Salute No Man
Then he called his twelve disciples together, and gave them power and authority over all devils, and to cure diseases.2And he sent them to preach the kingdom of God, and to heal the sick.3And he said unto them, Take nothing for your journey, neither staves, nor scrip, neither bread, neither money; neither have two coats apiece.
Go your ways: behold, I send you forth as lambs among wolves.4Carry neither purse, nor scrip, nor shoes: and salute no man by the way.5And into whatsoever house ye enter, first say, Peace be to this house.
“Salute no man by the way”? What does that mean?
I looked up “salute” in the bible online and there sure is a lot of Saluting goin’ on.
Please click on this link:
So if they are supposed to salute no man by the way,
then why do they do so much saluting in this link?
This is absolute nonsense and deception by the way!
Does “no man” mean something else?
Who is no man?
Funny, because in the Synoptic Gospel of Matthew, Jesus says:
And Jesus answered and said unto them,
Take heed that no man deceive you.
Does he mean do not be deceived by any man or does he mean Let NO MAN deceive you,
or was it warning you that “no man” is deceiving you??????
That may sound crazy, but on the other hand we are talking about deception.
And he said, I tell thee, Peter, the cock shall not crow this day, before that thou shalt thrice deny that thou knowest me.35And he said unto them, When I sent you without purse, and scrip, and shoes, lacked ye any thing?And they said, Nothing.36Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.
I thought they did not have a purse, scrip, and shoes above in verses Luke 9:1-3 at the top of this page and now they are supposed to have a purse. and take it and likewise their scrip, which they didn’t have but lacked nothing, and sell the only garment they have to buy a sword.
Is this nuts, or what?
Oh yea, and salute no man by the way! Weird!
11And as they heard these things, he added and spake a parable, because he was nigh to Jerusalem, and because they thought that the kingdom of God should immediately appear.12He said therefore, A certain nobleman went into a far country to receive for himself a kingdom, and to return.13And he called his ten servants, and delivered them ten pounds, and said unto them, Occupy till I come.14But his citizens hated him, and sent a message after him, saying, We will not have this man to reign over us.15And it came to pass, that when he was returned, having received the kingdom, then he commanded these servants to be called unto him, to whom he had given the money, that he might know how much every man had gained by trading.16Then came the first, saying, Lord, thy pound hath gained ten pounds.17And he said unto him, Well, thou good servant: because thou hast been faithful in a very little, have thou authority over ten cities.18And the second came, saying, Lord, thy pound hath gained five pounds.19And he said likewise to him, Be thou also over five cities.20And another came, saying, Lord, behold, here is thy pound, which I have kept laid up in a napkin:21For I feared thee, because thou art an austere man: thou takest up that thou layedst not down, and reapest that thou didst not sow.22And he saith unto him, Out of thine own mouth will I judge thee, thou wicked servant.
Thou knewest that I was an austere man, taking up that I laid not down, and reaping that I did not sow:23Wherefore then gavest not thou my money into the bank, that at my coming I might have required mine own with usury?
24And he said unto them that stood by, Take from him the pound, and give it to him that hath ten pounds.25(And they said unto him, Lord, he hath ten pounds.)26For I say unto you, That unto every one which hath shall be given; and from him that hath not, even that he hath shall be taken away from him.27But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.28And when he had thus spoken, he went before, ascending up to Jerusalem.
Honestly, do you really think Jesus the Messiah would say verse 27:
27But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me
SOUNDS MORE LIKE A MURDERING BANKER!
After reading these verses and the parable
I would have been a very confused disciple!
1. stern or severe in attitude or manner an austere schoolmaster
2. grave, sober, or serious an austere expression
3. self-disciplined, abstemious, or ascetic an austere life
4. severely simple or plain an austere design
Austerity programs can be controversial, as they tend to have an adverse impact on the poorest segments of the population. In many situations, austerity programs are implemented by countries that were previously under dictatorial regimes, leading to criticism that the citizens are forced to repay the debts of their oppressors.
So basically the Synoptic Jesus
is saying that he is an oppressor!
While on the subject of austerity here are some interesting articles from Rome of all places about Austerity cuts:
best part of the article is the comment by:
“So now living within your means is austere? This is just more spendthrift tripe.
If governments had been responsible in the first place and not given away more than they have taken in the economies around the world would be healthy and hearty. What were seeing is the result of irresponsible politicians on both sides of the aisle.”
