Did Jesus really say you have to sell everything you own?

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?

Tagged with: jesus, Poor, Possessions, Sell

pichi

because you don't understand

askegg

Please do enlighten me – what does Jesus *really* mean when he says

"Sell all that thou hast, and distribute unto the poor."

http://intensedebate.com/people/SeandBlogonaut SeandBlogonaut

perhaps its only for disciples, you can be like a follower have associate membership raher than full

http://intensedebate.com/people/SeandBlogonaut SeandBlogonaut

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

askegg

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.

http://intensedebate.com/people/askegg askegg

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 :)

http://intensedebate.com/people/SeandBlogonaut SeandBlogonaut

Or did it really happen like this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Behold_the_Man

http://intensedebate.com/people/askegg askegg

Oh! Thanks for the link – I will check the movie out :)

Will

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.
Delacroix

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.

http://intensedebate.com/people/askegg askegg

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?

R.S. Stone

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.

http://intensedebate.com/people/askegg askegg

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?

R.S. Stone

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.

http://intensedebate.com/people/askegg askegg

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.

R.S. Stone

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.

http://intensedebate.com/people/askegg askegg

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.

R.S. Stone

Or that's how it could be, anyway.
Myblog1976

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
http://intensedebate.com/people/askegg askegg

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.
Rational Thinker

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."

http://intensedebate.com/people/askegg askegg

What a great comment :)
Guest

I am a Christian and I am starting to see that you among all the contributors on this page are the most correct. I am by all outward measures a successful publisher. As I have studied the early church history the Christians in that time rejected worldly riches right up to the time of Constantine. When they did achieve a windfall, they rejoiced for the opportunity to have such bounty to give to the needy. There are even now Christians that practice lives of practical simplicity to be able to give as much as possible to the needy. You won't read about them in the media and they are ignored as fanatics by the traditional churches. I have found their example to be challenging me to reevaluate my own priorities towards God's plan for His Kingdom. And like you the message seems clear enough to me. I pray for God's grace as I venture to honor him with my bounty as well. Please don't disparage Christ for His followers blindness, by His Grace His truth will triumph.

http://intensedebate.com/people/askegg askegg

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.

Kristi

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?

Dermot Cottuli

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.
Cometa

To read all of his words and not find them contradictory, you first need to vote some more of those words out.

Kristi

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.

http://www.facebook.com/anwyll David Gibson

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.

Kristi

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.

http://intensedebate.com/people/askegg askegg

“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 :)
http://www.facebook.com/anwyll David Gibson

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.

http://www.facebook.com/NRParsons Nathan Parsons

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.

Kristi

Can you be specific?
What claims of Christianity do you find "unreasonable" and "wild" and un-"falsifiable"?

http://intensedebate.com/people/askegg askegg

"You have a soul" is one such claim. It's "wild" and un-"falsifiable".

Dirt to life

Just ran into your website it’s funny how you can hate something so much and not believe in it!

http://intensedebate.com/people/askegg askegg

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.
Kristi

It's called Christian Atheism.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Kevinbmcmillan Kevinbmcmillan

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
http://intensedebate.com/people/Kevinbmcmillan Kevinbmcmillan

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

glenn

So your response to this clear command of Jesus is that He laid out a command that turned out to be totally unnecessary and useless since the Kingdom did not work out the way He thought it would? That is your answer to this clear directive. Does it concern you that the early church took this plan literally right up till Constantine? Your irrelevant dismissal of the simple commands of the Lord Jesus with some random text arranged to satisfy the American Christian lifestyle is irrelevant. It may help you sleep at night but if you read the NT you will find that Paul, Peter and James all agreed with Jesus teachings and continued along the same lines. So now the apostles AND Jesus were mistaken and the American consumer lifestyle is preserved. How convenient.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Kevinbmcmillan Kevinbmcmillan

