UnderGround Forums
 

HolyGround >> The Eye of a Needle Parable


2/10/11 2:57 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
mmanthebay
8 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 5/12/08
Posts: 202
Hypnos, according to the Gospel of John Jesus had not yet ascended to the Father at the time of his showing Thomas his wounds. Therefore, he was not yet in his Glorified body. Phone Post
2/10/11 10:16 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Grakman
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 6/21/08
Posts: 3659
mmanthebay -  Hypnos, according to the Gospel of John Jesus had not yet ascended to the Father at the time of his showing Thomas his wounds. Therefore, he was not yet in his Glorified body. Phone Post

 He also told Mary Magdalene not to touch him when she first came upon him after the resurrection.

But this brings up a question: if he was not yet in his glorified body, how did he mysteriously appear in the upper room? Had he snuck in before hand and waited for the disciples to come? Did God transport him there in his wounded body?

If he had the wounds in his hands and feet because he was not glorified, was he sitll wounded on his body and head from the whips, beating and crown of thorns?
2/10/11 11:35 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
inlikeflynn
2 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 9/11/06
Posts: 481
Demitrius Barbito - This parable was part of my new Christian clip:



They are real questions that I struggled with. The purpose of the clip was just put float those questions in the air. That's how they became relevant to me. Someone forced a concept upon my notice at one time or another that I would have never come up with on my own "because of my conditioning and rigidity".

Here is where my conscience is at with each.

Giving money to the homeless:

I do this quite often. I talk to them about their life, Christ and give them a few dollars I used to do it all the time about ten years ago but my ex-wife (whom I have a wonderful relationship with right now) was very discouraging about it. She and her parents fed me lots of conservative ideas about how they are just bums, will only buy booze, are lazy and are probably not Christians. So, under that pressure, I stopped interacting with them and giving them money.

Can a Christian be homosexual who has just given into temptation:

Of course. All sorts of corruption proceeds from the human heart. Homosexuality is just another form of corruption and rebellion. It would be difficult however to reconcile being a homosexual as a POLICY decision concurrent "with" their Christianity for their lifetime. It is definitely something they need to be saved from. However, I once believed that the presence of homosexuality in a person "proved" there was no possibility of regeneration. I have come to see that many people I know and interact with today feel that way now.

Winning 100 million and only keeping 1 or 2 million:

Even though the bible says "Your store houses will be overflowing", I was given very corrupt interpretations of what that meant. I was also taught that "God shows who he likes and blesses by what they have". Then I experienced what tremendous wealth was like. I have since been given a gift of understanding what the hoarding of wealth creates in the human heart. It distorts ones own perception of who one is before God and before man. It It's causes one to "sociologically" drop out and become an independent and superior entity. It creates deep numbness to the needs of others as one satiates every desire or whim... So, YES, I could give away the "majority" of my lottery winning when dealing with 10's of millions of dollars...

Crushing a child's spirit or being empathetic:

"Honor your mother and father" and "spare the rod spoil the child" have been misused as tools to systematically destroy the vitality of children's spirits as far back as the eye (and heart) can see... Those who have done this (me being one of them) lacked the understanding that EMPATHY is what a child needs most from a parent. But empathy requires that an adult be intimately familiar with the little childs heart and that takes time, commitment and emotional connectivity. That's a tall order for person who's parent crushed the life out of them as children". Seems that many have lived a lifetime thinkings that harshness is a far easier way to achieve well behaved child (that being the prize the parent can then show off using the child as a little ambassador.)

So, yes, empathy is of a high priority over the past 4 years or so. In greater degrees all the time. I'm still learning.

Demi


Good post. I like the guitar work on that video too. :)
2/10/11 11:57 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
inlikeflynn
2 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 9/11/06
Posts: 482
colubrid1 - "
Actualy sxhasperating the child means after they grow up and you did not teech them the ways of the lord and His word.


I don't get that from most of the translations I've read. They seem to be warning fathers not to be too harsh in their commands or discipline, thereby discouraging the child from obedience.


On a side not. And I hate to talk or even think about this because i am a single dad of a 7 year old daughter. There is nothing in scripture about an "age of accountability".That is just a churchy term... Matter of fact if babies all went to heaven when they died , that would make abortionists the good guys doing a righteoues thing.


Well, there's nothing in Scripture about God not bathing in the blood of aborted fetuses for fun either, but we can infer from His character that He doesn't. How would it be just to condemn someone for not making a decision they never had a chance to make?

As far as it making abortionists the good guys, that is some twisted logic. Does that mean it's OK to murder believers because they are going to heaven anyway?
2/10/11 2:27 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
mmanthebay
8 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 5/12/08
Posts: 210
Grakman- good questions. Phone Post
2/11/11 10:35 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Demitrius Barbito
40 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 1504
Thanks inlikeflynn. I sometimes make a Christian nuisance of myself...
2/11/11 5:58 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Ridgeback
4 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 7/3/07
Posts: 21841
Grakman - 
Hypnos -  That reminds me of a question I've had and no one has really been able to answer it. Now after Jesus rose from the dead and came back to live amongst the disciples in his new glorified body. My question is, why did Jesus still have the holes in his hands and pierced side even though he was now in the glorified body? My assumption is so he could show Thomas who wouldn't believe until he saw Jesus with his own eyes and placed Thomas hand in his side. Then maybe the wounds closed up after Thomas saw and believed. Phone Post
Here's another one for you...

