Obey the authorities or you will be punished!

reply to post by borntowatch


He didn't exactly say that he was king, but this passage may imply it.

Luke 19
37 When he came near the place where the road goes down the Mount of Olives, the whole crowd of disciples began joyfully to praise God in loud voices for all the miracles they had seen:

38 “Blessed is the king who comes in the name of the Lord!”
“Peace in heaven and glory in the highest!”
39 Some of the Pharisees in the crowd said to Jesus, “Teacher, rebuke your disciples!”

40 “I tell you,” he replied, “if they keep quiet, the stones will cry out.”

So apparently Jesus wasn't exactly against being called king from what this passage says.

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by windword
reply to post by adjensen

 

As I said, claiming to be the "Son of God" wasn't a crime against Caesar or Rome,

Yes it was. It was treason, and that's why the pharisees brought Jesus to Pilot.

Nope.

So long as you bowed down to the Emperor and the state gods, the Romans didn't care one iota about what you believed or claimed to be. The Jews had a special dispensation because they were fanatically monotheistic.

Claiming to be the "Son of God" was blasphemy to the Jews, it meant nothing to Pilate or the Roman government.

The last I heard, Jesus didn't bow down to either the emperor or his state gods. Since Jesus didn't bow to them, do you think they cared what he believed?

Also, if Christianity wasn't any kind of threat to Rome, why did they begin to persecute them? Maybe because what Jesus taught was not to bow down to evil authorities such as Rome? Apparently Christians didn't get the message in Romans 13.

I will let you in on a little secret, Christians believe Jesus was the King and messiah.

reply to post by borntowatch


But he never said he was remember? So why believe something you don't think he ever said?

What exactly is your argument here? Because you just backtracked 3 or 4 posts by saying that.

reply to post by adjensen


Then why would he deny it? Why would he play games if all he had to do was say, "Yeah, I'm the son of God, the Word in the flesh. What's up?"

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1


Also, if Christianity wasn't any kind of threat to Rome, why did they begin to persecute them? Maybe because what Jesus taught was not to bow down to evil authorities such as Rome? Apparently Christians didn't get the message in Romans 13.

Show some historical evidence or is this just an enlightened assumption of yours

You should stop guessing at things, doesnt bode well for others opinion of your intelect

reply to post by adjensen

Nope. So long as you bowed down to the Emperor and the state gods, the Romans didn't care one iota about what you believed or claimed to be.

So, did Jesus bow down to the Emperor and the state gods?

The Jews had a special dispensation because they were fanatically monotheistic. Claiming to be the "Son of God" was blasphemy to the Jews, it meant nothing to Pilate or the Roman government.

That's why they accused Jesus of claiming to be "King of the Jews." The Jews had no king, no leader. If Jesus claimed to be king of the Jews, that was a problem for Rome. Why else would they bring him to Pilot with these accusations? If Jesus wasn't convicted of a Roman crime, why did Pilot place guards at the tomb? Why would Pilot care about the body of a self proclaimed prophet?

If blasphemy against the Jewish laws was all that Jesus was guilty of, they could have stoned him themselves.

The Jews took up stones again to stone Him. 32Jesus answered them, "I showed you many good works from the Father; for which of them are you stoning Me?" 33The Jews answered Him, "For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy; and because You, being a man, make Yourself out to be God," (John 10:30-33)

But, they wanted him killed by the Romans for treason, so they accused him of claiming to be "King of the Jews".

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
reply to post by borntowatch

 

But he never said he was remember? So why believe something you don't think he ever said?

What exactly is your argument here? Because you just backtracked 3 or 4 posts by saying that.

edit on 24-7-2013 by 3NL1GHT3N3D1 because: (no reason given)

Well you read the bible, its obvious isnt it, to a learned mind like yours

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by adjensen

 

Then why would he deny it? Why would he play games if all he had to do was say, "Yeah, I'm the son of God, the Word in the flesh. What's up?"

Well you read the bible, its obvious isnt it, to a learned mind like yours

reply to post by borntowatch

How could it be treason, thats absurd.

What do you think was the nature of the crime that led to the Romans applying the death penalty on Jesus? Why did Pilot post "King of Jews" on his cross? Why do so many scholars disagree with you?

Again, the life and teachings of Jesus are a rebuttal to Romans 13, which, in my opinion in an interpolation to assert the doctrine of the "divine rights of kings".

Originally posted by windword
reply to post by adjensen

 

Nope. So long as you bowed down to the Emperor and the state gods, the Romans didn't care one iota about what you believed or claimed to be.

So, did Jesus bow down to the Emperor and the state gods?

In addition to spending twenty minutes reading the Bible, you would know the answer to that if you spent twenty seconds reading my post. I underlined it in the bit that you quoted:

The Jews had a special dispensation because they were fanatically monotheistic. Claiming to be the "Son of God" was blasphemy to the Jews, it meant nothing to Pilate or the Roman government.

He was Jewish, so, no he did not, and no, he did not need to.

The Jews had no king, no leader.

Not correct. This is also included in the story of Holy Week in the Bible. When are you going to spend those twenty minutes and actually read the text you claim to know so well?

If blasphemy against the Jewish laws was all that Jesus was guilty of, they could have stoned him themselves.

Well, we're back full circle, with you making my point for me. The Pharisees wanted Rome to kill Jesus to stir up anger among those who followed him, as well as deflecting blame from themselves. Regardless of the composition of the lynch mob in Pilate's courtyard, there was still a significant following of Christ that the Pharisees wanted to steer clear of.

reply to post by adjensen


It's not the Bible I'm having a hard time understanding, it's you. I still don't know what your point is?