As I recall it was those union workers that stood up for the Roman Catholic Entity last year in regards to the homosexual child abuse charges against the church
and it was the Mayor of Rome Gianni Alemanno who amassed and rallied support from those union workers in Rome to save that entity.
“Presentation of Sculpture is First Act of New Sister Cities Relationship; Mayor of Rome to Announce Dream of Rome Project….”
The Capitoline Venus
“The Capitoline Venus is a significant descendent of the first, revolutionary statue of this type, the renowned Aphrodite of Cnidos by Praxiteles. With the Cnidian Venus, Praxiteles introduced a new subject to the history of art: the large-scale, freestanding, fully nude female. This type of image became known in modern times as a “Modest Venus” (Venus pudica)
because the goddess attempts to cover her nakedness…..”
I just don’t envision in any way the true Jesus to be austere. To me He seems to be very patient and thoughtful, at least in the Gospel of John. He laid down his life for his friends and that does not sound like austerity. Nor did Jesus seem to be wishful to have his enemies slayed before him, at least not in the Gospel of John. IF he wanted to have them slayed before Him, then why didn’t he do that while he was being interrogated and beaten up. It wasn’t as if he didn’t have plenty of opportunities, but He did not do that. However, I do believe the imposter and the deceiver rendered in the gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke would slay their enemies, and I believe they did slay them.
Here is an article about slaying with another meaning, please read:
Think about this statement of the Synoptic Jesus:
Thou knewest that I was an austere man, taking up that I laid not down, and reaping that I did not sow
So now he is not only a murdering banker,
but also a thief!
49I was daily with you in the temple teaching, and ye took me not: but the scriptures must be fulfilled.50And they all forsook him, and fled.51And there followed him a certain young man, having a linen cloth cast about his naked body; and the young men laid hold on him:52And he left the linen cloth, and fled from them naked.53And they led Jesus away to the high priest: and with him were assembled all the chief priests and the elders and the scribes.
Perhaps this young man took what Luke’s Jesus said in Luke 9:1-3 and Luke 10: 3-5 above literally?
I really don’t think Jesus said the stuff that Luke said that he said, and nor do I think this young man followed him, etc. I think it is malicious nonsense!
IF anything can be made of these verses in Mark is that there was another that the young men followed (or laid hold of) and it is not the real Jesus!
There is something very strange about the mention of this linen cloth since it is not mentioned in any other gospel.
Why would this incident be added? IF this had happened it would be in the Gospel of John, but it isn’t. John was there! If you read the Gospel of John it is very detailed in comparison to the mish-mash of incidents, parables, healings and ramblings of the other synoptic gospels.(Matthew, Mark and Luke)
Seems to me that the linen cloth left behind may be pointing to the Shroud of Turin and these verses (Mark 14:51-52) must have been added quite a bit later on.
A cruel joke of some kind!
Something to consider very seriously:
Is the young naked man that fled and left the linen cloth the same man that is on the Shroud of Turin?
In Acts, there is a contention between Barnabus and Saul after their mystery ‘ministry’ when James (brother of John Zebedee) is murdered by Herod and Peter is imprisoned by the same and then Peter goes to “another place” and then Herod mysteriously dies as told by Luke the writer of Acts and then Saul turns into Paul.
After these events Paul and Barnabus take John Mark with them.
I wonder if John Mark was Peter’s son? I wonder what the “another place” is referring to since the other two (possibly three) are murdered!
DID PETER SWITCH SIDES?
REMEMBER WHAT HAPPENED AT THE SEA OF GALILLEE WHEN JESUS VISITED THE DISCIPLES THE THIRD TIME AFTER HE HAD RISEN
AND WARNED PETER TO FOLLOW HIM.
18Verily, verily, I say unto thee, When thou wast young, thou girdest thyself, and walkedst whither thou wouldest: but when thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands,
and another shall gird thee,
and carry thee whither thou wouldest not.
19This spake he, signifying by what death he should glorify God.
And when he had spoken this, he saith unto him,
BEFORE PETER SEEMS TO END UP IN ROME, JAMES AND HEROD ARE KILLED AND PETER GOES TO ANOTHER PLACE (which obviously is Rome). PETER TELLS THE LADY AT THE DOOR TO TELL JAMES
( I thought James was already dead – killed by Herod)
THAT HE WAS RELEASED BY AN ANGEL FROM THE PRISON, YET HE GIRDS HIMSELF
WHICH IS OPPOSITE TO WHAT JESUS SAYS AT THE SEA OF GALILEE!