Jesus is recorded as having eaten bread and fish with the disciples after his resurrection. Did his body process ALL that he ate, or did he have to eliminate the waste?
 

 I remember reading some old father speculating that it was burned up spiritually.  

The scars I think remain though.  Or maybe the scars we earn on the way remain but those inflicted in other ways are healed.
2/11/11 8:17 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Grakman
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 6/21/08
Posts: 3665
Ridgeback - 
Grakman - 
Hypnos -  That reminds me of a question I've had and no one has really been able to answer it. Now after Jesus rose from the dead and came back to live amongst the disciples in his new glorified body. My question is, why did Jesus still have the holes in his hands and pierced side even though he was now in the glorified body? My assumption is so he could show Thomas who wouldn't believe until he saw Jesus with his own eyes and placed Thomas hand in his side. Then maybe the wounds closed up after Thomas saw and believed. Phone Post
Here's another one for you...

Jesus is recorded as having eaten bread and fish with the disciples after his resurrection. Did his body process ALL that he ate, or did he have to eliminate the waste?
 

 I remember reading some old father speculating that it was burned up spiritually.  

The scars I think remain though.  Or maybe the scars we earn on the way remain but those inflicted in other ways are healed.

 In some ways they could be considered a badge of honor; an eternal reminder of who he is and what he did.
2/12/11 4:54 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Ridgeback
4 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 7/3/07
Posts: 21850
 It also points to the notion that this life and this cosmos are not simply throwaways, but more like the vessels that will be filled with the life of the world to come.  It is important to note that on some level the resurrected body of Jesus is formed from his human body, not some completely new spiritual body with no relation to this life.  This is why Christians traditionally buried saints under church altars, venerated the relics of saints, and stored rather than burned the bones of their dead brethren.   

Now I hear modern Christians talking about leaving the shell of their bodies behind or their souls flying away to some Platonic disembodied heaven and it is a real shame considering.

 So all that to say that I don't think Jesus retained the scars of this life just long enough to prove a point.  
2/12/11 12:41 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
mmanthebay
8 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 5/12/08
Posts: 213
I don't think he held on to his scars to prove a point either. I just consider that he mentioned that he had not yet ascended. Also when I think of a Glorified body I think about the Transfiguration. I also recall John mentioning in Revelation that he, John, did not physically recognize Jesus. Is there any differences pertaining to these passages in the EO bible? Or different teaching? Phone Post
2/12/11 1:52 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Ridgeback
4 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 7/3/07
Posts: 21858
mmanthebay -  I don't think he held on to his scars to prove a point either. I just consider that he mentioned that he had not yet ascended. Also when I think of a Glorified body I think about the Transfiguration. I also recall John mentioning in Revelation that he, John, did not physically recognize Jesus. Is there any differences pertaining to these passages in the EO bible? Or different teaching? Phone Post

 No differences in the Bible.  The NT is the same for all Christians (only some OT books are different).  I haven't specifically come across anything from an EO father/theologian distinguishing between the risen Jesus pre-ascension and the post-ascension Jesus (although I am sure there is plenty out there).  My understanding thus far, however, is that the description of the risen Jesus is what we can expect in resurrection as well.  That is what I take to be the meaning of the "first fruits" reference.  The "don't touch me for I have not yet ascended" is a strange passage though for sure, especially in light of St. Thomas touching his wounds.
2/12/11 5:44 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
mmanthebay
8 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 5/12/08
Posts: 214
Other translations literate, "do not cling to me" instead of "do not touch me". One can cling to a thing in the non physical. "Clinging" can be emotional, mental, idealistic, ect. "Touching" in the relevant context is physical in modern English. Perhaps the many translations that emphasize "clinging" are on point. Phone Post
2/12/11 11:44 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Ridgeback
4 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 7/3/07
Posts: 21882
mmanthebay -  Other translations literate, "do not cling to me" instead of "do not touch me". One can cling to a thing in the non physical. "Clinging" can be emotional, mental, idealistic, ect. "Touching" in the relevant context is physical in modern English. Perhaps the many translations that emphasize "clinging" are on point. Phone Post

 Yes I've heard this before.  George MacDonald has a sermon on this where he points out the possible interpretations.  The issue isn't with touching him physically, but rather trying to cling to him in a way that doesn't want him to fulfill his plan.  Kind of a variation on St. Peter saying Jesus can't die.
2/15/11 7:53 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Demitrius Barbito
40 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 1523
What the hell happened to the eye of the needle...???

