DeepSight:

There is no way Jesus would have supported this sort of hate-preachment.

DappaD:
Read the following Scriptures carefully and try to be objective in your reasoning, can you do that ?


Romans 16:17

“Now I urge you, brothers, to keep your eye on those who create divisions and causes for stumbling contrary to the teaching that you have learned, and avoid them.”


1Corinthians 5:11

“But now I am writing you to stop keeping company with anyone called a brother who is sexually immoral or a greedy person or an idolater or a reviler or a drunkard or an extortioner, not even eating with such a man.”

2John 9-11

“Everyone who pushes ahead and does not remain in the teaching of the Christ does not have God. The one who does remain in this teaching is the one who has both the Father and the Son.  If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your homes or say a greeting to him. For the one who says a greeting to him is a sharer in his wicked works.”


Do you believe that the first century Christians were cultists to have laid down such rules?

Honestly, I don’t think your problem is with the Witnesses. Actually, your case should be against the Bible itself but you’re using the critique of Witnesses as a smokescreen.

To many people, the Bible is a bag filled with jellybeans and gravel, so they try to select the ones that are enticing to them and leave the ones that doesn’t sit right with them.

But that’s different when it comes to Jehovah’s Witnesses because we accept all the 66 books of the Bible as inspired of God so every part must be considered in our worship. 2Timothy 3:16

Do you believe that the first century Christians were cultists to have laid down such rules?

“Now I urge you, brothers, to keep your eye on those who create divisions and causes for stumbling contrary to the teaching that you have learned, and avoid them.”

“But now I am writing you to stop keeping company with anyone called a brother who is sexually immoral or a greedy person or an idolater or a reviler or a drunkard or an extortioner, not even eating with such a man.”

“Everyone who pushes ahead and does not remain in the teaching of the Christ does not have God.

DappaD:


In Jesus’ day, someone who wasn’t a Jew/Jewish proselyte i.e. a Gentile was viewed as a persona non grata.

So when Jesus was giving instructions to his followers on how to resolve issues at Matthew 18:15-17, he said that after the first, second and third steps to resolve the matter yielded no fruit, the person who is trying to resolve the issue should view the wrongdoer as a man of the nations[Gentile] and a tax collector.

Why the use of those terms in particular ? Because a Gentile and a tax collector were both viewed by the Jews as outcasts and sinners. Luke 19:7, Acts 11:2

Jesus was telling his followers to cease association with such persons who remained adamant and wanted to disrupt the peace of the congregation.
Was he inviting his followers to hatred ?
If no, please redefine what love means.

achorladey:


How did Jesus treats TAX COLLECTORS and PAGANS?

SHUN THEM ABI?

MaxInDHouse:


If you want us to TEACH you we will because it's the work we are assigned to do but if you're not interested there's no problem!

DeepSight:

It is well noted in the gospels that he associated freely with "tax collectors and sinners." Why?

Secondly the Parable of The Good Samaritan should suffice to help you.
How do you read it when he says, then, "a despised Samaritan" came along. . . ?

Yippeedaniel:
Ever wonder why anyone that left jw becomes a hater of the organization?. But no one who leave church become hater of da former church. Ever wonder y we have so many ex jw channel of YouTube? Over 69k on reddit but no single ex catholics, redeem, deeper life?. Theres more to it. This ex jw might have a point, Theres something driving them to do all this. I see many Nigerian exjw inda next 20yrs.

DeepSight:


This is arrogance and its UN-Christ-Like.
Christ taught humility, not this sort of proud presumption.

DappaD:


The reason being that tax collectors do normally collect more than the usual rate from their countrymen (Luke 3:13) that’s why Zacchaeus was viewed as a sinner(Luke 19:7) because they were viewed as thieves. It’s just like NURTW impounding your car for a minor offense but they later extort you large amounts. Obviously, you’d feel animosity towards any NURTW representative.



