• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Jesus hypocritical?

McBell

Resident Sourpuss
ALL OUT OF CONTEXT!

nice try
Really?
Every single one?
Would you care to explain or are you one of those who just jump up and down screaming 'out of context' because it is something you do not wish to hear?
 

Super Universe

Defender of God
I was browsing online and happened to come across this.

The Hypocritical Personality of Jesus (author unknown)

What's your opinion on this? Is the author misquoting or misinterpreting anywhere? Do the author's claims have any relevance?

Context! Since these people have conveniently left out the context surrounding some of these sayings I will provide you with it.

"I bring the sword", this means that Jesus was a rebel against the ways of man, He was going to cause problems, people should not think of Him as the Messiah, or anything, other than what they know of Him to do. I ask you this, did He ever carry a sword?

"He that hath no sword, let him sell his garment and buy one" so then he will be naked and only have the sword to cover himself with.

"But mine enemies... and slay them before me" Jesus did not say this. This is ancient priestly fabrication.

"...and men gather them into the fire, and they are burned" How does one describe the annihilation of an eternal soul to a human being who doesn't even understand what makes the wind blow? This passage was not meant that humans should burn disbelievers, it's referring to the destruction of souls.

Jesus looked with "anger", uh, so? Do you think He was not a man capable of such a thing?

Jesus overturned the moneychangers tables? And? What kind of Jesus do you want?

Jesus drove demons into animals and senselessly drowned them? Uh, do you know a better way to rid possessed people of demons?

Jesus proclamation of eternal damnation? Lucifer began his rebellion while Jesus was bestowed on the earth. He was warning people not to become like Lucifer and the rebels.

"If any man come to me and hate not... he cannot be my disciple", what would Jesus need to teach those who are already perfect?

"I am come to set a man against his father, daughter against mother..." Jesus was going to break some of the old traditional ways.

"Let the dead bury the dead", people think death is the end, it's not. Don't cry over one who has moved on. No person belongs to you no matter how much you think it is so.

Jesus did not marry or father children because it was forbidden of Him. He was about His Father's work, not His earthly mother who thought He was supposed to become the King of the Jews and fight the Romans.

Jesus never denounced servitude? He didn't change every babies diaper either. Do you think He was here to fix everything for you?

Jesus did not waste, or even use, the expensive ointment on Himself, a woman came in and poured it on Him and those nearby scolded her so Jesus scoffed back at them. She did a good deed, she had pure intentions. "You will always have the poor with you" Jesus said. Let me ask you this, what has any man ever gone without so that another could have it instead?

No women were chosen as disciples? Again, you want Jesus to fix everything for you. He picked His battles, you did not decide which ones for Him.

A man castrated himself because of something Jesus said? Sigh... It is not another man's fault for what a fool does.

"Marrying a divorced woman is adultery", you should know a mate before you marry and be sure they are the right one forever.

"Don't plan for the future", not what Matthew 6:34 says. It says "Don't WORRY about tomorrow", emphasis on the word WORRY.

"Don't save money", not what Matthew 6:19 says. It says "Don't store treasures on the earth, store them in heaven", be wise and earn your right to ascend because it is the only thing that truly matters, not your earthly value.

It's been 2,000 years and believers are still waiting? Why would He come again for them when they already believe? They missed it because they weren't His target.

The Golden Rule is meant to try and see things from another's view before you react.

You always want everything explained to you. If there is a bite out of the sandwich you just made and you and your brother are the only two people in the house, do you blame a man across the city?

Oh, I shouldn't have used a parable, you probably think I'm making a false accusation about your brother...
 

Fluffy

A fool
If this author had something valuable to say then why did they find it necessary to make at least some contextual errors.

If I read a physics essay and the author fumbles over something elementary in the first few paragraphs then I don't have the time to give him the benefit of the doubt.
 

Mister Emu

Emu Extraordinaire
Staff member
Premium Member
Really?
Every single one?
I wouldn't say every one of them, such as the teaching of an eternal damnation(but I disagree that such a teaching is "disturbing" as the article proposes)...

