by serein 76 Replies latest jw friends
Well, you ignored my question as well, so fair is fair.
I can't see one. Which of your many rhetorical questions would you like me to comment on?
We seem to agree that Jesus went around inciting men to abandon their wives and children and trek around Palestine after him living on hand outs but you see nothing wrong with that.
Instead you put the blame on the wives and children.
Wow!
I don't think I asked any rhetorical questions. I will go and check.
If they left their fields, then their wives and children had means to support, if they chose to remain behind. - Tec
So imagine Peter walking out on Mrs Cephas and all the little Peters and Petras and he says "Don't worry I have left you the boat and the nets so you will be fine, I'm off to follow Jesus around Palestine and live on hand outs, maybe I will look in when we are next in the area."
You and Jesus see nothing wrong with that?
Yeah, I did ask one rhetorical question on the last page.
But I also asked this: Would they have come to know Truth and Life had he ignored what He was meant to do, in order to stay with them? I think the answer to that is the point.
and this:
And how do you know that some of them did not support them in their following as well? (remember I meant support their choice)
And what we agree upon is that Christ called for his disciples/apostles to follow Him. If they had land and fields, those still belonged to them... or perhaps those were now left to the families that did not leave with them. Approving or not, that would have left those families with means.
Peace,
tammy
Tec - Please see my post 3170 just before you posted yours.
So imagine Peter walking out on Mrs Cephas and all the little Peters and Petras and he says "Don't worry I have left you the boat and the nets so you will be fine, I'm off to follow Jesus around Palestine and live on hand outs, maybe I will look in when we are next in the area."
You and Jesus see nothing wrong with that?
I don't know that anything happened like that at all... or if Peter even had a wife or children. They also stayed at houses belonging to some of his disciples, and ate at the houses of various disciples. So not everyone left their houses (permanently anyway); and perhaps some were given an ultimatum... stay with me and deny this 'apostate', or lose us and all of your possessions. As well, some still saw members of their families.
So we do not know the details, and we don't know that any woman or child was left to fend for themselves without support. I imagine that in those days, women were pretty good at tending the business of the families... especially if a husband must travel (for trade or for sea faring things or for war).
I do not judge or condemn people when all I have is a small tidbit, and there are other considerations.
Peace,
tammy
So we do not know the details, and we don't know that any woman or child was left to fend for themselves without support. I imagine that in those days, women were pretty good at tending the business of the families... especially if a husband must travel (for trade or for sea faring things or for war).
tec - How is this possible that you do not know all the details? I thought you had a direct link with the high command; you yourself stated in other threads that Jesus talks to you, why don't you just ask him? Then we can have this settled in no time.
cofty - I couldn't agree with you more. There are so many details and issues with just following the command at Matt 6:33 that the bible is uterly silent on. In so many ways it's the irresponsible thing to do. Case in point; the pioneering chickens that WTS have created over the decades are coming home to roost now. All of these baby boomers with no retirement savings; it's a disaster of epoch proportions that is coming to life right now. All of this and yet they are still holding fast to the approach of no education etc.
Cofty when Jesus asked those disciples to follow him and they talked about what they'd left behind, essentially they were leaving their Judaic law and communities. Following a man who claimed to be the Messiah without the approval of the Jewish leaders would have meant that they would have been outcast from those communities. It was because were leaving all they had known from birth. If memory serves me the disciples did remain in contact with their wives and went back to visit and support them? But remember that probably most of their extended Jewish families would have shunned them for leaving their faith.
Jesus knew that his time was short and they needed all the knowledge and strength that he could impart to them. Seeing his miracles and recognising his identity, these men who'd been waiting for him remember, would have been able to put faith in his ability to care for their wives and children while they served him.
Of course if you don't believe that Jesus came and was the son of God then it's all a wasted discussion, and just an attempt to try and tie Tammy in knots, maybe?
Loz x
we don't know that any woman or child was left to fend for themselves without support.
Yes we do..
Peter answered him, “We have left everything to follow you! What then will there be for us?”
Jesus said to them, “Truly I tell you, at the renewal of all things, when the Son of Man sits on his glorious throne, you who have followed me will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel. And everyone who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or wife or children or fields for my sake will receive a hundred times as much and will inherit eternal life. But many who are first will be last, and many who are last will be first. - Matt.19:27-30
Tec is correct ...there is no evidence of a wife or children left without support. You have no specific details of that because there aren't any.
Loz x