Jesus WAS not telling his disciples to become prejudiced and view non-Jews as scum. In fact, on a number of occasions he corrected their thinking in that regard about harbouring I'll thoughts towards non-Jews. Luke 9:55
And that was one practical lesson to be learnt from the parable of the good Samaritan.

With regards to Matthew 18:17, he was telling his followers to view persons who didn’t fall in line with congregational arrangements AS tax collectors and Gentiles. Because he knew that they would easily grasp that reference.

DeepSight:
DappaD and MainDHouse -

I feel compelled to share with you my analysis of the Parable of the Good Samaritan from years ago on this forum.


- - - - -- - - -

In all sincerity, let me ask you what you understand by the injunction that one must worship God is Spirit and in Truth?

In my own understanding, that simply means that dead outward ceremonies are not the substance of worshipping God - that the worship of God rather relates to the inward state of the spirit which corresponds to eternal truth.

This is why I brought up the parable of the good Samaritan, which I thought should be sufficient to show you from your own bible that the worship of God has absolutely nothing to do with outward ceremonies, rituals or dogmatic or doctrinal acknowledgements.

Now to elucidate the point it is critical that we carefully note the context of that parable -

The Gospel of Luke provides the context for the parable as:

One day an expert in religious law stood up to test Jesus by asking him this question: “Teacher, what should I do to inherit eternal life?”

So it should be noted that the parable was given within a context of salvation – namely that which would be required for one to be accepted with God.

Jesus replied, “What does the law of Moses say? How do you read it?”

The man answered, “‘You must love the Lord your God with all your heart, all your soul, all your strength, and all your mind.’ And, ‘Love your neighbour as yourself.’” “Right!” Jesus told him. “Do this and you will live!”

So it is also clear that the ensuing parable sets forth that which it takes to “love God” and “love one’s neighbour.”

This is all the more emphasized since as you well know Jesus often stated that those who care for their neighbours were actually showing such love to him and to God. “I was hungry, and you fed me . . . whenever you did this for one of those, you did the same for me. . . “

The man wanted to justify his actions, so he asked Jesus, “And who is my neighbour?”

Jesus then replied with a story:

“A Jewish man was travelling on a trip from Jerusalem to Jericho, and he was attacked by bandits. They stripped him of his clothes, beat him up, and left him half dead beside the road. By chance a priest came along. But when he saw the man lying there, he crossed to the other side of the road and passed him by. A Levite walked over and looked at him lying there, but he also passed by on the other side.


Now it is instructive that Jesus selects a Priest and a Levite to demonstrate his point – because the Priest and the Levite as you well know symbolize those who expressly acknowledge God, accept all the attendant doctrines about God and morality, and actively execute the outward rituals of “worshipping” God. The Levites as you know were a dedicated tribe of holy priests within the nation of Israel.

However Jesus has just shown what I am trying to say – namely that all the outward forms of acknowledgement of God which these people subscribed to did not in any way mean that they were really worshipping God – because of their action of ignoring the man who was hurt.

Now note carefully the next verses –

“Then a despised Samaritan came along, and when he saw the man, he felt compassion for him.”

Stop press! Note the words “despised Samaritan?” Why did Jesus not use any other lay Jew or even a non-specified person to elucidate his point? He rather chose to select what? – a DESPISED SAMARITAN!

Now Wikipedia says -


Thus note carefully the context – the Samaritan symbolizes people who are deemed to be “on the wrong side” of correct religious doctrine at the time and people who were accordingly “despised.”

Notwithstanding that, this is what Jesus conveys –

“Going over to him, the Samaritan soothed his wounds with olive oil and wine and bandaged them. Then he put the man on his own donkey and took him to an inn, where he took care of him. The next day he handed the innkeeper two silver coins, telling him, ‘Take care of this man. If his bill runs higher than this, I’ll pay you the next time I’m here.’

