|
Post by wonder in on Aug 3, 2007 11:54:42 GMT -5
Does any one know for certain?
|
|
|
Post by jordan on Aug 3, 2007 12:10:31 GMT -5
Could it be a rumour that just took off?
|
|
|
Post by birds have nests on Aug 3, 2007 12:48:31 GMT -5
Except if you call a penguin a 'bird'?
|
|
|
Post by scripture on Aug 3, 2007 13:27:20 GMT -5
He was driven out of his home town because he offended the people. He was not setting an example.
|
|
|
Post by Example on Aug 3, 2007 14:06:38 GMT -5
He was driven out of his home town because he offended the people. He was not setting an example. Oh, I see . I guess that explains it all. We are all examples of the way we live, aren't we?
|
|
|
Post by The real answer on Aug 3, 2007 14:12:22 GMT -5
He was driven out of his home town because he offended the people. He was not setting an example. The 'home town' that Jesus grew up in, forced Jesus to NOT have a home, because they drove Him out of their town. This made people believe that He wanted to be 'homeless', but what this really means is that Jesus was not permitted to live like God wanted Him to. God wanted Jesus to get married and settle down and raise a family, like Joseph and Mary did for Him. This was explained by our bible translators we hired to explain these things to us.
|
|
|
Post by ithascome on Aug 3, 2007 14:35:52 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by ANDREW M on Aug 3, 2007 15:21:09 GMT -5
Jesus had no set place to lay his head during his ministry, since he was moving about the country often too far from home to return to same.
Not quite "not having a home."
|
|
|
Post by ii on Aug 3, 2007 16:57:46 GMT -5
forgetting not that He had no where to lay His head signifing that He had no permanent place of His own
|
|
|
Post by junia on Aug 3, 2007 17:11:17 GMT -5
forgetting not that He had no where to lay His head signifing that He had no permanent place of His own Which could also be understood as the earth (his creation) was not his (Jesus') home. He left his home in heaven, in the incarnation, to accomplish his and the Father's redemptive plan.
|
|
|
Post by ANDREW M on Aug 3, 2007 17:13:28 GMT -5
Agreed ! During his ministerial years where he was rarely in his home area, he only had temporary accomodation. Of course his home was with his mother Mary. From the cross he handed over the responsibility of looking after her to the Apostle John (surely a lifetime commitment ?) who took her into HIS OWN HOME !
Irrespective of whether or not John partook of itinerant ministry, he had a "permanent" home. He may not have "permanently" stayed in it (I don't know), but he had a home nonetheless, which served the Lord's purpose. If John did not have that home, Jesus could not have transferred the responsibility for Mary to him.
|
|
|
Post by Jessi on Aug 3, 2007 21:12:46 GMT -5
Hello.
These verses seem to indicate that Jesus was not homeless in the sense alluded to by many ("itinerate", etc.). It seems, He had a place to stay in the beginning of John's gospel:
Jn 1:35 The next day again John was standing with two of his disciples,
36and he looked at Jesus as he walked by and said, "Behold, the Lamb of God!"
37The two disciples heard him say this, and they followed Jesus.
38Jesus turned and saw them following and said to them, "What are you seeking?" And they said to him, "Rabbi" (which means Teacher), "where are you staying?"[/i][/b]
39He said to them, "Come and you will see." So they came and saw where he was staying, and they stayed with him that day, for it was about the tenth hour.[/color]
Jn 1:28 puts Jesus in Bethabara--which is right at the tip of the Salt Sea on the Palestinian map of the time of Christ. The fact that he was "staying" somewhere seems to imply that He was staying in a house . . . but it could have been an alley or a field, too. I wouldn't die for the idea that it was a house in the town of Bathabara.
Jesus' words about the foxes having holes, birds of the air have nests (Mt 8:20, Lk 9:58) but the Son of Man has no place to lay his head -- seem to be referring to the reason He was transient, having a specific time frame in which to accomplish His mission.
Ministers, pastors, preachers and teachers today don't seem to be under the same obligation, since the reason for Jesus having lived a full life (achieving adulthood) was, in a limited way to provide an example for us to follow . . . But who could do all those things he did? The Word gives us His birth, one incident when he was 12, and then picks up again at 30. If his life was solely to be as an example to us, you would think every second would have been recorded.
But, according to passages on imputation, he was to achieve adulthood so as to perfectly fulfill the law, so that His perfect life in perfect obedience to God could be imputed to us, as our sin was imputed to Him (Rom 4:6, 5:10, I cor 1:30).
Jesus seemed to have plenty of places to stay--which would make him . . . not homeless. I cannot think of a passage which clearly states that Jesus was "homeless" but transient in that he was on a mission, which would culminate in his death and resurrection.
The idea that Jesus had no place to lay his head seems to me a reference to the fact that He came to die for the sins of His people and was transient . . . in that there was only a span of three years in which to complete His mission as the God Man, come to save His people from their sin (Matt 1:21).