I FIND THAT INTERESTING!
THE BOOK OF ACTS WAS OBVIOUSLY WRITTEN AFTER THE GOSPEL OF JOHN AND AGAIN PURPOSEFULLY CONTRARY!
7And, behold, the angel of the Lord came upon him, and a light shined in the prison: and he smote Peter on the side, and raised him up, saying, Arise up quickly. And his chains fell off from his hands.
smote past tense of smite (Verb)
8And the angel said unto him, Gird thyself, and bind on thy sandals. And so he did. And he saith unto him, Cast thy garment about thee, and follow me.9And he went out, and followed him; and wist not that it was true which was done by the angel; but thought he saw a vision.
wist= knew / be aware of
So does the above mean that Peter lied or embellished his story of his escape from prison? Or was Peter deceived as I believe he was deceived when he fell into a trance and was offered unclean animals to kill and eat in the Book of Acts.
WHAT IS LUKE ALLUDING TO WHEN HE SAYS PETER DEPARTED AND WENT INTO ANOTHER PLACE IN :
17But he, beckoning unto them with the hand to hold their peace, declared unto them how the Lord had brought him out of the prison. And he said, Go shew these things unto James, and to the brethren. And he departed, and went into another place.
WAS THIS WHEN PETER WAS KILLED AND THE ABOVE STORY IS MERELY A COVER STORY?
OR DID HE TURN HIS ALLEGIANCE TO ANOTHER I.E. FOLLOWED ANOTHER!
Or is Luke lying about Peter and what Peter said about the angel telling him to GIRD THYSELF in opposition to what was written in the gospel of John at the Sea of Galilee?
Either way it is contrary to the Gospel of John….
Jesus also said (in the Gospel of John) that the PRINCE OF THIS WORLD WAS COMING AND HE HAS NOTHING IN ME.
30Hereafter I will not talk much with you: for the prince of this world cometh, and hath nothing in me.
WHO IS JESUS TALKING ABOUT?
I THINK HE IS TALKING ABOUT THE “THE ANOTHER” THAT WAS GOING TO GIRD PETER WHEN HE GETS OLD! Or rather the one that would write about it in opposition to the gospel of John. It is no accident that just about everything written in the Synoptic Gospels opposes and mocks the Gospel of John. So I gather that the authors of those gospels are or represent the prince of this world!
25And Barnabas and Saul returned from Jerusalem,
when they had fulfilled their ministry,
and took with them John, whose surname was Mark.
WONDER WHAT THAT MINISTRY WAS?
JAMES THE BROTHER OF JOHN ZEBEDEE IS MURDERED (SUPPOSEDLY BY HEROD), HEROD IS KILLED (SUPPOSEDLY BY WORMS) AND PETER GOES TO ANOTHER PLACE and they take John surnamed Mark (man, book or both?)
Could the deaths of these men be the ministry that is fulfilled by Barnabus and Saul?
Then because John Mark does not “work” Paul doesn’t want to include John Mark in whatever it is he considered “work” in Acts 15:36-38. Very mysterious chronology of events!
36And some days after Paul said unto Barnabas, Let us go again and visit our brethren in every city where we have preached the word of the LORD, and see how they do.
37And Barnabas determined to take with them John, whose surname was Mark.
38But Paul thought not good to take him with them, who departed from them from Pamphylia, and went not with them to the work.
There is a “contention” between Paul and Barnabus. THEN Barnabus takes John Mark to Sicily. That is the last we hear about John Mark! However, we do hear about a person named Mark a verse later and I assume it is the same John surnamed Mark.
39And the contention was so sharp between them, that they departed asunder one from the other: and so Barnabas took Mark, and sailed unto Cyprus;
Who was John Mark? What happened to John Mark? He seems to disappear.
Some very strange things to consider in the Synoptic gospels that seem to cradle ACTS or visa-versa.
8Three shepherds also I cut off in one month;
and my soul lothed them, and their soul also abhorred me.