. 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
casey

To walk on water is to sell everything i own. This is my challenge. Choose to believe or choose to not. For me i have seen. I have this "god seized hole" in me. The words of the bible i have tried to dispute with an open clear mind and i could not do so. I took my preconceived thoughts i knew i had and tried to push them out of my mind, to use pure logic in my thoughts. That was my goal. But my emotions toward the matter many of the time got in my way of clear thought. Anger, hate, selfishness, lust, sarcasm, fear, pride, all things proven throughout history to cloud peoples minds from clarity. This fact is undeniable. Without these preconceived notions i could not rule the bible out not a word of it…… i tried…… and as my clear mind found itself a the nth degree the strait and narrow started to take form……………………. If the Haters are so sure of there beliefs i challenge you leave your hate in the trash where it belongs and speak to me in calm mind if you can. caseytking@gmail.com

This is by a man who sells everything he owns and follows Christ(to be free)
Luke

Some don’t get rich the honest way I am talking about the con artists scammers televangelist scuzbuckets etc. don’t care where your money goes they just miss use money be careful please like one of the televangelist scumbags has $40,000.00 marble made toilet in there there house. Be careful there are alot of televangelists and some churchs like the devoote scuzbucket ROBERT TILTON stole from charity, false faith healings so he could get peoples money these people on tv seeonly dollar signs
Luke

Its BAD WHEN THEY USE THE THERE HOLY OFFICE FOR GAIN THESE TELEVANGELISTS DOES THIS SO DOES THE 700CLUB
Luke

be careful about charity and donation fraud. Some relious organinations are fraud and just want your money and they don’t care how they use it on alot of them. But someone a religous nut claiming that God wants you to take someones life is a sin and crazy. also i believe it isn’t good for man to be alone this is the reason why God created Eve for Adam a compannion in other words men and women are compannions for each other. but not letting preists and nuns marry in the catholic church this is one of the reasons why there are so many sexoffenders and law suits from the victims in that church. BUT the ones who covered up the sex abuse scandal in the catholic church need to go to jail so do the pedophile priests. how come the authorities where not contacted to help the victims when this happened. they thought they could sweep the sex abuse scandals under the rug and people and victims in that church would forget when adult. the victims didn’t forget what had happened to them in the catholic church this is the reason why you don’t cover up sex abuse in the church the police should be called when it happened this is the reason why victims sued the catholic church so there wouldn’t be anymore child victims in the catholic church.
Luke

donation fraud or charatiy fraud has become a problem know the televangelists , charities, countless religious orgazanaions missuse the money they recieve only to fatten up there bank account the televangelists take advantage of people who are desprate for miracle, the middle class, the poor and working poor, and charging people money for forgiveness , prayer requests, suicidal tendencies etc is a sin urge someone to get professional help if they feel sucidal from a phycharatrist not a religious nut. Jesus really wasn’t saying sell everything you own but in a certain point of view. but using the bible to just get peoples money and not caring if they use the money right. there is a lot of greed in religion know from televangelists they want money only and will do anything to get money by stealing from charity like what robert tilton did. these televagelists need to be invistegated. but using the church as a big bussiness for money is a sin. be careful about churches or charaities that don’t want you to know how the money is being used. Salvation army is the only one my parents trust. charity fraud is a very big problem know
skatin4penguins

who let the christians in if i wanted a bible lesson id read mine. speaking of which check this out. http://standardmadness.com/offbeat/people-who-hav…
http://thingsfindothinks.com AndrewFinden

Oh, I really shouldn't, but your new Top 10 Posts widget is just so enticing!

this commandment?

It's not a commandment – the context of Luke 18 makes it clear it's a test designed to show that the rich young ruler hasn't actually kept the first commandment – his wealth was his god.

But I would agree with your observation that most of us are not very good at keeping the first commandment either, and are far too materialistic / consumerist, Christians and religious organisations included. For example, at this time of year, how many Christians are busy protesting that Christmas is about Jesus, and yet completely buying into the hyper-materialism consumerism of the season? (Indeed, it forces me to ask how am I guilty of this?)

Your exegesis might be a bit dodgy, but the conclusions and observations are not too far off the mark. ;)

http://www.godless.biz/ askegg

…or you could just assume the word mean exactly what they say: "Sell all that thou hast, and distribute unto the poor."

