• 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!

If you curse your Parents you must die?!!!

InvestigateTruth

Well-Known Member
How do you justify this law that Jesus confirmed and emphasized on, and how do you apply this to today's life:


15:3 But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition? 15:4 For God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death. 15:5 But ye say, Whosoever shall say to his father or his mother, It is a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; 15:6 And honour not his father or his mother, he shall be free. Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition. 15:7 Ye hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying, 15:8 This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. 15:9 But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

- Matthew 15
 

Sleeppy

Fatalist. Christian. Pacifist.
Cursing your parents would literally be cursing yourself. Children are one in flesh with the marriage of their parents.

Luke 14:26
`If any one doth come unto me, and doth not hate his own father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brothers, and sisters, and yet even his own life, he is not able to be my disciple.'

Though you must curse the unrighteousness of flesh. And the hierarchy of marriage, which did not exist in Paradise.

Luke 12:27
'And if I, by Beelzeboul, do cast out the demons, your sons -- by whom do they cast out? because of this they -- they shall be your judges.'

Mark 12:25
For when they may rise out of the dead, they neither marry nor are they given in marriage, but are as messengers who are in the heavens.

In the resurrection flesh and spirit are confined to God.

Ignorant spirits cursing the Spirit of God are like things devoured by fire from heaven. Ignorance is sacrificed, never being forgiven.

Mark 3:29
But whoever may speak evil in regard to the Holy Spirit hath not forgiveness -- to the age, but is in danger of age-during judgment.
 

Green Kepi

Active Member
How do you justify this law that Jesus confirmed and emphasized on, and how do you apply this to today's life:
15:3 But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition? 15:4 For God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death. 15:5 But ye say, Whosoever shall say to his father or his mother, It is a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; 15:6 And honour not his father or his mother, he shall be free. Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition. 15:7 Ye hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying, 15:8 This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. 15:9 But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.



This was under the Old Law. Christians are no longer under it. So...it doesn't apply to today's life....
 

InvestigateTruth

Well-Known Member
This was under the Old Law. Christians are no longer under it. So...it doesn't apply to today's life....

Then why did Jesus emphasize on it?

Notice that often when Jesus wanted to abrogate an old Law and modify it, He used the expression 'It was said to the people long ago........But I tell you"

For example:

"You have heard that it was said to the people long ago, 'You shall not murder, and anyone who murders will be subject to judgment.' But I tell you that anyone who is angry with a brother or sister will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to a brother or sister, 'Raca,' is answerable to the court. And anyone who says, 'You fool!' will be in danger of the fire of hell." Matthew 5:22


Also, consider the Law of divorce that Jesus changed it:

"Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery, and the man who marries a divorced woman commits adultery." Luke 16:18


But the verse in OP, does not seem to indicate Jesus changed that Law, but on the contrary He emphasized and reminded that Law.

 

Green Kepi

Active Member
He, at the time, was still alive. The Law had not been completed. He had yet to die on the cross. If a Christian thinks they are still under it...then they should be trying to keep the 613 Commandments....
 

nazz

Doubting Thomas
How do you justify this law that Jesus confirmed and emphasized on, and how do you apply this to today's life:


15:3 But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition? 15:4 For God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death. 15:5 But ye say, Whosoever shall say to his father or his mother, It is a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; 15:6 And honour not his father or his mother, he shall be free. Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition. 15:7 Ye hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying, 15:8 This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. 15:9 But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

- Matthew 15

Jesus was not supporting that law. He was simply using it to point out the hypocrisy of the Pharisees.
 

Brickjectivity

wind and rain touch not this brain
Staff member
Premium Member
Investigate Truth said:
How do you justify this law that Jesus confirmed and emphasized on, and how do you apply this to today's life:
I just went and did some looking around, because I wasn't sure. One thing to notice is that the passage in Exodus 21:17 repeats Father and Mother twice. One scholar of the rashi method says this repetition means that Jews musn't curse parents even after those parents have died. Before we can apply this to Christians or to Bahai's, first consider what it means to Jews. Abraham is their father, as is every patriarch leading right up to their own personal father and mother. Even though these people are dead they must still be honored. It helps makes sense of the 10 commandments doesn't it? In the list of the 10 commandments there are some very heavy hitters, like "Don't murder". Why put the command to honor parents in such an important list? Its because it applies to all ancestors, not just immediate family.

