The True Meaning of Luke 12.33 Disciples and Selling it all
02 Mar 2025, 4:17 am
Hi yall,
Jesus said in Luke 12.33 that you need to sell everything to be His disciple. Do you think he was being literal....Do you think this applied to just disciples back then or do you think it applies to Christians today. I know the first churches like the Church in Acts did not own private property. I am Church of Christ and we never taught to sell everything. The Church of Christ looks to the church in Acts as how the church should be so I dont really get why they dont want to do this issue like the church in Acts did. There are numerous examples on how the modern Church of Christ is way different than the Church in Acts.
At my old church we were taught to be multi-millionaires which seems contrary to what a church should be teaching its flock.My old church did not really teach members to be super rich.....just to achieve the 1950's American Dream which costs millions in today's dollars.I will be doing a separate thread discussing the logistics of selling everything.So please no discussion about what it means in today's world on how to sell everything and what happens after one does that in today's society.
Also in the Great Commission Jesus said to teach the world to obey everything that Jesus commanded and selling everything was a command of Jesus in Luke 12.33 in order to be a disciple I want to give everything to the church at some point after death but I just see modern day Christians as hypocritical because they still own McMansions. It kind of seems like selling everything is part of how you get to Heaven according to Jesus if he is being literal.
Last edited by Texasmoneyman300 on 02 Mar 2025, 8:52 am, edited 1 time in total.
02 Mar 2025, 7:52 am
I am not certain if I have this right. I would need to check with my rector at church.
I was though thinking of a similar passage a few days ago-Folow me, follow me and leave your homes and family and was wondering to distance ourselves from our family and I worked it out. This is very similar and in essence is the same thing. I checked the passage you mentioned today as well.
Jesus came to fulfil the law. He didn't do away with many things in the Old Testament-he brought things to a conclusion. So, the passage I mentioned I was thinking about a few days ago-Jesus is not asking us to abadon our family but to put him and his mission above all else. His message is reflected again in the Beautidues he gave. I think the passage you are wondering about centrally we have to do our best still and put his mission above all things in our lives. If we can do this it is fulfiled. So we can do these things give alms with what can and do not be excessive. I don't think Jesus is asking us to be destitue leaving no money in the bank for how would we give alms donations etc.Jesus is not asking us to be homeless and do away with all our family sentimental items. We should not worship money and give generously/live modestly with what we have in essence and keeping with the values of Christ in the Beautitudes.
I am not a Bible expert but that is how I see it.
An example of this is this Saint-
Katherine is a Saint, she was not without money in life-she gave generously and loved and served her faith.
It may help to see you don't need to be destitute.
https://www.ncronline.org/blogs/ncr-tod ... ine-drexel
02 Mar 2025, 8:10 am
I was though thinking of a similar passage a few days ago-Folow me, follow me and leave your homes and family and was wondering to distance ourselves from our family and I worked it out. This is very similar and in essence is the same thing. I checked the passage you mentioned today as well.
Jesus came to fulfil the law. He didn't do away with many things in the Old Testament-he brought things to a conclusion. So, the passage I mentioned I was thinking about a few days ago-Jesus is not asking us to abadon our family but to put him and his mission above all else. His message is reflected again in the Beautidues he gave. I think the passage you are wondering about centrally we have to do our best still and put his mission above all things in our lives. If we can do this it is fulfiled. So we can do these things give alms with what can and do not be excessive. I don't think Jesus is asking us to be destitue leaving no money in the bank for how would we give alms donations etc.Jesus is not asking us to be homeless and do away with all our family sentimental items. We should not worship money and give generously/live modestly with what we have in essence and keeping with the values of Christ in the Beautitudes.
I am not a Bible expert but that is how I see it.
An example of this is this Saint-
Katherine is a Saint, she was not without money in life-she gave generously and loved and served her faith.
It may help to see you don't need to be destitute.
https://www.ncronline.org/blogs/ncr-tod ... ine-drexel
Actually there are so many things in the Mosaic Law Jesus did away with but you are right that he came to fulfil the law not abolish it.However there so much of the Law of Moses that is no longer required of Christians.
