Why Paul’s missionary work amongst the Jews failed.

2016-10-25-photo-00001161



Categories: Bible

56 replies

  1. This intentional misquote by Paul is an excellent example which helps to illustrate why Paulinian faith based redemption and the “Gospel of Freedom” as preached by the Church actually NOT rooted in the OT.

    Whereas, on the other hand, the Qur’anic teaching of faith coupled with works, is in line with OT, and this is a point on which Judaism and Islam seem to agree.

    It is also likely that Jesus himself taught that works, action, good deeds, are required in order to enter into the Kingdom, as the parable of the goats and sheep seems to indicate (Matthew 25).

    Liked by 4 people

  2. If you look at the passage in it’s context it’s teaching the very opposite of what you claim it teaches:

    First there is a prophecy that the people will fail to keep the law and fall under the judgement of God and be sent in to captivity. Then they will repent.

    Restoration Promised

    1And it shall come to pass, when all these things are come upon thee, the blessing and the curse, which I have set before thee, and thou shalt call them to mind among all the nations, whither the LORD thy God hath driven thee, 2 And shalt return unto the LORD thy God, and shalt obey his voice according to all that I command thee this day, thou and thy children, with all thine heart, and with all thy soul; 3 That then the LORD thy God will turn thy captivity, and have compassion upon thee, and will return and gather thee from all the nations, whither the LORD thy God hath scattered thee.

    In order to avoid falling in to judgement again they need God’s prevenient grace:

    6 And the LORD thy God will circumcise thine heart, and the heart of thy seed, to love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, that thou mayest live.

    So without God’s grace the people cannot be sufficiently obedient to prevent them from lapsing into sin and incurring God’s wrath and judgement again. They cannot be obedient without his gracious work of circumcising their hearts:

    11In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ:

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Paul why did Mohamed’s missionary work fail to the Jews or Arabia?

    Like

    • Some Jews of Arabia did convert to Islam at that time, although most did not because they wanted the prophet to be of their own ethnicity.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Omer do you consider that a failure?

      Like

    • This is a very deceptive question. First of all, the Prophet called the Jews to worship the God they already believed in. There was no theological difference in the question of God. St. Paul called the Jews to worship Jesus as God. Big difference!
      Much of the Prophet’s discussion with the Jews was about following the Thora. The Prophet encouraged the Jews to follow the law in many instances. He wanted to show them that they were not exactly following the law in some issues and insisted on them doing it correctly. He did not come to them and told them blatantly that the Thora is invalid now. His first call was to the Thora and by following it they shall then see His truthfulness.
      St. Paul on the other hand mocked them for FOLLOWING the law and abolished it quite blatantly.

      The Jews were right when they rejected Pauline Christianity, a religion were God became a man and this God supposedly mocked what he has revealed before. Those Jews who rejected the Prophet rejected pure monotheism and a (new but very similar) law that should be for the whole world and not just for them.

      Liked by 2 people

    • “This is a very deceptive question. First of all, the Prophet called the Jews to worship the God they already believed in. There was no theological difference in the question of God. St. Paul called the Jews to worship Jesus as God. Big difference!”

      yes this is a strange one. in the jewish temple there is not a body of human being which represents jewish god. there are no idols. there are no shapes or forms

      “St. Paul on the other hand mocked them for FOLLOWING the law and abolished it quite blatantly.”

      jesus said to the rich man “you lack ONE thing..”

      paul would definitely not say ” you lack one thing…”

      Like

    • No, I don’t. If someone rejects a Prophet based on their racial prejudices, that is manifestly their failure, not the Prophet’s.

      Liked by 1 person

    • So its not a failure that the Jews rejected Mohamed. Interesting. BTW what happed to those Jews that rejected Mohamed as a prophet?

      Like

    • He simply repeats what he said before without looking at the responses and subtly adds the typical argument about the Jews of Arabia.

      There are three points about it:

      1. The Jews who were hostile to Muslims were fought against and eliminated.
      2. The other Jews of Arabia as well as Christians were expelled from the Holy Land, basically the Hijaz. See point 3 to see what happened to them outside.
      3. Jews and Christians have the right of protection through the Dhimmah. They can reject the Prophet and continue to live under Islamic rule.

