Did Jesus tell people to be completely adherent to the Torah 'laws'?

[JoStories]

Hi Jo,

Don’t be bothered. I cannot force you to believe me. It is true that the word of God strikes our heart and mind--to discipline ourselves from attaining righteousness. We both have struggles in life. The lust of eyes and flesh are commonly seen in our environment. Paul also had struggles. We (usually) would like to hear what we like to hear but God gave us the moral laws to be followed. I believed that it is our choice if we want to adhere or ignore just for the craving of our flesh.

Paul would’nt say such a thing to women as modestly and discreet if he does not protect the women. He did it for the sake of holiness in the sight of God.

Heb. 4:12
12. For the word of God is living and active and sharper than any two-edged sword, and piercing as far as the division of soul and spirit, of both joints and marrow, and able to judge the thoughts and intentions of the heart.

Thanks

note: pls. don't put acronyms, I can't understand the acronym meaning.

I had to go see what acronym you meant. POV means point of view. Most of the members here have been members of other boards or forums for some time and POV is an old acronym most would know. I apologize for presuming you would know that.

 

[JoStories]

Hi Leibowde,

If you had an intensive study of Christianity, how come you missed out the archaeological and historical evidence of the Bible?

How do you nurture yourself as having a close relationship with God?

Thanks

Yoshua, I don't think that is what Leibowde said, that being that the Bible is not historically accurate, etc. He said it was not historically accurate and for me, that means it is not entirely accurate, which it isn't. There is evidence of historical import but you have to admit that it is not ALL historically accurate. IE: Lack of evidence of a world flood, and much more. Leibowde tells me he is a Christian and, just like you, I take him at his word. Scholars cannot even agree on who wrote the gospels and when they were written. It is from there that I think Leibowde takes his point of view.

 

[rosends]

Hi Rosends,

Yes, that includes the laws related to murder or crime. I did not say that is an ethical law. Ethics and morals are commonly used interchangeably. If you will look at the meaning of “ethics”, it is a moral principles that govern a person's or group's behavior.

So when you said "Moral law such as “Thou shall not kill” is a direct command from God" you did or did not mean that the law against murder is an ethical law (assuming "ethics and morals are commonly used interchangeably")? It seems to me that you clearly claimed that a law against murder is an ethical law.

I believe that “Thou shall not steal” is still a moral law because this is a direct command from God. Morals encompass justice, respect and sexual conduct.

OK, so now you say that a law against stealing is a moral (ethical) law because morals encompass justice, which would make all moral laws also civil laws, since you said, "Civil Law about crimes, social behaviour punishments etc".

Civil laws are specifically given for the culture and place of the Israelites which encompass all of the moral law except the Ten Commandments.

Now you have added in 3.5 claims:
1. Civil laws are given to a specific culture and place. The inference would then be that one outside of that culture and place is not bound by those civil laws. So no one not in the Israelite camp in the desert is bound by the sabbath.
2. Civil law "encompasses all the moral law except the Ten Commandments." which is strange since moral law, as you already stated, encompasses civil law. That makes the two synonymous
3. The Ten Commandments are moral laws even though many of them they are clearly about crimes, social behaviors etc. This is possible because civil=moral according to what you have said.
3.5 The laws of the Ten Commandments are not included in the set of civil laws unlike other moral laws. I don't know why anyone would claim this. The Ten Commandments are just 10 laws which happen to be presented in this form. There is nothing in the Torah which distinguishes them and demands that they be excluded from a particular category.

To sum up, not only haven't you resolved the contradiction you earlier were speaking of, but you have also now muddled definitions and created uncalled for categorizations which have not cleared anything up.

 

[Yoshua]

Just out of curiosity, don't you think it is prudent to look at the validity of each passage individually in the Bible? It is a collection of many books written thousands of years ago by imperfect unknown authors with a far more primitive understanding of the physical world. They were compiled hundreds of years later by other imperfect men, still fairly unknown today. So, why wouldn't everyone look at a book like this with extreme scrutiny?

