Such a small sacrifice...

[Willum]

Mithrae quoted this popular NT drama...

Seems to me he and his immediate followers answered quite clearly what kind of love leads to salvation:

Mark 10:17 As Jesus started on his way, a man ran up to him and fell on his knees before him. “Good teacher,� he asked, “what must I do to inherit eternal life?�

18 “Why do you call me good?�Jesus answered. “No one is good—except God alone.19You know the commandments: ‘You shall not murder, you shall not commit adultery, you shall not steal, you shall not give false testimony, you shall not defraud, honor your father and mother.’�

20“Teacher,� he declared, “all these I have kept since I was a boy.�

21Jesus looked at him and loved him. “One thing you lack,�he said. “Go, sell everything you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.�


Acts 2:44 All the believers were together and had everything in common. 45They sold property and possessions to give to anyone who had need. 46Every day they continued to meet together in the temple courts. They broke bread in their homes and ate together with glad and sincere hearts, 47praising God and enjoying the favor of all the people. And the Lord added to their number daily those who were being saved.

Assuming it is true, selling all your property and possessions doesn't seem like such a big sacrifice for the Kingdom of Heaven, does it? How many believers on the site follow Jesus' guidance?

[Tcg]

Jehovah's Witnesses interpret Jesus' words to mean to live simple modest lives, not devoting energy to getting rich, earning mkre money than we need or becomeing the top earners in our communities.

That's certainly easier than following what he actually said. Who would want to give up everything as he commanded?


Tcg

[Mithrae]

Jehovah's Witnesses interpret Jesus' words to mean to live simple modest lives, not devoting energy to getting rich, earning mkre money than we need or becomeing the top earners in our communities.

That's certainly easier than following what he actually said. Who would want to give up everything as he commanded?

I grew up hearing that the JWs were a "cult" offshoot of Real Christianity.* Turns out that in their refusal to peddle the 'word of God' for profit, and their explicit and statistically demonstrable de-emphasis on material accumulation, they are considerably closer to Jesus' teachings than most other denominations. Rejection of military service is yet another point in their favour.

* Unsurprisingly I suppose, those few folk who really do try to follow Jesus' teachings as written are even more vehemently condemned as cults.

JWs are a bit off the mark on when Jesus 'returned,' but the man himself wasn't exactly on the mark for that either. Who among us is perfect?

Well... I guess the unaimed arrow never misses

[Tcg]

Jehovah's Witnesses interpret Jesus' words to mean to live simple modest lives, not devoting energy to getting rich, earning mkre money than we need or becomeing the top earners in our communities.

That's certainly easier than following what he actually said. Who would want to give up everything as he commanded?

I grew up hearing that the JWs were a "cult" offshoot of Real Christianity. Turns out that in their refusal to peddle the 'word of God' for profit, and their explicit and statistically demonstrable de-emphasis on material accumulation, they are considerably closer to Jesus' teachings than most other denominations. Rejection of military service is yet another point in their favour.

They're a bit off the mark on when Jesus 'returned,' but the man himself wasn't exactly on the mark for that either. Who among us is perfect?

As a wise poster recently pointed out, Matthew's Jesus expected it:

Matthew's Jesus also issued the command "Be ye therefore perfect, as your father in heaven is perfect." So what is the argument being made here; that we DON'T want to be perfect, that Christians should just try to scrape by with a bare minimum commitment and no real obedience? Does that make sense?

Perhaps other Jesus' are more lenient. Maybe they accept scraping by with a bare minimum commitment and no real obedience.

Are you arguing that we SHOULDN'T want to be perfect in spite of what poster Mithrae claimed ?


Tcg

[JehovahsWitness]

.. Anything more materialistic than the Acts model cannot be justified ....

ARE THE CHRISTIANS IN ACTS SPOKEN OF AS HAVING THEIR OWN HOUSES?

ACT 21:8

The next day we left and came to Caes·a·reʹa, and we entered the house of Philip the evangelizer,

ACT 21:8

He [Peter] went to the house of Mary the mother of John who was called Mark,+ where quite a few were gathered together and were praying ...

