious, self-righteous judges of the wealthy! Obama presumed to tell Americans once that he had nothing against success or making money --- BUT there is a point when enough is enough. How arrogant and presumptuous of him! Who is Obama to sit in judgment of the wealthy!? Did Jesus tell this "extremely rich" ruler that he had too much money? No! Jesus told him what he lacked! And what was it that he lacked, specifically? It's implied in the passage. He lacked love for God, which is the first and foremost commandment! He loved his money more than God! And did not Jesus else where teach:

Luke 16:13
"No servant can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one, and love the other, or else he will hold to one, and despise the other. You cannot serve God and mammon."
NASB

This is why the rich ruler went away very sad. Jesus' words cut him to the quick. They struck home to where this man lived; for his entire life revolved around his wealth. He was far more devoted to his money than to God.

As a Christian, therefore, I do not envy the rich. For in very many cases, if not most, their wealth will weigh as a millstone around their neck that will drag them down to the pit of hell on judgment day. I think I can say (albeit imperfectly) that in most cases, I, like Christ, "feel a love" for the rich. I also pity them; for their idol is their wealth. They trust only in their riches. They love their money. And because of this, they will suffer miserably for all eternity.

You are preaching those that have little are the greedy ones. And you sound as though your are the owner of a brutal sweatshop circa 1910 lecturing this little child.....

Ah, yes...now you've come full circle back to those "welfare queens" you mentioned earlier. Yes, those that have little are often jealous and greedy. They want what other people have. And not only are they jealous and greedy, but they are lazy to boot. I'm afraid the Entitlement Mentality is not a recent 20th or 21st century phenomena. It's been around ever since the Fall. I already pointed this out with Jesus' Miracle of the Ten Lepers, and how 9 of the 10 showed no gratitude for being healed. And when I return later, I'll prove this again from another perspective and with another encounter Jesus had with a group of "followers".

Boxcar

[Tom]

If I make a mouse trap and I profit $1 per trap and I sell 1 million traps and you make a trap but only sell 10,000 of them, why should I have to give you anything?

Dag nabbit, Husker, there ya go, using logic again.
Lefties cannot process logic. You should apologize for bringing a brain to a lib debate. :lol:

[hcap]

Oh, wait...I get it...I've missed it, according to your warped world view, because I don't pound and pummel the rich into the ground like you do and try to impose my Christian values on them, is that it? (Muslims do that with their values, I do not!) I've missed it because I don't dictate to them what they should do with their wealth. I've missed it because I don't berate them or denigrate them by telling them how evil they are.But for some warped reason you do all of the above and more to the poor.

Christianity ministers to the poor, rich and even libs who see through your hatred of humanity. Time to UNCLINCH that
spasmodic sphincter box.

[boxcar]

But for some warped reason you do all of the above and more to the poor.

Christianity ministers to the poor, rich and even libs who see through your hatred of humanity. Time to UNCLINCH that
spasmodic sphincter box.

So, you're going to turn your own hatred for the rich against me by saying I hate ALL humanity? Talk about projection! :bang: :bang:

The only reason you think I pick on the "poor", on the "have nots", on the "underclass" is because you libs are so blinded by your hatred for capitalism and the wealthy, you overlook the fact that the people on the flip side of that coin are just as sinful! You libs would never speak ill against the poor, which is why I do it to give this debate some balance and semblance of fairness! :bang: :bang: You hold them up as though they have some God-given right to other people's wealth -- to the fruit of other people's labor. The sin of jealousy and envy are talked about in the bible just as much as the sin of greed! (See, for example, Prov 3:31; 23:17, Mat 27:18; Mk 7:22; 15:10, Rom 1:29, Phil 1:15, 1Tim 6:4, Tit 3:3, 1Pet 2:1, Prov 6:34; 27:4; Act 5:17; 13:45, Rom 13:13, 1Cor 3:3, 2Cor 12:20; Gal 5:20; Jas 3:14ff.) So, if you want to debate the sin of greed with me, that's fine. But I will balance that with the sins of envy and jealousy. And both of these sins this godless government of ours encourages and promotes with all its hate-filled, class warfare rhetoric which is designed to stoke the flames of jealousy and envy in the minds, hearts and souls of the less fortunate among us.

But not only these sins, there is a third that our wicked, welfare state-minded, socialistic government encourages with its entitlement rhetoric and policies -- the sin of slothfulness (cf. Prov 10:26; 12:27; 19:15, Mat 25:26; Tit 1:12). Why do you think the apostle wrote the church at Thessalonica:

2 Thess 3:10
10 For even when we were with you, we used to give you this order: if anyone will not work, neither let him eat.
NASB

The apostle after giving this negative command, elaborated further by giving the reason for this command and he followed up further with this positive command:

2 Thess 3:11-12
11 For we hear that some among you are leading an undisciplined life, doing no work at all, but acting like busybodies. 12 Now such persons we command and exhort in the Lord Jesus Christ to work in quiet fashion and eat their own bread.
NASB

Working, Mr. Hcap is not a not a mere suggestion. Not working is not an option in this life. But the government does very little to separate the wheat from the chaff when it goes to determine who is worthy for public assistance and who isn't. The state really doesn't care because those on the dole will likely vote in the politicians in the next election who made their government checks possible in the first place!

