/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.21609095]

Many people always repeat the whole “it is easier for camel to pass than a rich man…” by Jesus yet I’ve literally never heard anyone mention what Jesus says immediately after that.

> "It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.”When the disciples heard this, they were greatly astonished and asked, “Who then can be saved?”
> Jesus looked at them and said, “With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.” (Matthew 19)

Why would Jesus make such a strong condemnation of wealth but then immediately walk it back by saying 'but with God all things are possible?' Why is the part never mentioned and completely ignored by everyone? I didn’t even know about it until last year. I’ve only ever seen people focus and talk about the camel part. And does anyone know what Jesus meant to be it?

[Anonymous No.21609097]

>trust fund baby panicked about his imminent eternal torture
Many such cases.

[Anonymous No.21609099]

>>21609095
*what Jesus meant by it?

[Anonymous No.21609106]

>>21609095
>be young me
>parents convert to pentecostalism
>pastor is really rich guy, drives a sport car and have a fancy house
>people start to make questions
>pastor starts a sermon where he explains this parable
>"it turns out needles where the name of the gateways in Israel and that's a bad translation"
>"in fact, a camel can cross a needle, but it cannot be fully packed"
>"so it is okay to be rich as long as your camel is not fully packed"
>"now, let's talk about tithing"

I hate the false prophets.

[Anonymous No.21609112]

>>21609097
I’m not rich. I’m not even a Christian.

I was just completely surprised by it when I first read it since throughout my life I’ve only ever heard people (mostly leftists to be honest) quote the camel part and never what Jesus said afterwards. It seems to be completely ignored for some reason.

[Anonymous No.21609116]

>>21609106
lmfao

[Anonymous No.21609122]

>>21609095
>>21609112
With man, it is impossible to fit a camel through the eye of a needle. With God that is not impossible. I don't think I fully understand your question. At no point does Jesus say a rich man cannot enter the kingdom of God, just that it is difficult

[Anonymous No.21609123]

>>21609106
Your pastor doesn’t know theology. The only thing that factors into our salvation is grace.

"For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast.:"

The rich man came to Jesus showing all that he had done to earn salvation and Jesus said that's not enough. Why? Because no amount of good works or asceticism will gain someone entry into the Kingdom of Heaven.

[Anonymous No.21609130]

>>21609123
>Your pastor doesn’t know theology.
Don't you fucking say. His church was a business and nothing more. It was all about tithing, selling books and blessed snake oil imported from the Holy Land™

> Why? Because no amount of good works or asceticism will gain someone entry into the Kingdom of Heaven.
Lutheran cope. You cannot serve God and Mammon. Asceticism is not a positive action to earn salvation, it is a negation of everything that drives us away from salvation.

[Anonymous No.21609136]

>>21609106
I was raised Mormon. I heard that too in Sunday school. That it was a special camel entrance, but the camel's had to kneel to enter, so it's saying people have to kneel before God. But then I heard another teacher say that a Mormon "apostle" clarified that no, it literally means needle as in needle and thread.

There have been denominations (like the shakers) who took that seriously and made requirements that people should give everything away. Those denominations went extinct. Time and time again, all the cults, all the religions, all the sects that have survived time have done it by being economically profitable. If they don't find a way to make money, they go extinct

[Anonymous No.21609137]

“If you want to give it all you've got,” Jesus replied, “go sell your possessions; give everything to the poor. All your wealth will then be in heaven. Then come follow me.” MAtthew 19:21

[Anonymous No.21609143]

>>21609136
What do you believe now? If you aren't Mormon anymore, did you have trouble woth your family when you left?

[Anonymous No.21609152]

Blessed are the meek: for it is they, not the rich and powerful, who shall inherit the earth.

[Anonymous No.21609157]

>>21609130
The rich young ruler sought to justify himself in front of Christ "I have kept every commandment" Jesus said then go sell your things and be made perfect. Jesus knew he couldn't do that.

The disciples also not understanding sought to also justify themselves and brought up that they had also left their possessions, etc. and Jesus said that any who left these things for the sake of Christ would receive many things including salvation, but not because they left them but because they believed in Him. They left these things to follow Him. Those who are dedicated to Christ will not be led by money or mammon.

Actually the disciples left behind their possessions to be with Jesus but it doesn’t seem they ever give it to the poor. Peter still had his house and even goes back to it with Jesus

> 14 When Jesus came into Peter’s house, he saw Peter’s mother-in-law lying in bed with a fever. 15 He touched her hand and the fever left her, and she got up and began to wait on him.

So it doesn’t seem like Jesus’s disciples gave up their possessions to the poor like Jesus commanded the rich young ruler to do, but merely left them behind because they believed in him.

[Anonymous No.21609165]

>>21609157
Wow, sounds like grifters wrote the bibble frfr.

[Anonymous No.21609175]

>>21609137
If this is to be taken completely literally then why did Jesus still praise a rich tax collector for giving up half of his wealth instead of all of it?

[Anonymous No.21609182]

>>21609175
why do you think, dummy.

[Anonymous No.21609199]

>>21609106
Many such cases.
https://youtu.be/9LtF34MrsfI

[Anonymous No.21609220]

>>21609095
I always read it as you can't buy your way into heaven

[Anonymous No.21609225]

>>21609106
Why does it feel like there’s only 3 kinds of pastors among Protestants these days

1. The greedy, money hungry pastor attempting to justify being selfish and rich
2. The LGBT pastor attempting to justify butt sex, extramarital sex and every kind of sexual act and perversion they can
3. The woman pastor who…is just there

Is there really no normal pastors left or something? I wouldn’t know. I’ve never been to a Protestant church.