02 Mar 2025, 8:47 am
I know Jesus did away with many things, but he loved his family as well so in what I was wondering if we had to walk away from our family with follow me. In the Commandments we are asked to honour our parents. Jesus did not expect us to do away with our family and this is a continuation. I was thinking of many things in essence. So we put his mission first and we can still honour our families if you perhaps are not called to live a closeted monastic life in complete servitude to God. The Ten Commandments are still going so helps you to reflect on your question. The Spirit of the law now.
02 Mar 2025, 3:05 pm
There's also this in Luke:
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?s ... ersion=NIV
But people find loopholes. I've heard it argued that he was only testing the rich man's attitude to his wealth, rather than saying that everybody has to give it all away, and that you can be as loaded as Zuckerberg as long as you don't feel too attached to it.
The problem with scripture as I see it is that it isn't really a coherent and consistent set of practical rules. It's often vague and poetical rather than scientific and precise. If you look for inconsistencies, you'll find them. If you try hard enough to explain those inconsistencies away, you'll manage it. That's probably why we have so many different brands of Christianity, each one playing up some scriptural ideas and playing down others, but all of them working from and endorsing the same set of books. Interpretations differ.
Reasoning itself seems to be frowned on:
"Trust in the Lord with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding"
But believers have tried to use such reasoning as the Watchmaker Analogy to deduce the existence of a creator, and if you forsake understanding, then when you hear scripture it will just go in one ear and out of the other.
At some point I think you have to just let the scrutiny of scripture go and feel your way through, do what you will and try to harm no one. I'm secular myself, but I especially can't imagine that if there was a heaven, it would be exclusively for the most expert theologians and Bible scholars.
funeralxempire
Veteran
Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 40
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 30,833
Location: Right over your left shoulder
02 Mar 2025, 3:08 pm
The Mormons were the correct answer.
_________________
The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.
They have a name for Nazis that were only Nazis because of economic anxiety or similar issues. They're called Nazis.
02 Mar 2025, 4:49 pm
I recently saw something written to the effect of, 'You reveal yourself in what you do when there's no law telling you what to do'.
I think Jesus was setting priorities. You can have money, family, etc., but put his mission first. Be prepared to get rid of anything that comes before the mission. Some of the apostles were tent makers. I guess they had to own their tools. But it was only a way to support themselves while they carried on their mission. Don't store up treasures on earth where moth and rust will corrupt. Why? Because the things of earth will grow strangely dim in the light of his glory and grace.
1 Corinthians 5:12-13: "What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? God will judge those outside. “Expel the wicked person from among you.”
You can judge those inside the church (part of the imperative of discipleship and encouraging and correcting your brethren in the way). This is primarily to correct, but also to evict them if they refuse. Again, it's about God first.
Go into all the world, preach the gospel, make DISCIPLES (not converts). James 2:19 "You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that—and shudder." Romans 12:1-2 "Therefore, I urge you, brothers and sisters, in view of God’s mercy, to offer your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and pleasing to God—this is your true and proper worship. Do not conform to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what God’s will is—his good, pleasing and perfect will."
Get the idea? It's not about money. It's about motive. Too many churches motivated by wealth (mega churches), power on earth (Seven Mountains, those influencing law and government, etc.), hate and bullying (those attacking Trans and gays, whom Jesus never mentioned; while ignoring everything he did mention).
Galatians 1:8-9: “But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned! As we have already said, so now I say again: If anybody is preaching to you a gospel other than what you accepted, let him be eternally condemned!”
According to Christians. There will be those preaching other Gospels. Get yourself a red letter bible (Prints Jesus' spoken text in red ink), and just read those four gospels for a while. Get a feel for his message. His intent.
So. Now that you're free to make money, which way will you turn? To the money... or to the message? Priorities.
Forget denominations. Every sect has its scandal. Seek a church of any denomination that shows evidence of being focused on the the concerns of the red letters. Plenty of churches find obscure verses to justify their own will. Avoid them.