      Your attempt to present the procedure from point 1 to all Jews who reject the Prophet is disgusting!

      Like

    • Rider, I see so those that rejected Mohamed where killed and expelled. We call that genocide.

      So lets count the differences and double standards.

      The Jews rejected Paul’s Message about Christ. Muslims consider that a failure.
      Paul then went to the Gentiles leaving the Jews to live in peace.

      The Arabian Jews rejected Mohamed messages about Himself and that is not considered a failure by Muslims. Mohamed and his merry band of followers then proceeded to kill and expel the Jews and even Christians who rejected Mohamed.

      Thanks for playing

      Like

    • I was quite clear but you seem to deliberately misunderstand.

      Those Jews that were killed were not killed for rejecting the Prophet but for fighting. You will find the explanations and discussions on this topic everywhere and also on this blog (Banu Qurayzah etc.).

      The non-Muslims were expelled from the Hijaz but they could continue to live outside. They were not killed for rejecting. If you once again claim that Jews or Christians are to be killed for rejecting Islam there will be no discussion possible with you.

      The failure of converting Jews is not a proof per se. This post was aimed to show how Pauline Christianity was not compatible with the Israelite religion. But not being able to convert Jews to a religion itself is not a proof against the religon.

      Paul had no political power to do anything else but his missionary work. When Christianity came to power a different approach was taken. This was not just done unjustly by worldly rulers but was legitimised by all kinds of Christian theologians.

      Like

    • He’s just a troll ignore him. He has been banned before but reappears under different names. He is also a coward who hides behind silly titles like ‘Fly The W’

      At least Ken is man enough to be himself.

      Like

    • To the Jews who rejected Prophet Muhammad nothing would have happened to them if they were not treacherous in their singed treaty of Madina where as residents of Madina they were supposed to protect Madina, not, be traitors and let the pagan tribes come and massacre the Muslim women and children.

      Among the Jewish tribe that was treacherous “some were killed, and some were taken captive,” as quoted in the Qur’an….which is in contradistinction to the tall tale that all of them were killed which is in the sira…unfortunately, most Muslims paid more attention to the heresay story in the sira than the words of God Almighty.

      Like

  4. “Whereas the Jews just laughed at Muhummad”.? Really?

    Go ahead and learn your history. Many Jews recognised the prophet-hood of Muhammad and even regarded Islam as divinely ordained to save Jews from the Byzantine (East Roman) empire. The Byzantine emperor Heraclius sought to force Jews living in his realm to accept Christianity. The Muslim conquest of the region prevented this decree from being carried out.

    In the early days of the Ummah, there were Jews who considered him to be a true prophet. I am not referring only to those who accepted Islam like Abdullah b Salam and Ka’b al-Ahbar. Consider the author of the Jewish apocalypse “Nistarot (Secrets of) R. Shimon b. Yohai”

    The Jewish author of Nistarot quoted Isaiah 21 “rider on donkey and rider on camel” which is one of the passages early Christian converts to Islam quoted with reference to Jesus and Muhammad.

    After examining the Septuagint,DSS and pre-Masoretic citations of this passage John C Reeves argues that the Masoretic rendition of this segment could have been a response to those segments of the Jewish scholars who used this verse the way the author of Nistarot did.

    Like

  5. Technically speaking, the Quran does not name the son that was to be sacrificed.

    But in any case, using your line of thinking how do you accept the “Gospel of John” when it contradicts the “Gospel of Luke”. Did Jesus meet all 11 disciples in the upper room simultaneously as stated in Luke. Or was Thomas absent only to meet him later on a separate occasion as per John?

    If you reject Islam because there are places where the Islamic narrative differs with the Biblical one what do you do when the Bible differs with the Bible?

    Do you have anything to offer in terms of evidence to back your accusations?

    Like

  6. You ignored the context of Deut. 29-30 – it is a prophesy of after they enter the land, and then when they don’t obey the law and then the Lord exiles them to another country (29:28) and then when they return (Deut. 30:3) – when they get a circumcised heart ( Tulip is right above – Deut. 30:6 – then they will be able to obey.

    The Lord later sent the Jews into exile as punishment / discipline for their disobedience – to Babylon for 70 years, then brought them back, but they still did not obey.
    Then, 400 years later, Christ came. Only He can obey the law. He fulfilled that part that you say the apostle left out – He obeyed perfectly.

    But you have to ask yourself, why was Israel never able to obey God’s law?

    Only when they got a circumcised heart (Deut. 30:6 – which “Tulip” is right – is only fulfilled in Christ – Colossians 2:11-12. Another way of putting is to have one’s stony heart removed and be given a soft obedient heart – the new birth – being born again by the Spirit of God. (see John 3:1-13 and ff.) Jesus is referring to Ezekiel 36:26-27.

    not quoting the full verse is not “misquoting” or “deliberately removing a vital clause”.

    He is quoting several phrases from Deuteronomy 30 in Romans 10

    See Romans 10:4-13

    4 For Christ is the end goal (ultimate purpose) of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes.

    5 For Moses writes that the man who practices the righteousness which is based on law shall live by that righteousness.
    6 But the righteousness based on faith speaks as follows: “Do not say in your heart, ‘Who will ascend into heaven?’ [ quoting Deut. 30:12] (that is, to bring Christ down),

    7 or ‘Who will descend into the abyss?’ [ quoting Deut. 30:13] (that is, to bring Christ up from the dead).”

    8 But what does it say? “The word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart” [ quoting Deut. 30:14] —that is, the word of faith which we are preaching,

    9 that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved;

    10 for with the heart a person believes, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, [g]resulting in salvation.

    11 For the Scripture says, “Whoever believes in Him will not be disappointed.”

    12 For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, abounding in riches for all who call on Him;

    13 for “Whoever will call on the name of the Lord will be saved.”

    The apostle is saying that only by Christ coming from heaven and dying and rising from the dead, and by trusting in Him and His atonement, and then getting the Holy Spirit, is a person able to obey the law.

    Romans 8:3-4
    For what the Law could not do, weak as it was through the flesh, God did: sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and as an offering for sin, He condemned sin in the flesh,

    4 so that the requirement of the Law might be fulfilled in us, who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.

    You must be born again by the Holy Spirit giving you a new heart. John 3:1-18

    Like

  7. Jesus gave the reason why people reject Him and His message:

    43 Why do you not understand what I am saying? It is because you cannot hear My word.

    44 You are of your father the devil, and you want to do the desires of your father. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth because there is no truth in him. Whenever he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies.

    45 But because I speak the truth, you do not believe Me.

    46 Which one of you convicts Me of sin? If I speak truth, why do you not believe Me?

    47 He who is of God hears the words of God; for this reason you do not hear them, because you are not of God.”

    John 8:43-47

    God has to open the heart – as in Acts 16:14 and 2 Cor. 4:6

    Like

  8. Jesus and His disciples were all Jews, and most Christians of the first century were Jews. Saul of Tarsus, Paul, also.

    So that is not “anti-Semitic”.

    Jesus it talking to the Pharisees who rejected Him and His gospel message.

    Like

    • Regardless, it is anti-Semitic: it demonises an entire race as evil. It has incited Christian hate towards Jews for centuries. Anyways, Jesus never said it.

      Liked by 1 person

    • No, it does not demonized the whole race. Gentiles (all nations) are lost in sin also. But that was only about some Jews who rejected.

      Centuries later hatred is wrong.

      Like

    • You whitewash your own scriptures. Imagine if that was in the Quran you would quote it everyday

      Liked by 1 person

    • The Qur’an does say stuff like that – Surah 9:29-30

      The Jews never called Ezra “the son of God” – goofy.

      and Hadith says “fighting against the Jews will go on until the day of resurrection” and “the rocks and trees cry out “there is a Jew behind me; come and kill him”, etc.

      disgusting.

      Quoted in the Hamas charter.

      Like

    • So you defend the blatant racism in your books by attacking Islam. Not very clever

      Liked by 1 person

    • Quoting the Islamic texts, and questioning them is rational; just as you sincerely believe you are criticizing the Bible by rational intellectual thought.

      You cannot deal with those Hadith verses, nor Surah 9:29-30

      Like

    • It is not racism in John. The same author and same book says in John 4:22:

      “. . . for salvation is from the Jews”

      So, it is not racism; not “all Jews”. You are lying about the text of John 8.

      Like

    • john, mark, matthew and luke were not jews
      and a jew can be anti-jew

      “jews could attack fellow jews with equal zeal”

      josephus says that the hebrew race who rebelled against rome were ‘slaves , the dregs of society and the bastard scum of the nation

      josephus war 5.4443

      jesus krist “son of god”

      “you are of your father the DEVIL, and your will is to do your father’s desires… when he LIES, he speaks according to his own nature”

      for 40 days,post resurrected jesus was giving fellow jews lessons on how to write about jews

      i guess forgiveness could not prevent jesus from telling john to write that jews are liars by nature

      Like

    • Luke is the only non-Jew.

      Matthew, Mark, John, Peter, Paul, James, Jude, Barnabas (possible human author of book of Hebrews) – all Jews who wrote NT books.

      Like


    • It is not racism in John. The same author and same book says in John 4:22:

      “. . . for salvation is from the Jews”

      So, it is not racism; not “all Jews”. You are lying about the text of John 8.”

      quote:
      Yet a time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in the Spirit and in truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks. 24God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in the Spirit and in truth.”

      this can no longer be limited to the jews.

      interpret that verse in light of

      John 8:39-47 (NRSV)
      39 They answered him, “Abraham is our father.” Jesus said to them, “If you were Abraham’s children, you would be doing what Abraham did,
      40 but now you are trying to kill me, a man who has told you the truth that I heard from God. This is not what Abraham did.
      41 You are indeed doing what your father does.” They said to him, “We are not illegitimate children; we have one father, God himself.”
      42 Jesus said to them, “If God were your Father, you would love me, for I came from God and now I am here. I did not come on my own, but he sent me.
      43 Why do you not understand what I say? It is because you cannot accept my word.
      44 You are from your father the devil, and you choose to do your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks according to his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies.
      45 But because I tell the truth, you do not believe me.
      46 Which of you convicts me of sin? If I tell the truth, why do you not believe me?
      47 Whoever is from God hears the words of God. The reason you do not hear them is that you are not from God.”

      quote:
      John’s gospel is thus the primary source of the image of “the Jews” acting collectively as the enemy of Jesus, which later became fixed in Christian minds

      quote:
      in John 7:1-9 Jesus moves around in Galilee but avoids Judea, because “the Jews” were looking for a chance to kill him.

      quote:
      New Testament scholar J.G. Dunn writes:
      The Fourth Evangelist is still operating within a context of intra-Jewish factional dispute, although the boundaries and definitions themselves are part of that dispute. It is clear beyond doubt that once the Fourth Gospel is removed from that context, and the constraints of that context, it was all too easily read as an anti-Jewish polemic and became a tool of anti-semitism. But it is highly questionable whether the Fourth Evangelist himself can fairly be indicted for either anti-Judaism or anti-semitism.

      quote:
      in the Gospel of John Jesus teaches his followers only to “Love one another” (John 13:34-35), meaning that Christian believers ought to be loving towards each other. The Jesus of the Gospel of John does NOT teach that his followers should love their enemies, or pray for those who persecuted them, because that would mean that the early Jewish Christians were obliged to love their more traditional Jewish bretheren who were persecuting them and kicking them out of the synagogues.

      by the time john was written “salvation from the jews” became useless concept.

      Like

  9. Ephesians 2:1-5
    The apostle shows “we too” (Jews) were also dead in sin, but Christ made us alive by His grace and Spirit – verses 4 and following.

    And you (Gentiles) were dead in your trespasses and sins,

    2 in which you formerly walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, of the spirit that is now working in the sons of disobedience.

    3 Among them we too all formerly lived in the lusts of our flesh, indulging the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest.

    4 But God, being rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us,
    5 even when we were dead in our transgressions, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved),

    Like

    • Bizarre answer. I’m referring to the anti Jewish hate speech John.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Paul says both Gentiles and Jews are lost in sin and unable to repent and believe unless God makes them alive in their hearts; unless God pours out grace.

      Like

    • It is not “anti-Jewish”. It is just “anti-Pharisee” and speaking the truth about hard heartedness and stubborn refusal to accept the Messiah.