[Anonymous No.21609258]

>>21609225
In the case of the first 2, I would leave as soon as I realized. I will never attend a sermon from a woman

[Anonymous No.21609301]

>>21609258
The woman pastor is likely also an pro-lgbt pastor anyway. The two seem to go together in many churches for some reason.

[Anonymous No.21609319]

>>21609225
Maybe live in the real world instead of eating up propaganda on social media

[Anonymous No.21609494]

>>21609258
>>21609225
>>21609301
>you MUST fume at [insert culture war issue]

[Anonymous No.21609515]

> Jesus said to him, “If you would be perfect, go, sell what you possess and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me.” Matthew 19:21
>When Jesus heard this, he said to him, “One thing you still lack. Sell all that you have and distribute to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me.” Luke 18:22
>Sell your possessions, and give to the needy. Provide yourselves with moneybags that do not grow old, with a treasure in the heavens that does not fail, where no thief approaches and no moth destroys. Luke 12:33
>“No one can serve two masters, for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and money. Matthew 6:24
rich westerners: What did Jesus mean by this?

[Anonymous No.21609537]

>>21609225
There are normal pastors within rural areas and the suburbs. It's the urban pastors who drink from the devil's cup.

[Anonymous No.21609609]

>>21609136
>>21609106
There's not one shred of evidence for the whole "gate" theory. There is, however, a theory that the original wording was "cable" like a rope used for shipping but that has the same metaphorical meaning.

[Anonymous No.21609675]

>>21609157
>So it doesn’t seem like Jesus’s disciples gave up their possessions to the poor like Jesus commanded the rich young ruler to do, but merely left them behind because they believed in him.
Yes, and that's what asceticism is about. It's not "look at me, how poor I am and thus I'm literally holier than thou", but more like "I don't need all this because I have it all in Christ."

[Anonymous No.21609683]

>>21609515
Historically, there have been several responses to this command of Jesus:

Taken absolutely literally as did the hermits of the medieval period who then became completely dependent upon the charity of other for their survival. However, such an attitude appears to be diametrically opposed to Paul's instruction for Christians to be self sufficient as far as circumstances allow as taught in

> 2 Thess 3:12 - Now we command and exhort to such by our Lord Jesus Christ so that, working with quietness, they may eat their own bread.

Taken cautiously with a view to practicality and circumstances. This appears to have been the case with the early church, who, while they sold many things to support the work of the early church, did not impoverish themselves so as to prevent them providing further support.

The latter position, which is more consistent with Paul's teaching, as quoted above, is also more consistent with NT practice. However, this does not prevent certain individuals who suffer especially with avarice and acquisitiveness, being properly required to sell their possessions as was the rich young ruler in Matt 19:21.

[Anonymous No.21609707]

How does Weber fit into all this?

[Anonymous No.21609724]

>>21609707
He explains how Protestantism was often a form of “worldly asceticism.”

> Max Weber characterized English Puritanism in his essay The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism (1904—05) as an essentially ascetic movement, and indeed it was. Puritan asceticism took the form of opposition to all expression of human pride. In this sense Puritanism was anti-humanistic and its asceticism the natural corollary to the belief that man is by nature a sinful, evil creature. Pride, pleasure in one's human- ity—expressed, for example, by long hair or fashionable dress—came to be considered a vice equal to and often linked together with the vices of drunkenness, gambling, idleness, and "worldliness." Puritan asceticism was, however, in Weber's phrase, "worldly asceticism." It required man to live in the world and not retreat from it. Monastic asceticism, hair shirts, meagre diets, and mortification of the flesh had no part to play in the Puritan lifestyle. Wine and beer were drunk freely, men and women dressed sensibly and appropriately to their station in society; celibacy was frowned on.

[Anonymous No.21609742]

>>21609683
paul was a faggot and i'm not listening to anything he says

[Anonymous No.21609839]

>>21609095
>Why would Jesus make such a strong condemnation of wealth but then immediately walk it back by saying 'but with God all things are possible?'
Because the point of many of the teachings was to show how it was impossible for anyone to fulfill the law. This statement by Jesus is the culmination of many teachings. For instance, Matthew 5:20, or where it says in the Gospel that you would be better to cut off your hand than be cast into hell because your hand causes you to sin. What Christ says here shows that it's simply impossible for a man to be saved by himself, and that he needs God. It's the culmination of those teachings where the final conclusion is outright stated.

That is why we have to rely on Jesus, whose righteousness is worthy of being saved, to justify us. We have to have His righteousness imputed to us, like it says in Romans 4. Without that, it's impossible since the standard to be saved is too high and too perfect.

[Anonymous No.21609877]

>>21609225
My local pastor looks like Dave Batista and runs the local food bank. He's a paragon

[Anonymous No.21609886]

>>21609225
I went to a Protestant church once and it was a woman pastor who kept making jokes about the gospel she was reading lol I never believed the memes before I thought "how bad could it be?"
Worse than I thought

[Anonymous No.21610133]

>>21609143
I'm an atheist now. My family were converts and became inactive before me. So I didn't have any trouble with them or with my friends. My wife is Catholic, so that basically means I'm Catholic.

I really subscribe to Plato's noble lie. I think religion is bs and all grown men have a duty to not be fooled by superstitions like religion. However I think there's huge value in religion, tradition, family values, ect. I look at my Mormon friends, or my wife's Catholic cousins and they are miles more happy than my atheist friends. Being monogamous, having kids, not doing drugs is the way to reach happiness. And I will always be thankful to the Mormon church for brain washing me into those good habits

[Anonymous No.21610167]

>>21610133
Fairly based desu. It all comes down to valuing the likely truth vs the benefits basing your life on a fairy tale can bring.
Almost comes down to personality IMO.