All Testaments Created Equal?

[Shermana]

To quote from Galatians that ties into Hebrews which calls the teachings of Jesus as the "new covenant", "But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed. Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster."

I agree, it doesn't "replace" it, meaning you can just toss it in the trash bin or something, but to me the modern expression to "transcend and include", is a better way to understand how it was understood by the founders of the religion. It was viewd as "fulfilling" the law, through understanding not the letter of the law, but the spirit behind it. Religion takes teachings and instructions and turns them into a substitute realization. Rather than coming to know the heart, it replaces that with legalism. "Love is the fulfillment of the law", says Romans 13:10. All the "new covenant" is to replace an externalized law, with an internal knowledge.

So in this sense, an internal realization supersedes an externalized law. It is "superior" as it is not just something imposed upon you, but something that grows from inside, without needed to be told. That said, if anyone holds to any tradition and realizes this, then they are operating from that very spirit, IMHO. There are plenty of Christians who externalize the teachings of the NT in the same way as living by the letter of the law to be "righteous before God". They too miss the point.

So what you're saying is that by using Galatians and Corinthians and other writings of Paul (regardless of authorship issues), they're essentially saying "The old doesn't matter anymore because the new now replaces the old" as if somehow "Internalizing" allows one to no longer be bound to do the "External" commandments. You can eat pork and work on the Sabbath all you want by your logic? Sounds like some wordplay that simply tries to dress the same idea of replacement theology in different colors.

Also, as for "no longer being under a schoolmaster", don't you actually have to go by what the school taught in order to no longer be under a schoolmaster? Aren't you essentially saying that one can now break all the rules of the school and disregard everything they were taught as long as you have some vague idea of internalized "love" which is at odds with EVERYTHING Jesus said on the matter?

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

This is neither the Thread or the Forum
To discuss the differences between Christianity and Judaism.
Both the Jews and Christians have selections of writings that they have compiled into their various scriptures. This is a fact and is in no way disrespectful.
There is a common heritage between them but little common interpretation or understanding.
This again is not disrespectful to either party.

 

[Windwalker]

So what you're saying is that by using Galatians and Corinthians and other writings of Paul (regardless of authorship issues), they're essentially saying "The old doesn't matter anymore because the new now replaces the old" as if somehow "Internalizing" allows one to no longer be bound to do the "External" commandments.

Internalizing something means that our actions are not something imposed from outside of us. It does not mean that you act lawlessly. But it recognizes, it comes to see that the external codes are NOT what is important as they are not 'righteous' in themselves. When I quoted Paul saying "Love is the fulling of the law", it means this. "Love works no ill". If your heart is filled by and guided by Love, all of your actions will follow. You will not harm another, steal from them, envy them, hate them, kill them, etc. You heart becomes the governor of all your action. You NATURALLY fulfill the law, because "love works no ill".

Now, if someone understands all the codes as the thing in itself, that this rules are what defines goodness and truth, to see someone 'violating' this rule to them means they are disobeying God. That is frankly, the difference between an externalized God, full of lists of static rules and regulations, and an internalized God, full of dynamic choices. The world is too complex to have all the edges defined. It takes dynamic choices, and that can only be assured of success by having that "law" come from a heart of "love". The landscapes of rules change based on a changing world. But love is eternal, and adapts. It is the heart that is judged, not conformity to lists of static and inflexible external rules. "Love works no ill". It writes the law, in every moment.

Again, I want to stress, Christians take Christianity and make it this very thing too, a list of static external rules that God judges them by. It's natural for people to see them this way until they understand it isn't about those, that's not what pleases God, but it is about the truth within the heart. That way naturally gives way to an in internal understanding at some point, hopefully, as it begins to see it is impossible for these to be adaptive in such as way as to bring balance and harmony and Peace. It's not the religion itself, it's the philosophy within the religion, regardless if that is the Christian, Jewish, Buddhist, Hindu, etc religions. The point is the law in the heart, not outside chiseled in stone which judges us.

Love works no ill. Love is the fulfilling of the law. And I'll add, it's not human emotional love of which I speak, but divine love. Hence the two great commandments, "Love God with all your heart, mind, soul and strength, and the second is like unto it, love your neighbor as yourself." The source is God. But is must be internalized in order to naturally fulfill the second, because "love works no ill". Otherwise, it's just conformity, not love.

 

[Shermana]

Internalizing something means that our actions are not something imposed from outside of us. It does not mean that you act lawlessly. But it recognizes, it comes to see that the external codes are NOT what is important as they are not 'righteous' in themselves. When I quoted Paul saying "Love is the fulling of the law", it means this. "Love works no ill". If your heart is filled by and guided by Love, all of your actions will follow. You will not harm another, steal from them, envy them, hate them, kill them, etc. You heart becomes the governor of all your action. You NATURALLY fulfill the law, because "love works no ill".

Now, if someone understands all the codes as the thing in itself, that this rules are what defines goodness and truth, to see someone 'violating' this rule to them means they are disobeying God. That is frankly, the difference between an externalized God, full of lists of static rules and regulations, and an internalized God, full of dynamic choices. The world is too complex to have all the edges defined. It takes dynamic choices, and that can only be assured of success by having that "law" come from a heart of "love". The landscapes of rules change based on a changing world. But love is eternal, and adapts. It is the heart that is judged, not conformity to lists of static and inflexible external rules. "Love works no ill". It writes the law, in every moment.

Again, I want to stress, Christians take Christianity and make it this very thing too, a list of static external rules that God judges them by. It's natural for people to see them this way until they understand it isn't about those, that's not what pleases God, but it is about the truth within the heart. That way naturally gives way to an in internal understanding at some point, hopefully, as it begins to see it is impossible for these to be adaptive in such as way as to bring balance and harmony and Peace. It's not the religion itself, it's the philosophy within the religion, regardless if that is the Christian, Jewish, Buddhist, Hindu, etc religions. The point is the law in the heart, not outside chiseled in stone which judges us.

Love works no ill. Love is the fulfilling of the law. And I'll add, it's not human emotional love of which I speak, but divine love. Hence the two great commandments, "Love God with all your heart, mind, soul and strength, and the second is like unto it, love your neighbor as yourself." The source is God. But is must be internalized in order to naturally fulfill the second, because "love works no ill". Otherwise, it's just conformity, not love.

So you're saying your basis in belief isn't actually based upon what the texts themselves say, or are you saying that God was a liar when he said the Law was for all generations, even until the Thousandth, or that anyone can go ahead and claim that the Law changes based on any dressed up language they want?

This supercessionist Replacement Theology never gets any less infuriating. And any less ridiculous. And any less unfounded.

 

[Falvlun]

thread closed for mod clean-up​