ARE THE THREE ABOVE THAT ARE KILLED JAMES, HEROD AGRIPPA, AND POSSIBLY PETER, MAYBE JOHN MARK WHO THIS VERSE IN ZECHARIAH 11:8 IS REFERRING TO? IT SEEMS THEY HAPPENED VERY CLOSE TOGETHER in time! AND IT COINCIDES WITH THE MINISTRY COMPLETED BY SAUL AND BARNABUS WHEN SAUL MOLTS INTO PAUL.
HERE IS AN INTERESTING ARTICLE ABOUT THE WRITER OF MATTHEW AND THE WRITER OF ZECHARIAH:
“There are no dates given for chapters 9-14 and Zechariah’s name does not even appear in that section. Times have changed and there is no reference made to Darius or any other king. The temple is standing, instead of waiting to be built (cf. 9:8, 11:13-14, and 14:21). As a result, many scholars suggest that chapters 9-14 of Zechariah were not written by Zechariah at all.
There is very solid evidence to support this position.
Matthew 27:9-10:Then what was spoken by Jeremiah the prophet was fulfilled: “They took the thirty silver coins, the price set on him by the people of Israel, and they used them to buy the potter’s field, as the Lord commanded me.”
Is this article suggesting that possibly Matthew or someone else wrote a part of the prophetic book of Zechariah! Or did he just misquote to mislead?
I think the author of the Gospel of Matthew did more than that!
1When the morning was come, all the chief priests and elders of the people took counsel against Jesus to put him to death:
2And when they had bound him, they led him away, and delivered him to Pontius Pilate the governor.
3Then Judas, which had betrayed him, when he saw that he was condemned, repented himself, and brought again the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and elders,
4Saying, I have sinned in that I have betrayed the innocent blood. And they said, What is that to us? see thou to that.
5And he cast down the pieces of silver in the temple, and departed, and went and hanged himself.
6And the chief priests took the silver pieces, and said, It is not lawful for to put them into the treasury, because it is the price of blood.
7And they took counsel, and bought with them the potter’s field, to bury strangers in.
8Wherefore that field was called, The field of blood, unto this day.
9Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremy the prophet, saying, And they took the thirty pieces of silver, the price of him that was valued, whom they of the children of Israel did value;
10And gave them for the potter’s field,
as the Lord appointed me.
Who is the Lord in this last verse?
The problem I have with these verses in Matthew is that many people believed in Jesus (of the Gospel of John) because Jesus had raised Lazarus from the grave (in the Gospel of John) and it was the chief priests who were plotting to kill Lazarus and Jesus because they were losing their preeminence and fear of the Romans taking their nation and so forth.
48If we let him thus alone, all men will believe on him: and the Romans shall come and take away both our place and nation.
49And one of them, named Caiaphas, being the high priest that same year, said unto them, Ye know nothing at all,
50Nor consider that it is expedient for us, that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation perish not.
14Now Caiaphas was he, which gave counsel to the Jews, that it was expedient that one man should die for the people.
Then there is Joseph of Arimathea who was a a rich man from Arimathea, waiting for the kingdom of God, a secret disciple who craved the body of Jesus and who was a prominent member of the Council.
By body does this also mean the followers of Jesus?
And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death; because he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth.
Please read about DECEIT:
Here is an interesting take on Joseph of Arimathea and Pilate:
What bewilders me is that Joseph of Arimathea is afraid of the Jews and is able to retrieve the body of Jesus from Pilate (a Roman).
Caiaphas and the chief priests are afraid that the Romans will take away their nation and all people would believe that Jesus is their Messiah if they allow Him to continue, so they plot to kill Him.
Another thing that bewilders me is that when Joseph of Arimathea goes to Pilate to take down the body of Jesus….why is Pilate surprised or shocked that Jesus was dead already? Supposedly IN THE SYNOPTIC GOSPELS there was an earthquake, and darkness for three hours, and the veil of the temple was torn in two. Wouldn’t one of these events and even more, all of these events make a person aware or suspicious that something unique was happening? Unless PILATE was taking a very heavy nap! And Joseph of Arimethea wants to bury Jesus before the Passover feast and an earthquake has just occurred, the veil of the Temple is torn in half, and darkness over the land? Wouldn’t Joseph of Arimethea have been aware of this,
IF WHAT IS WRITTEN IN THE GOSPELS OF MATTHEW, MARK AND LUKE WERE TRUE ?
Or was Joseph of Arimethea in a hurry to hide the body of Jesus in a tomb with a big stone and get on with the Passover?
