Comments on: Another Jesus Quote You’ll Never Hear in Church

By: lamalanga

lamalanga — Sat, 17 Dec 2011 15:28:00 +0000

“test her faith”…this is the most common back door spin from a kool aid drinkers.Jesus didn’t say “I will preach to the jews first and to the goyim later”.google fourwinds10.com and see what Talmud says about us goys.if you’re hanging on a cliff and there is a rope nearby, a jew is forbidden from taking the rope to save you.He must lynch you with it, but not save you.

By: lamalanga

lamalanga — Sun, 11 Dec 2011 04:35:00 +0000

sounds just like what a catholic/politician would say.He did not come to preach to gentiles.end of story.no spinning of this will ever fly.

By: JesusSaves

JesusSaves — Thu, 21 Apr 2011 03:07:00 +0000

Back in that time, Gentiles were generally non believers. When the young girls mother had finally seen proof of spiritual beings (the demons), She saw Jesus as her only hope. Jesus was being harsh on her to simply test her faith in him. Once she confessed that the Lord is her "master", he happily heeled her daughter.

There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. -Galatians 3:28

On demons; Above all, taking the shield of faith, wherewith ye shall be able to quench all the fiery darts of the wicked. -Ephesians 16

James 4:7 Submit yourselves therefore to God. Resist the devil, and he will flee from you.

By: Pookie234

Pookie234 — Sat, 02 Oct 2010 04:05:00 +0000

You are filled with hatred and confusion. This not at all an accurate representation of what was occurring in this scripture.

By: BM

BM — Fri, 10 Sep 2010 05:44:00 +0000

I am an atheist, but you can not cut the story into pieces, you need to understand as a whole.

By: Ahunterofdeer

Ahunterofdeer — Mon, 12 Jul 2010 03:43:38 +0000

Again as an atheist you missed the point. He healed her daughter !!! and he taught a point to people about faith !! Plus you also missed the point that if the bible was written by man things like this would not be reported as some times Jesus teachings were hard for the unbelievers but not to believers.. Smile God loves you and i am trying !!!

By: Jose

Jose — Tue, 05 May 2009 10:09:29 +0000

If the Atheist is right, we all die and nothing happens

If the Christian is right, Atheists(having heard the Gospel and knowing Jesus is the only way to Heaven, and if you haven't heard, now you just did) will burn in hell for an eternity. While the Christian will be with God in Glory and life forever in the single greatest place anyone could ever imagine.

hmmm..... It seems the Christian is on the win/win side of the situation

and I don't gamble on life

Thank you very much Atheist, ill take my chances being a Christian

By: Jose

Jose — Tue, 05 May 2009 06:09:29 +0000

By: CarlM

CarlM — Thu, 16 Apr 2009 21:09:57 +0000

It does weaken the argument when the initial assertion is provably false.

By: Maxolasersquad

Maxolasersquad — Wed, 15 Apr 2009 13:35:52 +0000

I again challenge your assertion in the title that you will never hear this story in church. I do not see how anyone could make such claims if they are not a frequent church goer.

By: cooperati

cooperati — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 23:49:22 +0000

I think in this you will find that you are preaching to the choir, in a perverse way. This is not some obscure verse without understanding and interpretation. This already has an established meaning, and commonly taught intent for what Jesus and the woman were doing.

If you went to church and asked what this meant, you wouldn't find many that agree with your point of view. Oh there are always a spiteful few that haven't a shred of mercy in their hearts for one reason or another.

But this verse is meant to teach those followers who would have seen it your way.

Good luck!

-=T=-

By: Anon

Anon — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 20:47:00 +0000

Actually, I have heard this verse taught in several sermons. But thanks for your random guess about it anyway.

By: icepyro

icepyro — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 20:29:37 +0000

"2: A guard came by and broke the legs of the other two condemned to hasten the process, but left Jesus alone."
- except for the whole part where they chose to stab him instead, although I am sure you can argue that point too.

Anyway, here is a morality question for you all, but first a verse:
22 And, behold, a woman of Canaan came out of the same coasts, and cried unto him, saying, Have mercy on me, O Lord, thou son of David; my daughter is grievously vexed with a devil.

Now my question is this: WHY is she grievously vexed with a devil? Perhaps it is because her and/or her mother made a 'deal with the devil' or some other questionable action. One could argue the lack of knowledge of the situation, but it is pretty pressing for me to hear of someone 'vexed by a devil' and assume innocence.

There may be even more to this on a cultural level, but even without that knowledge, there is obvious reason he doesn't want to help her just because she asked. Where would your morals stand if you could be 'fixed' by someone down the street anytime something goes wrong or you get sick if there are no repercussions?

Jesus decides to test her faith a bit to make sure she is really sorry for whatever caused the problem. He called her on just asking for help now that she is in trouble and she sunk to literal begging like a dog to show her faith. For being that willing (again I think there is cultural implications on top of the obvious), he healed her within the hour. I can't say for sure if it would have required that much debasement, but I like to think any show of real faith would have succeeded (although probably taken longer to convince).