It's no wonder you can't stand Fox News, since it presents news in a more fair and balanced way than its competitors. Likewise, you can't stand my arguments because I present both sides -- not just one, as you do.
While greed is certainly a grievous sin and is even compared to idolatry in the NT, nonetheless it's not the place of any Christian to dictate to any wealthy person what he "should" do with his money. Christians aren't called to usurp Christ's authority by assuming his lordship over other people's conscience. We are called to preach the Gospel of Jesus Christ -- the Good News of Salvation. Period. Christians are likened to farmers in the NT: One man plants [the Word], another waters; but it is God who gives the increase (1Cor 3:7)! Once a wealthy person becomes born again, I guarantee you that he or she will know how to handle their wealth.

On the other hand, while the deserving poor should be helped, this still doesn't give them any right to other people's money. They must guard their own hearts against the sins of envy, jealousy and slothfulness -- and even against anger or hatred toward the wealthy. They need to cultivate the virtue of contentment and thanksgiving.

The irrefutable fact of the matter is that the poor and the wealthy alike share one common spiritual problem: In most cases, both groups are lost! Both are in dire need of salvation. What both are sorely lacking is FAITH in Christ. To be sure, both have faith -- but the object of theirs isn't Christ. Because their faith is misplaced, their entire life is badly skewed -- in fact, a train wreck.

Boxcar

[hcap]

I no longer read any of your posts longer than several paragraphs or those loaded with more than one biblical passage.

You seem to regurgitate the same set of paranoid notions only slightly modified to the subject at hand. Boring and repetitive. Of course I don't expect much more from you, let alone the recognition that you are a spiteful old fool with no understanding of the core truths of your own religion.

Christianity is much broader than a "means" test and specifically warns against judging our fellow humans by employment agency screening tests and criteria. You miss the mark of what essential in life and lose your spiritual cool smugly denigrating others on minor transgressions and politicize the bible in order to fit your twisted vision of truth.

IT IS QUITE OBVIOUS you do hate the poor, ads most of humanity, and should consider some sort of upper colonic cleansing on a regular basis.

[boxcar]

Good question, which is why I asked it. :) If you listen to enough libs, the only morally responsible people in the universe are Capitalists, the Wealthy, Republicans, Conservatives, Jews and Christians. Everyone else need not worry about moral responsibility. People who sport "D's" after their name have practically been canonized saints here on earth by their worshipers, since they are always a benevolent force for Good in the world. The Poor in the world are all victims of the Rich, so it's not possible for the Poor to be morally culpable in any way, shape or form. After all, everyone knows, the "poor" would never make any conscious, deliberate life choices that would put them in a state of poverty. In short, the libs believe some groups because of their life choices are Sinners, while others are Saints by virtue of their economic condition, or skin color or their political party affiliation. You have to admit, the Libs do a nice sugar-coated job on their version of Reality.

But the bible paints a very different picture of the human race -- the entire race, including people of color, those in poverty and those in select political parties. What I'd like to do is tackle a huge passage in the Gospel of John. The 6th chapter contains 71 verses, so in order to keep this to a reasonable length, I will cherry-pick texts that will highlight my major points to this post. But in my own words, I will provide the larger context for the passages I select.

John 6 deals with one major theme -- Jesus' famous Bread of Life Discourse, but his discourse is set up by the miracle he performed prior to his teaching.
The miracle is also fairly well known by many, as it was the Feeding of the Five Thousand, whereby Jesus took five loaves and two fish, blessed them and fed about 5,000 people on a mountain.

How did this great multitude wind up on a mountain with Jesus? Well, the opening verses in this large passage tells us:

John 6:1-2
After these things Jesus went away to the other side of the Sea of Galilee (or Tiberias). 2 And a great multitude was following Him, because they were seeing the signs which He was performing on those who were sick.
NASB

And from where did this "great multitude" follow Jesus? Well, he was in Cana and Jerusalem and Samaria -- all in Galilee. So, it's important understand that this great crowd followed him in boats to the other side of the Sea of Galilee.

It's also important to not miss the fact that those who followed him to Tiberias had seen him perform other miracles on the other side of the Sea of Galilee. This is important to understand. Don't miss this because it was those miracles that drove them to follow him to Tiberias.

When on the other side, he climbs a mountain and performs another great sign in the midst of these people -- his Feeding of the Five Thousand miracle, which is recorded for us in vv. 1-15 .

Apparently, after they enjoyed their little lunch and had their bellies filled, it finally dawned on the people that Jesus was the "Prophet" who was to come into the world (v.14). Of course, Jesus is a great prophet, but he's also much more than this. But the crowd got so excited and energized after having their bellies filled and arriving at this little bit of knowledge, look what they wanted to do next:

John 6:15
Jesus therefore perceiving that they were intending to come and take Him by force, to make Him king, withdrew again to the mountain by Himself alone.
NASB

But Jesus wasn't going to have any part of this because he knew their motives were entirely carnal and selfish, as we'll see a little later. But what is interesting is that these people wanted to make him king. They perceived that he had great power, they had witnessed by now many signs and wonders that he performed on both sides of the Sea and they wanted to be part of that. They wanted to join the Jesus Party, as it were. They very likely figured anyone powerful enough to do these things was probably powerful enough to remove the Roman yoke off Israel's neck. But Jesus escaped from their midst and climbed back up the mountain to be alone and to pray.