(Often people that commit a crime like to bury their crime quickly and there happened to be a grave nearby owned by Joseph of Arimethea.)
Why would Pilate give the body of Jesus to Joseph of Arimethea?
Who is Joseph of Arimethea?
Is he that “other disciple” written about in the gospel of John that let Peter in to where Jesus was being interrogated?
Seems to me Pilate was being awful lax just giving the body of Jesus to Joseph of Arimethea and did not seem nor need to confer with all the other chief priests and the Counsel who seemed to be in his ear before.
Maybe Joseph of Arimathea was the top man and Pontius was his servant!
Here is an article about Joseph of Arimathea with a comment about the burial of Jesus. The reason I add this article is not for the article itself, but for the comment by Anna Rosa M which I found to be thought provoking at the least. I included the article even though I think it is a bit contrived so you can see where the comment came from. Beneath the link for the article is the comment that seems appropriate to add to my post:
“Even stranger things…
For the record, the Jews have never, ever practiced any form of embalming. Don’t take my word for it, check Judaic Mishnaic Law from the first century for confirmation.
As such, what on earth where Joseph A. and Nicodemus doing at the tomb…after sundown…with 70 plus pounds of spices and oils?
To claim that the wrapping of Our Lord’s body in linens, spices and oils was “in accordance with Jewish custom” is absolutely wrong.
Either the author was completely unaware of Jewish custom…or the ritual being performed on Christ’s body was NOT Jewish in origin.”
By: Anna Rose M. on March 7, 2008
at 8:46 pm
So why would a Jewish Councilman of the Sanhedrin, a “goodman and a just” as Luke describes Joseph of Arimathea, bury Jesus in an unJewish way,
or was Joseph of Arimathea not Jewish
and was actually in charge of the whole business.
Usually you give the body to the family, but that is nowadays. I have no idea what they did back then and being under occupation of the Romans.
Seems that the tomb of Arimethea was pre-calculated as the sight for the body of Jesus.
Furthermore, if Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemas had already prepared the body of Jesus, why would the women come to the tomb to do the very same thing. I thought it was already done by these two secret disciples.
It does not make sense!
50And, behold, there was a man named Joseph, a counsellor; and he was a good man, and a just:
“and a just” a just what?
a just man? a just judge? a just counsellor?
A Just Prince?
I think there is something missing in that sentence!
51(The same had not consented to the counsel and deed of them;) he was of Arimathaea, a city of the Jews: who also himself waited for the kingdom of God.
By the way, does God break his promises? If you read the prophecies in Zechariah, it seems that whoever wrote this part of Zechariah says that God does break His covenants:
10And I took my staff, even Beauty, and cut it asunder, that I might break my covenant which I had made with all the people.
If Matthew wrote part of Zechariah…..Could it be that he is the prince that made the covenant that he breaks with all the people (the many)? The only covenant made in the gospel of Matthew and the Synoptic Gospels is at the “last supper” which is not written about in the gospel of John!
I don’t believe that God breaks His covenants that He makes,
but I do believe that a covenant was made by a deceiver, and it was broken, and this person thinks he is God.
He is the prince of this world, a liar, a murderer, and a thief!
IN essence what I mean is that the rendition of Jesus and the events described in the gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke (the Synoptic Gospels) seem to describe Jesus as a thief, murdering banker, austere, unforgiving, eager to watch men slayed before him, avenging such as threatening the daughters of Jerusalem, a lunatic such as cursing a fig tree and comparing faith to a mustard seed, telling everyone he met not to tell about him as the multitudes were following him and sends them to the temple to give them alms…
Give me a break!
Referring to the prophecy in Zechariah as the prophecy in Jeremiah which Matthew (or whoever wrote the gospel of Matthew) is deceptive and reminds me of what Peter said happened to Judas Iscariot in the Book of Acts, written by Luke (whoever he is) -who also refers to Jeremiah, and why Matthew should be the 12th apostle by drawing lots between two men, who I think were one and the same person…. which reminds me of Josephus and his stories. (Drawing Lots at Yodafat)
Talk about deception…..this is insanity!
So why should we not wrest with the scriptures
as Peter suggested?
I think it would be stupid not to wrest after reading the Synoptic Gospels, at least if you bother to compare them to the Gospel of John!!!!!!
As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.