was Jesus turning the other cheek when He made a whip, and kicked over the money changers tables?

Mem said:

If I understand you correctly, your position is that, yes, what He did does conflict with his other teachings (although that is not the assertion "as I pointed them out."

Click to expand...

Yes. but again there is no issue because He is sovereign and we are not. meaning we have rules apart from the law to follow That He does not.

Didn't God do exactly that in regard to Jesus? Wasn't Jesus "tied to the same rules He tied us to" as born under the Law (Gal 4:4-5)?

Click to expand...

Jesus was tied to the law not the rule made by man. A perfect example of this is the command to keep the sabbath holy. For the makers of the law/makers of the rules/Halakha (not law, but interpretation of the law/rules on how to keep the law) Jesus did not have to respect or obey.

Meaning the Temple priests took the Torah and the laws it contained then spelled out how each law was to be. for example here are/where the rules of keeping the sabbath:
Core Biblical Rules

• • Total Rest: People could not do any regular labor, and the rule applied to family members, servants, and work animals.
  • No Fire or Cooking: Lighting a fire or preparing meals was forbidden, meaning food was typically prepared the day before.
  • No Travel: Long journeys or carrying heavy loads (traveling past a defined "Sabbath day's journey") were prohibited. [1, 2]

Strict Oral Traditions (Halakha)
Religious authorities added detailed fences around the law to prevent accidental work:

• • Carrying Objects: Moving an item from a private space to a public space (or vice versa) was forbidden.
  • Healing and Medicine: Treating sick people was restricted unless a life was in immediate danger.
  • Gathering Food: Plucking grain to eat while walking through a field was considered illegal harvesting and threshing. [1]

Jesus's Approach

• uman Need: Jesus challenged the strict legalism of the Pharisees, teaching that "the Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath".
  • Doing Good: He routinely healed people and defended his disciples for picking grain, showing that mercy, rescue, and human need trumped rigid rules.
  ~Google search
  
  
  
  
  So , when Jesus Healed the man who was crippled on the sabbath at the pool of Bethesda or allowed his disciple to pick grain on the sabbath because they where hungry Jesus was in violation of the Jewish oral tradition/Halakha Not God's law.
  
  
  In Similar fashion when Jesus completed the law, all of the requirements of the law had been met, which gave Him the right and authority to amend/add to the law. So now, it is not enough to not murder someone (which is all the law required.) Under Jesus hatred is now the same sin as murder. Or with adultery, under the law you ccan not have sex outside of your marriage. Under Jesus rules one can not have lustful thoughts otherwise it is like having sex.
  
  Jesus was under the law, but is not subject to the rules of man.​
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  

Mem said:

Equivocation of Jesus' cleansing the temple with His being slapped on the cheek seems to be comparing apples to oranges. For example, there's no confusing a slap on the cheek for any sort of gesture of honor or devotion.

Click to expand...

So again, If say you go to a church and it allows gay members in the church, but you hold fast to the teaching in 1 cor 5:
9 I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people— 10 not at all meaning the people of this world who are immoral, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters. In that case you would have to leave this world. 11 But now I am writing to you that you must not associate with anyone who claims to be a brother or sister but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or slanderer, a drunkard or swindler. Do not even eat with such people.

12 What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? 13 God will judge those outside. “Expel the wicked person from among you.

Does this verse married with Jesus' Equivocation/cleansing of the temple; allow us to 'cleanse our church is similar fashion especially when the command was given to "Expel" the immoral brother.

This word expel in the greek means to:
ἐξαίρω exaírō, ex-ah'-ee-ro;

1. to lift up or take away out of a place
2. to remove

So again can you physically remove such a person or, do you ask them to leave, Or do you turn the cheek allow them to come but not allow them to place membership?

pinebeach said:

I would think people would be more 'bothered' by slaves, multiple wives and God telling the Israelites to kill everyone and everything with reference to certain populations living in what was designated as the 'promised land'.

Click to expand...

Then, you'd be surprised to know that most young people who grew up in the church only to become one of the 70% who loose their faith in college can reconcile the multiple wives and even slavery bit that you would have trouble with. as most have the wherewithal to be able to draw a line between OT Judaism and NT Christianity. Being that they are two different religions, who just so happen to share the same book. Even then, there wasn't a command to have multiple wives, or even slaves.

pinebeach said:

At least that has always been what probably most of us here have had experience with.

Click to expand...

Again, i have been answering questions and working with people who are on the fence or struggle with their faith for almost 30 years now. I found that those who copout on their faith for the reasons you list are simply looking for a reason to leave. As someone who has fully accepted the idea that modern morality (the value system of the current western culture) is the pinnacle of human morality which allows them to condemn, anything pop culture does not currently allow. This is what gives one the ability to judge God or His People as immoral for the number of wives that they have or if they owned slaves.