Hi Leibowde84,

Yes absolutely. It is prudent to look at the validity of each passage. Some theologians or Bible scholars took their time hardly to produce commentaries, biblical studies, exegesis and interpretations. Their credentials should be highly considered as one of the basis for checking their interpretation integrity. I did not say that all theologians and scholars were true in their biblical studies and interpretation, but we may check it with our own by also studying the principles of interpreting scriptures, or research. I believed that hermeneutics is a must as standard for biblical studies.

Like example, dinosaur. To prove that there are dinosaur exist, archaeology is needed. Can you imagine how can we get nearer from the past (biblical accounts), and bring it to our current time? This is how principles of biblical interpretation become a standard. Not by feelings, self interpretation or guess, but studying the biblical account like forensic study.

Thanks

 

[Yoshua]

Because they were instructing the Torah from Moses' seat. Look at what Jesus says right after this:

4“They tie up heavy burdens and lay them on men’s shoulders, but they themselves are unwilling to move them with so much as a finger. 5“But they do all their deeds to be noticed by men; for they broaden their phylacteries and lengthen the tassels of their garments.6“They love the place of honor at banquets and the chief seats in the synagogues, 7and respectful greetings in the market places, and being called Rabbi by men. Matt: 23: 4-7

So Jesus is clearly saying to both practice what Rabbi's declare from "Moses' seat" but also makes it abundantly clear to not follow the example of the Pharisees in regard to Torah observance.

Hi Simplelogic,

That is true due to Pharisaic externalism, they want to impress people; showing to them that they are great teachers of the law and called as Rabbi. Jesus instead expose them and pointed them to the Father, that they should be under the authority of God, and should be humble themselves.

Thanks

 

[Yoshua]

Too much to put in a post.But mainly:
1. The date and authorship of the NT books.
2. How the books of the NT were chosen to be in the NT.
3. The role of Constantine, a pagan who still worshiped pagan gods, in development of the doctrine of the orthodox church.
4. The books taken out of the NT, and the ones excluded.
5. Changes made to the Gospels by the orthodox church "fathers".
6. The fact that Christmas and Easter are replacements for pagan holidays.
7. Contradictions between the gospel of Paul and the gospel of Jesus.
8. The orthodox church ignoring the teachings of Jesus if it clashed with their own.
9. The fake epistles.
10. The stark differences between the Gospel of John and the synoptics.
11. The fact that Jesus quotes almost exclusively from the Septuagint instead of the Hebrew scriptures.
12. If you read the Gospel of Jesus only(Jesus' words) you will find an entirely different meaning than if you read all the "commentators".
Now I am just a Jesuist.

Hi Lastinglight,

This is exactly the example of misconception or lack of understanding of the biblical text. You may make a thread for each as to scrutinize, investigate and create a study. I believed this forum can serve as an instrument for enlightening our doubts and skeptical thinking.

Thanks

 

[Yoshua]

Your verse from Corinthians is taken from the NIV. If we read it from the KJV, it is completely different. Here is the KJV:
Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,

As you can see, the message is entirely different. Homosexuality has NO part in this the verse. Abusers of themselves with mankind can mean myriad things. And the NIV was translated long after the originals and some agree that it was altered to reflect what the writers had in mind. So, IMO, you have not proven your argument, and I mean no offense here, but rather have again shown that Christians 'cherry pick' those verses that serve their agenda.

Hi Jo,

The subject about homosexuality is a very critical one when being discussed. I know that some of the forum members did not want to jump in to this subject. By the way, just to give you some idea about your message, it has to do with the Bible translators. This is the reason why I study biblical interpretation, so I will not get lost in studying the scriptures. The Bible translator connects the term “effeminate” and “abusers of themselves with mankind” as homosexual. The occurrence of this shift came in 1946. Let me brief you about this: if you will look at the original Greek text (below) that was used for homosexual is the term “arsenokoites”, “arsen” for male, “koitai” for mat or bed. This defined as a male engaging in same-gender sexual activity.

arsenokoites: a male engaging in same-gender sexual activity
Original Word: ἀρσενοκοίτης, ου, ὁ
Part of Speech: Noun, Masculine
Transliteration: arsenokoites
Phonetic Spelling: (ar-sen-ok-oy'-tace)
Short Definition: a male engaging in same-gender sexual activity
Definition: a male engaging in same-gender sexual activity; a sodomite, pederast.
HELPS Word-studies (biblehub)

I’m not God to judge who will saved or not; I don’t know you personally same as other members here. We just know them by sharing their stories here. Just my opinion here, a person should always seek God’s righteousness by accepting Him as Lord and Saviour, allow the Holy Spirit’s guidance and follow what God forbids such as killings, idolatry, immorality, fornicators and others.

