I think you may be misunderstanding what I said. In this quote you are responding to my post (#43) where I said, "Actually, you've not posted any scriptural references in your opposing post". The post I quoted from you, when making that comment is post #41. Check it again and you will see that you gave no scriptural references in that post. I'm not saying this to point score, but that I think you may need to slow down a bit.
As for the scriptural references you provided in post# 36, you're right. I should respond to them. I thought they were not particularly relevant and I didn't want to get bogged down dealing with them, but I wouldn't want someone using that reasoning with me so I also should not use it with you. I'm sorry for that. I've read them carefully and from what I can see they don't say anything about working for money. Nor do they say anything about some teachings of Jesus being for some Christians while other teachings are not for Christians. They talk about Christians sharing what they have with one another so that ever person's needs are met. You may assume that must mean working for money, because how could they have anything to give if they were not working for money, but that reasoning is still an assumption you make and not what the scriptures actually say and, I believe, not consistent with the overall spirit of what it means to share with one another.
As for the 2 Thessalonians 3 verse about those not working not eating, I responded to that point in my post to Seabass when he brought up the same argument. Please read it in post #39
John darling, "Instead you've asked me to show that evidence, which I already did. (
Matthew 28:20)"
Free
Please quote me directly and show me what it was
precisely that I was asking evidence of.
Here's the precise quotes.
It certainly does make certain things invalid for us today... Perhaps you can show where the disciples taught others
From what I can see, you say some teachings are invalid for us today (in particular the teachings about money and materialism). You go on to ask me to show where the disciples taught others to do the same things Jesus taught them to do. I did that with Matthew 28:20. Also, have a look at 1 John 2:5-6. So, my quote was accurate. The verses you posted don't say anything about selective teachings.
Now, I'd like to give some context to the "take nothing for your journey" teaching. Although it is given as a command, I do not say that it is a law with no spirit. Jesus words are sometimes given as commands, but they are still spirit, and the spirit flows where ever it wants to (John 3:8). This requires a certain amount of flexibility (or perhaps maturity), but it is difficult to explain this part without it being abused, because most people want to think of themselves as the exception when it comes to discipline and change.
I do not think Jesus meant that we must always travel with nothing. And yet, the teaching is there. Why did he command them to do this? What was the purpose of telling them to go with nothing? Have a look at Luke 22:35. He asks, "When I sent you with nothing, did you lack anything" And they answered, "Nothing". It was an exercise in faith; the application of his teachings from Matthew 6:24-34 where he said, "don't let worry about what you will eat, drink, or wear stop you from seeking God's kingdom first". Jesus wanted them to understand that these were not just teachings "in the heart" or "attitude teachings". They were teachings which he expected them to actually do. He wanted them to see they they really do work.
God really can provide for us so he sent them out two by two to preach the gospel, to eat whatever God provided, to sleep where ever God provided and to go where ever God wanted them to go. Until we, as Christians, can test ourselves by trying these teachings, we'll never understand what it means to live by faith the way Jesus and his disciples did. You can say these teachings were for other people, but by doing so you cut yourself off from one of the most important aspects of the kingdom of Heaven; trusting God as opposed to trusting in the systems of man. People argue that it's "what's in the heart" that matters, but God knows our heart better than we do. He knows the heart is deceitful above all things. Jesus knows better and that's why we should trust him even if our "heart" tells us it would be foolish to do what he says (John 2:24-25, Jeremiah 17:9).
The Greek word for "serve" is douleuo, and it means "to be a slave, serve, do service" (Thayer). This has nothing to do with not working for money, it means that one cannot be slave to both God and money. Again, this has to do with the heart and to whom or what it belongs. Look at what precedes this verse:
Can you serve Satan without working for him? You keep talking about context, but then you go back to legalism. For example, part of the definition you yourself give contains the word "serve" which is a verb (an action word), and the phrase "do service" which clearly implies some kind of work, but then you say that has nothing to do with "work". Jesus compared one of the masters to mammon, which means money and the things money can buy. It must have SOMETHING to do with money, and by your own definition that something is "doing service" for mammon.
He goes on to talk about how the flowers don't spin and the birds don't gather in barns (Matthew 6:26-28). Of course he's talking about work! but your extreme approach doesn't leave any room at all for that consideration. It's like a man who commits adultery with a prostitute and then argues to his wife that it has nothing to do with their marriage because he doesn't love the prostitute. When the wife becomes angry he gets his big Greek/Hebrew dictionary out and argues about all the various meanings of love in the "context" of adultery.
How much easier to just believe what Jesus said?
Mat 6:19 "Do not lay up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy and where thieves break in and steal,
Mat 6:20 but lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust destroys and where thieves do not break in and steal.
Mat 6:21 For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.
Mat 6:22 "The eye is the lamp of the body. So, if your eye is healthy, your whole body will be full of light,
Mat 6:23 but if your eye is bad, your whole body will be full of darkness. If then the light in you is darkness, how great is the darkness! (ESV)
This verse is saying that if one is a slave to money, money is their god and their master, and therefore God cannot be. It is one or the other that is master, not both. There is simply no way that this verse means that we cannot work for money.
Can you give some explanation as to what you think it means for someone to be a slave to money, like, in practical terms? Maybe give some examples so I have a better idea of how to respond to your argument? Thanks.