For a Christian this applies in a Christian universe, and a Christian has the martyrs, the apostles and Jesus as patriarchs. In reading the history of the churches for example there are people called 'Patriarchs' and it begs the question why they are called that. Its because they are like Abraham but for Christians. In addition to the martyrs apostles and Jesus, Christians also have additional patriarchs who have in some way benefited the believes that come after them. Applying the principle of Exodus 21:17 (though it cannot be applied literally) its obvious that Christians are expected to honor those that have gone before them in the Christian life.

I suppose the same would go for a Baha'i.

Oh, justifying this law for Christians means not literally observing it as I mentioned already. Jews I suspect also wouldn't have literally killed people over it, though I'm not sure. I suspect it is another way of saying someone will be cut off from the vine or from the nation, like when someone says 'You are dead to me'. Excommunication perhaps.
 
Last edited:

InvestigateTruth

Well-Known Member
I just went and did some looking around, because I wasn't sure. One thing to notice is that the passage in Exodus 21:17 repeats Father and Mother twice. One scholar of the rashi method says this repetition means that Jews musn't curse parents even after those parents have died. Before we can apply this to Christians or to Bahai's, first consider what it means to Jews. Abraham is their father, as is every patriarch leading right up to their own personal father and mother. Even though these people are dead they must still be honored. It helps makes sense of the 10 commandments doesn't it? In the list of the 10 commandments there are some very heavy hitters, like "Don't murder". Why put the command to honor parents in such an important list? Its because it applies to all ancestors, not just immediate family.

For a Christian this applies in a Christian universe, and a Christian has the martyrs, the apostles and Jesus as patriarchs. In reading the history of the churches for example there are people called 'Patriarchs' and it begs the question why they are called that. Its because they are like Abraham but for Christians. In addition to the martyrs apostles and Jesus, Christians also have additional patriarchs who have in some way benefited the believes that come after them. Applying the principle of Exodus 21:17 (though it cannot be applied literally) its obvious that Christians are expected to honor those that have gone before them in the Christian life.

I suppose the same would go for a Baha'i.

Oh, justifying this law for Christians means not literally observing it as I mentioned already. Jews I suspect also wouldn't have literally killed people over it, though I'm not sure. I suspect it is another way of saying someone will be cut off from the vine or from the nation, like when someone says 'You are dead to me'. Excommunication perhaps.

Sure it is a good belief to honor parents, and Baha'i Scriptures emphasizes on that. But I think we need to be fair, and analyze religious Texts as what they really are. If He only wanted to encourage honoring parents He would not say 'let him die the death'. And If His purpose is to show the Hypocrisy of them, He could have shown it in many other ways. Why emphasizing 'die the death'?
Here Jesus clearly saying He who curses his parents let Him die the death.

We shouldn't try to make a religion nicer than it is or make it look worse than it is. It is what it is....Just the facts that should be faced.


This Law started in Jewish text:

"Anyone who curses their father or mother is to be put to death." Exod. 21:17
 

Brickjectivity

wind and rain touch not this brain
Staff member
Premium Member
Investigate Truth said:
Sure it is a good belief to honor parents, and Baha'i Scriptures emphasizes on that. But I think we need to be fair, and analyze religious Texts as what they really are. If He only wanted to encourage honoring parents He would not say 'let him die the death'. And If His purpose is to show the Hypocrisy of them, He could have shown it in many other ways. Why emphasizing 'die the death'?
Here Jesus clearly saying He who curses his parents let Him die the death.

We shouldn't try to make a religion nicer than it is or make it look worse than it is. It is what it is....Just the facts that should be faced.


This Law started in Jewish text:

"Anyone who curses their father or mother is to be put to death." Exod. 21:17
I'm not hiding what I think. I truly have reasons to think that. While I'm not really an expert, one of the 10 Commandments says "Do not kill". There is no getting around this law. If the ten appear to conflict (which they do in this case) then it becomes necessary to clarify their meaning. Consider the case of Jephthath in Judges 11:35. He made a vow that he would sacrifice anything that came out of his house. What in fact happened was that the person (his daughter) he vowed to offer was sent to work at the temple for the priests, never to marry or to have children. This was how a person was offered as a burnt offering, because murder was against the ten commandments. If a man could simply vow to sacrifice someone to the LORD he could then circumvent the 10 commandments, which would be unthinkable. If he could say "I vow to offer so & so upon the altar as a burnt offering," and he could get away with murder this would nullify the ten commandments. T When one of the ten commandments says 'Let him be put to death' and another commandment says 'You shall not kill' one of the ten cannot undo another of the ten. Instead they interpret one another in order to keep the meaning. Out of this comes the principle of excommunication rather than literal stoning and killing. If you think I'm putting a 'Nice face on it' I'm not.
 
Last edited:

InvestigateTruth

Well-Known Member
I'm not hiding what I think. I truly have reasons to think that. While I'm not really an expert, one of the 10 Commandments says "Do not kill". There is no getting around this law. If the ten appear to conflict (which they do in this case) then it becomes necessary to clarify their meaning. Consider the case of Jephthath in Judges 11:35. He made a vow that he would sacrifice anything that came out of his house. What in fact happened was that the person (his daughter) he vowed to offer was sent to work at the temple for the priests, never to marry or to have children. This was how a person was offered as a burnt offering, because murder was against the ten commandments. If a man could simply vow to sacrifice someone to the LORD he could then circumvent the 10 commandments, which would be unthinkable. If he could say "I vow to offer so & so upon the altar as a burnt offering," and he could get away with murder this would nullify the ten commandments. T When one of the ten commandments says 'Let him be put to death' and another commandment says 'You shall not kill' one of the ten cannot undo another of the ten. Instead they interpret one another in order to keep the meaning. Out of this comes the principle of excommunication rather than literal stoning and killing. If you think I'm putting a 'Nice face on it' I'm not.

Well, it is true that one of the commandment is 'Do not Kill' but that is about killing the innocent.
It is like we say, we must not imprison anyone. But that does not mean we should not imprison the Criminals and Thieves. The Punishment must be there.
The Punishments in the Scriptures are given for those who commit some sins, and in this case according to Scriptures, cursing the parents is consider going against the Law of God and is punishable. Just the facts!
 

Brickjectivity

wind and rain touch not this brain
Staff member
Premium Member
IT said:
Well, it is true that one of the commandment is 'Do not Kill' but that is about killing the innocent.
It is like we say, we must not imprison anyone. But that does not mean we should not imprison the Criminals and Thieves. The Punishment must be there.
The Punishments in the Scriptures are given for those who commit some sins, and in this case according to Scriptures, cursing the parents is consider going against the Law of God and is punishable. Just the facts!
You have a strong opinion about it, but I would need to hear something a little more concrete. I won't assume that you are correct.
 

Pegg

Jehovah our God is One
Jesus was getting to the heart of the hypocrisy of the religious leaders.

Not only that, but those mosaic laws are STILL Gods standards. If we think its ok to revile or disrespect our parents today, we will end up in death. Not death by stoning, but death by Gods own hand on the day of judgement.

So Jesus wasnt abbrogating any laws... he was cementing them in the minds of his listeners. Thats why he said if we even 'think' of disrespecting them we will be accountable. If we even 'think' in our minds to desire a married woman (or man) we will be held accountable for adultery.

Jesus highlighted that sinful actions begin in the 'heart and mind' and unless we cleans our hearts and minds of defiling practices, we will be held accountable for them. Remember, it was a 'thought' which led Eve sin against God.
 
Last edited:

desideraht

Hellspawn
Simple.

Tradition.

Humans had silly thoughts in those days, where simple wrongdoings were punishable by extremes such as Death and amputation (cutting off someone's hand for stealing). Puny human brains of the Dark and Middle Ages were not so well refined, and it was not the fault of Christ that he would harbour the body of a puny Human Man. Thus he spewed the traditionalist values, the Medieval Way of things... Were this Incarnate to take form in our Modern Age, he would likely have more "Civil" things to say, I would think, for his tiny, puny, atrophied Human brain is somewhat better than it would have been many centuries ago.
 

Brickjectivity

wind and rain touch not this brain
Staff member
Premium Member
It is true that in the modern age we have hallmark greeting cards, colored tattoos and monorails.
 

psychoslice

Veteran Member
If we all still lived by the bible, we would all probley be burnt at the stake by now, we just wouldn't be here on this forum, in fact we would be still in the dark-ages. We have to be careful what we drag from the past, are we dragging something that will free us, or something that will imprison us.
 

Pegg

Jehovah our God is One
If we all still lived by the bible, we would all probley be burnt at the stake by now, we just wouldn't be here on this forum, in fact we would be still in the dark-ages. We have to be careful what we drag from the past, are we dragging something that will free us, or something that will imprison us.

We ARE living in the dark ages!
 

InformedIgnorance

Do you 'know' or believe?
Children were considered little different than property (especially girls for whom this was readily apparent with their being sold AS property), and it was naturally adults (in particular the more revered members of the group who tended to be older but not always) whom were more likely to be believed when stating that they received revelation (thus easy for said individuals to skew things in a way that served their own purposes), combined with them seeing their god as a sort of volatile father figure (often punishing or killing his earthly children for reasons they did not grasp) it is therefore not at all surprising that parents were considered well within their rights to kill their children for disrespect or disobedience.
 
Last edited:
Top