When evening arrived, the 12 (presumably) grabbed a boat and sailed back to the other side of the Sea of Galilee from whence they came.

And probably when it was really dark, Jesus descended mountain (quite possibly away from where all the boats were beached) and walked across the Sea to the other side (vv. 19-21). Now, things really start to get interesting.

Apparently, some of the crowd was already over on the other side of the Sea; for they noticed that there was no other small boat there, except the one in which the 12 arrived. And they knew that Jesus never entered that boat to get to their side.

Then more of the crowd that had been fed in Tiberias followed that day from there to Capernaum where Jesus and the 12 were. And they were all scratching their head because they, too, knew Jesus had never entered the boat with the 12. So, they were just dying to ask him how he got to Capernaum. They came close to asking him that by asking, "when" did he arrive? But Jesus pushed aside their carnal curiosity and got right to the point as to why they really followed him back to Capernaum. Here's is how Jesus replied to their question:

John 6:26-27
26 Jesus answered them and said, "Truly, truly, I say to you, you seek Me, not because you saw signs, but because you ate of the loaves, and were filled. 27 "Do not work for the food which perishes, but for the food which endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man shall give to you, for on Him the Father, even God, has set His seal."
NASB

So, in his very answer, he begins his Bread of Life Discourse. And he rebukes them because their motives were impure, selfish and greedy. They went to all this trouble to find him and to sail back to the other side of the Sea of Galilee all for the wrong reasons. They liked getting something for nothing! They really thought it would be cool to just hold their hands out, palms up and get free food, and quite possibly everything else they would need in life. (Let's face it: Jesus' food producing and dispensing techniques had the current Food Stamp Card system beat to a pulp!) This is why they wanted to take Jesus by force on the mountain and make him their king! They had their minds fixated strictly on the temporal, perishable benefits they thought they would reap by making him their king.

Then after Jesus focuses on and teaches them about the spiritual food that doesn't perish -- that is eternal and not temporal -- this is how "many of his disciples" responded to his teaching:

John 6:60-61
60 Many therefore of His disciples, when they heard this said, "This is a difficult statement; who can listen to it?" 61 But Jesus, conscious that His disciples grumbled at this, said to them, "Does this cause you to stumble?
NASB

And this was the response by many to Jesus' rhetorical question:

John 6:66
As a result of this many of His disciples withdrew, and were not walking with Him anymore.
NASB

Well, the Jesus Party didn't last very long did it? These "disciples" abandoned Jesus faster than rats jumping a sinking ship! They saw that he wasn't offering any temporal, earthly, perishable benefits. All he was selling was this eternal junk -- garbage pertaining to eternal life and their eternal destines. And they were clearly not interested in any of that nonsense! Tell me that we can't draw any present day political parallels from this account!

Liberals flock to Democrats like flies to horse manure because the Dems know how to tickle voters' ears. Liberal politicians know how to exploit human misery, suffering, hardships and struggles. Liberal politicians know how to grease those held hand out hands with their palms up, knowing they in turn will be rewarded come next election. As long as lib pols keep those promises rolling off their lips and force the Makers to pay the Takers, the Takers in life will vote them back in office.

Just because a person isn't rich doesn't mean he isn't a sinner like everyone else. The sins of envy and jealousy and most often found within the lower income classes because they covet and want what their wealthier counterparts have. And in this society they are taught that they have some kind of right to expect the wealthy to give them their money. The lower income classes feel they're entitled to other people's money because they have been brainwashed into believing they have been victimized by the upper classes! Class Warfare or Class Envy propaganda set the stage for proletariat's struggle against the bourgeois. There are more than few people in this world looking for something for nothing, as these false disciples were.

And the second thing we should take away from this passage is the unbelievable granite-like hardness of the human heart -- the heart that so many of you libs like to believe is basically good. The human heart is anything but good; and for this biblical observation, I have no doubt that Hcap will, again, accuse me of hating humanity. :rolleyes: But these disciples had been walking with Jesus for quite some time. They witnessed many of his miracles on one side of the Sea of Galilee only to witness another great miracle on the other side and they still refused to believe on him.

But I will give you this, Mr. Hcap, "hate" is involved in a Christian's life, for it is written:

Luke 14:26
If anyone comes to Me, and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be My disciple.
NASB

If our own lives were such lovely, beautiful and pure things to behold and to admire and to brag about, why would Jesus tell a great multitude that was following him that they must hate their own lives if they wanted to be his disciple?

'cap, you want to tackle this question?

Boxcar

[boxcar]

I no longer read any of your posts longer than several paragraphs or those loaded with more than one biblical passage.

Ahh...yes, you really can't stand the word of God, can you? It is, indeed, sharper than a two-edged sword (Heb 4:12)!

