Did Jesus Teach Freedom From Religious Law

[blü 2]

Yes, or do you believe otherwise?

And as well as @Wandering Monk's Matthew 23:1, there's Matthew 5:18 ─ "... till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the law until all is accomplished."

Nothing of the kind is found in Paul or in Mark, Luke or John.

And it seems to overlook the manner in which Paul and others had by then overthrown (for instance) the Jewish covenant of circumcision.

 

[Nakosis]

And as well as @Wandering Monk's Matthew 23:1, there's Matthew 5:18 ─ "... till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the law until all is accomplished."

Nothing of the kind is found in Paul or in Mark, Luke or John.

And it seems to overlook the manner in which Paul and others had by then overthrown (for instance) the Jewish covenant of circumcision.

I read that Christians think that Jesus fulfilled the law by his sacrifice. This was before Paul converted.
So how does that work...

Jesus forgave folks bypassing temple sacrifice.
Picked grain on the Sabbath.
Healed on the Sabbath.
Allowed his disciples to eat without washing their hands.

I don't know exactly what laws this transgressed but it upset the Pharisees.

Also what law exactly? Perhaps Jesus was referring to "God's law" which perhaps meant something different from the interpretation of the 613 laws the Pharisee had derived from the Tanakh.

 

[Muffled]

Yes, or do you believe otherwise?

I believe He did and the replacement is Him as fulfillment of the law.

 

[Muffled]

No. I'm quite sure that the Gospels quote Jesus directing his disciples to follow his law, Jesus' law, because The Father had delegated authority on to him.

In many ways it isn't a law but simply a living way and the early Christians called themselves the way.

 

[Muffled]

Law or advise? Was love God and love your neighbor as yourself given as a law or advise?

I believe for the Born Again Christian it is the fruit of the Spirit.

 

[Nakosis]

I believe He did and the replacement is Him as fulfillment of the law.

Yeah, I get that from other Christians too. However the law? the necessary fulfillment of payment for original sin?
The supposed 613 laws for the Hebrew was just to keep them busy in the meantime.

 

[dybmh]

In many ways it isn't a law but simply a living way and the early Christians called themselves the way.

Agreed. But. Jesus was not preaching to early Christians. He was preaching to Jews. Desperate Jews.

You would have a point, if, what you're saying is written in the gospels ( not the epistles which are marketing Jesus, not preaching his truth ).

Please bring verses to support your point of view, if you can. Gospels only, sir.

 

[PearlSeeker]

Not in my opinion. For example, teaching that lusting in your heart is the same thing as adultery and being angry is the same thing as murder, was an OBVIOUS form of putting a fence around the Torah. I just don't think those teaching have anything to do with the heart. More likely, they will simply make people feel guilty for reactions they cannot control.

You know the fence must be more strict and specific than the commandment. It's not meant to feel guilty. It's a precaution to become more alert and watchful in heart to prevent sin. We can't control all thoughts and emotions but it's useful to deal with them before they turn into physical manifestation of moral evil.

 

[Balthazzar]

Law or advise? Was love God and love your neighbor as yourself given as a law or advise?

I'll suggest this is simply a matter of mechanics and consequence, although religious laws often enough incorporated penalties to be paid for non-observance. To me, this is the difference between the mechanics and consequence vs religious laws and religious punishments. They are different from one another.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

You know the fence must be more strict and specific than the commandment

The two references I gave to Jesus' teachings are both more strict than the law and quite specific.

It's not meant to feel guilty.

I didn't say this was Jesus' meaning. Only that guilt it is the result.

It's a precaution to become more alert and watchful in heart to prevent sin.

And that was precisely what Jesus was trying to achieve.

We can't control all thoughts and emotions but it's useful to deal with them before they turn into physical manifestation of moral evil.

It is one thing to say try limit your lust because it can lead to adultery, but it is not a sin in and of itself. It is quite another matter to equate lust with adultery. Adultery is a deliberate and harmful act. Lust is spontaneous and instinctual, and harms no one.

Furthermore, the nature of a law is that it can be obeyed. Lust is impossible to avoid in life. Any commandment against lust outlaws something beyond our control.

 

[metis]

Jesus did not travel from city to city picking grain.

