Knowing Christ's words

[Nickolai]

Nickolai,

I am Antiochian Eastern Orthodox.

Yay, I'm not the only one.  I'm OCA jurisdiction.

Christos Anesti!

[sojourner]

Heidi,

Heidi, I knew we disagreed a long time ago.
What I wanted you to do is support what you are saying, as Micheal has stated. Also, to clarify and explain to you the postion of the Orthodox, of which I am, and not Roman as you keep inferring. There are Roman Catholics on this board that can ably defend themselves, they don't need me.

No doubt you are sincere but it would behoove you to learn how to support what you are saying, then,  I just don't believe that.

[sojourner]

Nickolai,

Indeed, He is Risen!

[Heidi]

Christ's words support what I believe. That's all I need.

[sojourner]

Heidi,

I'm not going to give up on you.

That is fine that you believe what you stated, and that they are your interpretation of that text in Matt. But if you are going to explain to someone why you believe such, saying it is Jesus' words and they point out a possible conflict with their understanding, how are you going to show them why you believe your understanding is correct?

[Heidi]

Because my interpretaion does not contradict Paul's or anyone else's words in the bible. Paul never asked us to call him "Father", much less our Holy Father at all! Your interpretation does indeed conflict wit Jesus's words. The passages you quoted were posted to show how they conflict with Jesus's words. Again, if there's a contradiction, then the interpretation is faulty.

[sojourner]

Heidi,

It is not a matter of Paul requesting that we call him father.
My interpretation, which is 2000 years old, conflicts with yours but that is not what I am trying to get you to see.

Your last sentence is really what it is all about at this point.
Permit me to role play with you. I'm a person who has not been exposed to the Bible.
You introduce me to the Bible and in a Bible study you explain to me Jesus' words and say that it means, Jesus said, not to call anyone father on earth.

Later we reach the other versus that you know about, and I say, 'how come Paul is using the term father and is calling his forebears, father, why is he saying that we can call him father, and Abraham is called father by the rich man in hades etc.

Now, how would you explain to me that that is not a conflict with your interpretation. To me it would be a conflict unless you could explain somehow that it is not. If you cannot, there is a conflict and your final statement would be true, or your interpretation is faulty.

Leave me and any catholic out of it and see if you can explain it? Remember, I'm not anything, just a struggling pupil of yours and I have a question.

[Heidi]

You still haven't a clue about what Jesus or I am talking about, do you? Do you know what the term "title" means? Do you see the distinction between a TITLE and a description? Jesus's WHOLE passage had to do with TITLES!!!! Titles, like DR., FATHER, RABBI, etc. are vastly different than talking ABOUT doctors, priests and fathers.  Titles are specifically DESIGNED to call ATTENTION to one's POSITION in society which is Jesus's WHOLE point!!!!! A friend of mine recently received a Ph.d. He does not WANT to be called "DR." because he is aware of how little he knows. That is humility, NOT pride. That is Jesus's point! Jesus is talking about the MOTIVE of each religious person who takes titles for himself and gives them to others. It is a HIERARCHY DESIGNED to receive honor for being holy. That is the OPPOSITE of all of Jesus's teachings! That is why he included the phrase; "He who exalts himself will be humbled and he who humbles himself will be exalted" in that passage! Jesus is talking SPECIFICALLY to religious leaders and believers. He is not talking to pagans whom he expects to put people on pedestals because they do not know the only true God but instead, wordly gods like people and things.  Jesus is talking only to believers who DO know the one true God. To believers, we are all BROTHERS with only ONE Father.  Jesus says this when one of his discples told him his mother and brothers were waiting for him.  But no, the catholic church disagrees with him. Some people are simply better than others and should be SEEN as holier, so they will have a title. Jesus can't be right. So let's decide for ourselves what our traditions will be.

 But since you can't see how the pope and the church can be wrong (a characteristis of a cult), then you think something like, "well the catholic church HAS to be right because there are so many of them!" Jesus said, "few will be saved." This means that the MAJORITY of the world will be Muslims, Jews, Buddhists, Hindi, and other unbelievers. The majority of the world will be WRONG in their thinking! So why COULDN'T the catholic church be wrong? Or do you simply think they're right because they're infallibe? They blatantly contradict Christ's words in MANY of their teachings.  Jesus said there will be many false teachers. Again, He is right. The catholic church DELIBERATELY ignores Jesus and decides for themselves what we should call each other, because of course, they know better. Their disobedience of Jesus's words is very BLATANT here because Jesus has spelled it out for all the world to see. So what the catholic cult members have to do is desperately try to find somethin else in the bible to change Jesus's meaning. They have no choice because the catholic church is infallibe! Sorry, but there are few passages which are as clear as that one. The true believers who are loyal to Jesus before the pope, can see very clearly the contradiction here. But the one who are loyal to the pope, have no choice but to look for a different meaning. This is why their doctrine is so long!!! Most of it is trying to explain and justify their beliefs. Jesus's message is EXTREMELY simple. The message of the catholic church is EXTREMELY complex and contradictory. No wonder there are more ex-catholics than any other denomination.

[Gracey]

You still haven't a clue about what Jesus or I am talking about, do you?

This really isn't how you should respond to a bible student.

Yes, I know he/she was "role playing", but how about responding in the same manner?

You could say something like: when Jesus was speaking to the crowd and his disciples about the Pharisees he was making reference to addressing people with title "Father", rather than describing someone as a "father". You see, the word "father" in itself can mean different things, one of those things being "sire" or "male parent". The title "Father" on the other hands connotates a different meaning. That's why it might seem like there are discrepancies in the scripture - because of the meaning of the word, or the context in which it was used.

Now, the point I am making Heidi, is not necessarily that you are wrong, only that the way in which you respond provokes people.

And also:

This means that the MAJORITY of the world will be Muslims, Jews, Buddhists, Hindi, and other unbelievers.

I really must protest this - you assume that there are not Jewish or Hindu Christians. There most certainly are. You simply cannot lump nationalities together as unbelievers. If you were attempting to list their religions, then you need to learn first what they are. Hindi is the official language (along with English, I believe) of India. Hinduism is probably what you were looking for. Ever heard of an organization called Jews for Jesus?  http://www.jfjonline.org/about/statementoffaith.htm


Gracey

[Heidi]

I really don't believe he has a clue of what I'm talking about. It wasn't meant in a mean tone, but a factual tone. It was simply an acknoweldgement of reality. I have explained this over and over and over again in the tone you described to no avail. Then it hit me, that he doesnt' understand at all what I've been saying. That's when I use capital letters to emphasize what I used to describe in the terms you have described. If you condiser me teaching to bible students, do bible students endlessly tell their teachers that they're contradicting themselves? How long do you think a "teacher" will put up with that?

[Gracey]

It was simply an acknoweldgement of reality.

Whose reality? Yours, of course - what you believe. Which, in fact, doesn't make it reality (at least from that other person's point of view).

Actually, Heidi, it's apparent to me that he/she does understand what you are saying. Because that person doesn't agree with you, doesn't mean they don't understand.

If you condiser me teaching to bible students, do bible students endlessly tell their teachers that they're contradicting themselves? How long do you think a "teacher" will put up with that?

If you want to become an accomplished and trusted teacher, then for quite a long time - remember, "long-suffering".

How do you wish to be known? As someone who simply rants about the same things over and over again, or as a student of the Word who is patient and willing to explain in a clear and concise way what they believe and why? Now, understand that I am not saying "seek the rightousness of men" - only that if people come to think of you as a good teacher, they are certainly more willing to discuss, listen and learn about the Word. The word of God is sharper than a two-edged sword, so we don't need to be.

blessings
Gracey

[Heidi]

The reality I'm talking about, Gracey, is the reality that we do not agree. That seems pretty evident, does it not?

If that person does understand what I'm saying and doesn't agree, then he thinks Paul and Jesus are contradicting each other. I do not. I have explained in detail the difference between a title and a description. Otheriwse, Paul is contradicting Jesus.

