From Luke 6 (which comports with Matthew)...
And they that were vexed with unclean spirits: and they were healed. And the whole multitude sought to touch him: for there went virtue out of him, and healed them all." "a great multitude of people out of all Judaea and Jerusalem, and from the sea coast of Tyre and Sidon, which came to hear him, and to be healed of their diseases;
So unless Luke is a liar, we learn this wasn't just a "curious crowd." These were people who if they weren't believers already, they sure were after they were healed since Christ healed "them all."
Do you know of anyone who was not a believer after Christ healed them?
Dr.E: What's the purpose of excluding the multitude from the Beatitudes?
KOSTA: That He calls someone "the light of the world."
You don't think Christ referred to believers as "the light of the world?" You think that designation only went to the Apostles?
This is getting sillier...
And early in the morning he came again into the temple, and all the people came unto him; and he sat down, and taught them... Then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life... As he spake these words, many believed on him..." -- John 8:1-2;12;30 "Jesus went unto the mount of Olives.
So we see that those who believe in Christ will "have the light of life" and thus become like Christ, the "light of the world."
But to others among them He said...
He that is of God heareth God's words: ye therefore hear them not, because ye are not of God." -- John 8:43;48 "Why do ye not understand my speech? even because ye cannot hear my word...
For the same reason He spoke in parables. He wasn't there to teach the crowds, but to teach His disciples. For the crowds, Christ provided miracles.
What peculiar thoughts. Christ meant something different by speaking in parables than He did by performing miracles? Weren't both a means of convincing those whom God had given eyes to see? Christ spoke in parables because Christ came to save the lost sheep of Israel, and every one of them will hear Him, and know Him as God and follow Him because God gives them ears to hear and a new heart to understand.
Miracles weren't to influence those who would never have faith; miracles were to further convince those to whom God gave faith.
I ask myself "Would Christ call ordinary crowds the light of the world?" Not all are teachers and not all are apostles. He picked His disciples and He taught them the secrets of the Kingdom of God.
So you imagine Christ came to earth to teach the secrets of the Kingdom of God to only His apostles???
No wonder you believe in the magick of the priesthood and an alchemy of the Lord's Supper. Read Luke 12...
For there is nothing covered, that shall not be revealed; neither hid, that shall not be known. Therefore whatsoever ye have spoken in darkness shall be heard in the light; and that which ye have spoken in the ear in closets shall be proclaimed upon the housetops. And I say unto you my friends, Be not afraid of them that kill the body, and after that have no more that they can do... And he said also to the people, When ye see a cloud rise out of the west, straightway ye say, There cometh a shower; and so it is." -- Luke 12:1-4;54"In the mean time, when there were gathered together an innumerable multitude of people, insomuch that they trode one upon another, he began to say unto his disciples first of all, Beware ye of the leaven of the Pharisees, which is hypocrisy.
So there's no division between Christ's words to believers and Christ's words to His disciples. They were one and the same. No "secret knowledge" imparted to the Apostles that is not given to every one who believes in Him.
I have never heard anyone in the Church talk about this. I have no clue how the Church sees it. I read it and I see it as I read it...I am only doing what every Protestant does every day: read as I see it.
That's not what Protestants do. Protestants do not dismiss Luke because he did not witness the Sermon on the Mount, as you have done. Protestants don't pick and choose indiscriminately, and then come to some "personal" conclusion. Protestants gauge every thought and belief on the word of God. And if we disagree, we come prepared to debate our differences so that the truth is more clearly articulated.
But now I realize the many Bible-believing Christians on this thread are not debating with a theology or a church or a religion or a set of beliefs, but just with one man and his peculiar take on the Bible.
Which is strange for one who supposedly believes that the EO church is the purest form of Christianity. Why not tell us what this "pure church" believes since you say you are a member of it rather than making it up as you go along?
We were talking about teaching, not healing. He taught His disciples (students, pupils), not crowds.
So we see that those who believe in Christ will "have the light of life" and thus become like Christ, the "light of the world."
It doesn't say they shall become but only that they shall have it.
Christ spoke in parables because Christ came to save the lost sheep of Israel
Apparently not, since the lost sheep of Israel rejected Him and His disciples, and He must have known they would.
Miracles weren't to influence those who would never have faith; miracles were to further convince those to whom God gave faith.
So, those who have faith don't have enough of it (although once saved you can't lose it!)? Is that what you are saying? And how come today all we need is just faith; no miracles needed?
No "secret knowledge" imparted to the Apostles that is not given to every one who believes in Him.
Nope. In those days, He taught only His disciples, and they in turn were to do the healing and teaching to the tribes of Israel. After the Pentecost, the disciples had to pick their own disciples, to teach them how to teach and heal others. It doesn't say that all believers can teach and heal.
Which is strange for one who supposedly believes that the EO church is the purest form of Christianity. Why not tell us what this "pure church" believes since you say you are a member of it rather than making it up as you go along?
The Church is not the purest form of Christianity; its teaching is because it is the least changed from the faith given to the Apostles. It is the same catholic Church whose orthodox faith put together the Bible you read. But the Church itself can never be "pure" because, it is a gathering of sinners, not saints.