It's OK to be a Non-believer, Jesus said so

[morteduzionism]

Using one verse from the Bible I hope to show that Jesus himself was o.k. with non-believers.

Mark 2:17-When Jesus heard it, he saith unto them, They that are whole have no need of the physician, but they that are sick: I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.

According to the Bible these are the words of Jesus Christ himself. These are NOT the reinterpretations of Paul or any other early church patriarch. In this verse J.C. clearly recognizes two distinct population groups: the righteous and sinners. He is clearly saying who he and his message are for.

There's simply no other way to interpret this. Its not vague or ambiguous. So when people/christians want to quote: Acts, books from the O.T., Romans, etc...there is only one problem with all of that those are not the words of Jesus!

It's just weird how I rarely hear Christians quoting Christ, as if they don't agree with what He says.

[Zenith Darksea]

There's simply no other way to interpret this.

Oh dear, I'm afraid there is. Because you see, a pre-requisite of righteousness is that you believe in Christ. If you don't, and if you know about Christ, then you're a sinner. Now there are some people who haven't heard of Christ in their lifetimes, and while Protestant Christianity really doesn't have much to say about these examples, Orthodox Christianity does. For example, I'll recount a story that my spiritual father told me a few days ago.

There was a monk in the Byzantine Empire during the Middle Ages who would say his prayers in the evening, and he would always curse Plato. Then one night Plato appeared to him in a dream, and asked,

"Why are you always cursing me?"

"Well," replied the monk. "You're a heathen! You didn't believe in Christ, did you?"

Plato replied, "It's true that when I was on Earth I was never a baptised Christian, but when Christ came down to Hades, I was the first to recognise Him."

This probably isn't a true story, but nonetheless it is illustrative. A prerequisite of righteousness is belief in Christ - you can't be righteous in God's eyes without it.

Also, don't forget the passages of Scripture in which Christ says that He is the only path to salvation and all that sort of thing, eh?

[morteduzionism]

A prerequisite of righteousness is belief in Christ - you can't be righteous in God's eyes without it.

Where does Jesus say that?

Also, don't forget the passages of Scripture in which Christ says that He is the only path to salvation and all that sort of thing, eh?

but according to Mark 2:17 his message is for sinners NOT the righteous...so yeah, he is offering salvation to sinners...

[Cluny the Scourge]

As a non-believer, why would I care a tuppence ha'penny whether Jesus thought it acceptable or not? That's kind of a definitional component of non-belief.

[rez]

He is offering salvation to non believers if they change their minds and believe in him. Its as clear as day that if you don't believe in jesus you will go to hell.

He comes to call the sinners TO REPENTANCE.

I.E. take the non believers and make believers out of them.

Nowhere does it state that not believing in Jesus is ok.

Furthermore i find it odd that you believe these are the exact words of Christ. Lord knows Jesus didn't write any gospels. Those are the words of Mark.

[Cluny the Scourge]

He is offering salvation to non believers if they change their minds and believe in him. Its as clear as day that if you don't believe in jesus you will go to hell.

Furthermore i find it odd that you believe these are the exact words of Christ. Lord knows Jesus didn't write any gospels. Those are the words of Mark.

Haven't you just kind of shot yourself in the foot there? If you don't believe in the reliability of the disciples in relaying the words of Jesus, then how can anything that Jesus said be 'as clear as day' ?

[morteduzionism]

He is offering salvation to non believers if they change their minds and believe in him.

you do realize that is not what the verse says, right? it's a stretch to get that interpretation out of Mark 2:17

Its as clear as day that if you don't believe in jesus you will go to hell.

some days are cloudy. how are you arriving at this conclusion?

He comes to call the sinners TO REPENTANCE.

true. except in the verse it is established that there are a group of people who he himself considers NOT to be sinners.

I.E. take the non believers and make believers out of them.

once again you are stretching the verse to create an interpretation that supports your point-of-view

Nowhere does it state that not believing in Jesus is ok.

sure there is. Mark 2:17

Furthermore i find it odd that you believe these are the exact words of Christ. Lord knows Jesus didn't write any gospels. Those are the words of Mark.

those are the words that in Christian Bibles are ATTRIBUTED to Christ...lol...
to piggy back Cluny...so if you don't accept the message/words of Christ, exactly who do you follow/worship?

[Beiss]

But according to the bible, we are all sinners?

[Lord Bohemond]

Consider a speech a doctor might give:

I am not here to help the healthy... I am here to help the sick.

Does that mean being sick is a good thing? No - it means the doctor is going to help the sick become healthy.

[morteduzionism]

Consider a speech a doctor might give:

I am not here to help the healthy... I am here to help the sick.

Does that mean being sick is a good thing? No - it means the doctor is going to help the sick become healthy.

Exactly! so the Dr. is not there for the healthy...the healthy do not need/require the Dr...

and the first half of Mark 2:17 uses the same variables, he saith unto them, They that are whole have no need of the physician-Mark 2:17

if you exchange whole:righteous and the physician:Jesus...it says/means the same thing as the second half of the verse, I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.

One of the FEW reasons someone would feel they need Jesus is if they accepted the notion of original sin(another concept NOT established by Jesus)...and that's fine...however, DO NOT project your own feelings of inadequacy/guilt onto other people...

[Lord Bohemond]

So if you don't believe you're sick, it's bad for someone to tell you you're sick?

I don't believe I have cancer. That means I don't need treatment.

[morteduzionism]

So if you don't believe you're sick, it's bad for someone to tell you you're sick?

no, except...in the verse Jesus is clearly(with no uncertainty) establishing two distinct population groups...sinners/righteous...he then states(according to the text) in clear language exactly whom his message is for...

insisting that EVERYONE is sick is a by product of the Original Sin theory...WHICH IS NOT ATTRIBUTED TO JESUS...

I don't believe I have cancer. That means I don't need treatment.

I'm not sure I see how belief fits into the conversation.

Sorry, I was asking morteduzionism, in regards to the topic and the original post.

repentance, as it relates to Christianity means(IMO) accepting Jesus as your lord and savior and asking Him to come into your heart/soul/life. And by that definition Mark 2:17 which says, I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance is clearly saying that the righteous are NOT being called to accept Jesus(for whatever reasons He deemed, He felt He had nothing to offer/say to the righteous)

Nevertheless, faith itself is the only component of being righteous to many Christians, and so you're never going to get them to admit the possibility of a righteous pagan.

I'm starting to see that for myself. No matter how 'good' you are to them no matter how 'christian' you are towards them...they(the ones I know) will never accept someone who does not share their beliefs...

It's also so much easier to simply have faith without concern for good deeds and the maintenance of one's integrity in general.

that's what I find so hyporcritical about them...too many non christians lead a more christian lifestyle than actual christians...

[the_mango55]

What is it that you think repentance means exactly?

[Lord Bohemond]

Acknowledging your sin, acknowledging the need for Christ, accepting Christ, and then living for him as best you can. If you don't feel the need to change your behavior, that implies you haven't truly repented.

[the_mango55]

Sorry, I was asking morteduzionism, in regards to the topic and the original post.

[green tea]

I am sorry, I have the bible only in my language, so I have to translate. But maybe we should look at the whole concept of this verse. Jesus sits on a table with sinners and is asked (his followers are asked), how he can sit there with those bad people. And his answer in this context seems to me clear: He sits there with the bad people who should change to become righteous (the sick). Those people who are no sinners don't need the doctor. And in his time, all "christians" were just one one form of jews, jews with a special opinion. So he refers to the normal jews or humans as healthy, and to the sinners as the "sick".

[Hjalmar]

It is possible to interpret various religious novels in a myriad of manners. Nevertheless, faith itself is the only component of being righteous to many Christians, and so you're never going to get them to admit the possibility of a righteous pagan.

It's also so much easier to simply have faith without concern for good deeds and the maintenance of one's integrity in general.

[Lord Bohemond]

Christians already following the law don't need his help. Unbelievers that are living wickedly do. And regardless, this still doesn't help your claim that you don't need to repent to go to heaven. Both Jesus and every writer in the gospels contradicted this statement. The statement means what it says. Trying to attach some completely contradictory meaning to it just doesn't hold water.

I'm not sure I see how belief fits into the conversation.

You claimed that "instilling guilt" in people is bad.

[morteduzionism]

Both Jesus and every writer in the gospels contradicted this statement. The statement means what it says. Trying to attach some completely contradictory meaning to it just doesn't hold water.

so according to you, the righteous are those that have already accepted J.C. and the sinners are those who haven't came around yet?

If that's what you think/believe...we must agree to disagree...although, I am not a christian anymore I put more weight on what is actually attributed to J.C. than what others Biblical writers have to say...J.C. is given credit for establishing two distinct groups of people(IMO)...if somewhere else in the gospels J.C. says that the ONLY righteous people in the world, during his times, were those accepting his message...please provide the verse

You claimed that "instilling guilt" in people is bad.

acutally I said DO NOT project...regardless, are you saying its NOT bad?...its ok for miserable people to want everyone else around them to be misreable too? it's ok to use your(not you personally) time/energy for the sole purpose of convincing someone that they are NOT happy? that they are in fact a sinner and doomed to hell, unless they accept J.C.

sheesh...think about that...does that make sense?

[Lord Condormanius]

its ok for miserable people to want everyone else around them to be misreable too? it's ok to use your(not you personally) time/energy for the sole purpose of convincing someone that they are NOT happy? that they are in fact a sinner and doomed to hell, unless they accept J.C.

This is pretty much why the Romans did not like Christians all that much. Many scholars, myself included, believe that the reason for persecution of Christians is because they did not tolerate other religions. They were constantly telling people that they were going to hell unless they gave up their way of life and accepted Christ. The Romans did not like religious intolerance...which is why they did not make a practice of persecuting religions (except for the Druids and Christians).

LC