I'm ready for that one...
2/15/11 8:17 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Hypnos
49 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 4/10/02
Posts: 1969
Demi - I still believe Jesus meant a actual needle. I was talking about this parable with a couple people and this guy came up and said, "Did you know that the eye of the needle was really the city gates of Jerusalem and camels had to shimmy on their knees to get through the small opening?" Can camels shimmy on their knees? I've never heard that in my life. I still believe Jesus meant a needle. Same with the parable about taking the log out of our eye before looking at the speck in another person eye. I believe Jesus also meant a real log. The needle is a needle and the log is a log. Anyways, I guess whats important is we get the parable instead of debating on if the needle was really a needle... Meaning me :) It just didn't sound right to me and that's why I made this thread to see what others had to say. Phone Post
2/15/11 8:49 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Hypnos
49 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 02/15/11 8:49 PM
Member Since: 4/10/02
Posts: 1971
Here is a clip from Mark Driscoll regarding the eye of a needle and the log in the eye. Mark tells it how it is.

If you don't want to watch the whole video, the log parable starts at 7:30 and the needle parable starts at 8:20

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aHLlHLhinPA&feature=related
2/15/11 9:12 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
LoveToChoke
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 11/1/06
Posts: 816
Do you know what a metaphor is?
2/15/11 9:23 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Ridgeback
4 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 7/3/07
Posts: 21942
 Jesus used hyperbolic language so I would probably bet he meant the literal eye of a literal sewing needle.  He talked about poking out one's eye if it offended.  I don't think he meant either literally, but I also think he was using hyperbole to convey that the matters were very serious.  In the context of the story the rich man had chosen his wealth over the state of his soul.  That is a serious matter and can potentially damn a person.  The kneeling came theory seems to appeal to those who are still hopeful they can both pull off being rich and entering the kingdom of heaven.
2/15/11 9:35 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Hypnos
49 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 4/10/02
Posts: 1972
Well put Ridgeback! Phone Post
2/15/11 9:40 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Grakman
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 6/21/08
Posts: 3681
Ridgeback -  Jesus used hyperbolic language so I would probably bet he meant the literal eye of a literal sewing needle.  He talked about poking out one's eye if it offended.  I don't think he meant either literally, but I also think he was using hyperbole to convey that the matters were very serious.  In the context of the story the rich man had chosen his wealth over the state of his soul.  That is a serious matter and can potentially damn a person.  The kneeling came theory seems to appeal to those who are still hopeful they can both pull off being rich and entering the kingdom of heaven.
Only poor people go to heaven? You are starting to sound like the rev, Ridge. ;)

So what constitutes rich? How many cars, flat screen tvs, computers, and jewelry can we have before we're considered rich?  Sounds like 90% of Americans are destined for Hell.


 
2/15/11 9:58 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Hypnos
49 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 4/10/02
Posts: 1973
If God blesses someone with success and wealth and at the same time the person is also a good steward with what God has provided, then that shouldn't be a problem. But if the person has wealth and not a steward with what God has provided and stores material things up for himself. Then that could be a problem. I think its a question of ones heart and motives. But in the end God is the judge. Phone Post
2/15/11 10:36 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Demitrius Barbito
40 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 1527
"""the person is also a good steward with what God has provided, then that shouldn't be a problem"""

Never met one... AND I'VE BEEN ONE!!! Gave it all up about a year ago...

He most definitely meant an actual needle... Consider scriptural consistency.


I still like everyone who doesn't agree...
2/15/11 11:09 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Grakman
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 6/21/08
Posts: 3690
 ^ what did you give up, Demitrius?
2/16/11 12:33 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
LoveToChoke
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 11/1/06
Posts: 817
Seriously, are you suggesting that Jesus never used metaphors? Everything he said was literal?
2/16/11 1:30 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Ridgeback
4 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 7/3/07
Posts: 21961
Grakman - 
Ridgeback -  Jesus used hyperbolic language so I would probably bet he meant the literal eye of a literal sewing needle.  He talked about poking out one's eye if it offended.  I don't think he meant either literally, but I also think he was using hyperbole to convey that the matters were very serious.  In the context of the story the rich man had chosen his wealth over the state of his soul.  That is a serious matter and can potentially damn a person.  The kneeling came theory seems to appeal to those who are still hopeful they can both pull off being rich and entering the kingdom of heaven.
Only poor people go to heaven? You are starting to sound like the rev, Ridge. ;)

So what constitutes rich? How many cars, flat screen tvs, computers, and jewelry can we have before we're considered rich?  Sounds like 90% of Americans are destined for Hell.


 

 I don't like this trend of misquoting me.  At no point did I write "all the rich are going to hell."  I do think that Jesus was absolutely warning people that wealth in this world puts their soul's in serious peril.  I have no issue with saying that most Americans, by the very nature of being born into such a rich and affluent culture, are automatically in greater jeopardy than those born into poverty.  

The Rev and I actually agree about more things than you might imagine.  I certainly agree with his notion (and the notion of his influences like Jacques Ellul) that Jesus is most likely not on the side of the powerful in any given circumstance and that means Christianity will always have subversive element to it.  So yes I think that a whole nation can deceive itself into thinking it has been favored by God due to material wealth when, in fact, it has been cursed by God for turning its back on righteousness.  

Reply Post

You must log in to post a reply. Click here to login.