I believe this makes it clear..
"Are all sin equal in the sight of God? YES, unequivocally." IHS jim
You have the right to be here all you want.. You can continue to pander to the LDS in the name of being nice.. Just understand Jesus NEVER Pandered to the Pharisees.. He even used name calling.. IHS jimOkay, I can't leave while James is still making stuff up.
I never said that, Jim...and neither did Alan. You are simply not comprehending what is being said.
Please, at least, read Alan's posts, if you couldn't understand mine (and NO you didn't understand...again!)
Nice, Jim. You could type that and then put "In His Name"? If that was "In His Name" it was taking his name in vain.
Maybe I had better stick around for awhile.
Not that it is a point that makes much difference but I disagree.. I believe that even the authority of Rome was given by God.. All things are done in accordance to God's will either perfect or permissive.. IHS jimThats a long question...
What i can see is that Jesus was turning to the guy who just said that he had the "authority" over life and death of him...and Jesus was pointing out that while Pilate is still a guilty party in the murder of an innocent man, his blame is less due to the fact that Pilate was just carrying out Roman law as he had been charged to do by Rome.
So Jesus is calling Pilate a "middle-man", whereas Caiaphas was simply out to kill Jesus for being Jesus.
Jesus is telling Pilate, "Your authority?..you dont have any real authority, your so-called 'authority' is actually someone else's"
This is the reason Jesus was more or less telling Pilate that he was kinda "off the hook" for the blame in killing a known innocent men.
this is the "For this reason" that is key to understanding the point Jesus is making to Pilate, and why Pilate heard this and right away tried to let Jesus go free.....
Jesus is also saying that Caiaphas has more blame in this murder of an innocent men.
Caiaphas is not a middle-man in this story...
I dont believe that the "from above" Jesus was talking about is God.
Jesus is not talking about "god" here.
That would be in the wrong context, it also would destroy the point Jesus is making with the "for this reason" statement he makes to tell why the man who turned him over has the greater sin.
The "authority" that Pilate was talking about, all came from Rome.
That is the authority that Pilate had to answer to...
Jesus points this out to Pilate.
This statement pointing this out to Pilate by Christ sets the stage for the next comment Jesus made concerning the "for this reason" statement.
When Jesus says, "for this reason" he connects the idea that Pilate was under someone else's authority himself with the idea that the man who turned him over to him was not under such authority.
The man who turned him over was not doing so because he was just "following orders of a higher command".
jesus was pointing out that while Pilate was just attempting to do his *** as best he could under the commands and authority of Rome, the man who turned him over to pilate to be killed was not.
The man who turned him over was doing so only because he had rejected Jesus...He rejected Jesus and now wanted Jesus killed.
This is the "greater sin" that Jesus speaks of.
So Jesus is not saying that Pilate was free of being guilty of sin.
But Jesus was saying that the sins are not equal, and that there is a degree of sins, and that Pilate's sin is lesser than the sin of the man who turned him over to him.
================================================== =
I believe this is the only correct understanding of this text.
Pilate makes a statement to Jesus, telling Jesus that he(Pilate) has all the authority he needs to set Jesus free, or put him to death.
Jesus responds to this by telling Pilate that Pilate actually has no authority on nhis own, but that he had to be given his authority by someone higher up in the Roman chain of command.
Then Jesus points out that for this reason, (being under the chain of command of Rome) the person who just turned him over to Pilate has a greater amount of sin in this situation.
This is because the person who turned him over to Pilate was not under the Roman chain of command at all....and was not being ordered to turn Jesus over to anyone!
Last edited by alanmolstad; 04-17-2014 at 10:02 AM.
Last edited by alanmolstad; 04-17-2014 at 10:08 AM.
That is an interesting theory that I hadn't seen or considered before. And you made a good case for it being true, IMO. Thanks for posting it.I dont believe that the "from above" Jesus was talking about is God.
Jesus is not talking about "god" here.
That would be in the wrong context, it also would destroy the point Jesus is making with the "for this reason" statement he makes to tell why the man who turned him over has the greater sin.
The "authority" that Pilate was talking about, all came from Rome.
That is the authority that Pilate had to answer to...
Jesus points this out to Pilate.
This statement pointing this out to Pilate by Christ sets the stage for the next comment Jesus made concerning the "for this reason" statement.
When Jesus says, "for this reason" he connects the idea that Pilate was under someone else's authority himself with the idea that the man who turned him over to him was not under such authority.
The man who turned him over was not doing so because he was just "following orders of a higher command".
jesus was pointing out that while Pilate was just attempting to do his *** as best he could under the commands and authority of Rome, the man who turned him over to pilate to be killed was not.
The man who turned him over was doing so only because he had rejected Jesus...He rejected Jesus and now wanted Jesus killed.
This is the "greater sin" that Jesus speaks of.
So Jesus is not saying that Pilate was free of being guilty of sin.
But Jesus was saying that the sins are not equal, and that there is a degree of sins, and that Pilate's sin is lesser than the sin of the man who turned him over to him.
================================================== =
I believe this is the only correct understanding of this text.
Pilate makes a statement to Jesus, telling Jesus that he(Pilate) has all the authority he needs to set Jesus free, or put him to death.
Jesus responds to this by telling Pilate that Pilate actually has no authority on nhis own, but that he had to be given his authority by someone higher up in the Roman chain of command.
Then Jesus points out that for this reason, (being under the chain of command of Rome) the person who just turned him over to Pilate has a greater amount of sin in this situation.
This is because the person who turned him over to Pilate was not under the Roman chain of command at all....and was not being ordered to turn Jesus over to anyone!