Christ's Forever,
Jessi
|
|
|
Post by gloryintruth on Aug 3, 2007 23:45:20 GMT -5
[Jessi Wrote] These verses seem to indicate that Jesus was not homeless in the sense alluded to by many. It seems, He had a place to stay in the beginning of John's gospel.
Jesus was homeless in that he did not own any property or a home. All his worldly goods at the end of his life apparently amounted to his woven coat, and his other clothes - this was all the Roman soliders had to divide between them. He did not even possess a family tomb - he was laid in a borrowed grave.
When we in the fellowship speak of Jesus being homeless, this is what we mean: he owned nothing, he was itinerant, and he stayed in the homes of friends and believers.
|
|
|
Post by gloryintruth on Aug 3, 2007 23:47:42 GMT -5
[Someone Wrote] Which could also be understood as the earth (his creation) was not his (Jesus') home. He left his home in heaven, in the incarnation, to accomplish his and the Father's redemptive plan.
Oh, the theories that abound when first we set out to deny the teaching of scripture due to sectarian bias!
|
|
|
Post by Interesting on Aug 4, 2007 3:56:59 GMT -5
[Someone Wrote] Which could also be understood as the earth (his creation) was not his (Jesus') home. He left his home in heaven, in the incarnation, to accomplish his and the Father's redemptive plan.Oh, the theories that abound when first we set out to deny the teaching of scripture due to sectarian bias! I've heard the same thing in meetings of the friends and workers that Jesus left his home in heaven and earth was not his home. The follow up being that once someone is born again, then their home is no longer this earth or on this earth, but in heaven. I wonder who is guilty of sectarian bias; one who accepts such a teaching or one who rejects such a teaching. I think GIT is so guilty of sectarian bias.
|
|
|
Post by Interesting on Aug 4, 2007 4:04:39 GMT -5
[Jessi Wrote] These verses seem to indicate that Jesus was not homeless in the sense alluded to by many. It seems, He had a place to stay in the beginning of John's gospel.Jesus was homeless in that he did not own any property or a home. All his worldly goods at the end of his life apparently amounted to his woven coat, and his other clothes - this was all the Roman soliders had to divide between them. He did not even possess a family tomb - he was laid in a borrowed grave. When we in the fellowship speak of Jesus being homeless, this is what we mean: he owned nothing, he was itinerant, and he stayed in the homes of friends and believers. You do not know that Jesus was homeless. You do not know that Jesus owned no property or home. You do not know that his worldly possessions amounted to just his cloak. You do not know that he had no family tomb. You do not know that he was homeless. Pretty much all people are itinerant. You do not know that he stayed always (which has to be assumed since you did not qualify) in the homes of friends and believers.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 4, 2007 4:51:38 GMT -5
quote - "You do not know that Jesus was homeless." He said he was. But he wasn't "homeless" as in, "on the street." He was cared for by those who witnessed him or loved him.
quote - You do not know that Jesus owned no property or home. Doesn't say, either way. But it is inferred when Jesus spoke of forsaking all for the Gospel. These verses are often quoted by salaried charlatans who would never be accommodated by their parish.
quote - You do not know that his worldly possessions amounted to just his cloak. We have to go on what the bible says.
quote - You do not know that he had no family tomb. It is possible there was a family tomb. It isn't relevant to any issue here.
quote - Pretty much all people are itinerant. An example of a Gospel preacher in the bible is Paul. He spent most of his latter days in traveling and preaching.
quote - You do not know that he stayed always (which has to be assumed since you did not qualify) in the homes of friends and believers. Sometimes he may have slept outdoors, and sometimes with the Pharisees and doctors of law. But most times, yes, it would have been with those who loved him.
|
|
|
Post by ANDREW M on Aug 4, 2007 5:20:32 GMT -5
I don't believe Jesus ever used the word "homeless" to describe his situation. Certainly he said he had no set place to lay his head.
The term "homeless" can imply different things.
1) Was Jesus homeless on account of being separated from the family home through the geographical demands of his mission. In other words, he did not sell the home for which he was responsible, him being the eldest son and his earthly father Joseph being off the scene. During the course of his mission he was dependent on his Heavenly Father to meet his needs. Remember he was responsible for his Mother Mary up until he was placed on the cross !
2) He sold all his possessions and became destitute, again relying upon God to meet his needs. If so, why did he wait more than three years (last minute really) to make provision for his equally destitute Mother ?
|
|
shushy
Royal Member
Warning
50%
Posts: 8,009
|
Post by shushy on Aug 4, 2007 7:11:11 GMT -5
Yes Andrew. He had a mother so he had a home. However his ministry took him away but I wouldnt call that homeless.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 4, 2007 7:54:26 GMT -5
[Jessi Wrote] These verses seem to indicate that Jesus was not homeless in the sense alluded to by many. It seems, He had a place to stay in the beginning of John's gospel.Jesus was homeless in that he did not own any property or a home. All his worldly goods at the end of his life apparently amounted to his woven coat, and his other clothes - this was all the Roman soliders had to divide between them. He did not even possess a family tomb - he was laid in a borrowed grave. When we in the fellowship speak of Jesus being homeless, this is what we mean: he owned nothing, he was itinerant, and he stayed in the homes of friends and believers. So would you consider some priest/monks homeless too? They may live in a monestary but they own nothing.
