I really don't know. Thanks for the link. So I guess I was misunderstanding "The Father" to be God.
Anyway, I'm still trying to wrap my head around Matthew 12:30. It's been a while since I read from the Bible... I forgot how dense the language is. Looking at it in context:
Then they brought him a demon-possessed man who was blind and mute, and Jesus healed him, so that he could both talk and see. 23 All the people were astonished and said, "Could this be the Son of David?" 24 But when the Pharisees heard this, they said, "It is only by Beelzebub, the prince of demons, that this fellow drives out demons." 25 Jesus knew their thoughts and said to them, "Every kingdom divided against itself will be ruined, and every city or household divided against itself will not stand. 26 If Satan drives out Satan, he is divided against himself. How then can his kingdom stand? 27 And if I drive out demons by Beelzebub, by whom do your people drive them out? So then, they will be your judges. 28 But if I drive out demons by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God has come upon you. 29 "Or again, how can anyone enter a strong man's house and carry off his possessions unless he first ties up the strong man? Then he can rob his house. 30 "He who is not with me is against me, and he who does not gather with me scatters. |
So to try and understand this...
- Jesus heals a blind/deaf/possessed man.
- The Pharisees freak out and say only the son of Beelzebub could have healed him (implying that Jesus is a demon?)
- Jesus retorts in an almost rhetorical way... implying that it wouldn't make sense for a demon to drive out other demons because it would cause a collapse of Beelzebub's kingdom.
- So then it seems like he is trying to draw a parallel with God's Kingdom... to say that if you are a part of God's Kingdom, you cannot go against God because it would cause the Kingdom to collapse.
- Lastly, 12:30 seems to imply that to be part of the Kingdom, you not only must not work against the kingdom, but you must also aid it. Which seems a little out of place because it doesn't really jive with the parallel he just made about Beelzebub. Maybe he was clarifying/amending?
I didn't think Jesus had the figurative "do-or-die" mentality. It is a little disappointing to read that. Regardless, it's definitely interesting.
Can anyone comment on my review to see if I'm understanding it correctly? I'd appreciate Christian input in particular but I welcome anyone's thoughts.
EDIT:
Of course, I also welcome responses to the other 2 questions I posted earlier.