Yes, I understand that, but when one preaches a completely sovereign God, who has his hand in every aspect of man and the things that go on here, it's more difficult (IMO) to claim man is totally responsible for his actions....and most especially for his unbelief, as God is the only one that can change that. Even further, that God has actually "predestined" a group of believers and left the rest to their own devices.
Well, I don't quite know about that. Pilate could no more set Jesus free than I could. It just turned out to be his lot in life the same it was with Pharaoh. Remember God had to harden his heart.I dont believe that the "from above" Jesus was talking about is God.
Jesus is not talking about "god" here.
That would be in the wrong context, it also would destroy the point Jesus is making with the "for this reason" statement he makes to tell why the man who turned him over has the greater sin.
The "authority" that Pilate was talking about, all came from Rome.
That is the authority that Pilate had to answer to...
Jesus points this out to Pilate.
This statement pointing this out to Pilate by Christ sets the stage for the next comment Jesus made concerning the "for this reason" statement.
When Jesus says, "for this reason" he connects the idea that Pilate was under someone else's authority himself with the idea that the man who turned him over to him was not under such authority.
The man who turned him over was not doing so because he was just "following orders of a higher command".
jesus was pointing out that while Pilate was just attempting to do his *** as best he could under the commands and authority of Rome, the man who turned him over to pilate to be killed was not.
The man who turned him over was doing so only because he had rejected Jesus...He rejected Jesus and now wanted Jesus killed.
This is the "greater sin" that Jesus speaks of.
So Jesus is not saying that Pilate was free of being guilty of sin.
But Jesus was saying that the sins are not equal, and that there is a degree of sins, and that Pilate's sin is lesser than the sin of the man who turned him over to him.
================================================== =
I believe this is the only correct understanding of this text.
Pilate makes a statement to Jesus, telling Jesus that he(Pilate) has all the authority he needs to set Jesus free, or put him to death.
Jesus responds to this by telling Pilate that Pilate actually has no authority on nhis own, but that he had to be given his authority by someone higher up in the Roman chain of command.
Then Jesus points out that for this reason, (being under the chain of command of Rome) the person who just turned him over to Pilate has a greater amount of sin in this situation.
This is because the person who turned him over to Pilate was not under the Roman chain of command at all....and was not being ordered to turn Jesus over to anyone!
people have free will...
that is why we are judged and found guilty.
if pilate had no way to free jesus...then jesus made an error in agreeing that pilate did have authority....
jesus even points out that pilates authority over jesus came down to him from above....not that there was none.
Man is responsible for his own unbelief. Someone who chooses to obey Joseph Smith and not Christ will be judged on that choice. No many can come to Christ without the Father drawing him. That is the teaching of Scripture, and nobody will have an excuse.Yes, I understand that, but when one preaches a completely sovereign God, who has his hand in every aspect of man and the things that go on here, it's more difficult (IMO) to claim man is totally responsible for his actions....and most especially for his unbelief, as God is the only one that can change that. Even further, that God has actually "predestined" a group of believers and left the rest to their own devices.
Oath formerly taken by Mormons promising not to reveal secret Mormon temple rituals: "Should we do so, we agree to have our breasts cut open and our hearts and vitals torn from our bodies and given to the birds of the air and the beasts of the field."
Try this thought out for size..... if God forced someone to do something evil , then God cant hold them guilty of doing it right?...
So the fact that we have free will eliminates the idea that god will force us to do things against our will....if that were the case then god would be guilty of what we could call, "forced-possession" of a person... (forced-possession as in the movie Exorcist)
So this means that god's plans took into full account the fact that at all times Pharaoh had always free will.
Last edited by alanmolstad; 04-17-2014 at 05:09 PM.
Sometime we just gotta realize, God's ways, are not our ways.Try this thought out for size..... if God forced someone to do something evil , then God cant hold them guilty of doing it right?...
So the fact that we have free will eliminates the idea that god will force us to do things against our will....if that were the case then god would be guilty of what we could call, "forced-possession" of a person... (forced-possession as in the movie Exorcist)
So this means that god's plans took into full account the fact that at all times Pharaoh had always free will.
However, before we are saved we have NO free will, because we are dead in our tressp***es and sins, and in bondage to Satan.
Oath formerly taken by Mormons promising not to reveal secret Mormon temple rituals: "Should we do so, we agree to have our breasts cut open and our hearts and vitals torn from our bodies and given to the birds of the air and the beasts of the field."
Possessed people are not held accountable...
If a person stands condemned, it is only because they are guilty ....
If they are guilty it is only because they had a true choice....
If you had no choice, if you were forced/coerced into breaking a law against your will, then you are innocent.
If you simply did not know any better, (a child or handicapped), then your sins are overlooked.
See, though....that is exactly what I'm talking about. If we have no free will (we are only free to sin) and we can only become believers, if God draws us and changes our heart...how could one possibly be responsible for not believing? It just doesn't make sense.
I guess I should explain it then......
but first....got to make a beer run to the fridge!
We might both need a drink for this one. ;-)
That is the catch 22 we'er in. I just leave it in God's hands. It will all make sense to us one day, just not today.
Remember God knows who is the believer before the believer even knows. However we know not so it is up to us to tell the Good news, and let God do the rest.
Well, to take Calvinist interpretation of scripture one step further, God doesn't just "know"....He chooses.That is the catch 22 we'er in. I just leave it in God's hands. It will all make sense to us one day, just not today.
Remember God knows who is the believer before the believer even knows. However we know not so it is up to us to tell the Good news, and let God do the rest.