The Gospels and Paul

[Xan]

You're sarcastic post was in direct response to my wanting to back off until I felt better, so it had everything to do with the medical crisis.

No, it didn't. You did not have to post an immediate response. No one is putting a gun to your head and telling to post immediately after I do. If you are feeling so bad, why are you still on the board in the first place?

My pointing out that I'm a gentile is because of the very passage we are discussing; this one in particular: "I was sick and you visited me", to which you apply to Jews only, according to your posts. Obviously, you can't visit me, but as a brother, I would expect more empathy and patience over my situation until I felt better.

I do not "apply" it to Jews only. I am simply stating that Jesus is judging the nations on the basis of how they treated the Jewish people. the direct reference is to the Jewish people, but the personal application is wider than that, obviously.

I have been nothing but patient with you. I did not make you respond when you did. You have done that totally on your own, with no prodding from me. Like I said, if you are feeling so bad, why jump on here at all? You are under no obligation to respond imediately.

My remark simply noted the obvious frustration with those who prefer to ignore the rules of literary analysis, which apply to the Bible as readily as any other text and who seem intent on ignoring those rules when they contradict a previously held veiw.

You will note that even though your first response was sarcastic and uncalled for, my initial response to you was not.

In my second response, I was simply responding with frustration that anyone when shown commonsense, universally accepted rules of literary analysis that we apply daily to things like new papers, cookbooks and biographical novels, seem to go out the window when the Bible is in play.

Then why did you quote me when you made that post? I said I was backing off until I felt better out of respect to you. You quoted that when you said: "Yeah, I know its rough when one is faced with the reality that there are rules of literary analysis in play where any piece of literature is concerned and that those rules prevent us from making any kind of interpretation of any text as we see fit." In context, it sounds mean.

Perhaps, you did not mean to quote me. Perhaps you hit the wrong button. That can certainly happen.

As far as being on here when I'm sick: I ate, I slept alot of it off. Now I'm waiting on my boyfriend to bring pizza, and I really don't have the energy to do much else other than pop around on the net and listen to Meatloaf.

I'll come back and have an intelligent discussion when my brain cells aren't in their current state of confusion.

[Guest shiloh357]

You're sarcastic post was in direct response to my wanting to back off until I felt better, so it had everything to do with the medical crisis.

No, it didn't. You did not have to post an immediate response. No one is putting a gun to your head and telling to post immediately after I do. If you are feeling so bad, why are you still on the board in the first place?

My pointing out that I'm a gentile is because of the very passage we are discussing; this one in particular: "I was sick and you visited me", to which you apply to Jews only, according to your posts. Obviously, you can't visit me, but as a brother, I would expect more empathy and patience over my situation until I felt better.

I do not "apply" it to Jews only. I am simply stating that Jesus is judging the nations on the basis of how they treated the Jewish people. the direct reference is to the Jewish people, but the personal application is wider than that, obviously.

I have been nothing but patient with you. I did not make you respond when you did. You have done that totally on your own, with no prodding from me. Like I said, if you are feeling so bad, why jump on here at all? You are under no obligation to respond imediately.

My remark simply noted the obvious frustration with those who prefer to ignore the rules of literary analysis, which apply to the Bible as readily as any other text and who seem intent on ignoring those rules when they contradict a previously held veiw.

You will note that even though your first response was sarcastic and uncalled for, my initial response to you was not.

In my second response, I was simply responding with frustration that anyone when shown commonsense, universally accepted rules of literary analysis that we apply daily to things like new papers, cookbooks and biographical novels, seem to go out the window when the Bible is in play.

Then why did you quote me when you made that post? I said I was backing off until I felt better out of respect to you. You quoted that when you said: "Yeah, I know its rough when one is faced with the reality that there are rules of literary analysis in play where any piece of literature is concerned and that those rules prevent us from making any kind of interpretation of any text as we see fit." In context, it sounds mean.

Perhaps, you did not mean to quote me. Perhaps you hit the wrong button. That can certainly happen.

As far as being on here when I'm sick: I ate, I slept alot of it off. Now I'm waiting on my boyfriend to bring pizza, and I really don't have the energy to do much else other than pop around on the net and listen to Meatloaf.

I'll come back and have an intelligent discussion when my brain cells aren't in their current state of confusion.