So, again.. Using pop culture as your moral foundation is the only way you can look at a culture 3000 years ago and condemn it for it's marital practices and or ties to slavery. If someone has already adopted pop morality, then they left God along time ago.

pinebeach said:

It's not every day you come across a person, such as yourself, who specializes in such an obscure revelation of difficulty unsaved people are having.

Click to expand...

perhaps you should read up on 1 cor 12: 12-31 Paul explains why we in our faiths may look different, and process why things differently than you do, yet still remain a member of the body of Christ.

pinebeach said:

Please let us know where you live so that we can stay away.

Click to expand...

wow.. Are you a christian or do they allow atheist here? How can you love your neighbor as yourself, if this is how you feel?

pinebeach said:

There was no command to turn the other cheek either. Jesus did not preface his words with 'a new command I give to you' as He did when He actually gave a 'new command'. Jesus was teaching and not adding to the commandments. In fact, you will not find any command telling you to turn the other cheek.

Click to expand...

Luke 6:
27 “But to you who are listening I say: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, 28 bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. 29 If someone slaps you on one cheek, turn to them the other also. If someone takes your coat, do not withhold your shirt from them. 30 Give to everyone who asks you, and if anyone takes what belongs to you, do not demand it back. 31 Do to others as you would have them do to you.
Mat 5 which is apart of the sermon on the Mount.

Everything thing Jesus teaches on the sermon on the mount is a command. This is not a point up for debate, so before you pint out this long diatribe, Know I will not read it nor respond to it. If you disagree, you time will be better served if you just say: "nut-huh.."

pinebeach said:

Your dodge and reinvent is way past tiresome. If you think that 'most' churched people know the difference between testaments I am here to tell you that is not true...not in this forum and not in real life.

Click to expand...

This maybe true of the circles you run in, but it is not true of the whole church. The Hebrew writer speaks of this when he identifies believers who need the milk of the word and others who need 'solid food.'

12 For though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need someone to teach you again the first principles of the ]oracles of God; and you have come to need milk and not solid food. 13 For everyone who partakes only of milk is unskilled in the word of righteousness, for he is a babe. 14But solid food belongs to those who are use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil.

and paul talks about this in 1 cor 3: 3 And I, brethren, could not speak to you as to spiritual people but as to carnal, as to babes in Christ. 2 I fed you with milk and not with solid food; for until now you were not able to receive it, and even now you are still not able;

We all do not have nor is it reasonable to demand that everyone all start with the same understanding.

pinebeach said:

There was no command to ditch all the wives and Paul tells slave owners to be kind to their slaves.

Click to expand...

Irrelevant.

pinebeach said:

You have a bug in your ear about something and at this point, I might be beginning to suspect that it is actually YOU that cannot reconcile Jesus saying turn the other cheek then going gangbusters to fake religious hypocrites. Yeah, the more I think about it, the more I suspect you actually need an answer you have not come up with.

Click to expand...

I kinda have reconciled this issue with the "meat crowd." For those who still need milk, I try and rephrase over and over till it clicks with them.

pinebeach said:

What are you doing above? Giving yourself credentials?

Click to expand...

No I was saying that: I found that those who copout on their faith for the reasons you list are simply looking for a reason to leave. As someone who has fully accepted the idea that modern morality (the value system of the current western culture) is the pinnacle of human morality which allows them to condemn, anything pop culture does not currently allow. This is what gives one the ability to judge God or His People as immoral for the number of wives that they have or if they owned slaves.

pinebeach said:

You started an op and people actually tried to respond to it.

Click to expand...

And I in turn responded back. This is how dialog works.

pinebeach said:

God has not changed. Jesus has not changed and I have not seen one word from you about the Holy Spirit let alone the gifts God has given for

Click to expand...

So?

pinebeach said:

believers to build themselves up with. I mean I just honestly see alot of word salad from you the more you try to sound like you have carved out a niche that only you really understand.

Click to expand...

If you need me to simplify what i have said all you need to is ask. I say this because 'word salad' usally refers to a perspective that just sees a jumble of words and cant make heads or tails of it. If that is where you are, then just cut and paste what you want explained.

pinebeach said:

How many faiths what are you even talking about I don't think you know.

Click to expand...

7. As Jesus in Rev 1 and 2 identify 7 unique churches that we all belong to. This is a solid food topic, which I do not think you are ready for But because you asked I will try to explain it to you anyways. I will say in modern terms that there are 7 'denominations' (For the lack of a better term) that we all belong to as described by Christ in his letter to the 7 end time churches.

I'm not saying that there are seven denominations like methodist, baptist, catholic etc.. Rather there are 7 levels of faith (or churches) that all christian belong to despite where they sit on sunday morning. Meaning a catholic church could have people belonging to all 7 different churches Jesus identifies. Each one of these churches was repersented by one of the 7 established churches in the book of revelation. These churches today repersent a condition of the hearts of those who attand church/the body of Christ. Meaning we all can be subdivided into one of these seven church despite what church we belong to.

pinebeach said:

Here is my best and most sincere advice to you contained in a part of a letter written by Paul who had but one faith and so should the rest of us.

