Is it okay to talk about casting pearls before swine?

[Alithis]

Sounds fine to me

started it here ... http://www.christianforums.com/t7741844/

 

[Luke1433]

An interesting thread, Michael. I may not have time to follow it as I have this one, but I have made a post there and wish you well with that discussion.

Now, may we return to discussing what Jesus meant by not casting our pearls before swine, and what it means to "rend" us.

I'm assuming that the "pearls" are the teaching of Jesus, and the "rending" is what Jesus promised elsewhere, which is that we would be libelled in much the same way that he was libelled, if we stay true to teaching what he taught us.

And the instruction is also similar to what Paul said to Titus (and maybe to Timothy too) about not wasting time on people who just want to argue. If his pearls (teachings) are not being seen as good news, then we just keep moving on until we find someone who DOES see them for the great treasure that they are.

How does that sound for an answer, Candle?

 

[Alithis]

..........

 

[Luke1433]

Hi, Michael. I see that you have removed what you wrote. Have you had some further thoughts about what you said? It relates to whether or not the "pearls" which Jesus has told us not to give to the pigs are the teachings of Jesus. Even though we are told to go into all the world and preach the gospel, the Holy Spirit still instructed Paul not to go into a certain place. It is not always the "right time" to approach some people. The Spirit and the Word seem to agree that sometimes you do not "cast your pearls".

I have found that it is often our silence which can speak most powerfully... not a silence which springs from fear, but a silence which springs from patience. We Christians are more often than not, so keen to "preach" that we do not take the time to discern whether or not anyone is listening.

 

[Alithis]

lol no i was raving on a bit and realized im being repetitive for no good reason haha . so i deleted it and moved on .

no i don't think i can add much to what i said .
the swine are not fellow believers
the pearl (for me ) is the topic most precious of the Holy Spirit.. and in the face of those who are quite obviously giving over to mocking everything your saying to them ..i would make a concerted effort to Not bring up that topic with those particular people at that particular time ..

for two reasons already loosely stated
One: i would feel hurt and offended by their mocking -emotionally (if not physically ) torn /rent .
and

two: i may be unwittingly goading them into their own folly and cause them to blaspheme . which would not be an act of love in Christ because I am to desire what he desires and that is that ALL come into a knowledge of the good news , believe and be saved .. especially those that presently mock .
i try to remember always the future state of ANY soul not saved .. and desire they never know that end .

 

[candle glow]

And the instruction is also similar to what Paul said to Titus (and maybe to Timothy too) about not wasting time on people who just want to argue. If his pearls (teachings) are not being seen as good news, then we just keep moving on until we find someone who DOES see them for the great treasure that they are.

Moving on is a reasonable explanation, which also accounts for what someone else was saying about refusing the give the gospel to someone. It's not that we refuse, it's that the pigs refuse.

However, what about a situation where we can't just move on, like here on the forum where we've got a specific thread? I suppose we could move on by ignoring people whom we feel are acting like pigs, though that could get awkward for others who are looking on and may not realize that the pig is being a pig. For example, wolves in sheeps clothing.

 

[RDKirk]

Moving on is a reasonable explanation, which also accounts for what someone else was saying about refusing the give the gospel to someone. It's not that we refuse, it's that the pigs refuse.

However, what about a situation where we can't just move on, like here on the forum where we've got a specific thread? I suppose we could move on by ignoring people whom we feel are acting like pigs, though that could get awkward for others who are looking on and may not realize that the pig is being a pig. For example, wolves in sheeps clothing.

You say what is true and then move on. Those who have ears to hear (or eyes to read) will hear.

 

[Luke1433]

I agree with Kirk. We obviously cannot post on every thread, and so we choose those on which we feel we can most freely share the pearls of Jesus' teachings. But even there (here?) there may come a time when we just move on to some other forum or some other form of witness.

There is also the possibility that we could ignore some posts on this thread (or any thread) and just respond to those points which seem pertinent, more or less speaking to some while ignoring others.

 

[RDKirk]

There is also the possibility that we could ignore some posts on this thread (or any thread) and just respond to those points which seem pertinent, more or less speaking to some while ignoring others.

That, too. That's what I tend to do on the open-to-non-Christian topics. If there is a correspondent who appears to be sincerely seeking, I'll start limiting my responses to/for that person.

Even in a real-world situation, such as conversing with a small group of people, it often happens that one person is merely provoking a dispute, but there may be other people in the group who are really seeking...but they won't say so outright.

This is where you need spiritual discernment to understand that the one doing the provoking is not really the one you are speaking to, and that your responses must instead be crafted for someone else in the audience. That might even mean uttering what seems like a complete non-sequitor--you might need to control the conversation to the Lord's benefit.

This is something notable in scripture: The gospel always presumes God. Nothing ever starts with trying first to prove the existence of God. Even Genesis starts out, verse 1:1, with the presumption of God.

This is because, as Psalms 14 and 55 both state, only a fool says in his heart there is no God at all. In Romans 1 we read that God gives His own argument for His existance in creation itself...and He has no further argument. If someone refuses to acknowledge God in creation itself, God "gives them over..." to the results of their own foolishness.

That's why Proverbs tells us not to argue a fool's argument. That's just a distraction from the gospel. People get tied up in those distractions all the time--when there might be a listener who actually needs to hear gospel, not arguments about abstract philosophical silliness.

Notice in Acts 17 when Paul is preaching not to Jews (who already believe in God) but to outright pagans. Even in that setting, he ignores the atheists (the Greek Skeptics, who were the ancient precursors of atheists) and specifically address those who are seeking God. He presumes God and is speaking only to those who already themselves presume God.

 

[Alithis]

the problem i see in many of these scenarios .. is it simply is not a stance of love in Christ Jesus to be going around viewing any one as "swine" .

 

[Luke1433]

Great post, Kirk.

As for it not being Christlike to view anyone as "swine", perhaps we need to find out who it was who first said this gosh-awful thing, so that we all learn to stay away from such an un-Christlike person! lol

 

[Alithis]

.. and yet a better way .. simply forgive

 

[rgleason]

What inspired advice! Thank you. I just experienced the Holy Spirit prompting me to hold my tongue when I was witnessing to a Mormon. I asked him "What if you are wrong?" and he shrugged his sholders.

That was a new experience for me.

 

[Luke1433]

Geason wrote: "I asked him "What if you are wrong?" and he shrugged his shoulders."

The Holy Spirit shrugged his shoulders????

Or the Mormon did?

It's not clear which.

 

[candle glow]

 

[Messy]

I thought about this thread when I read something today.
I'm most of the time on a Dutch christian forum and atheists are also allowed there, as long as they are respectful. So today a new one came with a question how somebody in 2013 could KNOW that his/her God was real and the only one. So, I thought: Hey, that's nice. I can share my testimony. But someone else responded: Are you really interested, because I don't want to throw my pearls before swine.
He responded: Oink Oink, you think I'm a pig?
My goodness, I understand that you can think this way, but don't say it please.

 

[Luke1433]

Hi Messy. I 90% agree with you. However, there does seem to be a place for shocking revelations about the nature of our own spirit at times too. Certainly Jesus used terms like wolf, viper, pig which were hardly complimentary. Of course just because someone is an atheist does not make them a pig, and I think where such terms are more likely to relate are amongst so-called believers. (Remember that Jesus did not appear to have problems with the obvious heretics so much as he did with the respected religious leaders.)

I have found that it is the respected religious leaders who more often than not treat the teachings of Jesus with contempt. It often becomes necessary to work around their refusal to confront the teachings of Jesus (and their tendency to do all they can to dig up dirt on anyone promoting the teachings of Jesus) which makes them fit into the category of someone who is out to "rend" those who push the teachings of Jesus.

I have, for example, refused to give my "testimony" to people who show signs of only wanting to learn more about my background in an effort to dig up dirt. And I say this of professing Christians, unfortunately.

 

[candle glow]

I think there needs to be some fairly reasonable signs of pigginess before publicly rebuking someone as a pig (or goat, viper etc...) and I think the publicness of it is for the sake of warning others not to get tangled up with that person.

 

[Messy]

Hi Messy. I 90% agree with you. However, there does seem to be a place for shocking revelations about the nature of our own spirit at times too. Certainly Jesus used terms like wolf, viper, pig which were hardly complimentary. Of course just because someone is an atheist does not make them a pig, and I think where such terms are more likely to relate are amongst so-called believers. (Remember that Jesus did not appear to have problems with the obvious heretics so much as he did with the respected religious leaders.)

I have found that it is the respected religious leaders who more often than not treat the teachings of Jesus with contempt. It often becomes necessary to work around their refusal to confront the teachings of Jesus (and their tendency to do all they can to dig up dirt on anyone promoting the teachings of Jesus) which makes them fit into the category of someone who is out to "rend" those who push the teachings of Jesus.

I have, for example, refused to give my "testimony" to people who show signs of only wanting to learn more about my background in an effort to dig up dirt. And I say this of professing Christians, unfortunately.

I gave my testimony and I shortly prayed for him, then the Lord told me to check another website, a Freethinker site of atheists, mostly formerly christians. Turns out it was just a setup from them, to get some christians to debate with on their site. But they linked my threat about evil in the world and an almighty God and my testimony and they read it.

 

[Luke1433]

It's a good point about atheists who go out looking for an argument. I tend to think of them as rabidly religious (in the bad sense), since they act like what many of them dislike in Christians, i.e. a tendency to argue about every little thing.

If this penchant for arguing is a sign of pigginess, then I think it's fair to say that most religious forums do tend to attract such people. This particular forum is fairly good at avoiding that (at least in the few threads that I have visited). They probably have to ban a lot of people in order to do that, however.

Added comment: If it's not clear, I'm referring to both argumentative atheists and argumentative believers. I think that quality is unattractive in both types.