In Luke 14:33 Jesus reportedly says:
“…whosoever he be of you that forsaketh not all that he hath, he cannot be my disciple.”
And in Luke 18:22 he says:
“… sell all that thou hast, and distribute unto the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, follow me.”
It seems clear that jesus was instructing his followers to sell everything they own and give it to the poor. Interestingly, I am not sure if the poor (who suddenly find themselves to be rich) should also sell everything they have been given, then give it back. Where does that end?
Why is it that almost no one claiming to be a Christian follows this commandment?
#1 by pichi on January 24, 2009 - 8:58 pm
Quote
because you don't understand
#2 by askegg on January 24, 2009 - 10:01 pm
Quote
Please do enlighten me – what does Jesus *really* mean when he says
#3 by SeandBlogonaut on January 27, 2009 - 8:56 am
Quote
perhaps its only for disciples, you can be like a follower have associate membership raher than full
#4 by SeandBlogonaut on January 27, 2009 - 8:57 am
Quote
or perhaps the man never intended to found a religion, or perhaps the quagmire that is the new testament is a mish mash of diffrent jesus tradtions
#5 by askegg on January 27, 2009 - 9:11 am
Quote
I know a lot of people who pay a lot of money every week for their associate membership. I guess it's better to shed all that wealth, because you can't get into heaven if you're rich
#6 by SeandBlogonaut on January 27, 2009 - 9:12 am
Quote
Or did it really happen like this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Behold_the_Man
#7 by askegg on January 27, 2009 - 9:20 am
Quote
Oh! Thanks for the link – I will check the movie out
#8 by Will on May 4, 2009 - 1:28 pm
Quote
To whom did Jesus say this? It was a man that was attached to his money in an inappropriate way. A way that put the money/possessions he owned between him and God. You could have a similar problem with something completely different, say food for example. You could have food be more important to you than God. In such a case one would have to learn to value food less and get God first in there life.
#9 by Delacroix on November 18, 2009 - 7:03 pm
Quote
Thank you Will, I agree. Jesus is real and alive with his followers even today. Many of you would choose to believe in him yet know that would mean letting go of something in your lives. Jesus takes us as we are. Do not try to fix yourselves just believe and he will help you. Many do not believe and therefore can not take action. Jesus more or less asked this man "Do you believe in me?" Many believe yet do not follow, this does not nescessarily mean that that they will not be saved by the grace of God. The Word does not elaborate about the rest of this mans life. We are all sinners and all can be saved by Christs sacrifice that is a gift. Are you pre-judging yourself? Do you not find yourself worthy of such a gift? Are you blushing at the thought of someone loving you so much? Dont worry God knows that you dont deserve it. Just receive and be thankful.
#10 by askegg on November 18, 2009 - 10:39 pm
Quote
Zeus is real and alive with his followers even today. Many of you would choose to believe in him yet know that would mean letting go of something in your lives. Zeus takes us as we are. Do not try to fix yourselves just believe and he will help you. Many do not believe and therefore can not take action.
"We are all sinners and all can be saved by Christs sacrifice that is a gift."
I do not have such a low opinion of myself. Perhaps you should seek medical attention for your depression?
#11 by R.S. Stone on December 2, 2009 - 4:16 pm
Quote
Attachments to the things of this world imply a person is lacking in their love of God because they are unwilling to believe the things to come are good enough to justify sacrificing their hold on earthly objects in favor of charity and ministry, their lack of trust in this case indicating a lack of love. Jesus is very exacting, promising to measure back to each person the fruits of their works, so while such people may enter the Kingdom of Heaven, it is likely their position and rewards within it will relate to the extent they gave, based on their means and how powerful the temptation to keep their treasures was. For every treasure you give up on earth, one is set aside for you in the kingdom of Heaven.
#12 by askegg on December 2, 2009 - 11:24 pm
Quote
Give me all your stuff. To do otherwise indicates you do not love Jesus as much as you think. I am prepared to risk eternal hell so that you may be granted ever lasting love. So how about it?