But several are. Several more, worse in my opinion, are quotes from parables...
 

Smoke

Done here.
Although I don't agree with Jesus' teachings in every respect, I don't see anything hypocritical about them. I do think it's hypocritical for any but the rarest and most unusual of people to claim they follow his teachings. I've never met anybody who did.
 

Smoke

Done here.
You always want everything explained to you. If there is a bite out of the sandwich you just made and you and your brother are the only two people in the house, do you blame a man across the city?

Oh, I shouldn't have used a parable, you probably think I'm making a false accusation about your brother...
It's just the kind of thing he would do. But how did you know?
 

rocketman

Out there...
I was browsing online and happened to come across this.

The Hypocritical Personality of Jesus (author unknown)

What's your opinion on this? Is the author misquoting or misinterpreting anywhere? Do the author's claims have any relevance?
Thanks for the link. Honestly it's all a bit silly and out of context.

From the top:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
LAMB OF GOD

"Was Jesus the Lamb of God?" ... the lamb of God was to sacrifice himself on our behalf, to read more into it is interpretation.

Matt 10:34 is consistent with Jesus mission, which was NOT to bring an end to suffereing asap. His point that those who try to follow him will by their very actions receive persecution and even be the 'cause' of armed conflict has been borne out by history.

Luke 22:36 even states that the only reason he asked his buddies to buy a sword was so that the prophecy would be fullfilled which say that others would view him as a bad guy. It was purely about image. And when his pal did use a sword on someone the very next thing he did was tell off his pal and heal the guy that got struck.

Luke 19:27 is lifted from a parable, a story. Including this at all shows a wildly naive study of the gospels.

The "witch/Inquisition" reference is irrelevant, and if people over a thousand years later twisted his words to suit their bigotry and persecuting spirit we can't then say that Jesus was a hypocrite as a result. Looking at John 15:6 more closely we see that Jesus was saying that we should not throw away our lives. But we all knew that he came to save, right? Therefore of-course he is going to make warnings about what it is we are to be saved from.

"Jesus looked at his disciples "with anger" (Mark 3:5).." Typical selective reporting and subsequent misrepresentaion. The full verse reads: "He looked around at them in anger, deeply distressed at their stubborn hearts.." The next immediate verse has him heal the shriveled hand of a man. This was not some raging, furious type; rather, this was someone who was distressed that others were not willing to do the right thing!

John 2:15 has Jesus having a crack at the rip-off merchants of his day. Good on him. He gets my vote. And if people don't want 'their' Jesus to be so physical, too bad.

Matt 8:32 is a meaningless inclusion. They were his pigs to terminate. The cycle of life and death for all animals has always been his. He designed it, he manages it, he owns it. So what? As for those who lost their pigs we know from Jesus own words that anyone who suffers for the kingdom will be compensated one way or the other.

Matt 15:22 is the only reasonable one in this bunch, but it still is sadly lacking in a broader context. In debating terms the inclusion of this might be classed as "begging the question". Why didn't Jesus heal everyone and fix everything, we may well ask. And to do so is to have missed the point of his mission, which was primarily to sacrifice himself. We may not like it, but there is a message in that story about faith. And notice that he did eventually heal the girl, even though she was a foreigner, which means that Jesus initial objection was not an absolute, but rather something to prod the mother. Hey, Jesus was an expert teacher ;)

From the article: "The most disturbing aspect of his personality was his belief in eternal damnation....Is this kind? Does the threat of violence make the sermons of Jesus more effective? Is hellfire a loving, peaceful idea?" This is an interpretation on the part of the author. It has been the subject of much mystery throughout the ages in christianity also, as some who love power over others use threats to try to get people to believe. But there are just as many believers who don't accept the concept of eternal suffereing. Some will point to Gen 2:22 and John 3:16 to show that we don't yet have eternal life and that therefore the 'fire' will simply switch us off, unlike Satan, who already has eternal life and can't be switched off (when God gives eternal life he keeps his word). In Rev Ch20 Satan suffers forever but it doesn't actually say that we will. My point is not to start yet another "Hell" debate, but to show that the article is as much indulging in interpretation as the rest of us. Personally, I think that given Jesus' teachings on compassion and love the view I outlined is pretty close to the mark. (See Matt10:28 for a resounding comment.)
-------------------------------------------
DID JESUS TEACH US FAMILY VALUES?