[BurnForChrist]

Yes it does demonstrate that the Jews are exactly who Jesus is talking about. The sheep represent those treated His bretheren kindly and they are distinct from His "bretheren." The use of the word "bretheren" from the text indicates that it is own people the Jewish people he is referring to and it is directly parallel to the judgment in the Valley of Jehoshaphat in Joel.

Your view makes no sense. Why would some Christians be sheep and the others be "my brethren?" The text does not allow for such an understanding.

On the contrary your view doesn't make sense. My view, as I posted, corresponded with 1st John, that one of the evidences and assurances of ones salvation is by there love for the brethren, those of the household of faith. And more then just 1st John:

Luke 8:20 And he was told, "Your mother and your brothers are standing outside, desiring to see you."

Luke 8:21 But he answered them, "My mother and my brothers are those who hear the word of God and do it!"

Heb 2:10 For it was fitting that he, for whom and by whom all things exist, in bringing many sons to glory, should make the founder of their salvation perfect through suffering.

Heb 2:11 For he who sanctifies and those who are sanctified all have one source. That is why he is not ashamed to call them brothers,

Heb 2:12 saying, "I will tell of your name to my brothers; in the midst of the congregation I will sing your praise."

The problem is your not seeing that the point that is being made. What the righteous did, the fruit of their lives manifested that they were sheep. They bore good fruit because they believed. They were sanctified and lived a sanctified life. You cant be a new creation and not act like a new creature.

Perhaps John Gill explained it best,

"Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me: which is to be understood, not in so limited a sense, as to regard only the apostles, and the least of them, for these were not the only brethren of Christ; nor in so large a sense, as to include all in human nature; but the saints only, the children of God, and household of faith: for though acts of charity and humanity are to be done to all men, yet especially to these; and indeed, these only can be considered as the brethren of Christ, who are born of God, and do the will of Christ; for such he accounts his mother, brethren, and sisters; and who are not only of the same human nature, but in the same covenant with him, and the sons of God, not by nature, as he is the Son of God, but by adoption, and so are heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ: now he that does any of the above acts of kindness to these "brethren" of Christ, and because they stand in such a relation to him, even the "least" of them: though he is not an apostle, or a martyr, or a preacher of the Gospel, or has any considerable gifts and abilities for usefulness, but is a weak believer in spiritual things, as well as poor in temporal things; and though it is but to "one" of these opportunity and circumstances not allowing it to be done to more; yet as such is the humility and condescension of this great king, as to account such mean persons his brethren; such also is his grace and goodness, as to reckon every instance of kindness and respect shown to them, as done to himself in person; and will take notice of it, accept and reward it, as if it had been so done."

[Guest yod]

Yes it does demonstrate that the Jews are exactly who Jesus is talking about. The sheep represent those treated His bretheren kindly and they are distinct from His "bretheren." The use of the word "bretheren" from the text indicates that it is own people the Jewish people he is referring to and it is directly parallel to the judgment in the Valley of Jehoshaphat in Joel.

Your view makes no sense. Why would some Christians be sheep and the others be "my brethren?" The text does not allow for such an understanding.

On the contrary your view doesn't make sense. My view, as I posted, corresponded with 1st John, that one of the evidences and assurances of ones salvation is by there love for the brethren, those of the household of faith. And more then just 1st John:

Luke 8:20 And he was told, "Your mother and your brothers are standing outside, desiring to see you."

Luke 8:21 But he answered them, "My mother and my brothers are those who hear the word of God and do it!"

Heb 2:10 For it was fitting that he, for whom and by whom all things exist, in bringing many sons to glory, should make the founder of their salvation perfect through suffering.

Heb 2:11 For he who sanctifies and those who are sanctified all have one source. That is why he is not ashamed to call them brothers,

Heb 2:12 saying, "I will tell of your name to my brothers; in the midst of the congregation I will sing your praise."

The problem is your not seeing that the point that is being made. What the righteous did, the fruit of their lives manifested that they were sheep.

They bore good fruit because they believed. They were sanctified and lived a sanctified life. You cant be a new creation and not act like a new creature.

so how can these sheep also be His brethren (outside of Arkansas) if He is judging between these same sheep and goats for how they treated His brethren?