You seem to regurgitate the same set of paranoid notions only slightly modified to the subject at hand. Boring and repetitive. Of course I don't expect much more from you, let alone the recognition that you are a spiteful old fool with no understanding of the core truths of your own religion.

Hey, hey...watch that stuff. I take reference to your "old" remark. I'm really not that old. As for the rest, this is your typical ad hominen, red herring-type response. And you talk about me regurgitating? :rolleyes:

Christianity is much broader than a "means" test and specifically warns against judging our fellow humans by employment agency screening tests and criteria. You miss the mark of what essential in life and lose your spiritual cool smugly denigrating others on minor transgressions and politicize the bible in order to fit your twisted vision of truth.

'cap, you don't have the first clue what Christianity is all about because you don't even have a clue on who Christ is.

IT IS QUITE OBVIOUS you do hate the poor, ads most of humanity, and should consider some sort of upper colonic cleansing on a regular basis.

I did make a concession in my last post to the point you made earlier about "hating". But somehow, I still don't think you're going to accept the bible's teaching on it. :rolleyes: In fact, I'd bet my life on it.

Boxcar

[hcap]

So you fabricate a political moral lesson grom one of the great spiritual allegorical stories in the bible?

John 6:26-27
26 Jesus answered them and said, "Truly, truly, I say to you, you seek Me, not because you saw signs, but because you ate of the loaves, and were filled. 27 "Do not work for the food which perishes, but for the food which endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man shall give to you, for on Him the Father, even God, has set His seal."
NASBOnce again you miss the mark choosing to make lib/con dem/repug pablum out of something obviously beyond your sense of proportion.

This is the mark and the essence of everything

"Do not work for the food which perishes, but for the food which endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man shall give to you, for on Him the Father, even God, has set His seal"

(BTW box be careful not to take the above too literally, because using boxcarian logic, it appears Jesus is telling everyone NOT to work for earthly goods. :bang: Ala lilies of the field)

So for your out of proportion interpretation to be believed, first Jesus fed the multitude not out of compassion, but as the prelude to a test
Did it ever occur to you that the story is first a miracle of compassion, then a lesson in what is truly important?

Then there is this other story.
Very similar

The Feeding of the 4000
or the miracle of the seven loaves and fishes
Matthew 15:32

"Jesus called his disciples to him and said, "I have compassion for these people; they have already been with me three days and have nothing to eat. I do not want to send them away hungry, or they may collapse on the way."

If you knew anything at all about love or compassion you would now tending to a starving mans earthly hunger is sometimes in order before spiritual truths may be fed to mans' spiritual hunger.


Perhaps you should go out and have a few burgers. Then we can these spiritual matters further

[hcap]

Just looking at a mans' worth by work alone is missing the mark. Ascribing political points based on narrow biblical interpretations is really missing the mark.

Don't get me wrong, earning ones keep is vital in both realms. In Zen, when asked by a student "what should one do after eating" the reply by the teacher is simply "wash your bowl"

[boxcar]

So you fabricate a political moral lesson grom one of the great spiritual allegorical stories in the bible?

Surely, you're not suggesting the miracle on the mount didn't actually occur, are you?

Once again you miss the mark choosing to make lib/con dem/repug pablum out of something obviously beyond your sense of proportion.

This is the mark and the essence of everything

"Do not work for the food which perishes, but for the food which endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man shall give to you, for on Him the Father, even God, has set His seal"

(BTW box be careful not to take the above too literally, because using boxcarian logic, it appears Jesus is telling everyone NOT to work for earthly goods. :bang: Ala lilies of the field)

So for your out of proportion interpretation to be believed, first Jesus fed the multitude not out of compassion, but as the prelude to a test
Did it ever occur to you that the story is first a miracle of compassion, then a lesson in what is truly important?

Oh, 'cap, 'cap, how dull your understanding of the blessed Word is. And you accuse me of missing the point? :bang: :bang:

To be sure, Jesus performed all his miracles out of his compassion and love for people, but that was NOT the primary reason he performed all his signs and wonders. He performed them first and foremost to glorify his Father who sent him into this world and to reveal to lost people that he was indeed the Sent One -- The Promised Messiah --the Great Prophet who the prophets of the OT foretold of his coming. Here are just a few passages that bear these truths out:

John 11:40-43
40 Jesus said to her, "Did I not say to you, if you believe, you will see the glory of God?" 41 And so they removed the stone. And Jesus raised His eyes, and said, "Father, I thank Thee that Thou heardest Me. 42 "And I knew that Thou hearest Me always; but because of the people standing around I said it, that they may believe that Thou didst send Me."
NASB

Luke 7:19-23
19 And summoning two of his disciples, John sent them to the Lord, saying, "Are You the Expected One, or do we look for someone else?" 20 And when the men had come to Him, they said, "John the Baptist has sent us to You, saying, 'Are You the Expected One, or do we look for someone else?'" 21 At that very time He cured many people of diseases and afflictions and evil spirits; and He granted sight to many who were blind. 22 And He answered and said to them, "Go and report to John what you have seen and heard: the blind receive sight, the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, and the deaf hear, the dead are raised up, the poor have the gospel preached to them. 23 "And blessed is he who keeps from stumbling over Me."
NASB

But did not the multitude who followed him back over to the other side of Sea of Galilee do precisely that -- stumble over him? Recall Jesus's question to them?

Matt 15:29-31
29 And departing from there, Jesus went along by the Sea of Galilee, and having gone up to the mountain, He was sitting there. 30 And great multitudes came to Him, bringing with them those who were lame, crippled, blind, dumb, and many others, and they laid them down at His feet; and He healed them, 31 so that the multitude marveled as they saw the dumb speaking, the crippled restored, and the lame walking, and the blind seeing; and they glorified the God of Israel.
NASB

This was exactly the kind of response his miracles were designed to elicit.

Luke 19:37-40
37 And as He was now approaching, near the descent of the Mount of Olives, the whole multitude of the disciples began to praise God joyfully with a loud voice for all the miracles which they had seen, 38 saying,

"Blessed is the King who comes in the name of the Lord;
Peace in heaven and glory in the highest!"

39 And some of the Pharisees in the multitude said to Him, "Teacher, rebuke Your disciples." 40 And He answered and said, "I tell you, if these become silent, the stones will cry out!"
NASB

But not all men responded appropriately to the great signs and wonders Jesus performed in their midst, as evidenced by the Pharisees' response above.

In fact, after Jesus raised Lazarus from the dead, that was the proverbial straw that broke the camel's back. That miracle instilled so much fear and hatred into the hearts of the religious establishment, that the Pharisees, Sadducees, Lawyers and Scribes plotted on how to dispose of Jesus once and for all. That miracle, which occurred late in his ministry, posed too much of a threat to the religious-political status quo.

And one more passage:

Matt 11:20-24
20 Then He began to reproach the cities in which most of His miracles were done, because they did not repent. 21 "Woe to you, Chorazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! For if the miracles had occurred in Tyre and Sidon which occurred in you, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes. 22 "Nevertheless I say to you, it shall be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon in the day of judgment, than for you. 23 "And you, Capernaum, will not be exalted to heaven, will you? You shall descend to Hades; for if the miracles had occurred in Sodom which occurred in you, it would have remained to this day. 24 "Nevertheless I say to you that it shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom in the day of judgment, than for you."
NASB

Therefore, there is nothing contradictory in the premise that Jesus performed miracles to glorify his Father who sent him into this world, to authenticate OT prophecies about the identity of the predicted Messiah, as a moral test to the witnesses of the signs and wonders and, yes, out of compassion and love for the lost. Your view of Jesus' great works is overly simplistic and badly out of balance, as proven by the passages above.


If you knew anything at all about love or compassion you would now tending to a starving mans earthly hunger is sometimes in order before spiritual truths may be fed to mans' spiritual hunger.

Your own words condemn your view and support mine! The problem with the "great multitude" who worked very hard to seek Jesus out on the other side of the Sea of Galilee was that the food in their bellies did not stir up their spiritual appetite. It only fanned the flames of their carnality and selfishness. They stumbled over the Miracle Worker! :bang: :bang:

Perhaps you should go out and have a few burgers. Then we can these spiritual matters further

Actually, I had a great burger last night at one of my favorite burger eateries.
So, I'm good for awhile. But thanks for thinking of my belly. ;)

Boxcar

[boxcar]

Just looking at a mans' worth by work alone is missing the mark. Ascribing political points based on narrow biblical interpretations is really missing the mark.

I do not look at a man's worth by whether or not he's working. Lack of work alone does not defile a man Rather I look at the whole man. The poor are so many upon the earth, they can barely be numbered; but not all the poor are worthy to be helped. As it is written:

Mark 7:20-23
20 And He was saying, "That which proceeds out of the man, that is what defiles the man. 21 "For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed the evil thoughts, fornications, thefts, murders, adulteries, 22 deeds of coveting and wickedness, as well as deceit, sensuality, envy, slander, pride and foolishness. 23 "All these evil things proceed from within and defile the man."
NASB

If someone is gaming the welfare system at the expense of honest taxpayers, I would not be nearly as inclined to render aid to that person over an honest, unemployed one. This is what you don't understand.

Don't get me wrong, earning ones keep is vital in both realms. In Zen, when asked by a student "what should one do after eating" the reply by the teacher is simply "wash your bowl"

And I would have added, "...and dry it afterward". ;)

Boxcar

[hcap]

Surely, you're not suggesting the miracle on the mount didn't actually occur, are you?

Does not matter. The lesson is what counts,
and how it is interpreted. What is the MOST important understanding and on the mark by far is the value of spiritual bread vs earthly bread. Not as you made it out to be. Your old song about the lack of payment for earthly bread and the laziness of those NOT willing to pay their way.
To be sure, Jesus performed all his miracles out of his compassion and love for people, but that was NOT the primary reason he performed all his signs and wonders. He performed them first and foremost to glorify his Father who sent him into this world and to reveal to lost people that he was indeed the Sent One -- The Promised Messiah
Maybe he did, but he used healing the crippled, feeding the hungry, and allowing the blind to see as examples of god's power. Whether or not the multitudes see the source is ALWAYS the crux of the issue. But the acts and miracles of inerrant goodness may open the door. Kindness and love move mountains and hearts. Walking through is still mans' choice
Your own words condemn your view and support mine! The problem with the "great multitude" who worked very hard to seek Jesus out on the other side of the Sea of Galilee was that the food in their bellies did not stir up their spiritual appetite. It only fanned the flames of their carnality and selfishness. They stumbled over the Miracle Worker!So then you ARE suggesting we starve the poor for their own good?

[lamboguy]

Sammy, are you under the mistaken impression that the rich are all republicans?

When are the people of this country going to realize that neither side gives two craps about "us?"


Davethat is for sure coming from the worlds greatest horse handicapper

[hcap]

If someone is gaming the welfare system at the expense of honest taxpayers, I would not be nearly as inclined to render aid to that person over an honest, unemployed one. This is what you don't understand.
In Zen, when asked by a student "what should one do after eating" the reply by the teacher is simply "wash your bowl"

And I would have added, "...and dry it afterward". ;)

BoxcarSince you did so well in adding some Zen wisdom, but once again straw man us with welfare cheats, here is a foolish Zen monk not knowing his ass from his elbow (probably a lib)
Two monks were washing their bowls in the river when they noticed a scorpion that was drowning. One monk immediately scooped it up and set it upon the bank. In the process he was stung. He went back to washing his bowl and again the scorpion fell in. The monk saved the scorpion and was again stung. The other monk asked him, "Friend, why do you continue to save the scorpion when you know it's nature is to sting?"

"Because," the monk replied, "to save it is my nature."

[thaskalos]

I do not look at a man's worth by whether or not he's working. Lack of work alone does not defile a man Rather I look at the whole man. The poor are so many upon the earth, they can barely be numbered; but not all the poor are worthy to be helped.

If someone is gaming the welfare system at the expense of honest taxpayers, I would not be nearly as inclined to render aid to that person over an honest, unemployed one. This is what you don't understand.
Life is painful for all of us, and this fact alone is reason enough to have compassion for all of humanity.

The sun spreads his warmth on saint and sinner alike...

[boxcar]

Does not matter. The lesson is what counts,
and how it is interpreted. What is the MOST important understanding and on the mark by far is the value of spiritual bread vs earthly bread. Not as you made it out to be. Your old song about the lack of payment for earthly bread and the laziness of those NOT willing to pay their way.

Maybe he did, but he used healing the crippled, feeding the hungry, and allowing the blind to see as examples of god's power. Whether or not the multitudes see the source is ALWAYS the crux of the issue. But the acts and miracles of inerrant goodness may open the door. Kindness and love move mountains and hearts. Walking through is still mans' choice
So then you ARE suggesting we starve the poor for their own good?

No, of course not! See, you miss one of the central lessons to the passage: The granite-like hardness of man's heart. You said that that miracle (and I suppose all others by extension) were not moral tests. But scripture refutes that notion. They were moral tests in addition to spectacular and awesome manifestations of God's power and his goodness. The desire of God's heart is that men respond to such demonstrations in a positive manner -- that is by repenting of their sins and placing their faith in the Messiah. This is why Jesus pronounced such a harsh judgment on Capernaum. He performed numerous miracles in that city but the overall response was not favorable.

Now as far as you ducking the issue on whether an actual miracle or not had occurred, if there was no miracle involving "earthly bread", then how could the relative insignificance of this kind of bread be contrasted to the significance of the "spiritual bread"? And if the "earthly bread" wasn't real, who is to say the "spiritual" one is a reality? You can't just look at these kinds of passages as a spectator on the sidelines. You really have to put yourself in the shoes of the people who were actually there. Of course, if the "earthly bread" was made up, then you might also think "the great multitude" who allegedly followed him to Tiberias and then back to the other side of the Seal Galilee were equally as fictitious. And so...the spider spins her web of deceit...

And if there was no "earthly bread" produced by a miracle, then Jesus' words in v.26, which actually begins his Discourse have no meaning. To what "signs" was he referring if no miracle occurred? Or how did their bellies become filled? How did they get the bread and fish that filled them? Was the food air-dropped into them? Or did the Jews have their own version of Meals on Wheels back then? Or did the crowd just pack their own Jewish deli-style lunches and take it to the mountain? :rolleyes:

Boxcar
P.S. And was the lunch kosher? :lol: :lol:

[boxcar]

Life is painful for all of us, and this fact alone is reason enough to have compassion for all of humanity.

The sun spreads his warmth on saint and sinner alike...

Two thieves were crucified with Christ. How many of them received his compassion?

Boxcar

[boxcar]

Since you did so well in adding some Zen wisdom, but once again straw man us with welfare cheats, here is a foolish Zen monk not knowing his ass from his elbow (probably a lib)

You won't get an argument from me there. :D

Boxcar

[thaskalos]

Two thieves were crucified with Christ. How many of them received his compassion?

BoxcarWe are both talking about the same Jesus, right...the one who said "Love Your Enemies..." ?

[boxcar]

We are both talking about the same Jesus, right...the one who said "Love Your Enemies..." ?

Well...I know the Jesus of whom I speak; but I won't presume to speak for you.

Anyhow, according to scripture, Christ was crucified between two thieves. Can you tell me if either of them, both of them or neither of them were recipients of his compassion?

