Posted on 12/03/2014 10:23:22 AM PST by NKP_Vet
Here is my previous post:
“One thing to note. God can and does call people ‘fools’ specifically. That is His prerogative, since He is God, and fully knows each human heart.
For example, Jesus told the parable of the rich man whose barns overflowed with all his produce. So he built new, bigger barns that could hold his abundance of wealth. God’s reaction was, ‘You fool, this night your life will be demanded of you; and the things you have prepared, to whom will they belong?’
Bottom line. We are prohibited from calling each other fools. Our knowledge of others’ hearts is too limited. God is free to do so, and does; His knowledge of hearts is unlimited.”
There is no question that God can call a fool a fool. No one who studies the Scriptures can deny it.
But there is also no question that Jesus prohibits us, with our much more limited knowledge of each other’s hearts, from doing likewise. Here is the verse that contains the prohibition:
22 But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother shall be [a]guilty before the court; and whoever says to his brother, ‘[b]You good-for-nothing,’ shall be [c]guilty before [d]the supreme court; and whoever says, ‘You fool,’ shall be [e]guilty enough to go into the [f]fiery hell.
Specifically, this:
“and whoever says, ‘You fool,’ shall be [e]guilty enough to go into the [f]fiery hell.”
Anyone who can read this teaching of Jesus and conclude that it means we should say to someone, ‘you fool,’ is completely reversing what the Lord said. I would not do that if someone promised me the entire world in exchange.
‘May i ask when where you born again and realized the profound changes of regeneration in heart and life?
Discuss the issues all you want but don’t make it personal.
Are men often offended when they are defined or told by a witness that they are a sinner, “dead in trespasses and sin?” A “fool” is a sinner who has rejected God. Does the Spirit of God not convict and convince men of sin? A word of truth spoken by a human instrument can can be used by the Spirit to bring men to their senses. Apparently Jesus, via His testifying that “their works were evil,” offended and insulted many — in their own minds. As to the “Golden Rule” and “doing unto other as I would have them do unto me?” Well, if I were a fool and on my way to hell to suffer in eternal torment for being a fool, I would hope that God would send someone to me who would love me enough to confront me with the truth. If offending me with the truth may be instrumental in the salvation of my soul, I would welcome someone to hit me between the eyes with the truth that will be my destruction if I continue on that path. Read what Jesus said to the rich man who went his own foolish way, “But God said to him, YOU FOOL! This night your soul will be required of you. Then whose will those things be which you have provided? So is he who stores up treasure for himself, and is not rich toward God” (Luke 12:20). Now, understand, I do not make it a habit of running around referring to folks as fools — not my style. But if the occasion ever arose, I would have the liberty to do so, should the Spirit of God permit it.
Did Jesus follow the “Golden Rule” in this incident?
Who is Jesus speaking to in the context of Matthew 5:22?
He is speaking to the self-righteous scribes and pharisees. They were full of external, legalistic behavior, who were busy justifying themselves. Another aspect of the context here is the issue of anger, in that Jesus is speaking of hating a brother, in a general sense meaning any other Jewish person in that culture. The term “fool” here can be defined as “stupid or dull.” And the statement here was made regarding “a mere accusation,” not a statement of fact. You might also do some research on Proverbs, and the number of times it refers to “fools,” as well as other writings in the Scripture. Fools of the worst sort do exist, they always have. It is not wrong to show someone what Scripture says about a person who rejects God. The prohibition Jesus is presenting here is calling a person a fool out of anger and hatred -—— context, context, context my friend is everything.
And again, I do not, nor would I run around flippantly referring to folks as fools; nevertheless, the fact of Scripture is that it does define some as fools.
I have acknowledged till I’m blue in the face that God calls people fools. But that does not negate the fact that He prohibits us from doing so. We are not God. Not everything that is done by God should be done by us. In the fifth chapter of Acts God killed two people for lying. Do you take this to mean we should kill every person that lies? Or that we should kill those who lie to the leaders of the local church/assembly?
God’s omniscience plus His sovereignty give Him license to do certain things we are prohibited from doing. Again, here is the Lord’s command:
‘whoever says, ‘You fool,’ shall be [e]guilty enough to go into the [f]fiery hell.’
There is no way to interpret that to mean we are supposed to say to other people, ‘you fool.’ There just isn’t, not unless you wish to completely reverse what Jesus said.
Please allow me to rephrase my last comment. It should read this way:
“There just isn’t, not unless one wishes to completely reverse what Jesus said.”
That you for your patience, and please accept this correction.
Yes, he and they certainly exalted themselves.
And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner. I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other: for every one that exalteth himself shall be abased; and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted. (Luke 18:13-14)
May we always have the humble and contrite heart we had in coming to Christ in salvation, though it may be a work to maintain it.
