Following Christ - what is the difference

Missing the point.

I am not a bit angry, have called no one a fool or even Raca.


Its just obvious that there is no difference. If it wrong to go to a funeral, it is wrong to have any possessions. In that interpretation both are given as things we must give up to follow Christ.

The Bible answer has been given several times in this thread. Funerals are not prohibited and we are not called to sell all we have to give to the poor. Both illustrations are matters of the heart.

I think it is even clearer now that no one can point out the difference in the two instructions.

 

Whoops, I see it now - thanks deejay.

Of course it is a typo, but it is easier to address that than answer the question.

 

I apologise agin for the typo. I admit that I am fallible and make mistakes. I meant to type "folks."

Now, can you answer my question. Why is wrong for me to go to a funeral but okay to keep a computer I could sell to give the money to the poor?

 

That is not the queation. Here is the question again.

Lets not get sidetracked. We were told elsewhere that the key reason for not attending a funeral was that Jesus said "let the dead bury the dead and follow me." I have pointed out that Jesus said "Sell all you have and distribute to the poor and follow me."

We can discuss the appearance of going to a funeral later. That is not the topic at hand. Start a new thread and I will GLADLY answer that question.

For now please answer my question as posed above.

 

There is no answer pastor. We all know that by now I think. I won't bump this thread again, I think the point is made.

 

But he did tell another man to sell all he had to give to the poor and follow Christ. Why is it obvious that one was a strict command and the other was a question of willingness?

Why not just admit that both dealt with the person's heart and were not commandments. That is the obvious Bible answer.

We have no right to say, "well, 'let the dead bury the dead' was an instruction but 'sell all you have to give to the poor' is a principle. When we do that we destroy the authority of God's word and our own reasoning becomes the authority. We must be consistant in our interpretation of scripture or scripture is meaningless.

Both situations were dealing with that individuals hearts and are princples for us today. Neither is an overall command for all Chrsitians of all ages.

 

"Sell all you have to give to the poor. I have another job for you that is more important than your possessions."

There is no resolution here. If one is a rule the other is a rule. Neither are rules or commandments. Jesus was trying their hearts to see which was more important to them. He was not telling me not to go to a funeral and He was not telling me to sell all I have to give to the poor.

The greatest abuse of scripture is when we try to make it fit our ideas and opinions. Even worse, when we try to use it to judge the hearts of others.

There is very little that upsets me more than Christians trying to make God's word conform to their own personal standards.

 

And he was pointing it out to them. The man's funeral was more important and the other man's possessions were more important to them. Of course He knew their hearts, that is why he put the test to them, so that all could see and learn that we too must know what it more important to us.

You stll haven't told me how to tell which is a rule and which is a principle other than your own human reasoning. So are you telling me that I should use human reasoning as a basis for interpreting scripture.

"Well, it is obvious that Jesus was telling us His followers that they cannot to go to a funeral and follow Him, but because my pastor owns a car Jesus could not possibly mean that we have to sell EVERYTHING to give to the poor in order to follow Him."

Consistancy please.

 

Pretty simple when we just take it the way it was intended isn't it?