Incidentally, this is why I hate government bailouts also.
Also incidentally, this is another Jesus quote I heard in church on several occasions.
I suddenly feel ironic for commenting like this when I don't attend church. shrug

By: Chris

Chris — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 20:03:52 +0000

Hmmm. I've heard that verse plenty of times in church. Your thesis is obviously wrong.

By: Daniel Miessler

Daniel Miessler — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 20:02:19 +0000

The good or bad kind?

By: Dan

Dan — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 19:54:50 +0000

Daniel, you amuse me.

By: Ryan

Ryan — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 19:04:25 +0000

I've heard this story many many times in church. Truth be told that in our day that language seems very harsh, but the term dog has a different meaning to us.

This excerpt taken from Jesus the Christ by James Talmage explains:

The woman, with importunate desire came near, possibly entering the house; she fell at the Lord's feet and worshiped Him, pleading pitifully, "Lord, help me." To her Jesus said, "It is not meet to take the children's bread, and to cast it to dogs." The words, harsh as they may sound to us, were understood by her in the spirit of the Lord's intent. The original term here translated "dogs" connoted, as the narrative shows, not the vagrant and despized curs elsewhere spoken of in the Bible as typical of a degraded state, or of positive badness, but literally the "little dogs" or domestic pets, such as were allowed in the house and under the table. Certainly the woman took no offense at the comparison, and found therein no objectionable epithet. Instantly she adopted the analogy, and applied it in combined argument and supplication, "Truth, Lord: yet the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their masters' table;" or, in the words of Mark's version: "Yes, Lord: yet the dogs under the table eat of the children's crumbs." Her prayer was immediately granted; for Jesus said unto her, "O woman, great is thy faith: be it unto thee even as thou wilt. And her daughter was made whole from that very hour." Mark emphasizes the special recognition of her final plea, and adds: "And when she was come to her house, she found the devil gone out, and her daughter laid upon the bed." The woman's commendable persistency was based on the faith that overcomes apparent obstacles and endures even under discouragement. Her case reminds one of the lesson taught by the Lord on another occasion through the story of the importunate widow.

You choose your perception, and that is every mans right. But it is also my right to speak my perception.

By: THE.MAC.GOD

THE.MAC.GOD — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 18:02:58 +0000

All of this is a moot argument considering the Bible is a mistranslated disaster area. And, this is coming from an ex-psycho Christian. I started wavering once I found that the whole "virgin" thing was a mistranslation from Hebrew into Greek of "Young Woman" with no reference to her virginity - this is much like the Muslims' 72 virgins being a mistranslation of "72 white raisins of crystal clarity." Plying people with pussy, or suppressing it, seems to be the religious agenda.
Also, only 2 of the 4 books mention he was born of a 'virgin' - you think that incredibly important detail would be ubiquitous.
But, IMHO, this verse doesn't compare to Jesus asking us to HATE our brothers, sisters, etc. Luke 14:26
Also, his continued acceptance of slavery as commanded by God from the OT is quite despicable - the Bible was used as one of the reasons for allowing slavery in the US ("If it's good fer God, it's good fer us!). Matthew 8:5-13, Luke 12:47 I've often wondered why there are any black or women believers in any religion.
I, of course, am only using NT scripture due to the standard apologetic response to any criticism of the Bible is to say, "That's OLD Testament and doesn't count." The OT is rife with instructions on how to mistreat people FOR God.
So, then stop hating gays. Jesus never said anything about it. Paul did once - but, he also never really talked about Jesus - barely knowing his story as told by the 4 books.
Btw, only a couple verses down from the Leviticus quote that 'condemns' homosexuality is a verse about selling your daughter into slavery, but it's OK to overlook that. I always love how people selectively judge FOR God instead of letting him do his own job.
And, since we can discount the OT, since it doesn't count anymore, also, it's old and counting... it doesn't, anymore - I missed the Rosetta Stone scripture that allows us to decipher which parts of the Bible are allegorical and which parts are FOR REALS THIS TIME.
I guess we need to throw out the 10 Commandments as well - They aren't in the NT. Those aren't very good, either. We should amend them to replace the first four with things like: Do not stand for slavery, Do not rape, Try to lead your life in a way that doesn't negatively impact others (much like the US's set up of personal freedoms), and Thou Shalt Learn as much as possible.
And on and on.

Man I love a good argument.

By: Chris

Chris — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 16:41:13 +0000

I have heard this in Church many times and all it really means is that the woman had faith in Jesus. Her station in life was meaningless and once her faith in Jesus was demonstrated she was able to receive the Lord's blessing. So it is actually a passage for Christians! Peace be with you…

By: Daniel Miessler

Daniel Miessler — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 16:39:32 +0000

Come on. Really?

You don't teach Jews to be humble by illustrating how the son of God requires a non-Jew to admit to be a dog willing to accept scraps from her master's table as a test before allowing her a miracle that was easy for him to perform in the first place.

You can't be serious.