#13 by R.S. Stone on December 2, 2009 - 4:15 pm
Quote
This event is followed by a passage in which Jesus comments it is hard for rich men to go to Kingdom, the reason being they don't want to give up their possessions. This can applied to anyone consumed by materialism. Try thinking of a materialistic attitude as a weight preventing your soul from ascending to Heaven. The disciples then ask him who can be saved, since it seems anyone on earth can be victim to this mindset to some degree. Jesus tells them that through men such a thing is impossible, but through God it is not. In at least one gospel, Jesus mentions that if the rich young man did this he would be 'perfect'. The implication seems to be that a person able to do as was asked of the young man would be worthy of Heaven on his own merits.
#14 by askegg on December 2, 2009 - 11:20 pm
Quote
Take this to it's logical conclusion and it's almost a Buddhists philosophy. Give up the material world and all it's possessions. Do not concern yourself with materialism. Give away your house, car, computer, clothes, and cash – these things are a distraction preventing your soul from ascending to heaven.
So how are you doing so far? Why is the many Christians still cling so desperately to the material world? Why do churches and other faith based organisations collect hordes of tax free money every week from their fleeced sheep? Explain why the Catholic church (for example) is so obsessed with materialism it is one of the richest institutes in the world – all while preaching the importance of being humble, meek, and charitable.
You're all going to hell.
#15 by R.S. Stone on December 2, 2009 - 4:16 pm
Quote
Of course, he would still require God's grace to actually enter the Kingdom, but the point is he would be morally deserving of it as opposed to getting the free pass it is speculated will be extended to many of Christ's followers. It may well be the rich young man is in Heaven; but unless he repented and did as stipulated he will probably not be seen among the saints on Judgment Day and will probably not occupy the highest table of the Feast to come.
#16 by askegg on December 2, 2009 - 11:23 pm
Quote
You are rich in comparison to most of the Earth's population. The vast majority of the world does not have electricity, let alone a computer, or the internet to hook this expensive calculator too. Give up your wealth so you can increase your chances of eternal bliss. Do anything else and I will call you a fucking hypocrite.
#17 by R.S. Stone on December 2, 2009 - 4:17 pm
Quote
Or that's how it could be, anyway.
#18 by Myblog1976 on January 1, 2010 - 3:09 pm
Quote
A rich man said to Jesus: "Good Master, what must I do to go to heaven?" Jesus first replied by telling the man no one is good except God. Jesus said that because the rich man did not believe Jesus is God, he believed Jesus was just another good religious teacher. No one can get to heaven if they do not believe Jesus is God.
The rich man however believed he was saved because he kept the commandments, so Jesus proved that the rich man was violating the commandment not to covet. The man refused to sell what he had because he coveted money, so he could not honestly say he should get into heaven because he keeps the commandments. Jesus deals with people where they are, and if they are willing, leads them to where they need to be (trusting in Christ alone for salvation).
By the way, Jesus said he would have treasure in heaven if he gave everything to the poor, but did not say giving everything to the poor would save him. If the man had followed Jesus, he would have learned that Jesus is God, and that Jesus shedding His blood to pay for our sins is what saves us.
Mike G
#19 by askegg on January 1, 2010 - 9:11 pm
Quote
Sell everything you own. To do otherwise is hypocritical and places you on the path to Hell.
Best of luck with your all loving god.
#20 by Rational Thinker on January 28, 2010 - 3:46 am
Quote
askegg! Don't you know that Christian scholars all over the world are, right this very moment, working feverishly at their computers to develop new and flowery arguments to the very clear, fundamental statement that Jesus made: that it's easier to lift and shove a thousand-pound, six foot tall humped mammal through the eye of a needle than for the rich to enter Heaven?
I even read one argument that the original wording was a mistake – that rather than "camel", Jesus actually said "cable."
I love that they spend their lives trying to bend Jesus' meaning to suit their own desires. I love that millions of American Christians are also gun nuts and pro-war. I love that it's okay to drop a bomb on a building with a pregnant Iraqi woman in it, incinerate the kid before it's born, and then point the Condemnatory Finger Of God at some terrified teenager who pulls into a Planned Parenthood.
They make all of our arguments for us.
"God, save me from your followers."
#21 by askegg on February 9, 2010 - 12:37 pm
Quote
What a great comment
#22 by askegg on February 17, 2010 - 9:21 am
Quote
Soooo…. because Jesus didn't say it to everyone means it doesn't apply to them. What did Jesus tell you directly? Oh yeah, nothing – he has been dead for 2,000 years.
#23 by Kristi on February 22, 2010 - 1:00 am
Quote
Noooo.. there are direct commands. For example, the very well-known golden rule, "Do to others as you would have them do to you" is for all followers of Jesus. Come on, man. Even you knew that.
Say, you're a student in a classroom. Your teacher tells the class to listen to him. Is that for every student? Yes. Then your teacher singles out one student and tells him to put his iPod away. Is that for every student? In one sense. Every student with an iPod out ought to put their away, knowing that the teacher disliked the example of the one student. But those without iPods aren't driven to do something, because it is not an instruction directed at them.
To connect the dots, Jesus' instruction to all his followers is that you cannot be a servant to two masters, both Mammon (the idol of money) and God. His specific instruction to a man enslaved to Mammon is to sell everything to be liberated of his bondage. That is not an instruction to those who honor God by stewarding their money well and view it as a temporary means of blessing others/living to the glory of God. But it still says, "beware of such bondage to money that you cannot follow Jesus." That would be my rough illustration.
So you believe Jesus existed 2,000 years ago and died. Do you have a statement of just what things about him you believe? I mean, what's your understanding of his life and teaching? I'm wondering not about the things you doubt, but what you say happened/what is true about him.
Generally, we fight against things for a reason other than their illogic. If Christianity just didn't make sense to you, you would be able to brush it off. Instead, you actually spend your time finding contradictory passages. Do you think that Christianity is hindering to society? A true threat/harm to something? What drives this occupation of yours?
#24 by Dermot Cottuli on February 17, 2010 - 11:56 am
Quote
Andrew please read the rest of the chapter or better still, quote it in it's entirety here and don't take it out of context
But that would shoot your argument down in flames and if there's one thing that a professing atheist likes, it's a skewed argument LOL 
Jesus continues on in the same conversation and says that his disciples would receive 100 fold in this life what they had given up and in the next eternal life so obviously the issue isn't possessions or wealth but rather the danger we all face when we are consumed by them. One oft misquoted text states that "the love of money is the root of many kinds of evil." Misquoted because you hear some people saying that money is the root of all evil.
Here's a truth championed by Jesus that pertains to christians and atheists – don't be consumed by wealth, riches or possessions to the detriment of what really matters.
#25 by Cometa on February 17, 2010 - 8:56 pm
Quote
To read all of his words and not find them contradictory, you first need to vote some more of those words out.
#26 by Kristi on February 22, 2010 - 1:07 am
Quote
Well we saw how successful that was with the Jesus Seminar. It's all or nothing, since we have absolutely no ability to know what actually happened except by faith. Does that make sense? The question at the heart of that would be, by what authority/power/knowledge would you be able to read through the Bible and decide what really happened or not? You couldn't. You haven't been there. You would only be bringing your presuppositions into the mix, and how can you verify your presuppositions? Our friend, askegg, here has faith that there is nothing supernatural. I have faith that there is such a thing as supernatural. If mere humans decide with their miniscule faculties that something is more true than another, there is no certainty.
So, since we cannot do that, you either search and study deeply with the *presupposition*/faith that it makes sense because the God of all things orchestrated it together, or you throw the baby out with the bathwater because you take it at face value. The latter option is certainly easier.
#27 by David Gibson on February 22, 2010 - 4:45 am
Quote
So basically – all truth is subjective and everybodies opinions on the true nature of reality is as valid as anyone elses? Surely you must have some manner of discerning those opinions on truth you find absurd or unlikely to be true?
I find it doubtful that Andrew has faith that there is no supernatural (whatever you mean by that) and more likely, like most evidence-based rationalists, he simply lacks sufficient evidence to support a belief in the "supernatural".
What is more likely to be the case is that your burden of proof for certain concepts that could be considered supernatural is lower than Andrew's or mine. Or you apply your burdens of proof with a degree of inconsistency. Consider, what is your burden of proof Jesus lived and died the way the Bible describes (assuming the contradictions are minor misrepresentations of a real event). Surely there would be contemporary references to Jesus and the events of his life as mentioned in the bible? What about the bible getting important dates and people in the correct time and place according to external sources? What about independant scientific evidence to support events as reported in the bible (archaelogical, geological, biological, etc)?
While I accept that we may not know the truth about all things, we can certainly build up an evidentiary case towards taking a position on a great many things – including the life and psuedo-death of Jesus Christ. I think the revealing point to this is you basically say it's a matter of faith a.k.a believing a proposition without evidence or in the face of contradictory evidence.
A little more about truth, the scientific method has proven itself to be an incredible tool for discerning increasingly accurate degrees of understanding and evidence towards the truth of nature and reality. Consider humankind's advancing knowledge of the shape of the Earth, from flat, to spherical, to a compressed sphere, to a slightly unevenly compressed sphere. From large, paradigm shifting representations of our planet to gradual, minute adjustments to the picture we have. Truth is the destination but understanding is the journey and as yet the scientific method is the safest, fastest and most efficient means of getting there.
Frankly, I don't care what Jesus is supposed to have said – I think it is unlikely he existed at all.
#28 by Kristi on February 24, 2010 - 7:37 pm
Quote
I do not think that truth is subjective at all! Based on the opinions of man, truth is completely subjective, yes. Think about HOW you know that you know. If you were truly skeptical, like Descartes or Hume, you would realize that science means very little apart from your presupposition that repeatability of data (in the past) IS reliable (for the future). How do you know that the sun will rise? When it comes down to it, you think from the assumption that the universe will operate as it always has.
That is what I meant by having faith in an un-supernatural context.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GlZtEjtlirc&fe...
This video is not to bash Dawkins or to support Stein but to demonstrate that even Dawkins admits to a leap of faith. And the movie EXPELLED, although very biased, actually reveals some weaknesses of naturalist claims and the trend among total naturalists (talking about serious scientists here) to appeal to higher intelligence. But not God. Never God. That's just a fool's tale.
Personally, I believe in Biblical revelation. That is, objective Truth from outside ourselves, transcendent of our creaturely conclusions about the universals. The wonderful thing is that the scientific method is compatible to that revelation. Is DNA amazing? YES! I know that because of the discoveries of the scientific method. But WHY is it amazing? Because it was designed. Not because it was discovered.
The cool thing is that, in studying the Enlightenment recently, I have come to the awareness that there were virtually no materialists in the age of Newton. He himself had an independent belief in Jesus, believing that he was made divine after his death…. Interesting stuff. Anyway, the main thing is that the Enlightenment came out of the established Christian continent because it was "self-evident" to them that God was eternal and steadfast, and that the universe would function accordingly, whether they were theist or deist.
Well, there's plenty more to write, but I wanted to at least attempt to suggest that you ought to really research what evidence there is for the existence of Jesus, because if he existed, there is a reason to care.
It's a honkin' huge book, but "Evidence that Demands a Verdict" will offer the best compilation of evidence for Jesus and the reliability of the Bible, &c. If that is too much, at least look at the writings of Josephus (if you have not already).
I also friended you on facebook, in case you wanted to continue talking about evidence and contradictions and faith and all that good stuff.
#29 by Nathan Parsons on February 22, 2010 - 4:59 pm
Quote
I wouldn't consider the non-belief due to a lack of evidence to be faith, but rather the reasonable, scientific approach to a wild claim not backed by evidence. I do not have faith that there are not fairies in my garden, but having never seen or experienced any, I would conclude that there aren't any, would this be unreasonable? It is definitely a falsifiable claim, unlike those of religion.
#30 by Kristi on February 24, 2010 - 7:39 pm
Quote
Can you be specific?