|
|
|
Post by junia on Aug 4, 2007 8:57:13 GMT -5
[Someone Wrote] Which could also be understood as the earth (his creation) was not his (Jesus') home. He left his home in heaven, in the incarnation, to accomplish his and the Father's redemptive plan.Oh, the theories that abound when first we set out to deny the teaching of scripture due to sectarian bias! Jason, Your reply really surprises and disappoints me. If I were easily offended I'd find your comment very offensive. You have no idea of my motives my friend.
|
|
|
Post by Jessi on Aug 4, 2007 12:09:28 GMT -5
[Someone Wrote] Which could also be understood as the earth (his creation) was not his (Jesus') home. He left his home in heaven, in the incarnation, to accomplish his and the Father's redemptive plan.Oh, the theories that abound when first we set out to deny the teaching of scripture due to sectarian bias! The poster has a good point. Christians are not citizens of this world, precisely because we are His. Philip 3:20. Christ's Forever, Jessi
|
|
|
Post by Jessi on Aug 4, 2007 12:34:04 GMT -5
GiF:Jesus was homeless in that he did not own any property or a home. All his worldly goods at the end of his life apparently amounted to his woven coat, and his other clothes - this was all the Roman soliders had to divide between them. He did not even possess a family tomb -
he was laid in a borrowed grave.
These were not exactly because he was poor, but so that Scripture might be fulfilled. It seems fairly clear:
Cast lots: John 19:24 They said therefore among themselves, Let us not rend it, but cast lots for it, whose it shall be: that the scripture might be fulfilled, which saith, They parted my raiment among them, and for my vesture they did cast lots. These things therefore the soldiers did. - quoting Ps 22:18 Tomb: Isaiah 53:9 And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death; because he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth.
10Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in his hand.
GiT:When we in the fellowship speak of Jesus being homeless, this is what we mean: he owned nothing, he was itinerant, and he stayed in the homes of friends and believers.
Strange. I always thought "homeless" meant without a home. Sin casa. Not having a home or a place to stay. Not having things seems more like being without things. I can have a home and have no things. I can have things and no place to stay. Are the words ITINERATE or HOMELESS used in any modern translation? NIV, maybe?
In the passage I mentioned, it doesn't say Jesus was staying with anyone at all. No others were mentioned. So, we don't know if he was staying with any disciples. At that time, he had not even chosen his 12 disciples, but was just meeting them. No one really knew what was going on until John yelled out, "Behold, the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world" (Jn 1:29, 36).
The workers always seem to have plenty of clothes and shoes and nice things they own. They do not follow the idea of no second pair of sandals (sandals were sinful when I was growing up--men or women were not allowed to wear them). No second cloak. They don't abide by the gospel of Jesus, then, as they preach him "with no clothes" and "owning nothing."
Workers own stuff. I know. I have hauled plenty of it up the stairs in my lifetime.
Christ's Forever,
Jessi
|
|
|
Post by Not Homeless on Aug 4, 2007 16:17:25 GMT -5
Proof context that Jesus was not homeless. Jesus had everything he wanted and needed for the PASSION. He needed nothing from man. He example was to help those blind help those that were not blind. Love One Another. Jesus need no grave because death would be defeated. Jesus needed no earthly home because: John 8
23: And he said unto them, Ye are from beneath; I am from above: ye are of this world; I am not of this world.
Matthew 26
Thinkest thou that I cannot now pray to my Father, and he shall presently give me more than twelve legions of angels? But how then shall the scriptures be fulfilled, that thus it must be?
Where is Jesus NOW?
The whole of GITs and Nats arguments are just plain stupid.
|
|
|
Post by So on Aug 4, 2007 16:20:19 GMT -5
Proof context that Jesus was not homeless. Jesus had everything he wanted and needed for the PASSION. He needed nothing from man. He example was to help those blind help those that were not blind. Love One Another. Jesus need no grave because death would be defeated. Jesus needed no earthly home because: John 8 23: And he said unto them, Ye are from beneath; I am from above: ye are of this world; I am not of this world.Matthew 26 Thinkest thou that I cannot now pray to my Father, and he shall presently give me more than twelve legions of angels? But how then shall the scriptures be fulfilled, that thus it must be?Where is Jesus NOW? The whole of GITs and Nats arguments are just plain stupid. Jesus had all of Gods Glory and power at His Command because He was of God, Is God and will always be God.
|
|
|
Post by nitro on Aug 4, 2007 17:36:55 GMT -5
Ithascome Good Post enough said with that
|
|
|
Post by nitro on Aug 4, 2007 17:48:19 GMT -5
Yes he was 1 chapter of Mark 45 verse:
45 But he went out, and began to publish it much, and to blaze abroad the matter, insomuch that Jesus could no more openly enter into the city, but was without in desert places: and they came to him from every quarter.
|
|