I have no question about it... I was just pointing out that it was more than "words alone" that Jesus used in the temple. He kicked some butt. This contradicts the post to which I was responding.
The fact that Jesus was angry? Yes, He was angry and He let the people involved know it!
Hmmm... if I'm not mistaken, that's the New American Standard translation you're quoting above.
So Jesus was angry, you say? Interesting how that fits in with the way the New American Standard translates Matthew 5:22...
"But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother shall be guilty before the court; and whoever says to his brother, 'You good-for-nothing,' shall be guilty before the supreme court; and whoever says, 'You fool,' shall be guilty enough to go into the fiery hell.
Admittedly, it's better than the NIV, but still leaves the problem of a "guilty" Jesus.
I couldn't find any instructions where Jesus told them to use the swords, in fact when a disciple cut the ear off of the slave of the high priest, Jesus said to stop and Jesus reattached the ear!
Right. I know of no such passage where He instructs them to use the swords. Who knows for sure why that comment was made--I've heard it was just to warn them that they would all be under the gun...I mean sword...soon. But we don't know for sure.
In fact, it's a mystery why Jesus actively resisted the moneychangers yet allowed Himself to be captured and executed--quite a change of tactics. Was not His body a temple? Why not protect it from desecration, if we're to be consistent? An interesting puzzle.
So Gondring,since Jesus told the disciples to carry swords (be armed), does that give the 2nd amendment even more credibility?
I think the 2nd Amendment needs no "credibility" from the Bible, as it stands on its own. However, if you are asking whether this verse helps to convince modern Christians that guns are not evil, then the answer is "yes". Many Christians these days have grown up with the idea that Jesus' ministry was purely anti-militant, anti-violence, and therefore, by extension, anti-weaponry. Well, if one is to believe active resistance is allowed, then weaponry makes sense.
A guilty Jesus? Oh Gondring, you might want to be careful here!
I am sure you are aware the Scripture you are referring to (Matthew 5:22) was comparing the "Old" Law regarding murder to the "New" Law which had even higher goals of not even being angry. It also was regarding taking your "brother" to court. It didn't say being angry was a sin!
Be angry, and yet do not sin;do not let the sun go down on your anger, and do not give the devil an opportunity." Ephesians 4:26-27
They were being encouraged to settle their differences amongst themselves instead of taking each other to court! Wish that was being practiced today!
Jesus NEVER instructs them to use their swords. "But I say to you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you," Matthew 5:44
As Jesus was dying on the cross he said,
"Father forgive them;for they do not know what they are doing." Luke 23:34
Maybe it's just me, but it sure doesn't sound like Jesus was ordering a jihad!
Love and forgiveness is what Jesus taught and He lived a perfect life!
In fact, it's a mystery why Jesus actively resisted the moneychangers yet allowed Himself to be captured and executed--quite a change of tactics. Was not His body a temple? Why not protect it from desecration, if we're to be consistent? An interesting puzzle.
Jesus didn't resist the moneychangers, he threw them out! He "allowed" himself to be captured because He willing died for you, Gondring, and all the rest of us so that we have the choice to accept His gift of forgiveness and Salvation.
Don't worry, Gondring, Jesus rose again, so "they" didn't destroy anything. The prophecy from the Old Testament was fulfilled!
As to the 2nd amendment...I was just having some fun! ;0)
Sorry for the preaching and getting off topic, but I had to respond to the post regarding a "guilty" Jesus!!!
Everyone have a Blessed day!