(compare 1 Cor 16:19, Philemon 2)

ACT 18:2, 3
So he [Paul] went to them, and because he had the same trade, he stayed at their [Aquila and Priscilla's] home and worked with them, for they were tentmakers by trade.

Interestingly this passage also suggests Paul and his companions exercised a trade (presumably to get money).





All quotations NWT


RELATED POSTS

Should Jesus words about abandoning "all things" be taken literally?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 89#p908689

Did Jesus stipulate that all his followers should renounce ownership of all material possessions?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 20#p835720

Did Jesus expect his disciples to give up absolutely everything they owned?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 61#p908161

Would the "Acts model" allow for Christian ownership of houses?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 13#p980613

Is there proof JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES are the religion that put spiritual things ahead of working for money?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 85#p909585

Did Jesus command all his disciples renounce employment and all private ownership.
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 01#p980601

To read more please go to other posts related to...

CHRISTIANITY , MONEY & WEALTH and ... JW's FINANCES

[Tcg]

[quote="Mithrae


.. Anything more materialistic than the Acts model cannot be justified ....

THE CHRISTIANS IN ACTS ARE SPOKEN OF AS HAVING THEIR OWN HOUSES;

ACT 21:8

The next day we left and came to Caes·a·reʹa, and we entered the house of Philip the evangelizer,

I'm no expert in math, but you claim that CHRISTIANS plural are spoken of as having their own houses. The evidence you provide to support this is that one CHRISTIAN singular was reported as having their own house. One CHRISTIAN singular does not add up to CHRISTIANS plural.

It should also be noted that the fact that Philip is spoken of as having a house doesn't mean that this behavior was approved of. Even today, evangelist participate in behaviors the Jesus character wouldn't approve of.


Tcg

[SallyF]

But the Christian version of "God" WANTS me to be rich …!

Surely this can't be ANOTHER theological contradiction …?



God Wants You to Be Rich: How and Why Everyone Can Enjoy Material and Spiritual Wealth in Our Abundant World
by Paul Zane Pilzer
3.99 · Rating details · 154 ratings · 14 reviews
In God Wants You to Be Rich, bestselling author Paul Zane Pilzer provides an original, provocative view of how to accumulate wealth and why it is beneficial to all of humankind. A theology of economics, this book explores why God wants each of us to be rich in every way -- physically, emotionally, and financially -- and shows the way to prosperity, well-being, and peace of mind.

Pilzer explains that the foundation of our economic system is based on our Judeo-Christian heritage and includes chapters on a variety of financial issues from outsourcing and unemployment to the rise of technology and real estate. https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/753 ... to_Be_Rich

I haven't read it, but my Mantle of Prophecy tells me that THIS Paul has lots of "scriptural" backing for his beliefs.



Jesus sure loves these folks ...!

[Tcg]

[Replying to post 24 by Tcg]

Astute readers can compare the time stamp of my post versus JW's edits and realize that JW edited their post after I pointed out their error in math. More importantly, none of JW's recent additions support the concept that Jesus didn't expect his followers to give up everything.

The fact that some didn't is no surprise. We see the same behavior today.


Tcg

[tam]

[Replying to post 12 by Mithrae]

Peace to you MIthrae,

Before going through your post (which might not even be necessary after this) I just have one more example to add to what JW listed about disciples owning homes, from Acts.

When [Jesus] saw His mother and the disciple whom He loved standing nearby, He said to His mother, “Woman, here is your son.� Then He said to the disciple, “Here is your mother.� So from that hour, this disciple took her into his home. John 19:26, 27


This is the disciple Christ loved. He had a home. Christ even gave him the care of His mother.




Peace again to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

[SallyF]

[Replying to post 12 by Mithrae]

Peace to you MIthrae,

Before going through your post (which might not even be necessary after this) I just have one more example to add to what JW listed about disciples owning homes, from Acts.