Or go your own way. Only you and you know who, will know.
_________________
assumption makes an 'ass' out of 'u' and 'mption'.
02 Mar 2025, 5:12 pm
I think Jesus was setting priorities. You can have money, family, etc., but put his mission first. Be prepared to get rid of anything that comes before the mission. Some of the apostles were tent makers. I guess they had to own their tools. But it was only a way to support themselves while they carried on their mission. Don't store up treasures on earth where moth and rust will corrupt. Why? Because the things of earth will grow strangely dim in the light of his glory and grace.
1 Corinthians 5:12-13: "What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? God will judge those outside. “Expel the wicked person from among you.”
You can judge those inside the church (part of the imperative of discipleship and encouraging and correcting your brethren in the way). This is primarily to correct, but also to evict them if they refuse. Again, it's about God first.
Go into all the world, preach the gospel, make DISCIPLES (not converts). James 2:19 "You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that—and shudder." Romans 12:1-2 "Therefore, I urge you, brothers and sisters, in view of God’s mercy, to offer your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and pleasing to God—this is your true and proper worship. Do not conform to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what God’s will is—his good, pleasing and perfect will."
Get the idea? It's not about money. It's about motive. Too many churches motivated by wealth (mega churches), power on earth (Seven Mountains, those influencing law and government, etc.), hate and bullying (those attacking Trans and gays, whom Jesus never mentioned; while ignoring everything he did mention).
Galatians 1:8-9: “But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned! As we have already said, so now I say again: If anybody is preaching to you a gospel other than what you accepted, let him be eternally condemned!”
According to Christians. There will be those preaching other Gospels. Get yourself a red letter bible (Prints Jesus' spoken text in red ink), and just read those four gospels for a while. Get a feel for his message. His intent.
So. Now that you're free to make money, which way will you turn? To the money... or to the message? Priorities.
Forget denominations. Every sect has its scandal. Seek a church of any denomination that shows evidence of being focused on the the concerns of the red letters. Plenty of churches find obscure verses to justify their own will. Avoid them.
Or go your own way. Only you and you know who, will know.
I have never been part of a denomination and never will be. I am non-denominational.
funeralxempire
Veteran
Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 40
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 30,833
Location: Right over your left shoulder
02 Mar 2025, 5:29 pm
Wouldn't Church of Christ meet the definition of a denomination?
I know a portion of Christians like to insist they're nondenominational, but in practice that rarely seems to be the case.
_________________
The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.
They have a name for Nazis that were only Nazis because of economic anxiety or similar issues. They're called Nazis.
02 Mar 2025, 9:47 pm
Wouldn't Church of Christ meet the definition of a denomination?
I know a portion of Christians like to insist they're nondenominational, but in practice that rarely seems to be the case.
There's a lot of debate about that but the church of Christ does not meet the classic definition because there is no hierarchy above the churches and each church is autonomous. Each church of Christ is different than all the others.It meets some definitions of denominations but fails to meet others....It depends on how you define a "denomination." However the traditional old school church of Christ considers themselves non denominational but even if it was a denomination its not as denominational as the Catholics or Methodists.
02 Mar 2025, 10:40 pm
Why would you give your possessions/the proceeds to a Christian church if you suspect that worldly accumulations are not in keeping with Christian values?
The Bible is so full of contradictions and inaccuracies that it makes no real sense to take it all literally. If you're serious about it, pay attention to the overall message attributed to Jesus' teachings, not the specific words he supposedly spoke years or even decades before they were written down, translated, edited, re-translated, all the while being adjusted to suit each particular publisher or the ruler du jour.
funeralxempire
Veteran
Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 40
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 30,833
Location: Right over your left shoulder
02 Mar 2025, 10:49 pm
Wouldn't Church of Christ meet the definition of a denomination?
I know a portion of Christians like to insist they're nondenominational, but in practice that rarely seems to be the case.
There's a lot of debate about that but the church of Christ does not meet the classic definition because there is no hierarchy above the churches and each church is autonomous. Each church of Christ is different than all the others.It meets some definitions of denominations but fails to meet others....It depends on how you define a "denomination." However the traditional old school church of Christ considers themselves non denominational but even if it was a denomination its not as denominational as the Catholics or Methodists.
