Why I Would Not Like Jesus

[Wrangler]

Interesting, if you are a Christian, the end goal is to make you like Him.

What Scripture says that?

 

[Wrangler]

Did Jesus lie?

Yes and where he lied has been explained numerous times. He told us to be as innocent as doves and as wise as serpents. It's clear to me now in today's overspiritualized Christianity, unwise platitudes, sacred cows, like he never lied are all over. Yes, he lied. Of course he lied! What do you call it when someone does not "tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth?"

 

[Wrangler]

When did he ever speak with a forked tongue?

Was the girl asleep or dead? Is Solomon's temple going to be built in 3 days or another temple? Is he the Christ or not?

 

[Wrangler]

Perhaps this is where a bit of research is needed

A gratuitious insult.

Jesus’ frustration was justified

That's my point! His lying, his lack of clear commnication was so bad, that even he got frustrated people could not see through the fog of deception - that he wove!

It wasn’t a difficult concept at all....no deceptiveness was ever intended.

Appeal to Diversion. The difficulty of the concept is not the issue. The issue is he's speaking with a forked tongue, as you say. Given, he is not talkig about bread, he shouldn't be using the word "bread."

Deception wasn't intended? If you talked about bread all the time, as a replacement for the Marvel character Groot saying, "I am Groot," you'd lose all your relationships. An honest attempt at communication was not intended either. As you say, it's not a difficult concept to use words that honestly reflect what you are trying to communicate - and it aint bread!

 

[Wrangler]

ou would rather accuse the son of God for being a bad teacher

Accuse? He was such a bad teacher that at John 6:66 he asked if he was so deceptive and offensive about what he was saying that he was going to lose his disciples.

The very idea that him being a bad teacher at these points is an accusation is ridiculous. I guess we have different understandings of what constitutes the highest standard of good and bad, relative to that standard.

His teachings prompted his enemies to orchestrate his murder

Said differently, his teachings were so bad, they got him killed. IF this is not bad, I do sincerely wonder what you would consider a bad teacher other than losing your students and getting killed over what you are teaching? Please state your rejection criteria. What constitutes a bad teacher? (And don't confuse the wonderful subject being taught with the person teaching it).

 

[Wrangler]

Death is sleep. John 11:11-14

Jesus was dead for “3 days.” After his resurrection, Jesus was to become the chief cornerstone (Isa.28:16) of the spiritual temple. Paul explained this in Hebrews. (8:1-5; 9:1-10:10)

Not really answers to my questions.

 

[WalterandDebbie]

Theologically, I reject the implied premise of this statement.

Psychologically, you can tell me all day long how I SHOULD feel. I'm dealing with the reality of how I feel. And I've articulated very clearly why I would not like Jesus.

He obviously lied repeatedly. Is the girl asleep or dead? Is Solomon's temple going to be built in 3 days or another temple? Is he the Christ or not?

Good morning Wrangler, yes, in spite of what you are saying He is the Christ the Messiah.

Love, Walter

 

[Wrangler]

Your accusation is false, because you didn’t understand his words

False. This thread is why I would not like Jesus. I’m allowed to have preferences. There is something about what he says that I do not like.

And I explained it very carefully. It is NOT about me not understanding. It is about his word deceptive choice that I don’t like. I understand he uses the word bread when he doesn’t mean bread.

I understand he uses the word sleep when he doesn’t mean sleep.

I understand he uses the word referring to Solomon’s temple to not refer to Solomon’s temple.

At some point, there is something duplicitous in a pattern of talking this way. And I don’t like it. A is A.

If he means the Pharisees are deceptive, then, say that straight away. Don’t talk about things (like bread) that is neither a person nor deceptive.

If he means the girl is dead, then, say that straight away. Don’t talk about sleeping AFTER you know your audience is not getting it!

If he means a temple that is not Solomon’s, then specify! Causing confusion is not the way.

 

[lforrest]

Again, sacred cow. He obviously lied repeatedly. Is the girl asleep or dead? Is Solomon's temple going to be built in 3 days or another temple? Is he the Christ or not?

I've already explained repeatedly that to lie is not necessarily a sin and deception is an effective tool in war, which he and we are in, a spiritual war. However, you are fooling yourself if your take on indirect communication extends to violate mutually exclusive language usage.

Let me give you an example. Years ago I had a joint savings account with my stepdaughter. I put money in and she took it out without permission. She said she'd put it all back the next month. 2 months later I asked her if she put the money back. Her reply? She did not put it ALL back.

I already went to the bank and had the facts. Putting no money back in is not putting it ALL back. So, I asked a follow up question that she was not prepared for. How much money did you put back? Obviously, her original statement of not putting it all back logically implies something that SHE KNEW is not true. Is the girl asleep or dead? Is Solomon's temple going to be built in 3 days or another temple? Is he the Christ or not?