      Like

    • More whitewashing, it say “the Jews” have the devil as there father. In today’s world that is hate speech, just as bad as Jesus calling a gentile a “dog” because of her race. Shocking stuff.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Nope; it was those specific Pharisees Jesus was talking to; not “all Jews”. You mis-interpret.

      On the Canaanite woman in Mark 7 and Matthew 15, Jesus was testing the disciples racial prejudice by quoting a common cultural racist statement that they would make.

      See here:

      https://apologeticsandagape.wordpress.com/2014/10/03/was-jesus-cruel-to-the-canaanite-woman-mark-724-30-matthew-1521-28/

      Like

    • Ken I love it when you try to justify racial abuse.

      Liked by 1 person

    • I don’t justify racial abuse; it is wrong; as both Jesus and the apostle Paul and all NT books teach.
      Revelation 5:9 – “some from all nations, languages, tribes, and peoples were redeemed by the blood of the lamb.” (see Rev. 5:5-6, 9)

      Like

    • “On the Canaanite woman in Mark 7 and Matthew 15, Jesus was testing the disciples racial prejudice by quoting a common cultural racist statement that they would make.”

      what a liar you are .

      quote:
      Jesus began with a myopic vision: he was sent only to care for Israelites. The Canaanite “dogs” were out of his purview. But it wasn’t until he was confronted with one of these dogs, face to face, that he discovered, to his surprise, that they are humans too, and dignified, even in their despair, capable of greater faith even than the so-called “faithful.”

      He was tempted in all ways as we are, tempted to see the Other as less dignified, less worthy, less faithful, less capable of faithfulness, less inclined to tolerance. He was tempted to see the Other as Other, rather than as Self. At first, he couldn’t see his own people, couldn’t see himself, in her. But confronted with that Other, Jesus learned. He learned to sympathize. To sympathize with the enemy. Jesus learned.

      makes better sense then your lies.

      Like

    • If you read Mark 7:20-23 and the roots of sin and that external washings don’t cleanse the heart (Mark 7:1-19), and see that pride/arrogance is one of those internal sins (Mark 7:23), and see that Jesus immediately and deliberated goes into Tyre and Sidon in Mark 7:24 ff, in order to test the disciples to see if they learned the lessons of Mark 7:1-23. This explains why Jesus said what He did.

      Like

    • it is possible that the disciples are telling him to give her what she wants

      http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0057%3Aentry%3Da)polu%2Fw

      if this is the case , then you have a problem

      the disciples are asking jesus to give her what she wants

      the greek is allowing this interpretation.

      your problem now is that jesus calls her and her people and her sick daughter dogs and that her daughter must continue to suffer until…

      in matthews version their is no “wait until i finnish with the children”

      he tells her ” it is not right to take the childrens bread and cast it to the dogs”

      quite clearly jesus is seeing himself as prideful and arrogant here.

      it is the disciples who have more mercy than him

      what is worse is that she has to agree to the insult and then turn it back on jesus, but she still did not win a seat next to the children.

      so why did she agree that she was a dog if it was nothing but “test” ?

      she had to agree because she was desperate not because she winked and said ” i’ll play the test”

      Like

    • see the sin of pride in Mark 7:23; then in verse 24 He deliberately goes to an area to test the disciples’ racial pride and prejudice.

      She did not wallow in self-pity and victim mentality and she did not complain. Her culture was very pagan and dirty – so she was admitting she was a “dog” – a dirty sinner – the only way to find life is to admit your sin and pride and dirtiness and repent and come to Jesus for cleansing. Only He can cleanse us in our heart. Her faith cleansed her heart. “cleansing their hearts by faith” – Acts 15:9-11 – The Gentiles are also saved by faith in Christ.