Jesus concludes –

“Now which of these three would you say was a neighbour to the man who was attacked by bandits?” Jesus asked. The man replied, “The one who showed him mercy.” Then Jesus said, “Yes, now go and do the same.

In this parable it is critical to note the imagery of the selected individuals –

1. “A Priest and a Levite” – are clearly indicative of people who have formally acknowledged God and are also at the fore-front of all the outward rituals and ceremonies.

2. “A Samaritan” – is considered on the wrong side of doctrine and dogma and is also “generally despised” in religious terms.

However it is easy to see that the man who is supposedly on the wrong side of doctrine – who no indication of God is made about is painted in glowing terms by Jesus because of his kind and merciful deeds.

I need to point out also the Imagery of Brotherly Affiliation. Note this from Wikipedia –
Quote


Much may be said – but basically there was this divide existing between the Jews and the Samaritans.

Now In answering the question – “who is your neighbour” – the parable of the Good Samaritan goes the extra step of showing that neighbourliness arises not from tribal or religious affiliations but from loving acts of concern for one another.

What this shows is that the “groups” of churches, mosques, or other theists, are useless in determining the question of neighbourliness. An Atheist or Buddhist could as well be a better neighbour than your Deacon in Church or your Imam in Mosque.

And given the parable of the Good Samaritan, in such an event, we can clearly see WHOM has done the will of God. . . .

So my dear friends, I assert to you today that which was the living essence of the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ – namely that love trumps all things and is the very essence of Christianity.

This is so simple and so pure – and should come so naturally to the Christian who is steeped in the ideas of Christ – which ideas tended towards love and doctrinal flexibility: Jesus statements on the observance of the Sabbath and other such – just show the flexibility I speak about – which tends towards –spirit and truth – and not outward forms.


Please who do you think the Priest and the Levite represent? And why did he specifically use these categories of people as examples?

DappaD:
@DeepSight, the parable of the good Samaritan is actually inconsequential in this discussion. We’re talking about someone who sinned/deviated from the truth, and what should be done in that case. Not you using a Biblical outlier like the good Samaritan parable as some kind of front when it doesn’t even fit into context.

P.S. I’m pleased to let you know I don’t feel compelled to read your long message after you’ve said that the apostle Paul’s teachings contradicted that of Christ’s. Your message can be directed to the apostle Paul and not me.
Thank you.

DeepSight:
Its pitifully sad if you do not see the relevance of the parable to this discussion. Because that shows you do not even understand the discussion. Or the implications of your own doctrines.
The parable is directly relevant to the matter at hand.
I am completely non-religious. I do not subscribe to any religion. In my youth though, I used to be one of you.
Time to shun me?

DappaD:
No, I do not see the relevance of that parable in this discussion because Jesus wasn’t talking about associating with an unrepentant sinner but about someone who was of a different tribe/background.

Whether you’re religious or not, I don’t really see how that helps your case here.

Oh and please spare me the condescending attitude, you don’t know me from anywhere just as I don’t know you. Keep the mutual respect as it is and don’t go beyond that to feed your ego.

DeepSight:
You see, -
1. There were also theological/ scriptural/ historical disagreements between the Jews and the Samaritans.
https://www.britannica.com/topic/Samaritan
2. The significance of "the priest and Levite" are cardinal to this discussion.
Don't tell me that is lost on you?
I mentioned it just so you understand I do not subscribe to biblical inerrancy.
Any condescension you imagine arises in your mind only perhaps on account of the prick of conscience.

DappaD:
Be that as it may, I’ve lost all interests in having further discussion with you. I take religious people seriously because at least I know they stand for some thing. Not someone who agrees with, yet still disagrees with the Bible at the same time.

DappaD:
@DeepSight, the parable of the good Samaritan is actually inconsequential in this discussion. We’re talking about someone who sinned/deviated from the truth, and what should be done in that case. Not you using a Biblical outlier like the good Samaritan parable as some kind of front when it doesn’t even fit into context.