I agree with that last point, that CoC and many other self-described non-denominational churches don't typically have the sort of top-down leadership that's typical of major denominations.
Where I believe the term non-denominational isn't quite true is that most of them take enough stances on theological issues that they end up as some variety of the Stone–Campbell Movement/Restoration Movement, which ultimately seems like a denomination, even if it's a fairly loosely organized one. It often comes off as though they're strongly projecting the Restoration Movement's theology onto the early church, while ignoring that the Restoration Movement doesn't always hold positions that the early church would agree with. (That said, I'm assuming churches without creeds are rejecting at least some of the conclusions to theological questions that earlier Christian sects enshrined within their creeds).
That said, I do appreciate that they generally don't try to insist that they have the only correct understanding and don't appear to seek to impose their understandings on other Christians or churches. A number of the theological issues that caused early schisms really don't seem relevant to the day-to-day lives of regular Christians (like miaphysitism vs. monophysitism vs. dyophysitism, for example).
I know there's also non-denominational megachurches, which seem like they don't want to take hard stances that might drive potential members away and effectively making them serve as Walmart Christianity with the goal of bringing in the most donations, while allowing members to project their own preferences onto the megachurch. As an outsider looking in it's hard to tell how much they're based in the Restoration Movement vs. adopting a similar mindset with more commercial motives.
_________________
The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.
They have a name for Nazis that were only Nazis because of economic anxiety or similar issues. They're called Nazis.
02 Mar 2025, 11:00 pm
Why would you give your possessions/the proceeds to a Christian church if you suspect that worldly accumulations are not in keeping with Christian values?
The Bible is so full of contradictions and inaccuracies that it makes no real sense to take it all literally. If you're serious about it, pay attention to the overall message attributed to Jesus' teachings, not the specific words he supposedly spoke years or even decades before they were written down, translated, edited, re-translated, all the while being adjusted to suit each particular publisher or the ruler du jour.
I dont think its wrong for the church to own property and accumulate wealth collectively since thats how the church in Acts did it.I just think its wrong for Christians to own private property if they want to be true biblical New Testament Christians following the example of the Church in Acts.
03 Mar 2025, 4:25 pm
My 2 cents. the actual scriptures weren't meant to be prescriptive. Basic premise is not to dissimilar to Hindu/Buddhist Santana dharma. Christ is supposed to have said "its harder for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven than for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle". Basically one who prioritises the accumulation of wealth is bound to the material world. So Jesus is saying "yeah, now worries, be rich, but good luck trying to get into heaven".
04 Mar 2025, 5:35 pm
I remember when the Moonies sent young cult members out to beg for donations.
The Moonies eventually realized that this wasn't going to be very profitable. They eventually decided that it would be more profitable to encourage members to become professionals, so that they could collect more in the way of tithes and offerings. The Acts lifestyle just wasn't going to turn the leaders into jetsetters.
Such is the way of all religions.
_________________
Semen retentum venenum est
05 Mar 2025, 1:08 am
My 2 cents. the actual scriptures weren't meant to be prescriptive. Basic premise is not to dissimilar to Hindu/Buddhist Santana dharma. Christ is supposed to have said "its harder for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven than for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle". Basically one who prioritises the accumulation of wealth is bound to the material world. So Jesus is saying "yeah, now worries, be rich, but good luck trying to get into heaven".
The arguments for the "prosperity gospel" thing seem pretty thin to me. There's a small number of rich dudes in the New Testament who, it kind of insinuates, are good Christians, but it's not mentioned whether they got to heaven or not. And as you suggest, there's a lot of stuff in the NT that suggests more strongly that wealth is a bar to the kingdom of heaven. True, the OT has a lot about good people being rewarded with huge material wealth, but I thought the Jesus and the NT superceded that. In fact I don't quite understand why the OT wasn't ditched a long time ago, or at least heavily cut down to size.