      Like

    • “If you read Mark 7:20-23 and the roots of sin and that external washings don’t cleanse the heart (Mark 7:1-19), and see that pride/arrogance is one of those internal sins (Mark 7:23), and see that Jesus immediately and deliberated goes into Tyre and Sidon in Mark 7:24 ff, in order to test the disciples to see if they learned the lessons of Mark 7:1-23. This explains why Jesus said what He did.”

      external washings don’t cleanse the heart
      pride and arrogance is one of those internal sins

      digression:
      washing hands with water is symbolic for clean heart
      if the water you use is clean, then you should keep a clean mouth

      back to what you were saying


      17 After he had left the crowd and entered the house, his disciples asked him about this parable. 18 “Are you so dull?” he asked. “Don’t you see that nothing that enters a person from the outside can defile them? 19 For it doesn’t go into their heart but into their stomach, and then out of the body.” (In saying this, Jesus declared all foods clean.)”

      jesus told her that “it is not right to take the childrens bread and cast it to the dogs” after she repeatedly begged him for a cure

      only after she bested him, she is able to change jesus’ mind

      out of jesus mind came out evil and then put into words

      out of jesus mind came out a dumb saying which was easily refuted by the woman

      it was jesus who used pride and arrogance when he said “CAST to the dogs”

      it is jesus who used pride and arrogance when he kept SILENT

      internal jewish disputes like washing hands don’t involve the “dogs ” and the “pigs”

      according to jesus they are animals who cannot reason

      Like

    • “If you read Mark 7:20-23 and the roots of sin and that external washings don’t cleanse the heart (Mark 7:1-19), and see that pride/arrogance is one of those internal sins (Mark 7:23), and see that Jesus immediately and deliberated goes into Tyre and Sidon in Mark 7:24 ff, in order to test the disciples to see if they learned the lessons of Mark 7:1-23. This explains why Jesus said what He did.”

      jesus makes the woman beg like a dog .
      there is no lesson in this
      on the other hand others get prompt responses

      “test the disciples”

      17 After he had left the crowd and entered the house, his disciples asked him about this parable. 18 “Are you so dull?” he asked. “Don’t you see that nothing that enters a person from the outside can defile them? 19 For it doesn’t go into their heart but into their stomach, and then out of the body.” (In saying this, Jesus declared all foods clean.)”

      it was jesus using abusive language. he had no compassion for the suffering dog

      it is the disciples who say “send her away…”

      it would have been better to send her away then humiliate her and see her beg like a dog

      i have seen one translation which says

      “give her what she wants” i.e dismiss her with her cure for she keeps crying after us

      Like

    • ” , in order to test the disciples to see if they learned the lessons of Mark 7:1-23″

      she replied, “even the dogs under the table eat the children’s crumbs.”

      29Then he told her, “For such a reply, you may go…”

      1. so what did they learn? that jesus’ insult backfired

      2. poor woman went away home thinking she was less than the children and benefited from waist

      3. poor woman went away home thinking that she is slave of the children (isaiah 14:1 -2)

      4. humiliated and publically confirms jesus’ word “dog” and goes away

      5. lesson: it is okay to call someone a dog as long as they accept it

      what came out of jesus’ mouth made a human go away thinking she was less than other humans

      Like

    • I think you mean “waste”. (left-over food that we throw away)
      “waist” is the middle section of a human where we wear a belt.

      Like

    • “see the sin of pride in Mark 7:23; then in verse 24 He deliberately goes to an area to test the disciples’ racial pride and prejudice.”

      question :

      “send her away for she keeps crying after us”

      is it possible that the greek for “send her away” is conveying the idea that

      “let her have what she wants so she quickly departs” ?

      reply:

      Quite possibly. It is a very flexible word: http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0057%3Aentry%3Da)polu%2Fw.

      repeated yourself. you made up the “Test the disciples racial pride ” bs because i just told you that the greek does not negate the fact that “send her away ” could mean
      “give her what she wants so then she goes away”

      where do we see “racial pride and prejudice” in “send her away ”

      racial pride was coming out of jesus’ mouth not the disciples .

      “She did not wallow in self-pity and victim mentality and she did not complain.”

      quote :
      In this story, Jesus never agrees to the equality of gentiles, or the equality of women, or the equality of gentile women with Jewish men. Jesus called the woman a dog. And she made her point by agreeing with him, not saying that she deserved equality or fairness, but merely begging for crumbs.

      It is a very, very common thing for someone who is oppressed to have to placate and pretend to agree with the oppressor in order to gain some small benefit. And that’s what we see happen here.