“At that time Jesus went on the Sabbath through the grainfields, and His disciples became hungry and began to pick the heads of grain and eat. But when the Pharisees saw it, they said to Him, "Behold, Your disciples are doing what is not lawful to do on the Sabbath.” (Matthew 12:1-2).May 27, 2020

This is clearly hyperbole in order to make a point -- the importance of learning spiritual matters. Honestly, if Jesus had LITERALLY meant for the man not to bury his father, that would be highly immoral

But he said unto him, Leave the dead to bury their own dead; but go thou and publish abroad the kingdom of God.-- Luke 9:60. It comes off as a teaching, so...

Very cool!

Ya, it's gonna be 73 today.

Take care, my friend.

 

[PearlSeeker]

And that was precisely what Jesus was trying to achieve.

Yes, Jesus taught to become more alert and watchful in heart but before you said: "I just don't think those teaching have anything to do with the heart."

It is one thing to say try limit your lust because it can lead to adultery, but it is not a sin in and of itself. It is quite another matter to equate lust with adultery. Adultery is a deliberate and harmful act. Lust is spontaneous and instinctual, and harms no one.

Furthermore, the nature of a law is that it can be obeyed. Lust is impossible to avoid in life. Any commandment against lust outlaws something beyond our control.

The basic distinction made by [Greek] Fathers is between the demonic provocation and man’s assent: the first lies outside man’s control, while for the second he is morally responsible. (Philokalia, Glossary)

Philokalia also describes different stages before temptation becomes sin:

provocation --> momentary disturbance --> communion --> assent --> ...

Communion (όμιλία - homilia); coupling (συνδυασμός - syndyasmos). Without as yet entirely assenting to the demonic provocation, a man may begin to ‘entertain’ it, to converse or parley with it, turning it over in his mind pleasurably, yet still hesitating whether or not to act upon it. At this stage, which is indicated by the terms ‘communion’ or ‘coupling’, the provocation is no longer ‘image-free’ but has become a logismos or thought (q.v.); and a person is morally responsible for having allowed this to happen. (Philokalia, Glossary)

 

[Bharat Jhunjhunwala]

Who's they?



Then why do you ignore the information which is shared with you by a practicing knowledgeable member of the Jewish religion?

They are the Jews who hold on to their outdated laws and outdated concepts. Ignoring the fact that the times have changed and humanity has evolved and God of today is different than the God of the yester years. Secondly, on the second point, the information shared by a practicing knowledgeable member of Jewish religion should be ignored if it is outdated and does not jive with what God wants today. At the root of this whole issue is the question whether God of the past is remains fixed or he changes in changes with times. If God of Moses, the God of Jesus and the God of Muhammad were different, then it clearly indicates that God himself is evolving and with the change of circumstance, he will continue to evolve. So, any religion that freezes God and says that God cannot evolve and holds God to ransom is fundamentally false and it should be adjusted according to the current times.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Yes, Jesus taught to become more alert and watchful in heart but before you said: "I just don't think those teaching have anything to do with the heart."

when I said, "I just don't think those teachings have anything to do with the heart," I was referring to the fact that lust is an instinctual thing, not a spiritual choice. My use of the word heart was a play on the similar use by Jesus, "Lust in your heart."

The basic distinction made by [Greek] Fathers is between the demonic provocation and man’s assent: the first lies outside man’s control, while for the second he is morally responsible. (Philokalia, Glossary)

Philokalia also describes different stages before temptation becomes sin:

provocation --> momentary disturbance --> communion --> assent --> ...

Communion (όμιλία - homilia); coupling (συνδυασμός - syndyasmos). Without as yet entirely assenting to the demonic provocation, a man may begin to ‘entertain’ it, to converse or parley with it, turning it over in his mind pleasurably, yet still hesitating whether or not to act upon it. At this stage, which is indicated by the terms ‘communion’ or ‘coupling’, the provocation is no longer ‘image-free’ but has become a logismos or thought (q.v.); and a person is morally responsible for having allowed this to happen. (Philokalia, Glossary)

This seems to have gone off on a tangent. The discussion is about Jesus building a fence around the Torah. It is not about demons or communion.

The only comment you make about the actual subject, is when you refer to the stages before temptation becomes sin. One of the things I note in that comment is that it makes a distinction between temptation and sin. Jesus did not make that distinction, His comments say that temptation IS sin. Unless of course you acknowledge that he is using hyperbole.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

“At that time Jesus went on the Sabbath through the grainfields, and His disciples became hungry and began to pick the heads of grain and eat. But when the Pharisees saw it, they said to Him, "Behold, Your disciples are doing what is not lawful to do on the Sabbath.” (Matthew 12:1-2).May 27, 2020

Your quote affirms that it was Jesus' disciples and not Jesus who picked the grain on the Shabbat.

