• 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!

Christian Warfare

Sand Dancer

Crazy Cat Lady
First, you haven't established that it wasn't okay, just that you, and the depictions of Jesus in the story don't.
Second, even if they were doing "something wrong", that does not justify assault and vandalism.


First, it is a brothel. Please stop using derisive slurs against your fellow human beings.

Second, as I pointed out before, that just because you liken it to having a brothel or drug den inside of a synagogue, does not mean it actually is like having a brothel or drug den inside of a synagogue. Your likening the two does not make them alike.

Third: As I pointed out before, and will continue to do so, you have not demonstrated that there was anything wrong with having money changers and animals in the temple. All that you do is express your repugnance with false analogies. If I think that an action is immoral, I do not have to liken it to other things to explain why it is wrong.

So, again, and again. And again.
Why was there anything wrong with having money changers and animals in the temple?
Do you even know why they were their to begin with? (I didn't ask if you can guess. I asked if you actually know?)

I can describe the temple courts, to demonstrate the area that was considered sacred. Since we are not told which part of the temple precinct the traders had occupied, one can only surmise that it was an outside court, most likely the court of the Gentiles.

The problem was making money in an area dedicated to the worship of God.

I thought the temple was where people paid their taxes, and the tax collectors could charge whatever they wanted, so they ripped people off. Jesus didn't want poor people being ripped off in his father's house.
 

oldbadger

Skanky Old Mongrel!
When does a covenant, or testament, come into effect? Is it when a person is dead, or when they're alive?
There's a covenant on the deeds of homes around here!
However, if you have accepted s covenant then it's up to you to keep it. Jesus was quite clear about riches, wealth and mammon, for example, but I don't often see Christians who have taken any notice of that....just one example of words rather than deeds. Yes?
 

Harel13

Am Yisrael Chai
Staff member
Premium Member
I can describe the temple courts, to demonstrate the area that was considered sacred.
Are you able to demonstrate this without using the NT?
Since we are not told which part of the temple precinct the traders had occupied, one can only surmise that it was an outside court, most likely the court of the Gentiles.
Are you able to bring proof that such things were not allowed in that area? If I remember correctly, it was not really a court - just the area of the Temple Mount where non-Jews and impure people could be found. If impure people could be there, why not traders?
 

Harel13

Am Yisrael Chai
Staff member
Premium Member
I thought the temple was where people paid their taxes, and the tax collectors could charge whatever they wanted, so they ripped people off. Jesus didn't want poor people being ripped off in his father's house.
There was only one tax to pay the Temple, and it wasn't even really a tax. It was the payment of the half-shekel coin for the upkeep of the Temple. However, if the Jews didn't give that money to the Temple, they would have had to give it to the Romans, who would have used it for the upkeep of their pagan temples, which is what happened after the Great Revolt ended.

I don't know about tax collectors ripping people off. Perhaps you're thinking of some other Roman tax.
 

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
In the Gospel account, Jesus kinda runs hot and cold as a champion of the poor.
I think we need to remember what Jesus did was just a sample, on a small scale of what he will be doing on a GRAND global scale when people will be as described in Isaiah 35th chapter.
We are all invited to pray the invitation to God for Jesus to come - Rev. 22:20
Come and bring ' healing ' to earth's nations - Rev. 22:2
Jesus will champion the poor according to Psalms 72:12-14, 8
 

ppp

Well-Known Member
Anger directed at an activity without inflicting injury (on the traders) is not violence against a person.
So if I were to go into a store where your mom was shopping, destroy property and drive everyone out by threatening them with a weapon, that, in your most learned opinion would not be violence.

Ha!
 

ppp

Well-Known Member
I can describe the temple courts, to demonstrate the area that was considered sacred. Since we are not told which part of the temple precinct the traders had occupied, one can only surmise that it was an outside court, most likely the court of the Gentiles.

The problem was making money in an area dedicated to the worship of God.
So you haven't a clue. You are just making up assumptions to fit the story.

[sigh]
This is a path of desire. Not reason.
 

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
Heh. The Bible is the big book of multiple choice. Didn't you know?
Multiple choice (?) or rather researching by parallel or corresponding cross-reference verses and passages showing the internal harmony among the many Bible writers
 

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
I was talking about chrisian (or other religions( governments. In this case Christianity imposing its will on government to pass laws that benefit chiristians to the detriment of non christians.
However your post "Tell others about the good news of God's Kingdom" what happens in the case the other person does not wish to know your version of good news because they have their own superior version?

Yes, the apostate clergy class liked to throne and de-throne kings/political.
I think it was Napoleon who took the crown and crowned himself !
So. genuine 'wheat' Christianity would be in subjection to 'Caesar' - Romans 13
Pay back Caesar's things to Caesar, unless Caesar wants you to break God's Law - Acts of the Apostles 5:29.
Christians are Not to force anyone to listen to them. The job is simply to tell and let the others decide for themselves.
The Bible's version of the good news of God's kingdom is at Daniel 2:44-45.
Jesus is the figurative 'stone' that will strike the political statue's feet causing it to collapse.
In other words, that political statue does Not collapse on it own but is on shaky feet made of iron and clay.
Seems to me we are now at the time of the toes, or perhaps more like being at the ' time of the toenails!'.
 

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
......So rather than creating a strawman, try to understand whats being said by someone. Anyway since you dont seem to know the verse in Luke, I took a snapshot and attached here.View attachment 60657
I'd like to take the liberty to add in the year 70 the un-faithful Jews in Jerusalem were killed by the Roman armies.
They did Not want Jesus to be king over them - Luke 19:27 - those enemies were slain/executed because they turned their backs on God by refusing Jesus as their king although they had the Hebrew Scriptures to follow.
 

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
And Matthew 7 tells you not to judge
Jesus was speaking about one's personal judgement of another - Matthew 7:1-5 (Luke 6:37; Matthew 18:33-34)
To impute or ascribe a wrong or bad motive to another would be a personal judging of that person, and what you use (could be your own personal opinion) to measure out could come back upon you - Mark 4:24.
Jesus was Not speaking about judging God's Word/ Scripture, but people.
One who does Not practice mercy (towards others) will have his judgement without mercy....... - James 2:13

Making personal judgement of another could put a stumbling block /obstacle before that person- Romans 14:13
 

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
Both things are equally wrong. What they were doing and Jesus' response were wrong. I'm a she.
Twice Jesus threw out the corrupted money changers at the beginning of his preaching and at the end.
- see John 2:14-17; John 12:20-27; Matthew 21:12-13; Mark 11:15-17.
It was Not un-controlled anger but 'zeal' - Psalms 69:9; Romans 15:3.
There was No other way to to get rid of the thieving money changers making God's house a cave of robbers.
I'm curious as to how you would have gotten the abusive money changers out of the temple.
 

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
Are you able to demonstrate this without using the NT?
Are you able to bring proof that such things were not allowed in that area? If I remember correctly, it was not really a court - just the area of the Temple Mount where non-Jews and impure people could be found. If impure people could be there, why not traders?
Matthew 2:13 his Father's house is a house of prayer - not a cave of robbers.
Mark 11:17 they made a house of prayer into a cave of robbers. ( form of extortion by charging exorbitant prices )
Luke 19:46 .... a house of prayer, they made it a cave of robbers.
John 2:16 ... they were making his Father's house a house of greedy business ( instead of prayer ).
 

Sand Dancer

Crazy Cat Lady
There was only one tax to pay the Temple, and it wasn't even really a tax. It was the payment of the half-shekel coin for the upkeep of the Temple. However, if the Jews didn't give that money to the Temple, they would have had to give it to the Romans, who would have used it for the upkeep of their pagan temples, which is what happened after the Great Revolt ended.

I don't know about tax collectors ripping people off. Perhaps you're thinking of some other Roman tax.

I think that's why people like Matthew Levi and Zachaeus were hated supposedly, because they pocketed money above and beyond the tax amount.
 

tom foolery

Member
As a follower of Jesus Christ, I am of the belief that I should not fight, or resort to physical violence. At points in the past, as a younger soul, I tried to justify defensive warfare, but as an older person I have become convinced of the rightness of non-violence.

The passage of scripture that plays loudly in my ears is Ephesians 6:10-12. It says,'Finally, my brethren, be strong in the Lord, and in the power of his might. Put on the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil. For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places'.

Some people regard non-violence as a form of cowardice, but my belief is that it is better to sacrifice one's life non-violently, than to sacrifice it attempting to take the lives of others. Jesus set an example of non-violence.

I'm not so naive as to think that there isn't great pain involved in the non-violent response to evil. It raises many difficult questions, but I believe the long term consequences of non-violence benefits all mankind.

What do you think?
i am not a follower of your ideaology. i was brought up with it, though. i am surprised to see a christian want to see people argue this point. do you have doubts about it?
 

Windwalker

Veteran Member
Premium Member
So are you claiming that Ghandi was purely influenced by the New Testament alone in his so called "Ahimsa"?
Do you just skim over posts and don't carefully read what the poster took their time to explain to you in them? Referencing back to that post to answer this:

Finally, regarding Gandhi being influenced by Christianity, I can't say much to that. But I'm sure he found parts of it he could in fact relate to. As do I. Otherwise, pray tell, why would he have said, "I like your Christ"?

Yeah. But I do not say "Jesus said it". I am quoting the NT, which I do not believe is Jesus's words.
You did say that. "Surprising he didnt read the part in the NT where Jesus would order the death of those who dont follow him." You pointed the poster to what Jesus "supposedly" said. It matters not if you believe Jesus actually said those things. In fact, if you don't believe he said those, then why would you ask him if he had read it? What was the purpose for that?

Thats great. Good for you. But its irrelevant to the conversation.
Little testy, aren't you? It is relevant to what you said, assuming I didn't know what Gandhi actually said. It shows that I did know. Not hard to follow that.

Because as I said, which you conveniently missed, that Ghandi was a Hindu, Advaita, with Jain and Vaishnavism influence. Thats I said to read.
I know what Gandhi was. I didn't "conveniently miss" that at all. Why would you think that? My point was, as a Hindu, Advaita etc, he liked what he read about Christ. Gandhi said that. Those were his words. Did you conveniently overlook that?

Okay. Every child knows its a parable. But if you say this parable is not about Jesus himself and his second coming, openly say "This is not about Jesus and his second coming".

Are you saying that??
That is what I said. It's a metaphor for the judgement of God. It's not at all the same as you claiming that Jesus orders that those who don't follow him to be killed. It's saying in the day of Judgement, those who don't believe of follow God, will be condemned. Your own religion teaches that very thing. Right? The only thing this metaphor is really saying, is the writer of that gospel is equating Jesus with God. God judging the living and the dead, is done by the Christ.

Your statement that Jesus order for nonbeliever's to be killed, is highly misleading. Dishonest even. "Kill the infidels", is never a command from Jesus. You never find Jesus telling his followers something like this: "Then, when the sacred months have passed, slay the idolaters wherever ye find them, and take them (captive), and besiege them, and prepare for them each ambush."; or this, "And kill them wherever you find them, and drive them out from whence they drove you out, and persecution is severer than slaughter,"

You find no such teaching from Jesus. Jesus taught the exact opposite of those teachings.
 

Windwalker

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Very good. So you are saying that Ghandi was saying you Christians dont follow the Christ depicted in the NT.

Correct? Do you not follow Jesus as a Christian? Do you agree with Ghandi?

Great.
I agree with what Gandhi said. I say the same thing myself. Yes, there are some Christians who actually follow Christ. But there are lot who don't. You ever see those funny "Republican Jesus vs. Bible Jesus" memes? That kind of makes the point. Even Jesus recognized that not all those who claim they are followers, actually are.

"Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven."

republican jesus1.jpg


republican-jesus.jpg

And so forth.....
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
Do you just skim over posts and don't carefully read what the poster took their time to explain to you in them? Referencing back to that post to answer this:

You jumped into someone else's conversation mate. When trying to defend people, at least understand what they were claiming fully.

You did say that. "Surprising he didnt read the part in the NT where Jesus would order the death of those who dont follow him.

Thats not Jesus making any claims, it is the New Testament making claims. You should know, I dont worship the NT and take what it says as "Jesus said".

I know what Gandhi was. I didn't "conveniently miss" that at all.

Tell that to your fellow you embraced to defend.

That is what I said. It's a metaphor for the judgement of God.

So its just a threat. Now whats actually going to happen in your theology.

Great. Thanks.
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
I agree with what Gandhi said. I say the same thing myself. Yes, there are some Christians who actually follow Christ. But there are lot who don't. You ever see those funny "Republican Jesus vs. Bible Jesus" memes? That kind of makes the point. Even Jesus recognized that not all those who claim they are followers, actually are.

"Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven."

View attachment 60725

View attachment 60726

And so forth.....

If you think a lot of Christians dont follow the Christ himself, its your business mate. I withdraw from that conversation.

And about Ghandi saying that same thing, are you sure his context was the same as what you have said above? Is that relevant to Ghandi?
 
Top