So you're saying that He's judging sheep for how they treated each other...and then judges the goats by how they mistreated His brethren who now look like sheep in the parable?

Am I really following your premise?

Perhaps John Gill explained it best,

"Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me: which is to be understood, not in so limited a sense, as to regard only the apostles, and the least of them, for these were not the only brethren of Christ; nor in so large a sense, as to include all in human nature; but the saints only, the children of God, and household of faith: for though acts of charity and humanity are to be done to all men, yet especially to these; and indeed, these only can be considered as the brethren of Christ, who are born of God, and do the will of Christ; for such he accounts his mother, brethren, and sisters; and who are not only of the same human nature, but in the same covenant with him, and the sons of God, not by nature, as he is the Son of God, but by adoption, and so are heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ: now he that does any of the above acts of kindness to these "brethren" of Christ, and because they stand in such a relation to him, even the "least" of them: though he is not an apostle, or a martyr, or a preacher of the Gospel, or has any considerable gifts and abilities for usefulness, but is a weak believer in spiritual things, as well as poor in temporal things; and though it is but to "one" of these opportunity and circumstances not allowing it to be done to more; yet as such is the humility and condescension of this great king, as to account such mean persons his brethren; such also is his grace and goodness, as to reckon every instance of kindness and respect shown to them, as done to himself in person; and will take notice of it, accept and reward it, as if it had been so done."

I appreciate that John Gill has an opinion...whoever he is.

But what's wrong with just quoting the Word of God here? What Shiloh is talking about is directly or indirectly mentioned as a future reality in the role of the Messiah by almost every Prophet. This role is completely consistent with the parable being about the nations being judged for how they treated Israel even if He had not used such clear descriptive words as "the nations" "sheep & goats" (good guys/bad guys) and "my brethren".

Isaiah, Jeremiah, David, Zachariah, etc....all talk about a day of the Lord when the nations would be judged for how they treated Israel. It's a veritable "who's-who" of real biblical Prophets (with all due respect to John Gill) who mention these same things centuries before Yeshua confirms them in Matthew 25.

Once the whole counsel of God is taken into account, I have to agree with Shiloh that Matthew 25 is talking specifically about His brethren in the flesh, the jewish people, no matter whose commentary it might contradict. That should not cause any envy because it's not a matter of preference in the same way humans think of preference and, after all, His ways are higher than ours so I'm 100% behind whatever He wants to do, ya know?

Yeshua was certainly not telling anyone to do this without remembering all who are poor, all who are in prison, all who are naked. That is a basic & important deeper principle of His message and if the nations (gentiles) who were joining to the remnant of Israel were suddenly now humble towards the "hated" lost sheep of the House of Jacob, it would indicate that there had been a true change of heart in them towards all people.

In other words, I do believe that the jewish people/Israel (one in the same) are a test for the nations. They are the only people to whom God says specifically, "they are my possession". He makes promises to their forefathers and for His namesake alone, He promises to keep them. I have absolutely no envy of that relationship because He has adopted me and I am treated like family also; but I'm going to stay out of their business and trust that His plan is the best one.

These chosen people have rebelled almost every day since they accepted His covenant and yet He has historically showered love & protection on them like a father. He chastised them just as He told all the Prophets He would do....and now brings them back to their land just as He promised at the end of it.

There is a better covenant available for "whosoever will" but there are also specific covenants made with the jewish people that are still in effect for them and are yet to be fulfilled. I believe the biblical texts show that all the Apostles expected a literal Kingdom of God to come to Israel on Earth with Yeshua crowned as the King Messiah at His return at some point in the future...after that comes the new heaven and the new earth.

So I see no reason not to expect it also?

[Guest]

Amen!

[exrockstar]

so how can these sheep also be His brethren (outside of Arkansas) if He is judging between these same sheep and goats for how they treated His brethren?

So you're saying that He's judging sheep for how they treated each other...and then judges the goats by how they mistreated His brethren who now look like sheep in the parable?

Am I really following your premise?

exactly.

this is the point Shiloh is trying to make.

BfC's interpretation says "help our Christians brothers and get onto the righteous side."

If Christ would have said "our brethren" or "our fellow brethren" then i'da listen but He didnt.