Nowhere in your quote does it state that walking through the grainfields meant walking further than was allowed on Shabbat.

But he said unto him, Leave the dead to bury their own dead; but go thou and publish abroad the kingdom of God.-- Luke 9:60. It comes off as a teaching, so...

So? So it means that if Jesus intended this to be taken literally, that would mean he was encouraging something deeply immoral.

 

[metis]

Your quote affirms that it was Jesus' disciples and not Jesus who picked the grain on the Shabbat.

Nowhere in your quote does it state that walking through the grainfields meant walking further than was allowed on Shabbat.

Traveling from village to village was prohibited on Shabbat, therefore the picking of grain wouldn't even be possible. Also, the disciples had their teacher with them, so... He basically was their rabbi.

So? So it means that if Jesus intended this to be taken literally, that would mean he was encouraging something deeply immoral.

No matter how one tries to play it, it doesn't encourage respect for the dead or family.

 

[PearlSeeker]

This seems to have gone off on a tangent. The discussion is about Jesus building a fence around the Torah. It is not about demons or communion.

Building a fence means to nip the sin in the bud. This means in inner unmanifested stage. Authors of gospels (and Jesus) and Philokalia see evil thoughts as provoked by the demons. Communion is a term for a stage where temptation starts turning into sin but still in thought.

The only comment you make about the actual subject, is when you refer to the stages before temptation becomes sin. One of the things I note in that comment is that it makes a distinction between temptation and sin. Jesus did not make that distinction, His comments say that temptation IS sin. Unless of course you acknowledge that he is using hyperbole.

In Mathew 5:28 Jesus says "pros to epithymēsai autēn". This literally translates as "look upon a woman in order to lust after her". It shows clear intent and indulging not mere attraction or desire. It's already over the bounds of temptation and controlled desire.

Maybe the word "lust" today has a different meaning than it used to.

Proverbs 6
23 For this command is a lamp, this teaching is a light, and correction and instruction are the way to life,
24 keeping you from your neighbor’s wife, from the smooth talk of a wayward woman.
25 Do not lust in your heart after her beauty or let her captivate you with her eyes.

 

[Spice]

Building a fence means to nip the sin in the bud. This means in inner unmanifested stage. Authors of gospels (and Jesus) and Philokalia see evil thoughts as provoked by the demons. Communion is a term for a stage where temptation starts turning into sin but still in thought.



In Mathew 5:28 Jesus says "pros to epithymēsai autēn". This literally translates as "look upon a woman in order to lust after her". It shows clear intent and indulging not mere attraction or desire. It's already over the bounds of temptation and controlled desire.

Maybe the word "lust" today has a different meaning than it used to.

Proverbs 6
23 For this command is a lamp, this teaching is a light, and correction and instruction are the way to life,
24 keeping you from your neighbor’s wife, from the smooth talk of a wayward woman.
25 Do not lust in your heart after her beauty or let her captivate you with her eyes.

I think the line between covet and lust is unclear in some cases. In comparing the scripture to today's world, appreciation of a beautiful form in a sexual way that goes no farther is lust on the covet side of the line. Not sinful - animalistic nature, but humanly controlled.

However, voluntarily indulging in poronography can very easily equate to adultery and therefore sinful. IMO, adultery in the scriptures was less about sexual intercourse, or sex of any kind, and more about hurting another through violation of a sacred trust.

In Isaiah, Israel commits adultery towards God. They violated a sacred trust.

 

[YellowFeather]

People believe a lot of things about Jehovah God and his Son Jesus Christ. Majority of that belief is from hearsay and made up beliefs in their own heads. Only them that study the Whole Bible with patience and faith will know the whole truth.

 

[YellowFeather]

Galatians 3:24 Wherefore the Law was our Schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we MIGHT be Justified by faith.. 25 But after Faith is come, we no longer under the schoolmaster. 26 For ye are all Children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. Once you have the knowledge of the commandments and follow them your Faith in Christ will grow. When your Faith is true to Christ you are no longer under the law. your mind no longer thinks of sinning. You still have to obey the law.