Well, we're back full circle, with you making my point for me. The Pharisees wanted Rome to kill Jesus to stir up anger among those who followed him, as well as deflecting blame from themselves. Regardless of the composition of the lynch mob in Pilate's courtyard, there was still a significant following of Christ that the Pharisees wanted to steer clear of.

Pure supposition on your part, as usual, and not backed up by scripture.

You keep deflecting and insulting in an attempt at derailing the subject of thread.

Did Jesus submit to earthly authority? Nope.

Was Jesus killed because of that? Yep

Did Jesus teach that WE should submit to the "divine right of kings"? Nope.

reply to post by borntowatch


What's obvious? That you think Jesus was king even though you believe he never said such a thing?

You keep flip flopping back and forth. Why did Pilate put "King of the Jews" on the cross? He obviously didn't put it their for no reason. Maybe he put it there because that's what he was accused of? It's pretty obvious.

reply to post by adjensen


Are you saying the Jews thought of Jesus as their king?

What do you have to say about this?

John 19
15 They cried out, “Away with him, away with him, crucify him!”

Pilate said to them, “Shall I crucify your King?”

The chief priests answered, “We have no king but Caesar.”

Obviously the Jews who wanted Jesus crucified saw Caesar as their king and not Jesus.

Originally posted by borntowatch
How could it be treason, thats absurd.

Perhaps you missed these quotes in my previous posts.

Jesus was arrested on a charge of treason and was crucified, a common form of execution for condemned criminals. To the Romans, Jesus was a troublemaker who had got his just desserts.
www.pbs.org...

In their mock trial, the religious leaders had agreed that Jesus should be put to death. But they did not have authority to put anyone to death under Roman law. So, as soon as morning came, they took Jesus to the the Roman governor, Pontius Pilate [PON chus PIE lat]. They falsely accused Jesus of treason against the Roman Empire for claiming to be the king of the Jews and for urging people not to pay their taxes.
www.christianbiblereference.org...

(Actually the Sanhedrin did have the authority to put Jesus to death by stoning. It was not blasphemy to claim to be a messiah, a man. If Jesus proclaimed himself a messiah god, then it would have been blasphemy.) Therefore the High-Priest handed him over to the Roman authorities (Pontius Pilate, the Roman governor), who found him guilty of treason (i.e., claiming to be the King of the Jews). The title "Son of God" was given to the Kings of the Jews. The Romans viewed Jesus as a pretender to the throne of Judea. Roman prefects demanded that the High-Priests arrest and turn over Jews seen as agitators or subversive persons.
www.easysurf.us...

Please understand the dilemma of these law-breaking priests. If they presented Jesus as a man convicted of blasphemy on the testimony of only two witnesses who did not agree, Pilate would reverse their verdict. If they presented Jesus as one convicted by his own confession, Pilate would set the verdict aside. And, of course, if they reported Jesus was convicted by unanimous verdict, Pilate would enter a verdict of acquittal. So the guilty priests presented Jesus to Pilate on a new charge they trumped up on the spot: treason against Caesar.
www.1215.org...

Jesus was tried and convicted for treason.

reply to post by charles1952

What I'm astonished by is the Bible's depth when considered as a whole. Thanks for the reminder.

What I'm astonished by is how some basement dweller can take a snipet of verse out of context and then think he has the full understanding of the matter. Ofcourse he doesn't actually understand, he's just being a douchenozzle for trolling purposes.

reply to post by lonewolf19792000

What I'm astonished by is how some basement dweller can take a snipet of verse out of context and then think he has the full understanding of the matter. Ofcourse he doesn't actually understand, he's just being a douchenozzle for trolling purposes.

What is the context of this citation?

Romans 13 1

Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God.
2 Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves.
3 For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and you will be commended.
4 For the one in authority is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They are God’s servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer.
5 Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also as a matter of conscience.

Why is it douchnozzly to discuss this scripture? How does Jesus represent an example of this scripture for us to emulate?

reply to post by lonewolf19792000




Jesus would be proud.

reply to post by lonewolf19792000


The passage isn't taken out of context AT ALL. It stands on its own pretty fine if you ask me. You only assume I've taken it out of context because you refuse to think about it, only accept it.

If you agree with what it says, that means you must agree with every decision a government has ever made, even the terrible ones. Remember, those in authority are there for your good, and every decision they make is based on what would be good for you.

The passage says it all, the government is an agent and servant of god. If you disagree with their policies, you disagree with god's policies and plan.

Originally posted by windword
reply to post by adjensen

 

It's not the Bible I'm having a hard time understanding, it's you. I still don't know what your point is?

Well, we're back full circle, with you making my point for me. The Pharisees wanted Rome to kill Jesus to stir up anger among those who followed him, as well as deflecting blame from themselves. Regardless of the composition of the lynch mob in Pilate's courtyard, there was still a significant following of Christ that the Pharisees wanted to steer clear of.

Pure supposition on your part, as usual, and not backed up by scripture.

Of course it's backed up by scripture. During Holy Week, Jesus and the Apostles were in the Temple every day, and yet they weren't lynched by the crowds. They could have been arrested at any time during those public appearances that week, and yet the Jewish leaders chose to arrest him at night in a desolate place. They held a trial in the middle of the night, something not commonly done, and they whisked him off to the Roman authorities first thing in the morning.

That is sufficient evidence that the Pharisees were afraid of public reaction to the arrest of Jesus.

Did Jesus submit to earthly authority? Nope.

Yes, he did, and that is the point of the scene with Pilate -- Jesus completely submitted to the authority that Pilate thought that he had, even though he pointed out that Pilate had no authority apart from that which was given to him by God.

However, as you seem to think that my suggesting that you actually read the text in order to make intelligent statements regarding it is insulting and beneath you, I guess I'll leave you to it.