What claims of Christianity do you find "unreasonable" and "wild" and un-"falsifiable"?
#31 by Dirt to life on February 25, 2010 - 5:10 am
Quote
Just ran into your website it’s funny how you can hate something so much and not believe in it!
#32 by askegg on February 24, 2010 - 10:07 pm
Quote
You cannot hate what does not exist. What I truly dislike is the self important arrogance of those who think they have the truth, yet are totally unable to demonstrate their case.
#33 by Kristi on February 24, 2010 - 7:47 pm
Quote
It's called Christian Atheism.
#34 by Kevinbmcmillan on March 11, 2010 - 3:28 pm
Quote
This is continued from my last post … The Bible has a comment on how to study it . 2 Tim . 2 : 15 …." Study to show thyself approved unto God , a workman that needs not to be ashamed , rightly dividing the word of truth. There are 3 classes of people addressed in scripture ,,,The Jews , Gentiles , and the Church of God .1 Cor . 10 : 32 . There was the church " in the wilderness " Acts 7 : 38 , The Kingdom church ,Matt.18 : 17 which has an earthly hope , and the church the " body of christ " I Cor. 12 : 27 which has a Heavenly hope
#35 by Kevinbmcmillan on March 11, 2010 - 2:42 pm
Quote
The Disciples n Christ were preaching " The Kingdom of Heaven is @ hand " Matt.3 :2 , 4 : 7 , 10 : 7 etc.. The " time " was @ hand for the King to bring in the long prophesied Kingdom where they would not need to " bring " anything into because Messiah would be their provider . Thats why they sold everything they had in early Acts in anticipation for " The times of refreshing " Acts 3 : 19 -21 . If Israel had accepted their Messiah this Kingdom would have been ushered in . Since Israel as a whole did not receive their King God has brought in the unprohesied program of the dispensation grace Eph. 3 :2 n we r lookin not for the Kingdom but to be delivered from the " wrath to come " 1 Thes. 1 : 10 …ie the tribulation Mat. 24 : 21 . During this age of grace Col . 1 : 25 -27 ..we r told that if a man does work neither should he eat 2 Thes. 3 : 10 and if a man provides not for his household he is worse than an infidel 1 Tim. 5 : 8
#36 by Kevinbmcmillan on March 11, 2010 - 3:28 pm
Quote
. It is very important to understand when you study scripture to realize who is being spoken to , about what , what comes before n after . All scripture is written for " us " but not all is written directly " to " us . 2 Tim . 3 : 16 . God has other people in other ages , past n future that He directly writes to just like He directly speaks to the Church , the body of Christ today in Pauls epistles . So .. Jesus is not telling us today to sell all we have because He was not speaking to you or me but the Jews of his day and promising them the eternal earthly Kingdom where He would be there on His throne n be their provider. I believe this but I could be wrong n would welcome any response … thanks
#37 by askegg on January 27, 2009 - 9:05 am
Quote
Closer to the truth, I believe. The character of Jesus seems to be a mixture of legends circulating at the time, badly cobbled together and poorly though out.
#38 by askegg on February 24, 2010 - 10:08 pm
Quote
"You have a soul" is one such claim. It's "wild" and un-"falsifiable".
#39 by askegg on February 25, 2010 - 12:26 am
Quote
“I do not think that truth is subjective at all!”
We can agree on that. Truth is something we can share, and if you are unable to share something it may not be true.
“Based on the opinions of man, truth is completely subjective, yes.”
Are you able to have an opinion that is not yours?
“Think about HOW you know that you know. If you were truly skeptical, like Descartes or Hume, you would realize that science means very little apart from your presupposition that repeatability of data (in the past) IS reliable (for the future).”
This topic deserves it’s own post, but can you provide evidence that things are not always been this way? Furthermore, if there is no predictability then the universe is chaotic. Are you proposing a god who creates a chaotic universe?
“How do you know that the sun will rise?”
Observation, prediction and validation. Repeatability.
“When it comes down to it, you think from the assumption that the universe will operate as it always has.”