I therefore, a prisoner for the Lord, urge you to walk in a manner worthy of the calling to which you have been called, 2 with all humility and gentleness, with patience, bearing with one another in love, 3 eager to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. 4 There is one body and one Spirit—just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call— 5 one Lord, one faith, one baptism, 6 one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all. 7 But grace was given to each one of us according to the measure of Christ's gift. 8 Therefore it says,

“When he ascended on high he led a host of captives,
and he gave gifts to men.

“When he ascended on high he led a host of captives,
and he gave gifts to men.

Click to expand...

noted.

pinebeach said:

Obscure unbiblical personal convictions just seem to hit wrong. Yes I know how dare I. I'm not gifted with the art of trying to be friends by agreeing with anything that comes along. So yes. wow

Click to expand...

You do not have to have a gift to treat people the way you want to be treated.

pinebeach said:

Apart from that, what I said was actually not meant to be taken literally. You are obviously not going to give out your address and I am not going to avoid it. But, now I wonder how you respond to people who say something that you take personal offense at.

Click to expand...

now you know

Citizen said:

No. He is God. He is perfectly righteous and just in every way. His actions flow from that basic fact. But He didn't, and it was perfectly righteous and just in every way.

Click to expand...

So doe righteousness include physically 'smiting' someone and kicking their stuff over and stomping it, If one is doing this on God's behalf?

Citizen said:

It's not an inconsistency on Jesus' part. It's a misunderstanding on the part of those who don't know or refuse to accept the facts of the Bible. Trying to insert human logic to reconcile an issue that doesn't need to be reconciled just creates confusion and error.

Click to expand...

So if your church is having a yard sale that all of the members of the church have an opportunity to bring in their stuff set up a booth and sell it.. If you see this as mirroring what the money changers and the people selling animals were doing, can you then fashion a whip and kick over their tables and run these people off of church grounds for the same reason Christ proclaimed?

OMC said:

“Turning the other cheek” is about personal offense. “Cleansing the Temple” is about protecting God’s people.
Different situations, different righteous responses.
Turning the other cheek (Matthew 5:39) is about refusing retaliation when you are personally wronged.
Cleansing the Temple (John 2:13–17; Matthew 21:12–13) is about confronting systemic exploitation and religious corruption harming others.
Personal insult → respond with non-retaliation
Injustice against others → confront boldly
Jesus did both perfectly.
Jesus wasn’t defending Himself. He was defending the poor, the Gentiles, and the integrity of worship.
He was fulfilling Malachi 3:1–3 — the Lord suddenly coming to His Temple to purify it.
Money changers were exploiting worshipers, especially the poor who needed affordable sacrifices.
The only place Gentiles could pray had been turned into a marketplace. Jesus quotes Isaiah: “My house shall be called a house of prayer for all nations.”
The whip was for driving out animals, not beating people. The text never says He struck anyone.

Click to expand...

Again I undrstand why Jesus did what He did. I am all for it. I am asking that if you take no personal offense but are over taken by zeal for God and His church, I am asking can you do the same thing?
So say your church is having a yard sale that all of the members of the church have an opportunity to bring in their stuff set up a booth and sell it.. If you see this as mirroring what the money changers and the people selling animals were doing, can you then fashion a whip and kick over their tables and run these people off of church grounds for the same reason Christ proclaimed?

Ninjazone said:

that is pretty funny a statement.

Click to expand...

I try

Ninjazone said:

I think that selling animals or living beings was a reason to be mad,

Click to expand...

Actually the passage tells us why Jesus was mad. It was because the money changers and the people who where selling the animals where severely over charging for them. Not because they where being sold. Remember they where all there at the time of the passover, where the law of moses required animal sacrifices. They where selling the animals that had been pre approved for sacrifice at a crazy rate. Thus prevent many pilgrims from completing their commanded duty to sacrifice an animal.

Ninjazone said:

it's still going on today, selling animals and then praying at the dinner table in thanks of the murdered animals as if taking life is somehow a good way to grow life or something.

Click to expand...

that is pretty funny a statement.

Ninjazone said:

Would you kick the tables if children were being sold or even required to labor at something without having freedom of will or voluntary attendance like at school?

Click to expand...

Depends on the circumstance.

Ninjazone said:

I remember being required to attend for my entire stolen childhood and still not being able to be worth a home in perfect world that has not only more than enough but capable of producing resources forever.

Click to expand...

and see how good you turned out? all of this wisdom, and understanding that had you not been forced to go to school, you would have missed out on all of this intimate knowledge that you have on the subject and now can share. Why would anyone deny someone else valuable life experience like that in favor of a luke warm existence?