 |
|
Those soldiers you listed did have such weapons and their
Posted on: September 3, 2021 at 01:59:44 CT
TigerMatt STL
Posts:
96620
Member For:
26.46 yrs
Level:
User
M.O.B. Votes:
3
choice led to their death.
But that does not having any bearing on your twisting of Jesus' words either intentionally or out of ignorance.
Matthew 10:34–36 (TNTC Mt):
(d) Jesus’ divisive mission (10:34–36). 34. Anyone who recognized Jesus’ mission as Messianic might properly think that I have come to bring peace on earth, on the basis of Isaiah 9:5–7; Zechariah 9:9–10; etc. That was his mission, as Luke 2:14 declares, and his disciples’ message, as v. 13 has shown. But the peace the Messiah brings is much more than the absence of fighting, which men dignify with the name of ‘peace’, it is a restored relationship with God. And in the bringing of such ‘peace’, paradoxically, conflict is inevitable, as not all will accept it. The sword Jesus brings is not here military conflict, but, as vv. 35–36 show, a sharp social division which even severs the closest family ties. (For this figurative use of sword, cf. Luke 2:35; 22:36 [probably]; the parallel in Luke [12:51] has ‘division’ for ‘sword’.) Jewish Messianic expectation often included a period of conflict before the Messiah’s triumph, but Jesus speaks here, as in the preceding and following verses, more of a division in men’s perMatthew 10:35–36 (TNTC Mt): personal response to him. As long as some men refuse the Lordship of God, to follow the Prince of peace will always be a way of conflict.
35–36. These verses paraphrase Micah 7:6, already alluded to in v. 21 (see commentary there); but what was in Micah a general prediction of social disruption, and in v. 21 was applied to religious persecution, is now presented as the direct (and intended) result of Jesus’ own mission. The verb translated set against is more Matthew 10:35–36 (TNTC Mt): literally ‘separate’: Jesus does not come to poison family relationships, but rather he brings a division, regrettable but inevitable, between those who respond to his mission and those who reject it. Christian experience down the ages confirms that genuine love and obedience to the fifth commandment do not rule out the possibility of the choice reflected in v. 37, and of the consequent division of the family.
(e) The cost of discipleship (10:37–39). Verse 37 spells out the cost to the disciple of the division forecast in vv. 34–36, and vv. 38–39 go on to add other aspects of the debit side of discipleship. Those who followed Jesus did so with their eyes open.
But that does not having any bearing on your twisting of Jesus' words either intentionally or out of ignorance.
Matthew 10:34–36 (TNTC Mt):
(d) Jesus’ divisive mission (10:34–36). 34. Anyone who recognized Jesus’ mission as Messianic might properly think that I have come to bring peace on earth, on the basis of Isaiah 9:5–7; Zechariah 9:9–10; etc. That was his mission, as Luke 2:14 declares, and his disciples’ message, as v. 13 has shown. But the peace the Messiah brings is much more than the absence of fighting, which men dignify with the name of ‘peace’, it is a restored relationship with God. And in the bringing of such ‘peace’, paradoxically, conflict is inevitable, as not all will accept it. The sword Jesus brings is not here military conflict, but, as vv. 35–36 show, a sharp social division which even severs the closest family ties. (For this figurative use of sword, cf. Luke 2:35; 22:36 [probably]; the parallel in Luke [12:51] has ‘division’ for ‘sword’.) Jewish Messianic expectation often included a period of conflict before the Messiah’s triumph, but Jesus speaks here, as in the preceding and following verses, more of a division in men’s perMatthew 10:35–36 (TNTC Mt): personal response to him. As long as some men refuse the Lordship of God, to follow the Prince of peace will always be a way of conflict.
35–36. These verses paraphrase Micah 7:6, already alluded to in v. 21 (see commentary there); but what was in Micah a general prediction of social disruption, and in v. 21 was applied to religious persecution, is now presented as the direct (and intended) result of Jesus’ own mission. The verb translated set against is more Matthew 10:35–36 (TNTC Mt): literally ‘separate’: Jesus does not come to poison family relationships, but rather he brings a division, regrettable but inevitable, between those who respond to his mission and those who reject it. Christian experience down the ages confirms that genuine love and obedience to the fifth commandment do not rule out the possibility of the choice reflected in v. 37, and of the consequent division of the family.
(e) The cost of discipleship (10:37–39). Verse 37 spells out the cost to the disciple of the division forecast in vv. 34–36, and vv. 38–39 go on to add other aspects of the debit side of discipleship. Those who followed Jesus did so with their eyes open.
Please explain why this message is being reported.
MESSAGE THREAD
- 
Those soldiers you listed did have such weapons and their - TigerMatt STL - 9/3 01:59:44