Matt 19:12 clearly says that if you don't like it don't do it. I fail to see the hypocrisy.

To Luke 14:26 and Matt 10:35,36 I offer the same response I gave above to Matt 10:34. I'm not sure if the author of the article thinks that sneaking in this kind of repetition makes his case stronger but it's just a waste of time in the end for him.

Matt 8:22 was in the context of a contemporary urgency of the mission. If I had to choose between aiding in everyone's eternal salvation or burying a dead person, even a relative, I would take the former. It's more important. This is a good thing, not a bad thing.

John 2:4 is not Jesus disowning his own Mother. What an absurd assertion! Shortly after he carried out her wishes. The NIV renders it: "Dear woman, why do you involve me.." Talk about misquoting the context. And when he was dying on the cross he asked his good friends to look after his Mum, who was also standing there watching her son die. He loved her. Period.
-------------------------------------------
WHAT WERE HIS VIEWS ON EQUALITY AND SOCIAL JUSTICE?

Luke 12:47 was a parable, using symbols of reward and punishment contemporaneous to the day, something the people would understand. As for Jesus views on servitude, he said it is more blessed to give than to recieve, but he also said that we should love one another as ourselves: If this were carried out to it's fullness there would be no slaves.

" Rather than sell some expensive ointment to help the poor, Jesus wasted it on himself, saying, "Ye have the poor with you always." (Mark 14:3-7) " The jar was already broken when Jesus made his statement. And the rest of the verse which was conveniently left out says: "..and you can help them any time you want." 'Nuff said.

"No women were chosen as disciples or invited to the Last Supper." No children were either. It was 1st C Judah for heavens sake. They were lucky they got out with their lives as it was. Of-course this selective quote ironically comes just after the claim about the woman with the perfume who, along with several other women, were elevated by Jesus much to the chagrin of the men around him. This selective quote also fails to mention the many women throughout Jesus life who were necessary for his mission to unfold, nor does it mention the early church female teachers mentioned by Paul, who in turn was declared by Jesus to be his mouthpiece (Acts 9:15)

to be continued...
 

rocketman

Out there...
...continued
----------------------------------------------------------
WHAT MORAL ADVICE DID JESUS GIVE?

Matt 19:12 - clearly says that if you don't like it don't do it. I fail to see the hypocrisy.

Matt 5:29-30 - we can take it literally if we like; did he demand any of the disciples do this? Apparantly not.

Matt 5:32 - In those days you could divorce your wife by giving her a slip of paper that said so. She could be left with nothing. It happened often when woman were getting on a bit and men were looking for a younger lass to warm their bed. This therefore was an appeal to social justice.

Matt 6:34 - does not say 'do not plan', it says 'do not worry'. Big diff'. Here in Australia we have long had the saying 'no worries', which is about attitude, not logistics. Sometimes I think Jesus was an Aussie.

Matt 6:19-20 - this is not saying outright not to save money no matter what, it was a teaching about attitude. The author conveniently leaves out verse 21 which completes the context: "For where your treasure is there your heart will be also.." And Proverbs tells us to multiply our money.

Mark 10:21-25 - this does not say don't become wealthy, again it's about where your heart is; this is a commonly misinterpreted scripture, and many, as is the case here, leave out verse 27: "..with man this is impossible, but not with God; all things are possible with God." God first, money second. Simple. I fail to see the hypocrisy.

Luke 12:33 - this appears to specifically be instruction given to the disciples (v22); they were on the most serious mission in history and focusing on their money would only distract them from the job. Note also that he promises treasure in heaven, so he is not against treasure.

