While researching the topic "Jesus was a socialist!" I came a across a line that seemed to turn the image of Jesus away from prince of peace to revolutionary.


Matthew 10:34 to 10:36
"Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace on earth: it is not peace I have come to bring, but a sword. For I have come to set son against father, daughter against mother, daughther in-law against mother in-law; a person's enemies will be the members of his own house hold.


This line contradicts the tradition view of Jesus as peace loving. The song of Jesus's birth is should not say "Let there be peace on Earth."

More puzzling, is that seems that the divison is a generation one. Son (younger) against Father (older), daughter (younger) against mother (older), daughter in-law (younger) against mother in-law (older). Never is it brother against sister, husband against wife or sister in-law against sister in-law.

There are a couple of way of viewing this. Jesus was rejecting the the traditional (conservate) practices of Judism in favor of new (liberal) reforms that would eventually lead to Christianity. Old Testment was an old way of thinking about God, the New Testment was a new way of thinking about God. What Jesus taught was very revolutionary. It is obvious He reject the status quo so this thesis is likely.

Another view is that when the story of Chirst was written , or should I say cannonize from the many different stories of Christ, into the 4 gosples the first church leaders wanted to differenticate Jews and Christians. There was no "Christians" right after Jesus was resurected. There just were Jews did not believe in Jesus and those Jews who did believe in Him. When the first church lead narrowed down to the 4 gospels they might have left this line to state a different of faith.

Another way of looking at this is that Bible was edited and or revised. I only found this passage in Matthew (I have not look at John yet). There are many slight differences in the 4 gospels that changes the message ever so slightly to have a political narrattive. This line line might be one of them. When taking this view, though, it makes the church to have a political agenda in mind.

Still again there is another way of viewing this, Jesus was a not only the Son of God, but also a prophet. There have been many prophets before Jesus. Each prophet coming when the people lose sight of God and each prophet returning the people back to God. This view seems similar to the first view in that there a rejection of the old for the new but that is not the case. This view suggests that the word of God is tainted by man and it takes a prophet to refocus the people back to the original message. But considering the differences of God of the Old Testment, angery and authoritive, to that of the New Testment loving and forgiving, this does not seem likely.

if i were to label the spirit of Christ i would call him perfectly balanced among all the spiritual forces in the heavenly realms..he completed the task he was given and the atonement has given us the power to find that truth for ourselves

eloquently worded...and so right on

thankyou friend..