Im still a salty biznatch about a street preacher saying they didn’t have to sell everything they down because Jesus said to one disciple and in that context yeah Jesus said it to that disciple.
Turns out that Jesus did say that you have to give up everything luke 14:25-33
The Cost of Discipleship (Matthew 8:18–22; Luke 9:57–62; John 6:59–66)
Now large crowds were traveling with Jesus, and He turned and said to them, 26“If anyone comes to Me and does not hate his father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters—yes, even his own life—he cannot be My disciple. 27And whoever does not carry his cross and follow Me cannot be My disciple.
Which of you, wishing to build a tower, does not first sit down and count the cost to see if he has the resources to complete it? 29Otherwise, if he lays the foundation and is unable to finish the work, everyone who sees it will ridicule him, 30saying, ‘This man could not finish what he started to build.’
Or what king on his way to war with another king will not first sit down and consider whether he can engage with ten thousand men the one coming against him with twenty thousand? And if he is unable, he will send a delegation while the other king is still far off, to ask for terms of peace.
In the same way, any one of you who does not give up everything he has cannot be My disciple.
But does anyone see a Christian legitimately follow this commandment from Jesus
Id think that would be owning too much for Jesus, but I guess they can use clothes and phone without owning it.
They probably just get happiness from experience and doing things
Jesus wasn’t telling the poor destitute to sell everything, he told the wealthy that it was their only way to salvation. A guy with a pair of shoes, a few sets of clothing and a phone is living as bare bones a life style as is possible in any modern society.
You are doing the Fox News bit of complaining that food stamp recipients have cell phones and refrigerators
Jesus kinda is weirdly enough. Like give up everything kinda explicit and the reward in heaven implies that however you live in this life will only be temporary suffering. So you could die in a ditch and life again in heaven. Heaven and God is what really matters.
But it’s weird like you can use things without owning them. Like they could give the shirt off their own back to someone that needs it just like they could presumably get it and I wouldn’t consider them owning the shirt just using it. Same goes for the phone too.
I’m not complaining about them having anything. It’s just odd that Jesus says give up everything but there work arounds because you can still use things without owning them
The medieval monks order of the Franciscans claimed exactly that and they gained quite some influence, land, buildings, and even money while claiming absolute poverty (not even collective ownership). It all relied on the claim, that the Pope was the true owner. But that also put the Pope in a difficult position as a merely worldly ruler of questionable morals, whom the Franciscans would deny the power to overrule previous church law. John XXII put an end to that by simply denying ownership of any of the stuff the Franciscans claimed to be “only using”.
I figured someone would. I was thinking of using a stone to break a nut or stand up a pot. If you leave the stone were you found it, it’s not like you own the stone.
But then we’re does it go from using something to owning something. Seems ownership would be more of a legal distinction or ownership is emotional attachment
As long as your basic needs are met, being happy is then just a skill issue.