      Once she had admitted to and agreed with his understanding of her place in the world, a dog who can at most expect crumbs, Jesus gave her what she begged for.
      end quote

      ” Her culture was very pagan and dirty – so she was admitting she was a “dog” – a dirty sinner – the only way to find life is to admit your sin and pride and dirtiness and repent and come to Jesus for cleansing.”

      to call a woman a dog / little bitch is to insult and degrade in front of people

      it’s meant to make the woman feel other than a human being

      it’s meant to tell her that she is without reason and she eats her own crap

      but there is not one place where jairus or the woman with blood was called “dog” .

      did her ill little daughter know anything about her pagan culture? what happen to “love thy neighbour” or “love your enemy” or “jebus loves all”
      this was a little girl suffering
      and jesus thought the people who would reject him and destroy him and judge him were more worthy and clean than the dog who came to beg for crumbs for her SUFFERING little daughter?

      here is a woman SUFFERING for her suffering daughter and jesus could think about how dirty her fukin culture is?

      in the story there is no

      repentance
      she receives no information on how to get saved
      her ill daughter receives no information on how to get saved

      she was not admitting she “was a dog” she was
      intelligent enough to make jesus realise that crumbs fall to the ground without people realising .

      quote:

      This incident was an aberration in his behavior, a single time when, on a whim, he decided to indulge an inferior person who amused him with her clever response but did not challenge his privileged world-view.

      The woman may have bested Jesus in this argument, in the sense that she convinced him to give her what she desperately needed.

      But she did not best him by arguing for her equality. And she did not best him by convincing him that she was equal. She did not best him by arguing for fairness. She did not convince him to treat gentile women, as a group, fairly.

      Saying that a dog may claim crumbs that fall from the table is a very, very different thing from saying that a dog is equal to a human child eating at the table. She used the time-honored technique of the oppressed and enslaved of flattering their oppressor in order to gain favor.

      end quote

      ” Only He can cleanse us in our heart. Her faith cleansed her heart. “cleansing their hearts by faith” – Acts 15:9-11 – The Gentiles are also saved by faith in Christ.”

      funny. in marks version, “woman for such a reply” nothing about “faith “

      Like

    • “see the sin of pride in Mark 7:23; then in verse 24 He deliberately goes to an area to test the disciples’ racial pride and prejudice.”

      She did not wallow in self-pity and victim mentality and she did not complain. Her culture was very pagan and dirty – so she was admitting she was a “dog” – a dirty sinner – the only way to find life is to admit your sin and pride and dirtiness and repent and come to Jesus for cleansing. ”

      i thought the lesson was suppose to teach not to look down on other human beings and to watch your mouth, but what we learn from the lesson is that it teaches that a non-jew can refute jesus and make him change his mind, with the condition that the woman admits that she is “dirty bitch” and her daughter is “dirty bitch” and she has dirty culture . once she publicly says ” dogs benefit from waste” jesus says , “woman for such saying…”

      jesus’ like prideful and arrogant jew in his lesson teaches

      1. see, she agreed that she is an animal

      2. she agreed with me that he place in the world is that of an animal who begs from crumbs

      quote:
      Once she had admitted to and agreed with his understanding of her place in the world, a dog who can at most expect crumbs, Jesus gave her what she begged for.
      end quote

      the test was to show his disciples how to handle non-jews and if you get them to admit that they are dogs, give them what they want.

      this is one human being looking down upon a humble human being who came for waste.

      this is one human being who called an ill and suffering girl “dogs” and one who receives her food by having it cast at her

      this is love? this is respecting your neighbour?

      this is caring for people ?

      Like

  10. Getting back to main subject of Paul’s post:

    What is the context of Deuteronomy 29-30 ?
    What is God predicting that Israel will do in the future, after they go into the land the first time? (after Joshua, etc.)

    What is that about the exile into another country?
    What is that about after they are restored to the land?
    What is that about being circumcised in their hearts? (see Deut. 30:6)

    But you have to ask yourself, why was Israel never able to obey God’s law?

    What is that about taking the heart of stone out and giving them a new heart? Ezekiel 36:26-27

    What is Jesus telling Nicodemus in John 3:1-18 ?

    Like

  11. “I don’t justify racial abuse; it is wrong; as both Jesus and the apostle Paul and all NT books teach.”

    no, jesus just waits for the insult turned back on him, then he changes his mind and gives the waist the woman came for. she didn’t get an invitation to eat from the childrens table.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: