- Jul 22, 2014
- 41,511
- 7,861
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Married
Look. If “sell all“ means “sell all that you have“ in the most literal sense, then the disciples should have sold their clothes that they were currently wearing and run around naked. So obviously all does not mean all here in the most strictest wooden literalistic sense that you are taking it to mean. In fact, the disciples had a boat when Jesus returned. They should not have a boat if they were to sell all of their possessions. Did Jesus rebuke them for not selling the boat? Also, to sell one’s possessions means one had money from the sale. It does not mean they just gave away their possessions or did not keep some of the money from the sale and give to others as they had need. How could the apostle Paul have a tent business if he was to have sold all his previous possessions and remain poor with no possessions? Was Paul disobeying God? Surely not. What about the believer named Jason? He was said to have owned his own house. Yet, the Scriptures did not condemn him for it. Also, in Luke 10:25-37, how can the Good Samaritan help the poor guy who was left for dead on the road if he had no money? He had oil, wine, a riding animal, and enough money to put this poor guy up in an Inn (To take care of him). Jesus said, go and do likewise. Jesus did not say, sell your riding animals, sell oil, and wine, and get rid of your money and help the poor guy hurt on the side of the road with absolutely no resources.
At Pentecost, many Jews traveled from far away places to Jerusalem and they needed either supplies and or lodging. The believers came together to share that need. But as we learn with Ananias, Peter said that his property was his own to keep. It was voluntary. 2 Corinthians 9:6-7 says, “But this I say, He which soweth sparingly shall reap also sparingly; and he which soweth bountifully shall reap also bountifully. Every man according as he purposeth in his heart, so let him give; not grudgingly, or of necessity: for God loveth a cheerful giver.” So it’s not like the Old Covenant where you had to tithe 10% of your harvest or livestock, etcetera. 2 Corinthians 9 is not a mandate. We are to give as God has purposed or called in our heart to give.
Also, consider that the disciples forsaken all that they had (Luke 14:33) (Matthew 19:27-29).
To “forsake” means to “leave” but it does not necessarily mean to “sell.” I can forsake my house to go on vacation for a month or two, but it does not mean I sold my house. So Luke 12:33 as referring to sell all that they currently had while they were with Jesus Christ. Meaning, they were to sell what they currently had on them at that moment while traveling with Jesus and this ties in later with Luke 22:35-36. Note: The other possessions of the disciples back at their homes would have been a good distance away for at least some of them. Selling of property also takes time, too. So you would have to assume that there was a large gap of time of months that took place of the disciples selling off everything they owned before Jesus talked with his disciples next. Nothing in Scripture suggests that they left for a long time and came back to Jesus. In fact, Luke 12:33 is explained in Luke 22:35-36 (of which you fail to grasp). But again…. ZACCHAEUS!!!!!!! What do you do with that? Ignore it? This whole argument by you is refuted just by his situation alone, but you can still keep arguing for a false belief that does not exist.
You criticize Continuationists for suggesting that the word “which” cannot refer to a person in 1 Corinthians 13:10, and I imagine you are frustrated by their non answers or inadequate apologetics on this matter to explain it. I am also frustrated by that. But you are doing the same with ignoring points in Scripture involving Luke 12:33. Zacchaeus is all I need to refute your argument here and yet you are still arguing against all logic and reason. You have to cut out the story of Zacchaeus to make your wrong interpretation on Luke 12:33 work (along with many other verses).
There are many concepts mentioned in Scripture here that causes your wrong belief in Luke 12:33 to self implode that you are not really dealing with involving Scripture.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