P.S. I’m pleased to let you know I don’t feel compelled to read your long message after you’ve said that the apostle Paul’s teachings contradicted that of Christ’s. Your message can be directed to the apostle Paul and not me.
Thank you.

DeepSight, the parable of the good Samaritan is actually inconsequential in this discussion

We’re talking about someone who sinned/deviated from the truth, and what should be done in that case

DeepSight:

This simply reveals the radical fundamentalist and fanatical intolerance which my original question sought to bring into the light.
Thank you, my job is done.

DappaD:
No, I do not see the relevance of that parable in this discussion because Jesus wasn’t talking about associating with an unrepentant sinner but about someone who was of a different tribe/background.



Whether you’re religious or not, I don’t really see how that helps your case here.

Oh and please spare me the condescending attitude, you don’t know me from anywhere just as I don’t know you. Keep the mutual respect as it is and don’t go beyond that to feed your ego.

DappaD:


LOL! Fanatical intolerance because I chose not to continue the discussion with you ? You would rather want me to continue against my will ?

Please go and resolve your issue with apostle Paul first before we can continue our chat. That’s the assignment I’ve given you.

Toodles.

DeepSight:


This simply reveals the radical fundamentalist and fanatical intolerance which my original question sought to bring into the light.
Thank you, my job is done.

MaxInDHouse:


That's why you need true Christians to TEACH you what Jesus taught otherwise you will be totally confused when someone inquisitive ask you what Jesus meant here:

Do not think I came to bring peace to the earth; I came to bring, not peace, but a sword. For I came to cause division, with a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law. Indeed, a man’s enemies will be those of his own household. Whoever has greater affection for father or mother than for me is not worthy of me; and whoever has greater affection for son or daughter than for me is not worthy of me. And whoever does not accept his torture stake and follow after me is not worthy of me. Matthew 10:34-38

If you want us to TEACH you we will because it's the work we are assigned to do but if you're not interested there's no problem!

DeepSight:

This is arrogance and its UN-Christ-Like.
Christ taught humility, not this sort of proud presumption.

MaxInDHouse:


Well he actually sent his first century Jewish disciples out to PREACH and TEACH {Matthew 28:19-20} but they must wait for the active force of God that will organize them as a group so that they will continue doing the work boldly and orderly! Act 1:8

Today we are the one and only ORGANIZED group practicing what Jesus laid down:
PREACHING and TEACHING.
So if you're not connected to us you are on your own! Luke 11:23

Today we are the one and only ORGANIZED group practicing what

Yippeedaniel:
Ever wonder why anyone that left jw becomes a hater of the organization?. But no one who leave church become hater of da former church. Ever wonder y we have so many ex jw channel of YouTube? Over 69k on reddit but no single ex catholics, redeem, deeper life?. Theres more to it. This ex jw might have a point, Theres something driving them to do all this. I see many Nigerian exjw inda next 20yrs.

DeepSight:


If its a biblical teaching, one must say it is definitely not a Christ-like teaching. The teachings of Jesus stand in contradistinction to this Pauline fundamentalist discriminatory intolerance. This is not different from the worst sort of Nazi antisemitism.

There is no way Jesus would have supported this sort of hate-preachment.

DeepSight:


Jesus' prime teaching was love. Even for enemies.
I therefore cannot imagine the man who said "let he who has not sinned cast the first stone" - supporting this sort of radical fundamentalist intolerance.

Yippeedaniel:

Ever wonder why anyone that left jw becomes a hater of the organization?. But no one who leave church become hater of da former church. Ever wonder y we have so many ex jw channel of YouTube? Over 69k on reddit but no single ex catholics, redeem, deeper life?. Theres more to it. This ex jw might have a point, Theres something driving them to do all this. I see many Nigerian exjw inda next 20yrs.

DeepSight:


GBAM!

DeepSight:


This is arrogance and its UN-Christ-Like.
Christ taught humility, not this sort of proud presumption.