Chase200mph

Which would kill this religion all together, we can only
hope I guess…. : )

I agree with your sentiment, how Christian can cherry pick
and add meanings under the ruse of metaphors and then turn around and ignore
the obvious is beyond me. The rich man in question lived no higher than the
AVERAGE pastor of any church I can think of…and I guess this is the reason you
never hear about this/these passage/s in church. Mathew and Luke both make mention of it…it’s
just bad for business so maybe they should edit this out as well.

http://thingsfindothinks.com AndrewF

Which would kill this religion all together, we can only

hope I guess…. : )

Well, it didn’t in the first century, when as well as poverty, they had actual persecution to deal with (as do many places in the world still). Didn’t kill it. Sorry.

AVERAGE pastor of any church I can think of…and I guess this is the reason you never hear about this/these passage/s in church.

Given your apparent hope for the downfall of Christianity, I tend to question how you know that one never hears this section of luke preached. Given my experience, I know that you’re also incorrect ;)

http://thingsfindothinks.com AndrewFinden

You could – but that we be a false assumption (an imposition on the text, one which fails to take the context into account.) Why should we just assume that, especially if the text doesn't indicate such?

(Actually, it's not the meaning that is so much the issue here – it's who it is said to and perhaps more importantly, why it is said – your interpretation that it is a universal command has no support from the text itself and is an imposition and thus 'twisting' the meaning. Bad hermeneutics leads to bad interpretations and applicatrion, like this.)

Let me demonstrate:

In a comment here you wrote:

Zeus takes us as we are. Do not try to fix yourselves just believe and he will help you.

Now, we could use your hermeneutic and just "assumes the words mean exactly what they say" and conclude that, clearly, you are promoting belief in Zeus. There's no need for the context of the quote, or of the whole discussion, nor of anything else you might have said about the issue of belief – we don't need to consider the nature of the discourse or consider any literary or rhetorical devices you might have been using – that would simply be 'twisting' the meaning of what is very clear here (as is often claimed of exegesis – which is about as accurate as saying that doing long division is just guessing) . It's obvious: you are promoting faith in Zeus.

But of course, if we do consider the context, both near and far, and the rhetorical device you are using we realise that such a conclusion is nonsense – far from twisting, using a proper hermeneutic stops us from twisting the meaning of the text.
http://thinkingdoesnthurt.blogspot.com/ David Gibson

P.S. How much money did 'Jesus' give away, because he certainly wasn't poor.

What gives you any impression of Jesus' financial standing?
http://thingsfindothinks.com AndrewFinden

Nope. Taking the quote in context and seeing why it was said does not show Jesus setting any 'rules for getting into heaven' at all. It shows him challenging the rich man about whether he really loves God more than his wealth (and his response shows he didn't) Only if you basically ignore everything Jesus says about salvation and gaining the kingdom could you come to conclusions that he was setting a rule about how to get into heaven. In fact, his whole point is that we're unable to keep the 'rules', and if, like the rich young man here, we think we have kept all the rules, then we're kidding ourselves, as this exchange shows. Far from setting rules, this exchange how we can't be saved by keeping them.

How much money did 'Jesus' give away, because he certainly wasn't poor.

There's no indication that he had any property – generally seems to have lived as a guest in other people's houses and was somewhat estranged from his family. What makes you say he 'certainly wasn't poor'?
philo351a

As far as I can tell, Jesus was talking to one specific person in Luke 18:22, aka "the rich young ruler".. This is about Jesus challenging this man's one partiality to his possessions, not a universal mandate that all His followers sell everything they have. It's not hard to miss the context.

Luke 14:33 is more along the lines of what Christianity is about, but it's not about possessions, necessarily. It seems to be about everything. The text is about how if someone wants to follow Jesus, everything else must come second and be forsaken for Him. Any Christian who isn't doing this isn't behaving like a Christian.

http://www.godless.biz/ askegg

"Rich" is a comparative measure. While you may not be rich in comparison to your countrymen, who are certainly rich in comparison to the millions who do not have an internet connection, a computer, or even electricity.