Boxcar

[TJDave]

Anyhow, according to scripture, Christ was crucified between two thieves. Can you tell me if either of them, both of them or neither of them were recipients of his compassion?

Boxcar

I know. Can even quote chapter and verse. But since I'm not, nor ever will be, a Christian my knowledge doesn't count. I won't spoil it for the backsliders. :lol:

[thaskalos]

The part about the 2 crucified thieves is a little more hazy than you make it. According to the Gospels of both Mark and Matthew...BOTH thieves mocked Jesus while they were on the cross (Matthew 27:44).

Only Luke mentions the story about the apologetic thief...which has become so well known.

IMO...this part was added on by the fathers of the church, in order to promote their doctrine which states that, even if you are a criminal, all you need to do is ask for forgiveness and "ye shall be saved".

It's a very interesting little doctrine...which more than a few "Saints" have used to their advantage.

Constantine "The Great", who was a very brutal Roman Emperor, remained a pagan until the end of his life...and only on his death bed did he "repent" and get baptized by bishop Eusebius of Nicomedia...thus insuring the kingdom of heaven for himself.

As a result of this "belated" confession and baptism...the Eastern Orthodox Church not only canonized him as a Saint, but they called him an "Issapostolo"...which means "equal to the Apostles".

How convenient...

[sammy the sage]

Sammy, are you under the mistaken impression that the rich are all republicans?

When are the people of this country going to realize that neither side gives two craps about "us?"


Dave

Too bad you HAVEN'T read much of my PREVIOUS posts in the LAST several years..You'd KNOW were I stand...:rolleyes:

[sammy the sage]

Mr. Sammy Sage, I've been a Christian for many moons. I strongly suspect that I saw the "BIG PICTURE", i.e. from the perspective of biblical perspective, long before you have come to realize the moral condition of political parties.


Never. And here's why: The scriptures, in numerous places, makes it abundantly clear that wealth for most people will be their eternal undoing.

This is why I can't relate to this class warfare or class envy garbage. It's the love for it that is.

Boxcar

Boxcar

So why the UNRELENTING support of the pugs/cons who promote UNFAIR oversea's labor practice's...paying some 12 yr.old $12 for 12 hour day... :faint:

Meanwhile THIS thread got TOTALLY off topic...

Answer me this...how MUCH are the upper 1% entitled to keep....I've heard elsewhere...as MUCH as they can LEGALLY....

But THAT can be adjusted BY tax's...so seriously...how MUCH should they BE allowed...

personally..35% is TOO much for me...the 9-10% they had for 50 yrs seemed about right....but NOW...they are DESTROYING us/america from inside out...

just my take...

[boxcar]

The part about the 2 crucified thieves is a little more hazy than you make it. According to the Gospels of both Mark and Matthew...BOTH thieves mocked Jesus while they were on the cross (Matthew 27:44).

Oh, oh, oh...gotta be very careful here and exegete the parallel passages with great care. While there are similarities, there are also differences which need to be taken into account and reconciled. :)

First of all, Jesus was crucified on a hill and it appears that he was crucified at the highest point on the hill, i.e. on the crest or in middle -- between the "thieves" and/or the "criminals", depending on whose gospel account you're reading. What is very interesting here is that there are two different Greek terms used. Matthew and Mark employ the term lestai which literally means "thieves". However, Luke claims that they were "criminals", which is a different Greek term kakourgoi and literally means "evildoers".

Another puzzling difference is the question of when these others were crucified with Jesus. Matthew and Mark tell us the others were crucified after the dividing of Jesus' garments and the placement of the accusation. However, in Luke (and in John, too) the others were led with Jesus and were crucified before the dividing of the garments.

And then, of course, how many "robbers" or "thieves" mocked him? One or more or all?

These, then, are the major difficulties with this crucifixion account pertaining to the "transgressors" who were numbered with him -- which is a fulfillment of Isa 53:12. But this prophecy does not tell us a specific number. All we know from this OT prophecy is that there would be at least two "transgressors" who would be numbered with Jesus. This is important to keep in mind. (And for now to avoid confusion in my proposed solution to these difficulties, let's just call the people who were crucified on the hill with Christ "transgressors".)

But I think the biggest key to reconciling these difficulties lies with John's account. First, we learn that Jesus was crucified between two transgressors (Jn 19:18).

The second thing we learn is that these two in John (and in Luke, also) were crucified with Jesus before his garments were divided (Jn 19:23; Lk 23:34).

The third very important item to understand is that crucifixion didn't take place before a normal, ordinary sabbath. No! It took place just prior to a "high day", which was the first day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread. It was very important to the Jews, therefore, that all the bodies of the crucified Jews (for Romans did not crucify their own citizens!) be taken down from their crosses and buried before sunset -- the beginning the "high day" sabbath (Jn 19:31). In all probability, the Jewish high priests requested of Pilate that he order his soldiers to break the legs of all the crucified Jews in order to expedite their deaths by suffocation. In other words, the Jewish High Priests were up against the clock!

And this fourth detail is a huge key, I believe. Pilate accommodated the Jews' request and ordered his soldiers to break the legs of those crucified. John tells us that the soldiers came and broke the legs of the first man and second man who were crucified with Jesus. In other words the two "transgressors" who were crucified with Jesus and before Jesus' garments were divided (Jn 19:32).

Here is why this detail is so important: Since Jesus was crucified on the top of the hill -- at the crest of the hill -- between two "transgressors, we must ask why would the soldiers go to cross number 1 to break that guy's legs, skip cross number 2 which is where Jesus presumably hanged, go to cross 3 to where the other man hanged and break this legs, then come back to cross 2 where Jesus was? But if there were only two transgressors who were crucified with Christ, this is what we'd have to believe. And that doesn't make any sense. Logically, the soldiers would start at the low end of the hill and work their way up to the crest.

I submit to you, therefore, that this was what happened, as there were probably four transgressors who were crucified with Christ. On either side of Christ, there was a "thief" and an "evildoer". This would neatly explain the two different Greek words used which have different meanings.

And it would also explain the difficulty of two being crucified before Christ's garments were divided (Lk and Jn) and two crucified after his garments were divided (Mat and Mk).

And it would explain why the soldiers would logically start at one end of the hill and work their way to the other end, and how by the time they reached cross #3 with Christ on it at the top of the hill, he had already died; therefore, it was not necessary to break any of his bones. This, of course, fulfilled another OT prophecy (Ps 34:20). And soldiers wanting to be sure that Christ had in fact died pierced his side, instead, to see if he bled.

Finally, it would explain, of course, how one pair of "transgressors" hurled abuses at Christ, while only half of the other pair did. Everything harmonizes quite nicely once we allow for the very real and viable possibility that Jesus was crucified with more than two transgressors -- probably four.

Only Luke mentions the story about the apologetic thief...which has become so well known.

IMO...this part was added on by the fathers of the church, in order to promote their doctrine which states that, even if you are a criminal, all you need to do is ask for forgiveness and "ye shall be saved".

Well, that's your speculation. I operate under an entirely different set of biblically-based presuppositions -- mainly, "let God be true and every man liar" (Rom 3:4). What I will give you, however, is that the early church may have had a perverted understanding of the repentant "evildoer".

All the major components necessary for true repentance and faith are in the Lukian account. The "evildoer" feared God, while the other sinner did not.

The repentant evildoer confessed his guilt, while the other did not.

The repentant evildoer acknowledged that he was under a just sentence, while the other did not.

The repentant evildoer, evidently, knew enough about Christ and his ministry to know that Christ was a righteous man and undeserving of his punishment, while the other sinner did not know or could care less.

Finally, the repentant evildoer exercised faith in Christ since he asked Jesus to remember him when Jesus came into his kingdom. Evidently, this sinner knew something of Jesus' kingdom teachings during his ministry.

Having said all this, I will concede that foxhole conversions are probably very rare and I would not recommend that anyone think for a moment that they can live like the devil right up to their last hour of death and then repent at the last minute; for no one knows when their life will be required of them.

So, this brings me back to full circle to what you, Thaskalos, thought about God's "universal" compassion. You were wrong here, too. Christ had no compassion, evidently, on the others who died with him; but he did save the one repentant sinner. As it is written:

Rom 9:15-16
15 For He says to Moses, "I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion." 16 So then it does not depend on the man who wills or the man who runs, but on God who has mercy.
NASB

One thing I would ask you to take away from this little teachable moment: Don't allow the sinful abuses of the early church to cloud or prejudice your thinking about scripture. God is true and faithful to his promises. Man is neither. Don't use those abuses as your "convenient" excuse to abuse scripture, lest you fall into the same snare as the early fathers.

Boxcar

[boxcar]

So why the UNRELENTING support of the pugs/cons who promote UNFAIR oversea's labor practice's...paying some 12 yr.old $12 for 12 hour day... :faint:

I don't blindly support anyone. I go issue by issue. I have already said that the Repugs aren't angels. I came to this conclusion years ago, which is why I changed my voter registration to "independent". I did not want to be associated with the Party of Stupid.

Boxcar

[sammy the sage]

I don't blindly support anyone. I go issue by issue. I have already said that the Repugs aren't angels. I came to this conclusion years ago, which is why I changed my voter registration to "independent". I did not want to be associated with the Party of Stupid.

Boxcar

Well fair enough...then what do you CALL the OTHER ruling party...you know...the one you sarcastically have under you moniker?

Beside's...their BOTH OWNED by the banker's :faint:

[boxcar]

Well fair enough...then what do you CALL the OTHER ruling party...you know...the one you sarcastically have under you moniker?

Beside's...their BOTH OWNED by the banker's :faint:

Yup, it's a tough world we live in. But who is going to save America? Which genius is either party going to put forth?

The other party is the Party of Evil, if you're alluding to the Dems. Talk about The People being caught between a rock and hard place! :rolleyes:

Boxcar

[senortout]

Dag nabbit, Husker, there ya go, using logic again.
Lefties cannot process logic. You should apologize for bringing a brain to a lib debate. :lol:

logic smogic. I make a better mousetrap, sell it for more per trap, and do better'n you. It caught guys like you before. Think again!