Just to keep things rolling: Matt 21:28-31

[uriel1972]

As far as I can tell Jesus is basically saying that those who promise themselves to him go to Heaven regardless of subsequent behavior. However those that actually live the life but do not promise themselves are denied the Kingdom of Heaven.

I found this astonishing when I first saw it in a movie on TV, then I read the Bible (cover to cover I might add) and there it was.

What say the local scholars?

[Tunkamerica]

1. i remember reading the chick track when i was 8 or 9

that had the vietnam war-era captain who committed several atrocities accepting jesus at the last second getting to heaven while the guy who didn't kill anyone went to hell.

[Mariana]

12. I remember that one!

I have to say, those Chick tracts really portray their particular god in a bad light.

[AlbertCat]

15. those Chick tracts really portray their particular god in a bad light.

Last edited Thu Dec 15, 2011, 03:22 PM - Edit history (1)

AND...

They're hysterical!

http://www.chick.com/catalog/tractlist.asp?language=English


One of my fave panels from "the Gay Blade"



oh and this one from the same laugh tract



What a riot!

[LAGC]

2. Sure is pretty handy.

Not many religions where you can kidnap, rape, and murder multiple people then "get saved" on Death Row and know you are destined for paradise in the after-life...

[deacon_sephiroth]

3. I wouldn't call myself a scholar, but if you want the peanut gallery's thoughts.

That right there just said there's gonna be hookers in heaven.... Why didn't the christians just SAY THAT IN THE FIRST PLACE!? I am now ready to accept Jesus into my heart as my personal ticket to hookerland, er um, "savior".

[TygrBright]

4. My reading is different, but perhaps we're looking at different translations.

"'What do you think? A man had two sons; and he went to the first and said "Son, go and work in the vineyard today." And he answered "I will not"; but afterward he repented and went. And he went to the second and said the same, and he answered "I go, sir," but did not go. Which of the two did the will of his father?' They said 'The first.' Jesus said to them 'Truly, I say to you, the tax collectors and harlots go into the kingdom of God before you.'"

I found it important to read this mindful of the context of the verses: More than any of the synoptic Gospels, Matthew is about Jesus' confrontation with the traditional religious authorities of his time, and his confounding of their hypocrisy, abuse of power, collusion with occupying authorities, and insensitivity to the poor and dispossessed (of which there were many, in an occupied territory.) Earlier, the powerful and self-righteous local authorities had called out Jesus for dining with tax collectors and sinners. In the verses just prior to this, they were attempting to get him to say something blasphemous or self-incriminating.

My reading is actually the opposite of yours: With these words, Jesus points out that those who are regarded as sinners by traditional authority, and who rebel against traditional authority ('I will not') may actually be doing the work of God, and thus become part of the kingdom of God. And those who pay lip service to the work of God, but actually do nothing to advance it, will take longer to become part of the kingdom of God.

On edit: An alternative but related reading (and I like this one just as well, maybe even better, but find it less apposite with the context, as well as potentially offensive to non-believers,) is that those who rebel against, ignore, or reject God, but do work that God wants done, are of the kingdom of God before those who profess obedience to God but do nothing of his work.

He goes on to say, 'For John came to you in the way of righteousness, and you did not believe him. But the tax collectors and harlots believed him; and even when you saw it, you did not afterwards repent and believe him.'

hermaneutically,
Bright

[Sal316]

5. Very well done.

[uriel1972]

6. That all depends on what group you think

The tax collectors and harlots fall into, in the following verses Jesus refers to them believing in John but the questioners not, which I think tends to place the tax collectors and harlots in the second group; those that promise, but keep on living as they always did.

I am reading KJV which refers to them as publicans and harlots.

[TygrBright]

7. One challenge that different translations offer is the semantic shifts in English words...

...between the date of the translation and modern understanding.

"Publican" in the modern era refers to someone who keeps a pub; thus the sense of the verses evokes the notion of moral reprobation.

However, the "publican" in the Roman empire was actually a government contractor who was employed to collect taxes-- not an official of the government, but a contractor who worked on a percentage basis. There was of course considerable scope for rapacity and dishonesty in such employment, and the publicans were universally hated, regardless of their individual character. That is, they were hated simply because they were publicans, willing collaborators with the occupying forces.

So the failings represented in the verse encompass both those who violate social norms of "moral" behavior (harlots,) and those who are hated based (essentially) on presumption. I suppose a good modern analogy would be "Congressmen" or "lawyers." I read this as a rebuke to the self-righteous; people who presume that violation of statutory definitions of morality, and membership in a despised group provide the self-righteous with license to despise them.

Yet in spite of such status (outside legal definitions of "morality," and being a member of a despised group,) those individuals may, by their actions (rather than by their status) become part of the kingdom before those same self-righteous people, who may conform to social and legal norms of morality, and may be part of socially respected groups.

