What if they have removed themselves?
What if they are not financially able?
Since Jesus was our savior, didn't he have the right to do what ever he wanted to do, and felt that was best?
Since you don't believe in Christ as our savior, I guess you can't objectively answer this.
He sure does. Except in all things He appeared to be an observant Jew. I don't see why he would play the "God Card" on this one issue instead of doing what the Law says should be done.
Since you don't believe in Christ as our savior, I guess you can't objectively answer this.
Actually none of us can "objectively" answer this. We think He's God so that colors our answer. Angelo doesn't so that colors his. We would need to find someone who absolutely doesn't care to find someone "objective." Angelo is speaking here as an expert on what a normal Jew would do vis-a-vis the Law.
SD
Where is the evidence that this is the case? Speculation on your part.
Since Jesus was our savior, didn't he have the right to do what ever he wanted to do, and felt that was best?
That's a different argument than saying that the firstborn had the authority to delegate care of his mother to someone other than his brothers. Sure, he could say this, but that doesn't remove the obligation under the Law for the brothers to see to it themselves.