An old Cherokee is teaching his grandson about life. “A fight is going on inside me,” he said to the boy.
“It is a terrible fight and it is between two wolves.
One is evil – he is anger, envy, sorrow, regret, greed, arrogance, self-pity, guilt, resentment, inferiority, lies, false pride, superiority, and ego.”
He continued, “The other is good – he is joy, peace, love, hope, serenity, humility, kindness, benevolence, empathy, generosity, truth, compassion, and faith.
The same fight is going on inside you – and inside every other person, too.”
The grandson thought about it for a minute and then asked his grandfather, “Which wolf will win?”
The old Cherokee simply replied, “The one you feed.”
There are no good or evil wolves because both love and hate are healthy.
I'm sorry, but pretending that love is always good and hate is always bad is Care Bears level psychology.
You are confusing emotions with making rational and informed choices based on emotions.
And no, Jesus was not evil or Satanic when he flew into a rage during the Cleansing of the Temple. Jesus was righteous to feel anger and his was righteous to act on it. Your entire argument crumbles when you realize that love and hate can be good and evil.
That depends on whether or not you can hate actions and not hate people. Jesus was rightfully angry at the behavior of the moneylenders who were both taking advantage of His fellow Jews, and blocking the Court of The Gentiles.
Matthew 21: 12-13
Isaiah 56: 6-7
Jeremiah 7:11
Amen....
Jesus overturned tables and used physical violence against the greedy Jews.
That said, Jesus still felt ANGRY, likely mostly because the the sin and perhaps a little anger was directed towards the sinners as Jesus beat the greedy Jews with a whip as they ran for their lives.
But my point still stands. Anger is not inherently evil. Jesus felt anger and acted on His anger and his actions were good, not evil or Satanic. This is the single best example I can thing of and we both know that you can't rebut it even if Jesus did feel some anger at the sinners or not.
Granted, but the moneylenders (not all Jews, as you seem to insinuate twice,) were essentially 'setting up shop' where they did not belong. Nehemiah 5 or 6 describes a similar incident with Sanballat and Tobiah, who tried to do the same thing, essentially. Nehemiah kicked them out as well as the Gentile merchants who tried to come to the gate to make a sale on the Sabbath.
I somewhat agree with your baseless interpretation of scripture, however nitpicking at my metaphor doesn't rebut anything about my argument. We may as well be arguing about the best flavor of ice-cream.
God bless you, have a good evening....
God bless you too, my friend.
...wasn't there an episode of "The Office" where one of the characters wanted to debate the philosophical validity of the motivational posters that were displayed on the walls?
...just asking for a friend...
...doggy winks....
Probably. The difficulty I have with some people who start this type of debate is the coloring of motives - It's one thing for any people group to call each out for faults, it's another thing when someone starts painting all of any group, Black, White, Hispanic, Cherokee, or Jew in a negative light. Just because some prominent Englishman (or German) is an idiot doesn't make them all idiots.