Since you have been a Baptist, have you . . .

[TaterTot]

Would you be open to hearing another interpretation? I mean really open?

 

[Johnv]

Originally posted by standingfirminChrist:
Did Christ allow that disciple to go to his dad's funeral? My Bible tells me He didn't.

I think you're missing the point of that story. The man in question ws putting off following Christ until his father was dead and buried. At this point in the account, we don't even know if his father was even dead yet. Jesus was not forbidding him from attending to his father. He was calling the man to put God first, and man second.

To imply in any way that Scripture forbids people from attending funerals of different denominations or religions is not only a gross perversion of scripture, it's plain silly. And that's the truth fo scripture, plain and simple.

 

[standingfirminChrist]

I am always open to the truth.

 

[PastorSBC1303]

Originally posted by Johnv:
I think you're missing the point of that story. The man in question ws putting off following Christ until his father was dead and buried. At this point in the account, we don't even know if his father was even dead yet. Jesus was not forbidding him from attending to his father. He was calling the man to put God first, and man second.

To imply in any way that Scripture forbids people from attending funerals of different denominations or religions is not only a gross perversion of scripture, it's plain silly. And that's the truth fo scripture, plain and simple.

SFIC, here is a simple to the point, clear interpretation of the passage. It is faithful to the context of the passages around it and deals with the heart of what Jesus is trying to teach.

Thanks Johnv, I was going to put something together like that, but you beat me to it.

 

[TaterTot]

would you even consider that truth might in a view contrary to yours?

 

[4His_glory]

Originally posted by standingfirminChrist:
I am always open to the truth.

The why did you brush off what I explained?

 

[4His_glory]

Originally posted by C4K:
You want to really call me a heretic?

I have even been to Catholic christening when some close friends invited us.

Never been to a first communion or confirmation, they are usually on Sunday and I am busy .

Heretic!

I have been to both a first communion and a confirmation. I guess I am a heretic too, but it wouldn't be the first time I was burnt at the stake.

 

[4His_glory]

I would like SFiC or Diggin to explain how simply attending a Catholic funeral means I am participating.

When I go, I don't particiapte in the chants, or the communion. I pretty much sing if the words to the song are good (usually Amazing Grace- talk about ironic) and just be there to comfort and love my family and/or friends.

 

[4His_glory]

Originally posted by PastorSBC1303:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Johnv:
I think you're missing the point of that story. The man in question ws putting off following Christ until his father was dead and buried. At this point in the account, we don't even know if his father was even dead yet. Jesus was not forbidding him from attending to his father. He was calling the man to put God first, and man second.

To imply in any way that Scripture forbids people from attending funerals of different denominations or religions is not only a gross perversion of scripture, it's plain silly. And that's the truth fo scripture, plain and simple.

SFIC, here is a simple to the point, clear interpretation of the passage. It is faithful to the context of the passages around it and deals with the heart of what Jesus is trying to teach.

Thanks Johnv, I was going to put something together like that, but you beat me to it.

</font>[/QUOTE]Mega dittos. Thats what I was trying to point out earlier.

 

[standingfirminChrist]

As I said, I am open to the truth. So far I have only seen people evading the truth. Calvin's Commentaries on this matter does not explain why Jesus said 'Let the dead bury their dead'. Why would He not have said, 'Follow me, but go bury your dead'?

Let the dead (spiritually dead) bury their dead (deceased)

 

[Artimaeus]

Originally posted by C4K:
Who is partaking in the religious services.

Psa 50:18 When thou sawest a thief, then thou consentedst with him, and hast been partaker with adulterers.

This guy didn't actually do the stealing himself, he just went along with it. So I guess that was all right because of his great love for the thief who was, after all, a loved one who was a person to be honored and respected otherwise.

2Jo 1:11 For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.

This guy didn't actually do the evil deeds he just wished him well who was doing the evil deeds and that made him a partaker of those evil deeds. the Bible makes it clear that a person does not actually have to perform the deeds for a person to be a partaker of those deeds. You aren't merely being neutral but are actively supporting this religious ceremony by giving your support in attendance.

I am amazed at some of the reasoning here.

As am I.

If Roman Catholicism is merely another "flavor" of Christianity then by all means show your support.

If Roman Catholicism is a false religion propagating a false gospel then do not consent to it by "going along" with the religious service.

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

Who is consenting with them? Who is going along with them? Who is wishing them well? Who is supporting them?

Amazing, simply amazing. I don't think I have been more amazed at a line of thinking since I have been on this board.

 

[Craigbythesea]

Originally posted by standingfirminChrist:
If you back up, it was neither I, nor Diggin who started the translations thing, so back that boat up where it's at.

it was changed by Craig when he suggested I read some crazy jounal instead of taking the Word of God literally

It staggers my imagination to think that a Baptist would willfully and deliberately misrepresent the truth to other Baptists on a Baptist message board.