I believed God is just fair enough and gives justice to those who contemplate with their sexuality problem.

Thanks

 

[leibowde84]

Hi Leibowde,

If you had an intensive study of Christianity, how come you missed out the archaeological and historical evidence of the Bible?

How do you nurture yourself as having a close relationship with God?

Thanks

I have studied the archeological and historical evidence of the Bible, and often it seems to be incredibly lacking. Often Christian biblical experts use confirmation bias to strengthen their arguments on the validity of scripture.

I have a personal relationship with God. I don't limit myself to the understanding of much more primitive men thousands of years ago.

 

[Yoshua]

OK, so now you say that a law against stealing is a moral (ethical) law because morals encompass justice, which would make all moral laws also civil laws, since you said, "Civil Law about crimes, social behaviour punishments etc".

Rosends,

The following are the examples of the civil laws in the Old Testament :

Civil Law
1. Servants and the Poor
Exo. 21:7-11; Exo. 21:2-6; Deut. 15:12-18; Exo. 20:1-26; Exo.21:1-36

2. Punishments
Exo. 21;22-25; Lev. 24:19-20; Deut.19:16-19

3. Marriage
Deut. 21:10-14; Exo.21:7-11

4. Sabbaths and Feasts
Exo. 23:12; Deut. 5;14-15; Exo. 31:12-17 (internationalbible.com)

Now you have added in 3.5 claims:
1. Civil laws are given to a specific culture and place. The inference would then be that one outside of that culture and place is not bound by those civil laws. So no one not in the Israelite camp in the desert is bound by the sabbath.
2. Civil law "encompasses all the moral law except the Ten Commandments." which is strange since moral law, as you already stated, encompasses civil law. That makes the two synonymous
3. The Ten Commandments are moral laws even though many of them they are clearly about crimes, social behaviors etc. This is possible because civil=moral according to what you have said.
3.5 The laws of the Ten Commandments are not included in the set of civil laws unlike other moral laws. I don't know why anyone would claim this. The Ten Commandments are just 10 laws which happen to be presented in this form. There is nothing in the Torah which distinguishes them and demands that they be excluded from a particular category.

To sum up, not only haven't you resolved the contradiction you earlier were speaking of, but you have also now muddled definitions and created uncalled for categorizations which have not cleared anything up.

I'm not an expert in the laws of the Old Testament; You are a Jewish, I believe you are more familiar with it than me. I'm just trying to present what I know as of now.

So when you said "Moral law such as “Thou shall not kill” is a direct command from God" you did or did not mean that the law against murder is an ethical law (assuming "ethics and morals are commonly used interchangeably")? It seems to me that you clearly claimed that a law against murder is an ethical law.

I did not say that there is an ethical laws, ethics and morals are interconnecting each other. We are going into cycle again.

Thanks

 

[Yoshua]

I have studied the archeological and historical evidence of the Bible, and often it seems to be incredibly lacking. Often Christian biblical experts use confirmation bias to strengthen their arguments on the validity of scripture.

I have a personal relationship with God. I don't limit myself to the understanding of much more primitive men thousands of years ago.

Hi Leibowde84,

May I know what is lacking?

Thanks

 

[psychoslice]

I myself always felt that Jesus was trying to take us away from the old laws, and become one with God is love, and living through that love is the only true law, love God with all your heart and love your neighbours, can't go wrong there.

 

[Desert Snake]

I myself always felt that Jesus was trying to take us away from the old laws, and become one with God is love, and living through that love is the only true law, love God with all your heart and love your neighbours, can't go wrong there.