I am not a teacher nor do I wish to be known as one. Jesus said we have only ONE teacher, and again, I agree with Him. We are all brothers. It is you who insinunated I was a teacher. I responded to your analogy. On the contrary, it is you who sounds like a teacher. You are instructing me how to behave. My role model is Christ. He did not compromise the truth to spare people their feelings. Again, he was very clear, firm, and sometimes harsh. He did not kill people with kindness to earn the praises of men. He simply called a spade a spade.  He actually called people evil, condemned them to hell, a brood of vipers, confronted their sin, and told the Jews that the blood of this generation will fall on their shoulders for their unbelief. He did this in the spirit of love and truth,so that they may receive eternal life which IS true love, not specifically to hurt them. That is my motive also. My motive is not undermine people for the sake of undermining them. It is to show that only the teachings which lead us back to Christ ALONE are the true teachings. I hate evil, sin, but love the sinners. When you understand that, you will be able to distinguish real love from of flattery.

[blainefabin]

I really don't believe he has a clue of what I'm talking about. It wasn't meant in a mean tone, but a factual tone. It was simply an acknoweldgement of reality. I have explained this over and over and over again in the tone you described to no avail. Then it hit me, that he doesnt' understand at all what I've been saying. That's when I use capital letters to emphasize what I used to describe in the terms you have described. If you condiser me teaching to bible students, do bible students endlessly tell their teachers that they're contradicting themselves? How long do you think a "teacher" will put up with that?

are you refering to yourself as a "teacher"?


Mat 23:8   "But do not be called Rabbi; for One is your Teacher, and you are all brothers.
Mat 23:9   "Do not call {anyone} on earth your father; for One is your Father, He who is in heaven.
Mat 23:10   "Do not be called leaders; for One is your Leader, {that is,} Christ.
Mat 23:11   "But the greatest among you shall be your servant.


this verse says we shouldn't call men teacher, father or master. you are trying to be a teacher but it says that One is our teacher...are you trying to be that One?

see this is where the whole argument falls apart... christ here is really trying to show us that the greatest among us shall be our servant, which is what the catholic priesthood is all about service.

mike

[Heidi]

I just explained that, Blaine, in the post before yours.

[Gracey]

The reality I'm talking about, Gracey, is the reality that we do not agree. That seems pretty evident, does it not?

No, that did not seem to be the reality you spoke of in your other post, but thank you for clarifying.

I am not a teacher nor do I wish to be known as one

Then what are you doing? If you are not trying to instruct others in the way of the bible, then what are you doing? It doesn't appear to be conversation....

If you so truly believe the words of Christ Jesus our Lord, then you will wish to be known as a teacher:

Mat 5:19   Therefore whoever shall relax one of these commandments, the least, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of Heaven. But whoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of Heaven.

Mat 28:19  Therefore go and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,

And from Timothy:

1Ti 2:7  To this I am ordained a preacher and an apostle (I speak the truth in Christ, I do not lie), a teacher of the nations, in faith and truth.
2Ti 1:11 to which I am appointed a preacher and an apostle and a teacher of the nations.
2Ti 1:12 For this cause I also suffer these things; but I am not ashamed, for I know whom I have believed, and I am persuaded that He is able to guard My deposit unto that Day.

You are instructing me how to behave.

It is the bible that instructs us how to behave:

2Ti 2:24 But the servant of the Lord must not strive, but to be gentle to all, apt to teach, patient,

Again, he was very clear, firm, and sometimes harsh. He did not kill people with kindness to earn the praises of men. He simply called a spade a spade.  He actually called people evil, condemned them to hell, a brood of vipers, confronted their sin, and told the Jews that the blood of this generation will fall on their shoulders for their unbelief.

To a certain degree you are correct in that he was harsh - indeed with the Pharisees, but you will seldom find that behaviour when he was trying to teach.

I don't disagree with everything you say, some things I certainly do, others, not, but I take issue with your disrespect of others.

He did this in the spirit of love and truth,so that they may receive eternal life which IS true love, not specifically to hurt them.

Your "motive" may be what you say, but your methods belie the fact that you are not exhibiting this love, nor the fruits of the spirit. Actions can become a very clear indicator of just what our motives are. The bible does not hesitate to tell us that we should be more than just hearers of the word, but doers of the word.

It is to show that only the teachings which lead us back to Christ ALONE are the true teachings. I hate evil, sin, but love the sinners. When you understand that, you will be able to distinguish real love from of flattery.

I agree, each one of us must not take totally to heart what a man says; prove all things against scripture.

I happen to understand quite well the difference between real love and flattery. How? Once, I was you.

Gracey