Meta => Amature pop psychology. You are trying to read into the text a meaning that isn't there. Nowhere does it say that he didn't get along with his family. It says that at one point, after his ministry got going, his Mother and brother's came to take him home. They thought he was getting in over his head and perhaps that he had gone nuts. IT doesn't say he never got along with them.

The writer of Matthew quotes Jesus: "Don't get the idea that I came to bring peace on earth. I did not come to bring peace but a sword. After all, I have come to pit a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law. A person's enemies are members of the same household." (10:34-36)

Meta => That's just something called a "literary divice." IT's just a way of saying that he will be controversial. Try reading some Shakespire and other great literary works, maybe take a few English calsses and read about literary divices.

According to the writer of Mark, Jesus' relatives thought he was insane: "Then he goes home, and once again a crowd gathers, so they could not even grab a bite to eat. When his relatives heard about it, they came to get him. (You see, they thought he was out of his mind.) (3:20-21)

Other NT passages further establish the fact that Jesus had family problems; hence, he made the comment about the need to hate family members as a perequisite for discipleship.[/B][/QUOTE]

Meta => That is ridiculous. That's not what it says. Nowhere does it say that he had family problems. That is reading a modern (popular and shollow) interpritation into the text that doesn't need to be there. No one would have given him the time of day, much less worshiped him as God if he had really wanted them to hate their families.

Metacrock: "...It's stupid to think that he [Jesus] literally meant 'hate.' Why would he want anyone to hate their parents.?"

Answer: "He [Jesus] went away from there and came to his own country; and his disciples followed him... and many who heard him were astonished, saying...'What mighty works are wrought by his hands! Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary and brother of James and Joses and Judas and Simon, and are not his sisters here with us?' And they took offense at him. And Jesus said to them, 'A prophet is not without honor, except in his own country, and among his own kin, and in his own house.' Mk. 6:1ff

Clearly, Jesus does not get along with his unbelieving "kin" and the people of his own hometown. He could do little to persuade the very people who knew him best. They had seen his act many times and found him "offensive."

"Now the Jews' feast of Tabernacles was at hand. So his brothers said to him, 'Leave here and go to Judea, that your disciples may see the works you are doing. For no man works in secret if he seeks to be known openly. For even his brothers did not believe him." Jn. 7:2ff

Clearly, Jesus did not get along with his brothers. They considered his act unbelievable. (Later in this passage Jesus lies to them and says he will not leave for Judea; however, shortly after they leave, he goes to Judea, secretly.)

"My mother and brothers--who are they?" Mk. 3:33

Clearly, Jesus did not get along with his mother and brothers.

"If any come to me and do not hate their own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters--yes, even their own life--they cannot be my disciple." Lk. 14:26

"A person's enemies are members of the same household." Mt. 10:36

Clearly, Jesus did not get along with his family.

If you have textual evidence to support your claim that Jesus got along with his family, present it.

One question is that are you guys looking for the truth or just debunking it for the sake of it? If the bible is all about logical arguements why would it be a religion? And not just science or math like the other courses we learn at school? One note too logic or rationality is limited yes it isn't this all powerful tool we humans think it is it is limited. Rationality is only useful in this realm if u believe in heaven or hell because all conclusions we can think of comprise of what we have seen or heard or learnt in this world. How could you use something of this earth to try to understand something above? This doesn't mean we can't though, faith is a required tool to fully understand the bible and if one doesn't take a step of faith HIS msges would never ever be understood fully by us like what HE said. He would make even the wise foolish.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Messiah:
[B]One question is that are you guys looking for the truth or just debunking it for the sake of it?

I am interested in what precisely, literally happened historically. The more facts and evidence we can gather, the better idea we can have of what actually occurred.

Unfortunately, the JC Bible does not always depict history as it literally occurred. (Therein lies the problem.) If someone points out this fact, using examples from the Bible, he is not attempting to "debunk" anything. He is just presenting evidence.

[Originally posted by Messiah]
One question is that are you guys looking for the truth or just debunking it for the sake of it?
Looking for the truth.

If the bible is all about logical
arguements why would it be a religion?
If the bible is all about illogical arguments, why should it be taken seriously?

And not just science or math like the other courses we learn at school?
Mythology isn't taught at schools anymore?

One note too logic or rationality is limited yes it isn't this all powerful tool we humans think it is it is limited.
You really should try using punctuation sometime. It'll makes your nonsensical rhetoric a bit more readable.

Rationality is only useful in this realm if u believe in heaven or hell because all conclusions we can think of comprise of what we have seen or heard or learnt in this world.
Which orifice did you pull that correlation out of? It makes NO sense.

How could you use something of this earth to try to understand something above?
If you can provide us with something not of this earth that'd be great.

This doesn't mean we can't though, faith is a required tool to fully understand the bible
It's not the only required tool, ignorance is also required.

and if one doesn't take a step of faith HIS msges would never ever be understood fully by us like what HE said.
Who the fuck is "HE"? YHWH?

He would make even the wise foolish.
And still does to this day.


[This message has been edited by Tobideru (edited December 13, 2000).]

Dear tobideru, how can you say u'r looking for the truth if what i see is anger? And i don't blame u cause i guess u must have some reason for this behaviour, unless u'r irrational. I can see being sensible not logical don't work for you people. (refuting EVERY statement that i put forward) Anyways, i just like to ask the people here one question do any of u believe in an existence of a perfect GOD?

Hermeneutics means, if you don't like what the Bible plainly says, then keep reinterpreting it until you do like it.

penatis: I agree with that clarification.

Thank you. Obviously, you are a person who recognizes the value of a sensible, critical approach to the Judeo-Christian Bible and its correlation to actual history.

If we could go back in time with a film crew and impartial reporters, we could document what happened at various points in history. I personally would give up five years of my remaining life on this planet to determine precisely how much of the NT reflects historical reality.

Well done Meta, Luke 14:26 can be nothing else than an hyperbole showing that one must love Jesus even more than is immediate family. That reminds me

"The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers" 2Cor 4:4