It is all true from God's point of view, which is what's important. The words Jesus had been speaking were spirit and life. He often spoke in metaphors and parables because he knew we would not understand spiritual things. Other times he just spoke them to be understood later.

Neither is God someone under authority. Jesus was not required to clarify himself. The whole concept of lying by omission is false when there is no obligation under authority to report.

 

[Wrangler]

The whole concept of lying by omission is false when there is no obligation under authority to report.

Huh? A lie is only a lie if there is an obligation under authority to report? Does this mean:

1. Those in authority have no obligation to speak the truth, including not lying by omission?
2. Therefore, the word ‘lie’ does not apply to those in authority?

In all my life, I’ve never heard such a conditional aspect to truth telling.

 

[lforrest]

Huh? A lie is only a lie if there is an obligation under authority to report? Does this mean:

1. Those in authority have no obligation to speak the truth, including not lying by omission?
2. Therefore, the word ‘lie’ does not apply to those in authority?

In all my life, I’ve never heard such a conditional aspect to truth telling.

To lie by omission is to remain silent about something rather than resort to untrue words. No lie is told if you say nothing... Unless you previously told someone that you would report about such and such.

 

[Wrangler]

Jesus did lie by omission in not answering if he was the Christ. And he lied by calling one thing another thing. Bread, sleep, temple. I don’t like this.

Scripture says the Spirit gives us a spirit to be bold. Start by calling things what they are: deceptive religious leaders, a dead girl and your identity, Anointed by God.

 

[MA2444]

nooo. The Lord is intentionally very vague at times for various reasons, we cant handle the Truth!! Or to make it hard for the enemy to understand and last but not least (!!!) is how else is He going to make us to stay in faith for now/.

It's all about faith in the Lord Jesus. Do you trust Jesus?

 

[lforrest]

Jesus did lie by omission in not answering if he was the Christ. And he lied by calling one thing another thing. Bread, sleep, temple. I don’t like this.

Scripture says the Spirit gives us a spirit to be bold. Start by calling things what they are: deceptive religious leaders, a dead girl and your identity, Anointed by God.

An invention of tyrants, who think everyone in the world answers to them. Why should God answer to them?

Jesus did as his father told him to do. If the Father said to conceal, Jesus obeyed. He also told people to tell no one about some things, when he revealed too much too soon.

 

[Aunty Jane]

False. This thread is why I would not like Jesus. I’m allowed to have preferences. There is something about what he says that I do not like.

Who says you have to like it? Is it Christ’s place to reveal things more explicitly for those who don’t understand? Why don’t they understand?
What was it that gave his first century disciples “understanding” of what he taught?......it was not to the educated ones, but to humble fishermen and such that he revealed his truth.

“I publicly praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have carefully hidden these things from wise and intellectual ones, and have revealed them to young children. . . . who the Father is, no one knows but the Son, and he to whom the Son is willing to reveal him.”

To whom was the Son willing to reveal his Father?
Are you a “wise” person in your own eyes, Wrangler....or are you a “young child”?...are you meek and teachable, or are you demanding something that has not been granted to you for a reason?
You cannot shake your fist at God because you don’t understand what his son taught.
You accuse him of being a liar and a bad teacher! Where do you suppose that is going to get you?

And I explained it very carefully. It is NOT about me not understanding. It is about his word deceptive choice that I don’t like. I understand he uses the word bread when he doesn’t mean bread.

As @Spyder and myself have shown you.....it wasn’t “bread”...it was “leaven”......which is only a component of bread.....the raising agent. The disciples misunderstood....but that didn’t make Jesus a liar.
Jesus used “leaven” as a metaphor for evil spreading to invade the thinking ability of those around them, by entertaining wrong thoughts.....leading to wrong conclusions, words and actions. Are you spreading a little leaven of your own?

I understand he uses the word sleep when he doesn’t mean sleep.

To his Jewish audience, who had no belief from their Scripture in the afterlife of an immortal soul, “sleeping” was the metaphor for death....a condition from which they expected to awaken in the resurrection, just as Jesus said of his friend Lazarus.
John 11:11-14..
“After he said these things, he added: “Lazʹa·rus our friend has fallen asleep, but I am traveling there to awaken him.” 12 The disciples then said to him: “Lord, if he is sleeping, he will get well.” 13 Jesus, however, had spoken about his death. But they imagined he was speaking about taking rest in sleep. 14 Then Jesus said to them plainly: “Lazʹa·rus has died”.

Upon what did Jesus base his words?
What was the condition of the dead according to Jewish Scripture?

“For the living know that they will die, but the dead know nothing at all, nor do they have any more reward, because all memory of them is forgotten. . . .Whatever your hand finds to do, do with all your might, for there is no work nor planning nor knowledge nor wisdom in the Grave, where you are going.” (Eccl 9:5, 10; Psalm 115:17)

I understand he uses the word referring to Solomon’s temple to not refer to Solomon’s temple.