So if "everything else must come second and be forsaken for Him" perhaps you should start living by his example and think about all those people without your riches. As Jesus said – they are not important, he is. Somehow, I think you will lack the courage to actually follow his advice.

http://thingsfindothinks.com AndrewFinden

Sure – we are, comparatively, wealthy – but it would be a wrong conclusion to say that wealth and possessions are in and of themselves bad and to be done away with. Jesus is not making a rule about living like an ascetic monk. To make something legalistic about it completely misses the point. But you're certainly right that we are to be generous with what we have, and I might suggest that it's a little bit presumptive (indeed, judgemental) of you to make calls about other people in this regard – especially without actually being privy to any of it. The example is there not to create a legalistic rule about what you can and can't own (anathema to the gospel!) nor to look at other people and judge them, but to spur each us to look at ourselves and inspect our own desires and priorities and see if we really are putting Christ before our possessions -and as you point out, it's easy in our culture to overlook how materialistic and wealth-reliant we might actually be!

Pingback: Acai Berry select reviews
Chase200mph

Answer: IF, he was speaking to a single person, then why add
it in the bible which professes to speak to all……………….

http://thingsfindothinks.com AndrewF

The bible does speak to all – it is a message of redemption for all. It is not, however, simply a list of universal rules. There is much to learn from the narrative about the rich young man – namely about how wealth can be an idol, how none of us fullfil the law, even if we think we do.

LoveJesus anon

For the whole law is fulfilled in one word: “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.”

Luke 21:1-4 Jesus looked up and saw the rich putting their gifts into the offering box, and he saw a poor widow put in two small copper coins. And he said, “Truly, I tell you, this poor widow has put in more than all of them. For they all contributed out of their abundance, but she out of her poverty put in all she had to live on.”Proverbs 28:22 A stingy man hastens after wealth and does not know that poverty will come upon him.Proverbs 14:21 ESV / 4 helpful votesWhoever despises his neighbor is a sinner, but blessed is he who is generous to the poor.

Subscribe to the Podcast

Father Bob and Aronra

This week I meet with Aronra in Melbourne for the Global Atheist Convention, and thought it would be a good idea to chat up with Australia’s most popular secular humanist Catholic Father Bob for a chat. Strap yourself in for this one.

Standard Podcast [ 56 min 23 s | 36 MB ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

On Thursday the 17th May the churches of Tasmania will be hosting an event at the Stanley Burbury Theatre entitled “Excellent Marriage”. According to their web site the event “aims to celebrate the importance and value of marriage for the Australian community”. They say “people from religious and non-religious backgrounds, young and old, are all invited to…
Continue reading

Ultimate Answers

Those who have been following this blog for a while will, no doubt, recall the various discussions/debates/arguments I have had with Andrew Finden in the past. As frustrating as I find them at times, I think he often tackles interesting and difficult topics with a calm intelligence not very often found in the religious debate. This…
Continue reading

Dear Mr. Swan,

Wayne Swan is currently having meeting to finalise the Australian federal budget. In these tough economic times it is more important than ever to ensure your hard earned tax dollar is being spent in the most effective and efficient manner. In view of this I can think of one poorly thought out federal program which,…
Continue reading

We have it all

Last weekend I attend the second Global Atheist Convention run by the Atheist Foundation of Australia in Melbourne. The convention attracted over 4,000 attendees to listen to extraordinary line up of world class speakers from a variety of disciplines on a wide range of topics. The convention began with a comedy line up including the brilliantly hilarious…
Continue reading

Poor Pell

Last Monday on Australia’s ABC television network the jet-lagged evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins squared off against Catholic Cardinal George Pell on the “Q and A” program with unimpressive results. A transcript of the entire show can be found in the ABC’s web site. The level of intellectual debate on this episode of Q and A…
Continue reading

Did Jesus really say you have to sell everything you own?

Similar Posts

Subscribe

Father Bob and Aronra

Further Reading

Excellent Marriage

More Ultimate Answers

Ultimate Answers

Dear Mr. Swan,

We have it all

Poor Pell