Again, do you have any reason to suspect that this is NOT the case?
“That is what I meant by having faith in an un-supernatural context.”
Err – I have evidence, so I do not need faith.
“… to appeal to higher intelligence. But not God. Never God. That's just a fool's tale.”
Rational people are open to the idea of a god, you just need to provide evidence of his existence. Simply really. You complete failure to provide any is not my problem – it’s yours. Get to work!
“Personally, I believe in Biblical revelation.”
Revelation is necessarily first person. As you said earlier truth is not subjective at all! Better get your story straight.
“That is, objective Truth from outside ourselves, transcendent of our creaturely conclusions about the universals.”
Revelation cannot be shared. You can say you had one, but cannot share the experience with me. It’s totally subjective.
“The wonderful thing is that the scientific method is compatible to that revelation.”
Only if it’s predictable, testable, and objectively verifiable.
“Is DNA amazing? YES! I know that because of the discoveries of the scientific method. But WHY is it amazing? Because it was designed. Not because it was discovered.”
Please give me a metric for design.
“The cool thing is that, in studying the Enlightenment recently, I have come to the awareness that there were virtually no materialists in the age of Newton.”
Because we did not understand enough of the universe. We know better now.
“He himself had an independent belief in Jesus, believing that he was made divine after his death…. Interesting stuff.”
Good for him. Unfortunately, arguments from authority are logical fallacies.
“Anyway, the main thing is that the Enlightenment came out of the established Christian continent because it was "self-evident" to them that God was eternal and steadfast, and that the universe would function accordingly, whether they were theist or deist.”
The source of the enlightenment is irrelevant and your attempts to rewrite history pathetic. Ponder this, is maths true because much of it was derived from the Islamic Arab world?
“Well, there's plenty more to write, but I wanted to at least attempt to suggest that you ought to really research what evidence there is for the existence of Jesus …”
None. There are only stories.
“It's a honkin' huge book, but "Evidence that Demands a Verdict" will offer the best compilation of evidence for Jesus and the reliability of the Bible,”
I will add that to the ever growing list of book I need to read.
“If that is too much, at least look at the writings of Josephus (if you have not already).”
Josephus wrote about the phenomenon of Christianity, not Christ. He was not an eye witness to the events, he probably did not even meet an eye witness, and he only wrote a few short passages on the topic. Is this really the best you have?
“I also friended you on facebook, in case you wanted to continue talking about evidence and contradictions and faith and all that good stuff.”
Anytime
#40 by David Gibson on February 25, 2010 - 5:05 am
Quote
I think Andrew summed up the majority of what I would have replied with.
My question regarding your suggestion the historicity of Jesus has solid support (nevermind this negates the very idea you have faith about his life). I haven't read the book you suggest and will seek it out when my pile of books to read is smaller.
Josephus, surely you must have encountered the variety of criticisms against this evidence for Jesus? For starters check his birth date, then follow this up with an investigation in to the degree to which his writings were left untouched by the early church.
A Hume and Descarte, I was a big fan of Descarte many years ago (more for his mathematical brilliance though). To think these people really offer any support to your own position suggests to me that you haven't really read their work. Perhaps you could start with Hume's position regarding belief in miracles.
Ultimately though, I don't care what Hume, Descarte, Newton, Einstein, Collins, etc believe about God. I have a personal burden of proof which must be met or succeeded for me to accept a proposition regarding the existence of God. To date no one has been able to present satisfactory evidence, including God himself as far as you're concerned. If your God exists, he God knows what this standard is and according to Tim 2:4 "wants all men to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth" and to date has not provided this evidence to save me.
Ultimately, I'm open to evidence that is consistent with our current understanding of the universe. I fully accept that this understanding itself will be changed and modified by more evidence and I am certain that should humanity survive another 500 years they may look back at our current science struggling to fathom how limited our view of the universe was without even knowing what dark energy really is.
Finally, have you read Bart Ehrman's "Misquoting Jesus"? I think perhaps it might provide an expansion of your view of the bible if you haven't.