I see the following verse as based on the assumption that belief in John involves a commitment to what John preached. That, presumably, the harlots and tax collectors who believed John looked for the coming of the promised one whom John preached. This is seen by the fact that when the one promised by John DID come, they recognized him and followed him--and by that, they become part of the Kingdom. Whereas the authorities who ignored John similarly repudiate Jesus' identity as the one John promised. Thus, the harlots and publicans achieve precedence to the kingdom of God.

The fascination of scripture is its multitude of layers and messages that make it a resource for seekers from so many different backgrounds and with so many different experiences and spiritual goals.

Those who complain that scripture "contradicts itself" and those who attempt feats of hermaneutic gymnastics to prove that there are no "contradictions" alike seem to miss the point: scripture is an endless trove to be gathered and explored and scrutinized and discovered, over and over again, to achieve internal wisdom and insight along the individual spiritual path.

exigetically,
Bright

[napoleon_in_rags]

8. I think you got it backwards.

NIV: 28 “What do you think? There was a man who had two sons. He went to the first and said, ‘Son, go and work today in the vineyard.’
29 “‘I will not,’ he answered, but later he changed his mind and went.

30 “Then the father went to the other son and said the same thing. He answered, ‘I will, sir,’ but he did not go.

31 “Which of the two did what his father wanted?”

“The first,” they answered.

Jesus said to them, “Truly I tell you, the tax collectors and the prostitutes are entering the kingdom of God ahead of you.

It sounds like Jesus was rebuking them for getting it wrong by choosing the first, but I think the text intends to say that the crowd understood the metaphor and got it right, and they were being rebuked for acting like the second son.

[uriel1972]

9. Hmmm, it's a challenge to understand

when so much time has passed and 'common knowledge' of context changes. I despair of the literalists, I really do.

[deacon_sephiroth]

10. reading all these you HAVE to ask

Why would an omnipotent being be so vague?

Why would the words of the creator be so very open to interpretation?

Why sew confussion among your creation (in many many ways, one of which is supposedly language, which has been a real rollercoaster for the bible too)

Why sit back in silence and let your words come to mean 100 different things to 100 people?

If these are the rules to live by and the wisdom to give you life and happiness, why is it not accessible? Does he not WANT people to have it? Understand it? Get it right? etc???

[AlbertCat]

16. There is one answer to all your questions that makes sense...

.... and you know what it is.

[lindysalsagal]

18. Written by the same person who wrote this:

[iris27]

11. When Jeffrey Dahmer died, the pastor at my church

did a sermon about just this section of scripture. I'm not sure how he managed it, but he had the adults all thinking it was entirely just and according to God's plan that Dahmer was now in heaven (converted while in prison) and Ghandi in hell.

[ButterflyBlood]

13. I've often wondered why homosexuality is the exception to those who think that way

I mean even if they consider homosexuality a sin by their thinking a gay or lesbian who believed in Jesus Christ would still receive salvation and go to heaven. But you don't exactly see any acceptance or affirmation of LGBT Christians from that crowd.

[iris27]

17. The same church as above taught that continuing

in the same "sinful" behaviors after accepting Jesus was being "unrepentant" and thus God's forgiveness would not apply to "practicing homosexuals". Of course that explanation is bullshit because obviously they don't extend that same line of thought to other "sins" people do all the time, like lying or "coveting your neighbor's spouse".

Sorry for all the scare quotes...I just can't type that stuff with a straight face.

[struggle4progress]

14. I do not understand your reading of the parable of the two sons:

"A man, with two sons, asked one to work in his vineyard. That son said no but later changed his mind and went. Meanwhile the father asked the other son the same. This son promised to go but did not. Which of them responded as their father wanted?" And they replied the first did. So Jesus said, “Look! Tax collectors and prostitutes enter the Kingdom ahead of you!"

Imagine walking around with that man. You see him ask one son to go work, and the brat outright refuses to help. What a crummy attitude! What doesn't his father just boot him out? Then you see the second son cheerfully agrees immediately to help. What a really great kid! Who wouldn't want an obedient righteous son like that?

But imagine instead watching the vineyard. Who actually shows up? Why, there's that arrogant no-good lazy back-talking little punk! The cheerfully dutiful son, who quickly promised to be there, never shows

The story is a slap in the face to anyone who ever spoke hypocritical words

And the message doesn't get better, either. This trouble-maker from Nazareth really isn't making lots of friends among the better class of people: "The tax collectors and prostitutes are better than you!" Oh, really? When the voice of conscience urges us towards some good work, only a wretch would say, "Oh, bugger off, conscience! I think today I'd rather just fuck around. I've got some ideas for extorting money from poor peasants, backed by the police power of the state!" Wouldn't it be better if we replied cheerfully, "Certainly, my conscience! Of course! You are right!" so our conscience could be soothed and satisfied?

One son is honest and authentic. Asked to work in the vineyard, he tells his father honestly that he does not want to do that today. But he is honest with himself, too: he does not hide from his bad conscience -- and in the end, he does labor. The other son, with one dishonesty, not only quiets his father and sends the old man away -- he also manages in the same instant to quiet his own conscience and send it away too

Be ye therefore doers of the word and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves
James 1:22