Prior Book | Prior Chapter | Prior Verse | Next Verse | Next Chapter | Next Book | Viewing NASB and Amplified 2015 | |
NASB | 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. |
AMPLIFIED 2015 | 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 [in the sense of indifference to or relative disregard for them in comparison with his attitude toward God]--he cannot be My disciple. |
Bible Question:
I wanted to thank you for the time, effort, consideration, and thoughtfulness that you have put into your answers to this question. I can tell that you, too, are seeking to understand the truth as best as we can. I especially appreciate that you are stressing the importance of context. The more I study my Bible (and the less I find I know), the more important that context becomes. If I understand your answer correctly, you are advocating a principle, not only of considering context, but of considering that not everything written in the Bible is written directly for us. And you have cited excellent examples to show where we should determine who is speaking, to whom, and the relevance of whether what is being said applies to all persons at all times. This technique is close to what I suppose the Bible scholars call "dispensationalism" - that God deals with different people in different times in different ways. This method of interpretation can certainly seem to be helpful. It allows us to, though you may not like the term, "pick and choose" what parts of the Bible apply to us and what parts do not. For instance, I don't see many Christians taking a lamb to the church on Sunday morning to be sacrificed at the altar. Why not? Because a thorough study of the scriptures seems to support that the old sacrificial system has been done away with and, as Hebrews says, there is no longer a sacrifice for sins. So, in this particular case, it would seem that the scriptures themselves support that God's methods change over time. The signs that Jesus lists in Mark 16 become a little sticker don't they? I wouldn't have much opposition if I said that an animal sacrifice is no longer necessary (although those of Judaism would probably disagree with me). But if I start to say that the signs that Jesus gave are no longer applicable to the church, then my assertion becomes much more tenuous because: 1. Christians claim to follow Christ and His teachings, YET they themselves are picking and choosing WHICH of His teachings apply to them and which ones don't. 2. And, to the best of my knowledge, I don't recall Jesus saying that all of these signs were only for a particular group (other than believers). It would be similar if I claimed to be a follower of Buddha but did not believe that ALL of his teachings applied to me. Most Christians operate under some form of this "a la carte" Christianity. I am not saying that it is right nor wrong to do this. But I am curious as to WHY Christians do what they do. After all, most Christians claim to follow the teachings of their leader. But if pressed about this (as in Mark 16), many (if not most) of the Christians in the circles that I travel would say, "Yes, that is what Christ taught but it doesn't apply to me." So my question is, how can we claim that we are followers of Christ if we do not follow His clear teaching? What gives the disciples the right to determine which teachings of their teacher apply to them and which ones don't? That, my friend, is where I am at. I am looking at the specific teachings of Jesus and trying to determine, as best I can, whether or not I should even wear the name of Christian and say that I believe in Jesus. It is difficult for me to say that Jesus is my Lord if I am not willing to do what He says. It is difficult for me to say that He taught the truth if I am willing (and sometimes eager) to relegate His truths to other people and other time periods. But in the end, I find that I have to do this or His teachings make no sense. For instance, at one point Jesus sends out His disciples ONLY to the house of Israel. They are to take His gospel to the Jews only. Is this His true command? Certainly. But He seems to revise this command later in Matthew 28 when He gives out the great comission, doesn't He? There, His disciples are told to go into all the world. This "change" is substantiated by the scriptures themselves. Many of the other teachings of Christ are much more ambiguous. Are Christians on shakey ground when they claim to believe in Jesus Christ but either limit or dismiss some of His teachings? I am not questioning Christ's person at this point. But I am curious to what extent I can call myself a Christian if I disregard the clear teachings of the one I claim to follow. seeking4truth |
Bible Answer: [So, in this particular case, it would seem that the scriptures themselves support that God's methods change over time.] I don't believe that is an accurate conclusion. It's always been a "blood" demand with God. Why? Because life is in the blood. Corrupt the blood, corrupt the life. Give a transfusion of new pure blood and save it. |