Yes, the great carpenter fisherman quasi Rabbi. What lessons He taught by Galilee.

 

[psychoslice]

Yes, the great carpenter fisherman quasi Rabbi. What lessons He taught by Galilee.

yes, but we probably will never truly know what he taught, seeing the way the scriptures have been handled over the many years.

 

[Desert Snake]

yes, but we probably will never truly know what he taught, seeing the way the scriptures have been handled over the many years.

I don't seem to have that problem, when reading the Bible. Looks pretty clear to me. Other peoples interpretations, not so much. So, I have to disagree with you there, to an extent. Also, He didn't write things Himself, or at least, not a full text, etc., so, it seems that if some one is looking for that sort of thing, they might want to try another religion.

my .02$

 

[leibowde84]

Hi Leibowde84,

May I know what is lacking?

Thanks

There are many different examples of troublesome issues, but here are a few.

1. We don't know who wrote the Gospels. It has become clear that they were not written by the men for which they were named, and the 4 Gospels were chosen from a colleciton of roughly 30 that had been circulating around that part of the world for over a hundred years.

2. Historical innacuracies regarding Herod and his "slaughter of the innocents" (which never actually happened ... or at least we have absolutely no reason to believe that it did).

3. The Gospel writers did not know the geography of the Holy Land, and it is clear that they were writing from source material that was not "historical" in any real sense of the word.

4. "Star of Bethlehem": No record of such a celestial even outside the gospel of Matthew.

5. Roman census in Jesus birth story: No historical record of this, and the Romans kept pretty darn good records.

6. Death of Jesus: Claimed in the Bible to be accompanied by blackout of sun, raising of the dead, and an earthquake, yet there is no mention of this in any other source besides the Gospels.

 

[metis]

The following are the examples of the civil laws in the Old Testament :..

But for Jews, no distinction was made between what one might call "civil law" and "religious law". There was for gentiles living in eretz Israel, however, in that they were considered exempt from observing certain prescribed Laws that were what we might call strictly "religious laws", such as observing Passover.

 

[rosends]

But for Jews, no distinction was made between what one might call "civil law" and "religious law". There was for gentiles living in eretz Israel, however, in that they were considered exempt from observing certain prescribed Laws that were what we might call strictly "religious laws", such as observing Passover.

True. Labels and distinctions were not to be found in the text except for the concepts of chok, mishpat, eidah etc.

 

[Simplelogic]

Rosends,

The following are the examples of the civil laws in the Old Testament :

Civil Law
1. Servants and the Poor
Exo. 21:7-11; Exo. 21:2-6; Deut. 15:12-18; Exo. 20:1-26; Exo.21:1-36

2. Punishments
Exo. 21;22-25; Lev. 24:19-20; Deut.19:16-19

3. Marriage
Deut. 21:10-14; Exo.21:7-11

4. Sabbaths and Feasts
Exo. 23:12; Deut. 5;14-15; Exo. 31:12-17 (internationalbible.com)



I'm not an expert in the laws of the Old Testament; You are a Jewish, I believe you are more familiar with it than me. I'm just trying to present what I know as of now.



I did not say that there is an ethical laws, ethics and morals are interconnecting each other. We are going into cycle again.

Thanks

The term "civil law" does not exist in the Bible. Nor is the law of Moses divided up this way. It is a comprehensive set of instructions.

 

[Brickjectivity]

I'm still participating in the thread. No comment at this time.

 

[LASTINGLIGHT]

Hi Lastinglight,

This is exactly the example of misconception or lack of understanding of the biblical text. You may make a thread for each as to scrutinize, investigate and create a study. I believed this forum can serve as an instrument for enlightening our doubts and skeptical thinking.

Thanks

All of the twelve points made above are made because science, history and credible research have proven the Christian church's view on these points to be wrong. Leibowde84 brought up more points. You want to quote the Bible, fine. You can not prove the historical accuracy of the Bible by quoting it. You can prove the historical and scientific validy of the Bible by studying it yourself. Historically, geographically, and scientifically, facts and figures only.