The journal article that I asked him to read was not in “some crazy Journal ”but in one of the most respected New Testament Journals, New Testament Studies. The article itself includes a comprehensive compilation of the history of the interpretation the relevant passages in Matt. 8 and Luke 9.

And any honest Baptist knows that there is a vast difference between his interpretation of a passage in the Bible and the passage itself. What may appear to the uneducated reader to be an obvious literal interpretation may, and very often does, prove to be the wrong interpretation when the passage in the Bible is read in the light of its literary, cultural, and linguistic context, a context that was very familiar to the original readers but much less familiar to the 21st century reader.

 

[4His_glory]

Originally posted by standingfirminChrist:
As I said, I am open to the truth. So far I have only seen people evading the truth. Calvin's Commentaries on this matter does not explain why Jesus said 'Let the dead bury their dead'. Why would He not have said, 'Follow me, but go bury your dead'?

Let the dead (spiritually dead) bury their dead (deceased)

I wasn't reffering to Calvin's commentaries, it has been pointed out that we do not know if this man's father was dead or not, and it has furthermore been pointed out by more than one what Christ was saying to this man, yet you still refuse to aknowledge that.

 

[Craigbythesea]

Originally posted by standingfirminChrist:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Amazing interpretation of an event. Jesus knew the man's heart, pure and simple. He knew that the burial was simply an excuse, it was an attempt to try the man's heart. We have no idea if the man's father was a believer or not.

The fact that our Lord said 'Let the dead bury their dead' tells us the father was indeed an unbeliever.

The first word 'dead' had to have meant 'spiritually dead', for we know a physically dead person cannot bury another physically dead person. There is a key word here that shows the father was indeed unsaved... the word 'their'. They were spiritually dead. The father belonged to their class of people. We know this because the word 'their' speaks of belonging to someone. </font>[/QUOTE]Your interpretation is virtually for certain incorrect and your posted reason for believing it is totally absurd. Jesus was speaking here to Jews who would have been familiar with the rabbinic teachings regarding burying the dead and it was upon this basis that the man wished to bury his father who was literally dead or about to die. The main point of these passages in Matt. 8 and Luke 9 is that absolutely nothing, not even the most revered rabbinic traditions, can be allowed to interfere with one’s following Christ.

The physically dead man belonged to those who are spiritually dead, but that does not even remotely suggest that he was spiritually dead. Historically speaking he probably was, but the text itself does not suggest this.

The Bible deserves to be read carefully and prayerfully so that one does not make such foolish mistakes in the interpretation of it.

 

[4His_glory]

Originally posted by C4K:
Who is consenting with them? Who is going along with them? Who is wishing them well? Who is supporting them?

Amazing, simply amazing. I don't think I have been more amazed at a line of thinking since I have been on this board.

I am amazed as well, I am also saddened, but this type of thinking as well as this type of poor hermenutics isn't the first time I have seen it.

 

[4His_glory]

Some one has yet to explain how comforting loved ones in a time of grief is consenting with Catholics.

I hope that those who think like this don't have unsaved Catholic relatives, for I fear their testimony before them is completly shot.

 

[PastorSBC1303]

Originally posted by Craigbythesea:
Your interpretation is virtually for certain incorrect and your posted reason for believing it is totally absurd. Jesus was speaking here to Jews who would have been familiar with the rabbinic teachings regarding burying the dead and it was upon this basis that the man wished to bury his father who was literally dead or about to die. The main point of these passages in Matt. 8 and Luke 9 is that absolutely nothing, not even the most revered rabbinic traditions, can be allowed to interfere with one’s following Christ.

The physically dead man belonged to those who are spiritually dead, but that does not even remotely suggest that he was spiritually dead. Historically speaking he probably was, but the text itself does not suggest this.

The Bible deserves to be read carefully and prayerfully so that one does not make such foolish mistakes in the interpretation of it.

SFIC, here is another clear to the point interpretation of the passage that has once again been shown to you. You keep saying you are open to the truth, but your actions show otherwise.

 

[standingfirminChrist]

Originally posted by 4His_glory:
Some one has yet to explain how comforting loved ones in a time of grief is consenting with Catholics.

I hope that those who think like this don't have unsaved Catholic relatives, for I fear their testimony before them is completly shot.

One does not have to attend a catholic church to comfort the bereaving. One can visit with the family at home, and if family members are lost as the deceased, one can encourage them to seek the Lord.

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

Of course you can and should, that is not the point.

Other than adding to God's word:

Let the dead (spiritually dead) bury their dead (deceased)

you still have not shown why it is wrong to attend the funeral.