He used Solomon’s temple to illustrate what would happen to the literal Temple, which upon his death was to become redundant as the place where God accepted the sacrifices of his people. Christ’s death pointed to a new Temple in heaven, where Jesus entered to present the value of his sacrifice to his God, but he was referring to “the temple of his body”.....not his literal fleshly body, but his spiritual body....the “body of Christ” who were going to rule with him in heaven. This was the way opened up for them in his own resurrection.

1 Cor 3:16-17..
“Do you not know that YOU people are God’s temple, and that the spirit of God dwells in YOU? 17 If anyone destroys the temple of God, God will destroy him; for the temple of God is holy, which [temple]YOU people are.”

This is what thorough Bible study reveals to those who put in the effort to understand....Jesus likened it to ‘digging for hidden treasure’.....where is your shovel Wrangler.....are you standing there leaning on it?

At some point, there is something duplicitous in a pattern of talking this way. And I don’t like it. A is A.

You don’t have to like it.....where is that written?
And what obligation does God or his Christ have to give those who are too lazy to study, any understanding at all? At this moment in time we are all being separated into only two camps.....”sheep or goats”.....which camp are the whiners in do you think?

If he means the Pharisees are deceptive, then, say that straight away. Don’t talk about things (like bread) that is neither a person nor deceptive.

He didn’t speak about “bread”.....who is not getting it?

If he means the girl is dead, then, say that straight away. Don’t talk about sleeping AFTER you know your audience is not getting it!

What was the end result Wrangler? The parents presented their daughter alive to those who scoffed. Jesus was going to demonstrate what Jews knew to be true about “sleeping” in death, but had never witnessed it first hand....
“Moreover, brothers, we do not want you to be ignorant about those who are sleeping in death, so that you may not sorrow as the rest do who have no hope.” (1 Thess 4:13)

If he means a temple that is not Solomon’s, then specify! Causing confusion is not the way.

Those to whom Christ revealed his Father’s will and purpose were not wondering for long, because they stayed around to hear the explanation....they didn’t go off in a huff declaring that Jesus was a bad teacher or someone who was teaching them lies.

For those who want answers, those answers are all there in the Scriptures......they might require a little effort to gain an understanding, but God is not looking for lazy people to populate his Kingdom. He is looking for the genuine souls who are willing to patiently wait for God, through his son, to reveal his truth to them as Jesus said.....
John 6:44, 65....
“No man can come to me unless the Father, who sent me, draws him. . . . .This is why I have said to you, no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father.”

What is that telling you? What is that telling all of us?
If the Jesus whom God sent is not good enough for you.....then who has to change their attitude in what you require of him? Will he alter his teaching methods to accommodate those to whom he has not revealed his truth?
What does he require of you in order for that to happen?

 

[ThePuffyBlob]

say what you mean and mean what you say.

not all ppl r like u
for example me i am not good at explaining things in all language that i know
it is like a person is speaking in tongues but there is no one to translate it
let us just say that my iq is below average

Jesus may have been a teacher but he obviously was not an effective teacher using any objective standard.

i am easily offended especially when it comes to christianity but i am not offended by u at all because it is foolish

this is nonsense and foolish
because God the father is in the son which is the christ

there is a possiblity that christ teaches that way so that not all people will understand it

it is God's will that christ jesus teaches that way and not the way that it is easily be understood

 

[Wrangler]

it is foolish

this is nonsense and foolish

there is a possiblity that christ teaches that way so that not all people will understand it

Agreed. "Teaching" so that not all people will understand it is foolish nonsense.

 

[Wrangler]

As I see it, the sacred cow is glossed over in predictable ways.

The Lord is intentionally very vague at times

Like changing the subject. It is not "vague" it is lying, using words to mean something the words don't mean, leading to frustration of the audience as well as the speaker. The very definition of poor and deceptive communication, not vague communication.

Why should God answer to them?

Why not? Why create a life form capable of communicating only to interact cryptically and deceptively? Do you think Adam was unaware of the fact that when Eve ate the forbidden fruit that she did not die?

 

[Wrangler]

Who says you have to like it?

No one. Thanks for making that point. I'm just saying publicly that I don't like certain things about how Jesus communicated at times.

 

[Lambano]

I'm just saying publicly that I don't like certain things about how Jesus communicated at times.

I was once asked at a Bible study, "If you had lived at the time of Jesus, would you have followed him?" It's a tough question.

On this side of the Resurrection and Pauline theology and 2 thousand years of atonement theories, yeah, we carefully analyze Jesus's cryptic teachings because we believe "You have the words of eternal life" (John 6:68). But would I have followed him back then?