• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

He who is not with me is against me

phattonez

phattonez

Catholic
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 3, 2009
Messages
30,870
Reaction score
4,246
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Matthew 12: He who is not with me is against me, and he who does not gather with me scatters.

There is no thinking that Jesus was just a good guy with a good message. There is no yeah He's a historical person but I honestly don't think much about Him. No, Jesus demands a response. By claiming to be the Son of God, you must either accept Him or call Him a liar or a lunatic. If He's a liar then He's evil, and if He's a lunatic then He's not a good guy with a good message.

So the idea that people can see Jesus as a guy with a good philosophy and worthy of resepct: sorry, not good enough. You either must fully embrace Him or reject Him. There is no middle ground. If you see Him as only some good philosopher then you either call Him evil or crazy. There is no way around that. Either He is the Son of God or He is evil/crazy.
 
You're sure to win lots of followers with that approach.
 
phattonez said:
Matthew 12: He who is not with me is against me, and he who does not gather with me scatters.

There is no thinking that Jesus was just a good guy with a good message. There is no yeah He's a historical person but I honestly don't think much about Him. No, Jesus demands a response. By claiming to be the Son of God, you must either accept Him or call Him a liar or a lunatic. If He's a liar then He's evil, and if He's a lunatic then He's not a good guy with a good message.

So the idea that people can see Jesus as a guy with a good philosophy and worthy of resepct: sorry, not good enough. You either must fully embrace Him or reject Him. There is no middle ground. If you see Him as only some good philosopher then you either call Him evil or crazy. There is no way around that. Either He is the Son of God or He is evil/crazy.
Click to expand...

We are all the sons and daughters of God.

Your "my way or the highway" interpretation of scripture is incorrect. "Either you accept he's the son of God or he's crazy/evil." Either you're wrong, crazy or evil. Which is it? ;) ;)
 
MaggieD said:
We are all the sons and daughters of God.
Click to expand...

Not in the same way as Jesus and you know it.

Your "my way or the highway" interpretation of scripture is incorrect. "Either you accept he's the son of God or he's crazy/evil." Either you're wrong, crazy or evil. Which is it? ;) ;)
Click to expand...

How does one misinterpret Jesus' words here? They're quite explicit. "He who is not with me is against me."

And the options for me are correct, incorrect, or misinformed. Thinking that you must either accept or reject Jesus' claim to be the Son of God does not make me crazy. Thinking that you are the Son of God when you are not, however, would make you crazy.
 
phattonez said:
It's not an approach, it's the only way.
Click to expand...
It's certainly not the only way to present the Gospel to non and even fledgling believers. Many are attracted to the basic precepts emphasized by Jesus, yet are hostile to the idea of organized religion for a myriad of reasons. Endorsing this type of all or nothing approach will likely do more to dissuade potential Christians than help your cause.
 
phattonez said:
Matthew 12: He who is not with me is against me, and he who does not gather with me scatters.

There is no thinking that Jesus was just a good guy with a good message. There is no yeah He's a historical person but I honestly don't think much about Him. No, Jesus demands a response. By claiming to be the Son of God, you must either accept Him or call Him a liar or a lunatic. If He's a liar then He's evil, and if He's a lunatic then He's not a good guy with a good message.

So the idea that people can see Jesus as a guy with a good philosophy and worthy of resepct: sorry, not good enough. You either must fully embrace Him or reject Him. There is no middle ground. If you see Him as only some good philosopher then you either call Him evil or crazy. There is no way around that. Either He is the Son of God or He is evil/crazy.
Click to expand...

True, assuming Matthew wasn't some hack trying to convince people to join his church.
 
phattonez said:
Matthew 12: He who is not with me is against me, and he who does not gather with me scatters.

There is no thinking that Jesus was just a good guy with a good message. There is no yeah He's a historical person but I honestly don't think much about Him. No, Jesus demands a response. By claiming to be the Son of God, you must either accept Him or call Him a liar or a lunatic. If He's a liar then He's evil, and if He's a lunatic then He's not a good guy with a good message.

So the idea that people can see Jesus as a guy with a good philosophy and worthy of resepct: sorry, not good enough. You either must fully embrace Him or reject Him. There is no middle ground. If you see Him as only some good philosopher then you either call Him evil or crazy. There is no way around that. Either He is the Son of God or He is evil/crazy.
Click to expand...

Hmm....seems to be a little cherry picking there.

Here's the passage that your citation came from:
22 Then was brought unto him one possessed with a devil, blind, and dumb: and he healed him, insomuch that the blind and dumb both spake and saw. 23 And all the people were amazed, and said, Is not this the son of David? 24 But when the Pharisees heard it, they said, This fellow doth not cast out devils, but by Beelzebub the prince of the devils. 25 And Jesus knew their thoughts, and said unto them, Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand: 26 and if Satan cast out Satan, he is divided against himself; how shall then his kingdom stand? 27 And if I by Beelzebub cast out devils, by whom do your children cast them out? therefore they shall be your judges. 28 But if I cast out devils by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God is come unto you. 29 Or else how can one enter into a strong man’s house, and spoil his goods, except he first bind the strong man? and then he will spoil his house. 30 He that is not with me is against me; and he that gathereth not with me scattereth abroad.
Click to expand...

and the following passage:
31 Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men. 32 And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come. 33 Either make the tree good, and his fruit good; or else make the tree corrupt, and his fruit corrupt: for the tree is known by his fruit. 34 O generation of vipers, how can ye, being evil, speak good things? for out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh. 35 A good man out of the good treasure of the heart bringeth forth good things: and an evil man out of the evil treasure bringeth forth evil things. 36 But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment. 37 For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned.
Click to expand...