John 6:27 - The context here was focusing on God. It was clearly a figure of speech or the crowd would have pointed it out.

Matt 5:28 - this is clearly refering to intent. Sexual urges and responses are built-in by God, and marriages wouldn't work without them. Talk about taking things out of context.

Matt 5:11 - says absolutely nothing about MAKING people persecute us deliberately. False claim.

Matt 5:13-16 - does not say to let others think we are better; letting light shine means not being afraid to be a nice person in front of those who scoff at such things. The context Jesus laid down in many places is one of humility and becoming a servant, not big noting ourselves. This claim betrays some really poor scholarship.

Luke 19:23-26 - apart from being a parable, the author is not paying attention here: there is really only one investor in the story, and many brokers ;)

Luke 6:30 - this is a teaching under the radical 'love your enemy' concept, but it does not make Jesus a hypocrite. And again it must be taken in context: earlier in the article Jesus is cited as overturning the money-changers tables, so the author should know very well that Jesus himself was willing to take on theives! Luke 6:30 therefore is in the context of love, but to a degree that is consistent within an overall responsible approach. For those who do allow others to get away with doing bad things where doing so is going to have an effect on those doing the bad thing then do it, but this is not the same as deliberately being a 'soft touch'.

As for Matt 5:39, Matt 5:40, Matt 5:41, Matt 5:42 etc, the principle just mentioned applies.
-------------------------------------------------------------
WAS JESUS RELIABLE?

Matt 16:28 - many believe that the following chapter was a fullfillment of this, often based on the use of the Greek word HORAO for 'see'.

"He mistakenly claimed that the mustard seed is "the least of all seeds" (Matt. 13:32) " - It was the smallest seed known to his audience. I fail to see any hypocrisy.

"and that salt could "lose its savor" (Matthew 5:13). " And it's another metaphor. And while sodium chloride is what it is, salt wasn't always pure in those days, and if it became too contaminated it was thrown out, not that any of this changes the meaning of the metaphor.

Trying to equate Matt 5:22 with Matt 23:17 is to once again miss the context, in this case, the problem of judging someone, which is obvious from the surrounding verses.

Trying to equate John 5:31 with John 8:14 is to yet again miss the context, in this case 5:31 is refering to a type of testimony which was given by John the Baptist. Jesus then clearly says in verse 36 that he has an additional testimony. 8:54 is simply saying that whether it comes from him or not it is still valid to him, which is all that matters as far as his mission goes.

-------------------------------------------------------------
WAS JESUS A GOOD EXAMPLE?

Matt 21:18-19 - this is similar to the pigs: he owned the cycle of life and death for plants too; this would have been a good example to the disciples that he meant what he said about getting rid of 'plants' that don't produce 'fruit'.

Mark 2:23 - here Jesus showed an understanding of the law that exceeded that of the other experts of his day, and was evidenced by him getting the better of them in the ensuing discussion.

Matt 21 - this chapter shows Jesus claim to authority regarding his reasons for taking the horse, which, as emmanuel, ultimately belonged to him anyway.

"The "humble" Jesus said that he was "greater than the temple" (Matt 12:6), "greater than Jonah" (Matthew 12:41), and "greater than Solomon" (Matthew 12:42). " He was humble, to the point of death. That doesn't mean he didn't have the right to emphasise certain truths when it was required.

"He appeared to suffer from a dictator's "paranoia" when he said, "He that is not with me is against me" (Matthew 12:30)." His brief was to intervene for all humanity. He was the only person in history who could say such a thing with complete authority.
-------------------------------------------------------------
The rest of the article is largely speculative and there exists umpteen threads on this forum that cover those other topics.

Sorry for these long posts.
 

rocka21

Brother Rock
The rest of the article is largely speculative and there exists umpteen threads on this forum that cover those other topics.

Sorry for these long posts.


thanks for the time you spent on this.

People take little quotes and phrase's out of context all the time, not just with Jesus but with everyone.
 
Top