[deut31:12]

Once again people are splitting hairs instead of understanding what is being said. It is as if it can't be accepted that Jesus wouldn't call Christians his brethren. There is nothing wrong with Jesus calling those who do God's will his brethren as I have already given a scripture stipulating to that.

BurnforChrist posted a scripture I missed:

For both he that sanctifieth and they who are sanctified are all of one: for which cause he is not ashamed to call them brethren, - Hebrews 2:11

So far that is two separate places that Jesus has referred to Christians as his brethren.

In Mat 25 Jesus is judging the world for what they did and did not do for his brethren. We are instructed all over the new testament to take care of each other in our infirmities and to help each other in our times of need. Part of what we are going to be judged by on the judgment day is if we did this or not and that is what Jesus is illustrating.

For some reason Jesus holds it in higher regard when things are done for or against Christians. We even have this illustration:

Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, the same is greatest in the kingdom of heaven. And whoso shall receive one such little child in my name receiveth me. But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea. - Matthew 18:4-6

The judging done in Mat 25 is only part of what the world is going to be judged for. I am the one who originally brought out the example in Mat 25 to show that the world, both bad and good, will be judged by their deeds. This was brought out in response to the original OP's post, but like many times, people began picking the scriptures apart to take away from their purposed meanings.

What was supposed to be garnered from Mat 25 is that we are all going to be judged on the same day for the same things. Meaning that we are responsible for doing the will of God as we are going to be judged by it.

[exrockstar]

What was supposed to be garnered from Mat 25 is that we are all going to be judged on the same day for the same things. Meaning that we are responsible for doing the will of God as we are going to be judged by it.

no only the ones one earth will be judged.

even if you make it to eternal life you still go into the 1000 reign in a mortal body.

after all...who will be there to reproduce if no mortals enter the 1000 years?

im just sayin

[Guest shiloh357]

Yes it does demonstrate that the Jews are exactly who Jesus is talking about. The sheep represent those treated His bretheren kindly and they are distinct from His "bretheren." The use of the word "bretheren" from the text indicates that it is own people the Jewish people he is referring to and it is directly parallel to the judgment in the Valley of Jehoshaphat in Joel.

Your view makes no sense. Why would some Christians be sheep and the others be "my brethren?" The text does not allow for such an understanding.

On the contrary your view doesn't make sense. My view, as I posted, corresponded with 1st John, that one of the evidences and assurances of ones salvation is by there love for the brethren, those of the household of faith. And more then just 1st John:

Luke 8:20 And he was told, "Your mother and your brothers are standing outside, desiring to see you."

Luke 8:21 But he answered them, "My mother and my brothers are those who hear the word of God and do it!"

Heb 2:10 For it was fitting that he, for whom and by whom all things exist, in bringing many sons to glory, should make the founder of their salvation perfect through suffering.

Heb 2:11 For he who sanctifies and those who are sanctified all have one source. That is why he is not ashamed to call them brothers,

Heb 2:12 saying, "I will tell of your name to my brothers; in the midst of the congregation I will sing your praise."

The problem is your not seeing that the point that is being made. What the righteous did, the fruit of their lives manifested that they were sheep. They bore good fruit because they believed. They were sanctified and lived a sanctified life. You cant be a new creation and not act like a new creature.

Perhaps John Gill explained it best,

The problem here is that you are trying to use nonparallel passages that speak to different issues and possess different contexts than does Matt. 25. Comparing Scripture with Scripture only works when you use parallel passages that are identical in subject matter, context, line of thought, etc.

The fact remains that it is simply incongruous to the passage to claim that the sheep are Christians who treated other Christians ("my brethren") with compassion. Again, why would Jesus separate some Christians as sheep and others as His brethren? "My brethren" is treated as completely separate group from the sheep who treated them with compassion.

You have a logical interprative problem if both the sheep and Jesus' brethren are interpreted as the same group. The text simply does not allow for it.

[deut31:12]

What was supposed to be garnered from Mat 25 is that we are all going to be judged on the same day for the same things. Meaning that we are responsible for doing the will of God as we are going to be judged by it.

no only the ones one earth will be judged.

even if you make it to eternal life you still go into the 1000 reign in a mortal body.

after all...who will be there to reproduce if no mortals enter the 1000 years?

im just sayin

What you are saying is incorrect.