It's actually a very good passage regarding tolerance, faith and respect of your fellow man.

It's also a little ironic that you chose this particular passage as a vehicle to cast aspersions on the faith of others but, as the saying goes, "God works in mysterious ways".
 
a351 said:
It's certainly not the only way to present the Gospel to non and even fledgling believers. Many are attracted to the basic precepts emphasized by Jesus, yet are hostile to the idea of organized religion for a myriad of reasons. Endorsing this type of all or nothing approach will likely do more to dissuade potential Christians than help your cause.
Click to expand...

It's not an approach, it's the truth. Should I present a lie? Should I allow people to persist in the delusion that you can think Jesus was a nice guy and that's about it?
 
Lutherf said:
Hmm....seems to be a little cherry picking there.

Here's the passage that your citation came from:


and the following passage:


It's actually a very good passage regarding tolerance, faith and respect of your fellow man.

It's also a little ironic that you chose this particular passage as a vehicle to cast aspersions on the faith of others but, as the saying goes, "God works in mysterious ways".
Click to expand...

What cherry picking? The Pharisees here are claiming that Jesus casts out demons by the power of demons. They denied the good that He did and called Him evil. He then here says that anyone who is not for Him is against Him. That is, that if you do not believe that He is the Son of God, then you are implicitly calling Him evil.
 
Lachean said:
Which god?
Click to expand...

Note the capital "G" in Maggie's post. As you already know, this is a reference to the monotheistic God worshipped by Jews, Christians, and Muslims.
 
nota bene said:
Note the capital "G" in Maggie's post. As you already know, this is a reference to the monotheistic God worshipped by Jews, Christians, and Muslims.
Click to expand...

I don't know that, not do I believe the use of a capital G is of any indication; As if YHWH were any more special than any other alleged god being promulgated.
 
phattonez said:
What cherry picking? The Pharisees here are claiming that Jesus casts out demons by the power of demons. They denied the good that He did and called Him evil. He then here says that anyone who is not for Him is against Him. That is, that if you do not believe that He is the Son of God, then you are implicitly calling Him evil.
Click to expand...

The idea is that you either accept God or you do not. If you do not then you won't be accepted into the kingdom of Heaven. There is no condemnation and, in fact, it's made clear that blasphemy against faith is a forgivable sin but blasphemy against God is not.

The entire structure of Christianity is built on the premise that man is inherently fallible but, through understanding, love and commitment to God and his creation you can and will be forgiven.
 
Lutherf said:
The idea is that you either accept God or you do not. If you do not then you won't be accepted into the kingdom of Heaven. There is no condemnation and, in fact, it's made clear that blasphemy against faith is a forgivable sin but blasphemy against God is not.

The entire structure of Christianity is built on the premise that man is inherently fallible but, through understanding, love and commitment to God and his creation you can and will be forgiven.
Click to expand...

Not according to the Pope.
 
Lutherf said:
The idea is that you either accept God or you do not. If you do not then you won't be accepted into the kingdom of Heaven. There is no condemnation and, in fact, it's made clear that blasphemy against faith is a forgivable sin but blasphemy against God is not.

The entire structure of Christianity is built on the premise that man is inherently fallible but, through understanding, love and commitment to God and his creation you can and will be forgiven.
Click to expand...

The denial of the Son of God with full knowledge is the same as calling Him evil. There is no way around that fact.
 
phattonez said:
The denial of the Son of God with full knowledge is the same as calling Him evil. There is no way around that fact.
Click to expand...

I'm not here to debate the matter. As far as I'm concerned there's nothing to debate. The best I can do is sow the seeds. If you choose to brush them away then so be it.
 
Lutherf said:
I'm not here to debate the matter. As far as I'm concerned there's nothing to debate. The best I can do is sow the seeds. If you choose to brush them away then so be it.
Click to expand...

Yup, because apparently you want to brush aside the very explicit words of Christ.
 
Lachean said:
I don't know that, not do I believe the use of a capital G is of any indication; As if YHWH were any more special than any other alleged god being promulgated.
Click to expand...

Umm, it's a convention, and its intention is to distinguish between God and gods. But you knew that too.
 
phattonez said:
Yup, because apparently you want to brush aside the very explicit words of Christ.
Click to expand...

The Son of God is a teacher...a Rabbi...but it's the nature of teaching that the lessons often have different meanings to different students. You have chosen your interpretation and I have chosen mine. May your understanding serve you well.
 
Lutherf said:
The Son of God is a teacher...a Rabbi...but it's the nature of teaching that the lessons often have different meanings to different students. You have chosen your interpretation and I have chosen mine. May your understanding serve you well.
Click to expand...

I'm just waiting for an explanation as to how I'm supposed to interpret His words any differently when He is so explicit about it? Was it some metaphor that I missed? Sarcasm? I think not.
 
The way I read it Jesus is saying that those who sin and repent will be forgiven, but to "blaspheme the Holy Ghost/Spirit" is to deny that Jesus is the messiah and His message even unto death. The Holy Spirit is what convicts the hearts of humanity and is God's Spirit upon the earth by which Christians are guided, miracles are performed and the lost convicted of sin and pointed towards truth. To blaspheme the Holy Spirit is to say that Jesus is not the messiah, to not repent and to ignore/deny the convictions the Holy Spirit has done in each person's heart and to go to their graves having never accepted that, which would mean eternal hell.
 
nota bene said:
Umm, it's a convention, and its intention is to distinguish between God and gods. But you knew that too.
Click to expand...

YHWH is not the only monotheistic deity.

Please do not presume to tell me what I know.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom