Jesus seems to refer to a nonexistent "hate your enemy" verse? (Matthew 5:43)

[Soyeong]

Psalm 5:5. The foolish shall not stand in thy sight: thou hatest all workers of iniquity.6. Thou shalt destroy them that speak leasing: the LORD will abhor the bloody and deceitful man.”

Ephesians 6:12 For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers over this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places.

A key part of coming to love someone that we once considered to be our enemies is recognizing that they were never truly our enemies.

 

[Neogaia777]

Whenever Jesus was directly quoting from the OT, he proceeded it by saying "it is written", but when he was quoting from what the people of his day had heard being said, "he proceeded it by saying "you have heard that it was said", so his emphasis on the different form of communication is important. In Deuteronomy 4:2, it is a sin to add to or subtract from the Law, so Jesus was not doing that in Matthew 5, but rather everything that he taught in that chapter was in accordance with what was written. So the point that he was making in Matthew 5:43 was that while the OT does instruct us to love our neighbor (Leviticus 19:18), it does not instruct us to hate our enemies. On the contrary, verses like Exodus 23:4-5, Deuteronomy 23:7, Proverbs 24:17-18, and Proverbs 25:21-22 are all in accordance with loving our enemy.

That's a good post, and I do appreciate it, perhaps some aspects of the OT do tell us to love our enemies in a way anyway, but, how is one loving his enemies by killing them...?

God Bless!

 

[Neogaia777]

Ephesians 6:12 For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers over this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places.

A key part of coming to love someone that we once considered to be our enemies is recognizing that they were never truly our enemies.

Great, but again, how is one loving his enemies by killing them, and their women and children, etc...?

God Bless!

 

[Soyeong]

That's a good post, and I do appreciate it, perhaps some aspects of the OT do tell us to love our enemies in a way anyway, but, how is one loving his enemies by killing them...?

God Bless!

Thank you.

Do you agree that God loves everyone and that He has rightly judged people worthy of receiving the death penalty? Do you think that it is incompatible for a judge who loves his neighbor to ever rule against anyone? By ruling against one person, a judge is also ruling in favor of someone else, and in that moment it is about upholding justice, and a world where justice is upheld is far more loving than a world where it is not.

 

[Neogaia777]

Thank you.

Do you agree that God loves everyone and that He has rightly judged people worthy of receiving the death penalty? Do you think that it is incompatible for a judge who loves his neighbor to ever rule against anyone? By ruling against one person, a judge is also ruling in favor of someone else, and in that moment it is about upholding justice, and a world where justice is upheld is far more loving than a world where it is not.

I agree, I just wanted to hear you say it... Sometimes it is totally justified, even if you love an enemy to kill them or wipe them out completely...

And they all return to Him (God) anyway...

But only justified when and where God directly commands it though... And not at other times, etc...

God Bless!

 

[mcarans]

I agree, I just wanted to hear you say it... Sometimes it is totally justified, even if you love an enemy to kill them or wipe them out completely...

And they all return to Him (God) anyway...

But only justified when and where God directly commands it though... And not at other times, etc...

God Bless!

This line is thinking is dangerous because people often claim that God is on their side against their enemy and that they are justified in exterminating them. Look at the Rwandan genocide as a modern example.

"Father Athanase Seromba who ordered the bulldozing of his church with 2,000 Tutsis inside and had the survivors shot"

By this reasoning, Father Seromba was loving his enemies.

 

[Neogaia777]

This line is thinking is dangerous because people often claim that God is on their side against their enemy and that they are justified in exterminating them. Look at the Rwandan genocide as a modern example.

"Father Athanase Seromba who ordered the bulldozing of his church with 2,000 Tutsis inside and had the survivors shot"

By this reasoning, Father Seromba was loving his enemies.

I know it's dangerous, but who ever said anything about this line of thought or thinking was "safe"...

In trying to understand or justify many things in the OT, there is not much "safe"...

It's the "why" that needs to fully understood, for that is the only true power or way of getting through it, is very accurately and fully understanding the "why's" of all that was done in the OT...

Was God only showing us our own ways, for example, or what might be the other explanations, etc...?

The judgments of a man or men or the way man would judge, until Christ came, etc, or would do, be, act, behave, judge, etc, till Christ came, etc...

To show us the failure of it, etc...? And that was not really the way God is, or does, or would do, or judges, etc, but it became necessary to show us our own ways (first) etc...?

And that was the paving of the way for Christ, etc...

That that was "why the OT Law Covenant" etc...

Anyway, "theories" anyway...

Get's you thinking and makes you think though...

God Bless!

 

[klutedavid]

In Matthew 5:43, Jesus appears to refer to an Old Testament text which should read something like "You shall love your neighbour and hate your enemy". However, there is no such verse in the Bible. What are we to make of this? Could He be referring to Psalms 139:21-22 or actions driven by hatred in the Old Testament?

More here:
Jesus seems to refer to a nonexistent "hate your enemy" verse? (Matthew 5:43) : cruciformity

Jesus actually said, 'you have heard that it was said', which is different to Jesus saying that which is written.

It is these small points that people miss sometimes. I have missed the occasional one myself.

 

[mcarans]

I know it's dangerous, but who ever said anything about this line of thought or thinking was "safe"...

In trying to understand or justify many things in the OT, there is not much "safe"...

It's the "why" that needs to fully understood, for that is the only true power or way of getting through it, is very accurately and fully understanding the "why's" of all that was done in the OT...

Was God only showing us our own ways, for example, or what might be the other explanations, etc...?

The judgments of a man or men or the way man would judge, until Christ came, etc, or would do, be, act, behave, judge, etc, till Christ came, etc...

To show us the failure of it, etc...? And that was not really the way God is, or does, or would do, or judges, etc, but it became necessary to show us our own ways (first) etc...?

And that was the paving of the way for Christ, etc...

That that was "why the OT Law Covenant" etc...

Anyway, "theories" anyway...

Get's you thinking and makes you think though...

God Bless!

The problem is if you had been there at that church just before Father Seromba bulldozed it and he told you what he was about to do was with God's blessing and there is Biblical precedent for it, you'd have no grounds on which to dissuade him.

 

[mcarans]

Jesus actually said, 'you have heard that it was said', which is different to Jesus saying that which is written.

It is these small points that people miss sometimes. I have missed the occasional one myself.

"“You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’" (Matthew 5:38) Eye for eye and tooth for tooth is in the OT and is also preceded by "you have heard that it was said".

 

[Neogaia777]

The problem is if you had been there at that church just before Father Seromba bulldozed it and he told you what he was about to do was with God's blessing and there is Biblical precedent for it, you'd have no grounds on which to dissuade him.

I'd doubt whether he was a true man of God or who he was truly hearing, that's for sure...

That's why we have to extra careful, and test them to see if they are truly of God or not...

I think we can be pretty sure that, after Christ, He (God) no longer commands that today as well...

If we know how Christ was the end of that or those kinds of things as His (God's) true followers and believers in Christ (and God) today that is...

That God not longer does or commands those kinds of things now today, etc...

But that the Devil might or will only, etc...

And if we don't know that today, then we are pretty lost indeed...

God Bless!

 

[mcarans]

I'd doubt whether he was a true man of God or who he was truly hearing, that's for sure...

That's why we have to extra careful, and test them to see if they are truly of God or not...

I think we can be pretty sure that, after Christ, He (God) no longer commands that today as well...

If we know how Christ was the end of that or those kinds of things as His (God's) true followers and believers in Christ (and God) today that is...

That God not longer does or commands those kinds of things now today, etc...

But that the Devil might or will only, etc...

And if we don't know that today, then we are pretty lost indeed...

God Bless!

Why did God change after Christ?

 

[Neogaia777]

Why did God change after Christ?

God's standards never changed, and really He never changed either, it's just that, well, I believe or think anyway, that His plans and purposes in the OT after the law was given, was a rather dark or darker period of time, and a darker part of His plans that needed to fulfilled first in preparation for Christ, but that is was not the whole entire plan, etc, but was only the first or middle part of it, etc, which I kind of said to you about in post #47, that He might have been trying to show us our own ways, etc, ways that were never meant to work but were to prepare the way for Christ, ect, and the next parts of His plans, etc, and we're in a different part of the plan now, after Him (Christ), etc...

That's just kind of my theory or take anyway...

Things did change from the Old to the NT after the law and before Christ, etc, but I don't think God ever changed, etc, just that His plans and/or purposes were different during that period of time, etc, etc, etc...

And for that reason, since it is clear that the ways in and after Christ and the in the NT and afterwards are "much more passive ways", and much more of ways of a kind of much more "passive resistance" against evil and the things of evil, when that is necessary, I don't think God would ever give us or anyone the command to kill today, after Christ, etc...

Were in a different part of the plan now I think...

God Bless!

 

[Neogaia777]

God's standards never changed, and really He never changed either, it's just that, well, I believe or think anyway, that His plans and purposes in the OT after the law was given, was a rather dark or darker period of time, and a darker part of His plans that needed to fulfilled first in preparation for Christ, but that is was not the whole entire plan, etc, but was only the first or middle part of it, etc, which I kind of said to you about in post #47, that He might have been trying to show us our own ways, etc, ways that were never meant to work but were to prepare the way for Christ, ect, and the next parts of His plans, etc, and we're in a different part of the plan now, after Him (Christ), etc...

That's just kind of my theory or take anyway...

Things did change from the Old to the NT after the law and before Christ, etc, but I don't think God ever changed, etc, just that His plans and/or purposes were different during that period of time, etc, etc, etc...

And for that reason, since it is clear that the ways in and after Christ and the in the NT and afterwards are "much more passive ways", and much more of ways of a kind of much more "passive resistance" against evil and the things of evil, when that is necessary, I don't think God would ever give us or anyone the command to kill today, after Christ, etc...

Were in a different part of the plan now I think...

God Bless!

But then again, I don't know how much that theory holds water either, as God in the OT seemed kind of shocked and/or surprised by our disobedience at times also, moved by emotion, etc...?

And I have a theory for both that and this (that I just said to you or quoted above) (my previous post I just quoted), anyway, that reconciles both of these, but I'm not allowed to go into it or that in too much detail on here or on this site unfortunately...?

God Bless!

 

[mcarans]

But then again, I don't know how much that theory holds water either, as God in the OT seemed kind of shocked and/or surprised by our disobedience at times also, moved by emotion, etc...?

And I have a theory for both that and this (that I just said to you or quoted above) (my previous post I just quoted), anyway, that reconciles both of these, but I'm not allowed to go into it or that in too much detail on here or on this site unfortunately...?

God Bless!

May I ask why not?

 

[ViaCrucis]

In Matthew 5:43, Jesus appears to refer to an Old Testament text which should read something like "You shall love your neighbour and hate your enemy". However, there is no such verse in the Bible. What are we to make of this? Could He be referring to Psalms 139:21-22 or actions driven by hatred in the Old Testament?

More here:
Jesus seems to refer to a nonexistent "hate your enemy" verse? (Matthew 5:43) : cruciformity

I always took it to mean that Jesus was describing conventional wisdom. "Hate your enemy" is conventional wisdom, a popular sentiment; Jesus turned such a sentiment on top of its head saying that we should love our enemies. Jesus takes the commandment to love our neighbor and broadens our neighbor to include everyone, even those individuals who would wish us harm.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Neogaia777]

May I ask why not?

No, sorry...

God Bless!