When [Jesus] saw His mother and the disciple whom He loved standing nearby, He said to His mother, “Woman, here is your son.� Then He said to the disciple, “Here is your mother.� So from that hour, this disciple took her into his home. John 19:26, 27


This is the disciple Christ loved. He had a home. Christ even gave him the care of His mother.




Peace again to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

I'm a slave of Rationality myself …

But nonetheless, I examined what may be the exegetical intricacies of the text you quoted …

AND …

This is based on faith alone, mind you …

The disciple whom Christ loved, may have taken the Blessed Virgin Mary into his SPIRITUAL home, prior to her being Assumed into Heaven …!

So we may not be talking about a physical home at all, right here …!!!

(That's how it works … isn't it …?)

[Mithrae]

[Replying to post 27 by tam]

Hi Tammy. If you lived in a cave, then a cave is your home. If you lived in a communal dwelling with half a dozen others, then that is your home. What you've quoted doesn't say that the disciple held personal possession of a house. More to the point, even the word 'home' doesn't occur in the Greek text; it's just "he took her into his own." Some other versions use the word 'household' instead, which perhaps gives more of the familial sense obviously conveyed by providing for her as his mother.
https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/jhn ... nc_1016027

Again, Jesus' words are absolutely clear; sell everything amd give to the poor; don't lay up treasures on earth; trust in God even for your daily bread; whoever seeks to save their life will lose it; if you're working for money, you can't work for God; don't work for the food that perishes but for that which endures to eternal life; whoever does not forsake everything he has cannot be Jesus' disciple; at times, don't even take a spare shirt as you go and preach; go into all the world and preach the gospel, teaching others to obey every example Jesus and the twelve themselves had set! This isn't an obscure proof text, it's a consistent and clear message repeated again and again and again throughout the gospels. And in response all we see are extremely ambiguously singular examples... maybe Martha owned a house at some time during Jesus' ministry...?


#####
#####

.. Anything more materialistic than the Acts model cannot be justified ....

ARE THE CHRISTIANS IN ACTS SPOKEN OF AS HAVING THEIR OWN HOUSES?

ACT 21:8

The next day we left and came to Caes·a·reʹa, and we entered the house of Philip the evangelizer,

ACT 21:8

He [Peter] went to the house of Mary the mother of John who was called Mark,+ where quite a few were gathered together and were praying ...

(compare 1 Cor 16:19, Philemon 2)

Hi JW. It seems you're suggesting that you've identified an error/contradiction in Acts? 2:44 says that the believers held all things in common, but you think that these houses were the private possessions of Mary and Philip? I would say that if 2:44 is correct - which it must be if the apostles followed Jesus' teaching at all - then these other verses are just a simpler way of saying "the house which used to be the private possession of Mary" or "the communal home in which Philip was the most prominent resident." Luke had already explained that they didn't hold personal ownership of property; he probably wasn't expecting folk to trawl through his words with a fine-tooth comb looking for excuses to disobey Jesus, he just wanted to identify which house these folk had gone to. But if you prefer a contradiction, by all means... as TCG has noted, and I had noted earlier, even if these are examples of disobedience, what of it?

ACT 18:2, 3
So he [Paul] went to them, and because he had the same trade, he stayed at their [Aquila and Priscilla's] home and worked with them, for they were tentmakers by trade.

Interestingly this passage also suggests Paul and his companions exercised a trade (presumably to get money).

Paul normanlly travelled with a partner, similar to Jesus sending the disciples out in pairs, and in Athens he'd spent each day proclaiming the gospel (17:17), not working for money. Moving on to Corinth on this occasion, he went ahead without Silas or Timothy. Alone in a new city, he met some fellow tentmaking Jews also relatively new to town and they struck up a friendship and worked together. Now only on the Sabbaths did Paul 'reason with' the Jews and Greeks; exactly what about, we're not told. But when he was rejoined by Silas and Timothy, he was "compelled by the Spirit, and testified to the Jews that Jesus is the Christ" (Acts 18:5). Perhaps this change in tack even caused a temporary rift with Prscilla and Aquilla, because he left their home to live with someone else.

Does that sound like it's the story of a sterling example for all Christians to follow?