The Lord is nigh unto them that are of a broken heart; and saveth such as be of a contrite spirit. (Psalms 34:18)
In contrast to,
How much she hath glorified herself, and lived deliciously, so much torment and sorrow give her: for she saith in her heart, I sit a queen, and am no widow, and shall see no sorrow. (Revelation 18:7)
‘I think Josh McDowell originally set out to disprove Christianity, but when confronted with the evidence, well, he got it, and wrote Evidence that Demands a Verdict. ‘
You are exactly right. McDowell was a brilliant and successful lawyer, and also an atheist. He decided to disprove once and for all the resurrection of Christ, since by doing so he could destroy the entire foundation of Christianity. He figured that would convince the world irrevocably that Christians were wrong and atheists were right.
He tackled the problem like the sharp, critical attorney that he was. And to his shock, slowly but surely, he discovered that all the historical Christian claims were true. His conversion followed, and the book you mentioned came next. He eventually added More Evidence that Demands a Verdict. I’ve heard him speak; God truly touched him in an amazing and powerful way.
Maybe some from here or here by the looks of the formatting! And he "stole" (compiled) it from some other research. Praise God for brethren and grace.
Let's not forget, also, that Jesus is teaching the religious leaders as well as the disciples that obeying the "letter" of the law cannot make one perfect and righteous. He was showing them the "spirit" of the law and that was where the self-righteousness collapsed. You don't commit adultery? So what, you commit adultery when you even look at another woman and lust after her. You don't murder? So, what, you murder when you hate someone or disparage him by calling him a fool. We might be able to say we don't break the letter of the law, but our deceitful heart is exposed when compared to the spirit of the law. The law was our schoolmaster to bring us to Christ.
Really excellent points; thank you.
You are completely and clearly if sincerely wrong, and ignore the reasons why, and base your objection on a false and liberal idea of what love can be manifested as.
"Fool" is just one invective, and it is clear that not only was the Lord not claiming an exception for Himself in uttering such, but His disciples also called the same people some of the same things and type of things that He did.
Again, to be consistent then you must also insist the Lord prohibits any killing, and ever being angry at someone, all of which, as with the use of invectives, are sanctioned within a certain context.
And while one can be angry with his brother for something the needs correction, as Paul obviously was in rebuking Peter in Gal. 2, a pastor is not be "soon angry," (Titus 1:7) as there is a holy anger, out of principle, driven by love for Truth and virtue.
Be ye angry, and sin not: let not the sun go down upon your wrath: (Ephesians 4:26)
But the context of the censure against calling his brother a fool in Mt. 5:22 was that of doing so in a wrong anger, an anger that is forbidden, out of which one speaks rashly with his mouth.
But if you want to dismiss context, immediate and that of the whole of Scripture, and hold to the absurd idea that the Lord was teaching not to do as He did, then keep away from engaging in Bible exegesis.
Finally, J.P Holding notes,
Skeptics may of course go on to object that this is offensive anyway, even without the contradiction, but the polemic registered here is no more than within the range of stock accusations made among various parties in Judaism, which were perfectly acceptable in this time period. Skeptics may not impose their modern values upon peoples of the past for whom such exchanges of rhetoric were stock-in-trade -- it is no more offensive in this context than modern men "playing the dozens." http://www.tektonics.org/lp/namecallfool.php -JPH
And read here on Rhetoric in the NT World
I’m not ignoring the context. I’m saying that the context does not reverse Jesus’ injunction.
Here it is again.
‘whoever says, ‘You fool,’ shall be [e]guilty enough to go into the [f]fiery hell.’
I will not argue that what Jesus is saying is that it’s fine to say to others, ‘you fool.’ In fact, He is saying the opposite. I accept His prohibition. It applies to us, but not to Him; please see my prior comments.
Good for you!
But it HAS snared countless millions to the MOTHER church.
Those seven churches in Asia were CATHOLIC (to hear our FR Catholics tell us), and THEY evidently MUST have had those PRECIOUS missing books, and THEY were led by Peter (the supposed rock) and yet they FAILED to 'properly' catechize their members and the Lord called them out on their OUTRIGHT errors. (Good start; Rome!)
And just WHERE are these 'catholic' churches now?
Gone too soon for the COUNTER Reformation to save them.
Address these facts!
He said, “May I...”
To Whom?
Close one!
Gotta get rid of that 'personal' thing; right?
You uh, ONE can ping the mod and he(she?) will remove any post you've typed if you tell them it had errors in it and you'd like to re-type it.
(I'm sure this may have a time limit though.)
Thanks for checking. I realized that the source compilation was MUCH larger that the pieces I cut out.
It appears I ‘stole’ it from you!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.