Posted on 10/02/2013 5:44:32 PM PDT by fkabuckeyesrule
For starters, you would need to understand what the kingdom of heaven really is. Next, one must realize that money itself is amoral. It wasn't the wealth and position themselves that were the problem. It was what they represented to the man. He based his value on his position and wealth rather than on who God was in his life. And as the story goes, the man walked away sadly because he was unwilling to let go of his self-serving value system.
Now to the eye of the needle. I suspect when you hear 'needle', you are thinking of a sewing needle. But in those times, the 'eye of the needle' was a small gate that allowed entry into a city when the main gate was closed (e.g. during nighttime hours). The eye of the needle was a narrow passage through the wall which allowed restricted entry. A camel could pass through, but only by crawling on it's knees and only after having it's baggage or burdens removed.
So yes, a camel passing through the eye of a needle was indeed possible, but only after we remove our old baggage. And only after this baggage is removed and our mind is renewed can we see the kingdom of heaven alive in us.
I hope this helps.
Charge them that are rich in this world, that they be not highminded, nor trust in uncertain riches, but in the living God, who giveth us richly all things to enjoy; That they do good, that they be rich in good works, ready to distribute, willing to communicate; Laying up in store for themselves a good foundation against the time to come, that they may lay hold on eternal life. I Thmothy 6: 17-18
Being charitable and being a socialist are two different things. Socialism is a form of government whereby people are still subjected to the rule of a handful of other people. I tend to go the parable route where Jesus was saying to be giving, kind, and compassionate, therein lies your riches.
My two cents.
The “government,” personified in Pontius Pilate, found “no cause of death in this man,” and desired to set him free. But the Pharisees and high priests of the Jews were determined that Jesus be put to death, and to this end played their political trump card, namely, Jesus claim to be a king. Pilate, to save his own hide, had no choice but to have his soldiers crucify Jesus. Yes, Jesus was executed by the Romans, but the ultimate, true determinative agent was the Jewish leaders. Thus was God’s purpose fulfilled, that His Beloved Son, Very God himself, die to pay the debt of man’s sins.
There is no cause to expect Bill O’Reilly to know or understand this.
Saw her - and the new book she’s promoting - something like “The Myth of Christian Persecution: how Christians made up all the stories about being thrown to the lions” - she’s an intellectual, and a college teacher at that - the only way she has to be noticed and stand out from the common man is to come up with far-fetched, bizarre theories and narratives, lest she not get tenure - feel sorry for her.....
Based on what I heard O’Reilly say the other day, he is also taking much of the Bible out of context, as well.
Figured you would want to jump in here.
Your main point is correct - however, this wasn’t a prable, it was an actual event recorded in the gospels.
Just to keep totally accurate - the story of the widow woman giving all that she had was not a parable, it was an actual event. Jesus sat where he could watch, and saw it occur.
Per my Late Mother, “you help people who can’t help themselves, not people who won’t help themselves”.
Oh yeah, she wasn’t talking about the Government.
Because Christ..said give not take
.you can give every thing you own right now to who you please
..no government needed to do in
..that is your free will that is not socialism
...a socialist government takes from other..
You can not give because you do not own because you are not free
Really have you ever heard a socialist..they rant about the people need to to take from the rich....not about give to the poor
Well, the burial couldn't have been that nice, Jesus up and left after a couple of days!
You are correct; my mistake. Thank you for pointing that out.
True.
I believe He was referring to the distractions wealth provides, that may take him away from Godly pursuits. He said "hard", not impossible.
But then, I have no Doctorates to my name, in religion or anything else...
So, he knew she was an incompetent flake and chose her for that reason?
(Singing)
Shame, shame on Old Notre Dame
The Greeks and the Poles have stolen your fame,
Why send Malick through the line,
Schwartz and Rosconsky, where the heck's O'Brien?
Why keep the Irish there on the bench
And give the ball to the Germans and French,
The nation wonders what became of the Irish of Notre Dame!
< /break from theological discussion >
You seriously think BOR staff doesn't vet his guests ?
As soon as I saw the title of the book this “intellectual” wrote, I switched to a more intelligent program over on GSN, “Baggage”.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.