Dear Fellow Christian Parents,

[SheldonCooper]

I assume that you would have preferred that Jesus do nothing in this circumstance ?

Reprimanded Peter for getting violent with a guard when He was getting seized. On His way to crucifixion. Peter cut the man's ear off with his own sword and Jesus tells Peter in so many words, don't do that. You live by the sword, you die the sword.

Yet, this same Jesus made a weapon and used tables as a weapon with the same passion Peter had for Him. ( Live by the whip and tables, you die by the whip and tables )

You're seriously trying to argue this? I can go on and on. Peter did exactly what this minor did at the school who bullied the original poster's son.

You lead by example and you simply can not deny that Jesus' violent example not only influenced Peter to cut a man's ear off? But also influenced a minor of our time to bully a mother's son verbally.

 

[The_Believer7]

Exactly. Because He was doing nothing all along. Suddenly, on this particular day was the first time a temple was used for business other than prayer? Or was this the first day He actually seen it first hand? Or did I read it wrong when He said He's the Son of God and His time had not yet come to make the Temple obsolete.

Don't know what you're going for here, ... but Jesus was hardly a do-nothing type of person. If He had been, ... it's not likely that so many persons would be so drawn to Him and His teachings/actions.

Jesus simply saw a wrong, ... and effected a correction.

Exactly, what is the real message here? You want to reference secular means of solving issues in comparison to a righteous figure of holy regard such as Jesus Christ? Who's Father made the proclamation to Moses on Mt. Sinai " Thou shalt not kill "...the same Messiah who said if you hate someone you murdered them in your heart.

Jesus has not spoken spoken of hating anyone here (or ever) ... and is not demonstrating such in His actions in this corrective incident.

We come back to the subject at hand at how Jesus' actions was possibly misinterpreted by a minor and they reacted in the form of being a bully.

Are you conflating bullying ... with applying corrective action ?

Bullying is a quite specific activity ... wherein one exerts effect upon another (or others) ... for the sole purpose of obtaining one's own advantage ... or inflicting harm.

That's not what's going on here ...

 

[SheldonCooper]

I assume that you would have preferred that Jesus do nothing in this circumstance ?

The bulk of Old Testament influences both violence and slavery. The Father of said Jesus Christ. This very document known as the Bible is what was used to justify the beating of African American slaves in the United States of America.

You seriously do not have an argument here in regards to the very strong case that the Bible has had quite the negative influence on society. Not only physically, but now psychologically.

 

[SheldonCooper]

Are you conflating bullying ... with applying corrective action ?

I'm simply showing in plain view the power of influence.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

So a mass shooting at a concert in Las Vegas or a school in Florida is permissible so long as their is just cause. Interesting. I suppose if a person was to commit an act of terror in a building claiming it was " His Father's House " and the only proof of this claim was to read some documentation that talked about a man that had no name and the terrorist in question says.." I'm that man "...the legal system should just say..." Oh, okay then. Carry on with your manic episode, sir. "

In my estimation, blaming Jesus for the "terror" of the Cleansing of the Temple is about on a par with morally blaming a tornado for obliterating a farmer's barn.

 

[SheldonCooper]

Bullying is a quite specific activity ... wherein one exerts effect upon another (or others) ... for the sole purpose of obtaining one's own advantage ... or inflicting harm.

So I suppose Job wasn't bullied then. God is in the Heavens and suddenly Satan, the bully of all bullies, approaches and they have a little wager and God allows Satan to bully Job for the sole purpose of obtaining one's own advantage..or inflicting harm.

 

[The_Believer7]

Yet, this same Jesus made a weapon and used tables as a weapon with the same passion Peter had for Him. ( Live by the whip and tables, you die by the whip and tables )

You are overreaching here ...

Jesus overturned the tables ... and used a whip to drive animals out of the Temple ... so that the citizenry could pray ...

In your presumed view, noone can carry out such passionate corrective activity as Jesus did. That leaves room for a whole lot of evil in the world.

You're seriously trying to argue this? I can go on and on. Peter did exactly what this minor did at the school who bullied the original poster's son.

Yes Peter (not Jesus) did ... but Jesus corrected him ... and healed the action.

You're seriously trying to argue this? I can go on and on. Peter did exactly what this minor did at the school who bullied the original poster's son.

So ... it is your contention that, in a world where his nation was under domination by the Roman government (as represented on Judean streets by Roman soldiers with swords and military hardware) ... that Peter was motivated to perform his act of violence ... by seeing Jesus perform the cited corrective action (where noone was killed, hurt, or dispossessed of rights) ?

 

[SheldonCooper]

In my estimation, blaming Jesus for the "terror" of the Cleansing of the Temple is about on a par with morally blaming a tornado for obliterating a farmer's barn.

So you're saying the Son of God known as Jesus has the IQ of a Tornado. Fascinating.

 

[SheldonCooper]

Yes Peter (not Jesus) did ... but Jesus corrected him ... and healed the action.

Yes, ergo, Jesus was a hypocrite in doing so.

So ... it is your contention that, in a world where his nation was under domination by the Roman government (as represented on Judean streets by Roman soldiers with swords and military hardware) ... that Peter was motivated to perform his act of violence ... by seeing Jesus perform the cited corrective action (where noone was killed, hurt, or dispossessed of rights) ?

Absolutely. There's no reason for the " Son of God " to have to perform such " carnal " tactics as that. Do understand, sir, Jesus Christ is equivalent to a Super Hero. The man walked on water for crying out loud. Cast demons out verbally and resurrected the dead. Logically, makes no sense that He would suddenly denounce His majesty to be a dumb jock. But, because the Son of Man chose to dumb Himself down to the level of a dumb jock, his disciple aka follower PETER followed that example.

 

[The_Believer7]

So I suppose Job wasn't bullied then. God is in the Heavens and suddenly Satan, the bully of all bullies, approaches and they have a little wager and God allows Satan to bully Job for the sole purpose of obtaining one's own advantage..or inflicting harm.

God didn't bully Job ... but He did allow Satan to bully him.

I'm not going to attempt to answer for God regarding this ... however I am at a loss to see how this applies to the situation at hand ...

 

[2PhiloVoid]

So you're saying the Son of God known as Jesus has the IQ of a Tornado. Fascinating.

Did I actually say that? Or did you mistakingly infer that?

The problem here, Sheldon, is that in your personally intuited sense of human rights, you fail to see that any Creator has the prerogative to dismantle what He has created, or to trim the banzai tree that He has planted. Just because there is an obverse fact that the 'creation' doesn't like being trimmed (or disciplined) by the Creator doesn't clearly show that the Creator is somehow in the wrong. He may be in the wrong according to fabricated moral systems that the 'creation' just happens to fashion and favor.

Besides, I suppose that if a tornado were to hit a local church in your area, maybe even the church you went to, you'd feel like that was one intelligent tornado, wouldn't you?

 

[The_Believer7]

The_Believer7 said: Yes Peter (not Jesus) did ... but Jesus corrected him ... and healed the action.

SheldonCooper said: Yes, ergo, Jesus was a hypocrite in doing so.

I accept that this is your stated judgement.

 

[SheldonCooper]

The problem here, Sheldon, is that in your personally intuited sense of human rights, you fail to see that any Creator has the prerogative to dismantle what He has created, or to trim the banzai tree that He has planted. Just because there is an obverse fact that the 'creation' doesn't like being trimmed (or disciplined) by the Creator doesn't clearly show that the Creator is somehow in the wrong. He may be in the wrong according to fabricated moral systems that the 'creation' just happens to fashion and favor.

Now, tell that to the minor who possibly followed the act of rage shown my Jesus Christ. Cause clearly you are not aware of the topic at hand nor are you aware of the context and once again you seem to be consumed with the fantasy of going one on one with me, yet again.

 

[The_Believer7]

Logically, makes no sense that He would suddenly denounce His majesty to be a dumb jock. But, because the Son of Man chose to dumb Himself down to the level of a dumb jock, his disciple aka follower PETER followed that example.

Speaking for all of the "dumb jocks" in the world, ... I'd certainly hate to see you come to a position of power and/or influence. You're a bit judgmental, sir ...

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Now, tell that to the minor who possibly followed the act of rage shown my Jesus Christ. Cause clearly you are not aware of the topic at hand nor are you aware of the context and once again you seem to be consumed with the fantasy of going one on one with me, yet again.

Oh, it's not fantasy, Sheldon.

 

[The_Believer7]

Now, tell that to the minor who possibly followed the act of rage shown my Jesus Christ. Cause clearly you are not aware of the topic at hand nor are you aware of the context and once again you seem to be consumed with the fantasy of going one on one with me, yet again.

In consideration of the term "rage", ... it's not Jesus who seems to be exhibiting such in this correspondence ...

 

[The_Believer7]

Oh, it's not fantasy, Sheldon.

In that case, please allow me to get out of the way ...

 

[SheldonCooper]

In consideration of the term "rage", ... it's not Jesus who seems to be exhibiting such in this correspondence ...

Indeed. It's the bully that inspired the original post.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Indeed. It's the bully that inspired the original post.

I guess we're "fortunate" to have you here at CF to guide us in the right direction, Sheldon. Since you're obviously the expert on all of this ...

 

[SheldonCooper]

I'm not going to attempt to answer for God regarding this ... however I am at a loss to see how this applies to the situation at hand ...

" What's that saying? " Like Father Like Son? Father is violent, the Son is violent. 2,000 plus years later a minor reads about it and is now violent in school. That's how it applies.