by Terry 43 Replies latest watchtower bible
What read them as if they were written to mates instead of congregations?
Yes. And also as if he didn't believe he was writing under inspiration of holy spirit. His ORDERS (according to the Governing Body) become opinions immediately, for one thing. You will probably find that he didn't disfellowship people for disagreeing with him, certain religions just like to create that impression.
Respectfully,
AuldSoul
Ok, I have an open mind, I'll give it a go
Paul rightly says that the Jews had to pay a price for crucifying Jesus and the Jerusalem council agreed.
What do you mean THE JEWS?
The Jews couldn't crucify anybody.
The Roman government crucified Jesus.
The Jews had every conceivable right to regard Jesus as a troublemaker politically and religiously.
Jesus was an apostate to Judaism. His interpretation of himself and how the law was to be applied went against
everything the Jews held dear.
I think we've completely lost perspective from this remote point in viewing history.
The view we have today of who/what Jesus was is colored by two thousand years of nicey-nice blonde Jesus indoctrinations from the lips of biased interpreters.
Step back and look at it from a first century perspective.
T.
Jesus did not intent to abrogate the Mosaic law but to fulfill it.
The very concept of "fulfilling" a law is absurd.
How do you fulfill a traffic law? If you find a perfect driver who doesn't exceed the speed limit the state doesn't revoke the law for everybody else. It is utter nonsense.
The Law of Moses was a standard of behavior that was supposed to set the Jews apart from the Gentile nations who did what was right in "their own" eyes. Moses' Law supposedly revealed what was right in God's eyes.
Things didn't stop being righteous behaviors just because a purportedly "perfect" man lived a life free of incident.
And further, we are ignoring the fact that Jesus constantly challenged the law. When the prostitute was about to be stoned to death it was in FULL ACCORDANCE with God's perfect law (as given to Israel). What Jesus did was apply an interpretation to the law which served a philosophical purpose.
1.You who apply the law aren't MORE righteous than the people you are condemning under the law.
2.Expecting mercy through ritual is inferior to human understanding of what forgiveness actually is.
The Jews were a people of ritual righteousness who did not contemplate the reality of social consciousness.
They were pretty much the same mentality as Muslims are today with knee-jerk sensibilities and no self-reflection. They see enemies and law breakers everywhere and demand blood. But, they fail to see themselves as objectively flawed.
The very concept of "fulfilling" a law is absurd
Not spiritually, and that's what Jesus did. The letter kills, the spirit makes alive.
Example, one law, of the 10, says do not covet, what really does that mean?
Jesus said that even if you only lust after another, you've commited the act.
Fulfilling the law involves more than the the things we do, but involves also the way we think, (repent = turn your mind around) we need to change the way we think.
One of the problems I see many have in trying to figure out what Jesus taught, is that they relie only on the bible as their source, but unfortunitly the bible is badly corrupted, even the early roman church fathers in their writings confirm that. But there are many other sources available to us, Nag Hammadi text, Dead sea scrolls... And others...Truth didn't start in Jesus time, but in the beginning of time.
Jesus said: Matt 7: 13 "Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. 14 But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.
Matt 7: 21 "Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22 Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?' 23 Then I will tell them plainly, 'I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!'
Paul said: Romans 10:13 13 for, "Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved."
Jesus showed there was effort involved, Paul removed all effort,
so he could get more adherents, which = $$$
I'll believe Jesus over the Apostate Paul any day.
Acadian
Terry, in Leviticus the Law of Moses is presented over and over as a covenant or pact between God and the Israelites (+vast mixed comapny and any proselytes that attached themselves to Judaism. "Covenant" was used interchangably with "Law" and Paul wrote that Christ fulfilled the Law and also wrote that he fulfilled the covenant. If the words in the Bible were his, he even made a compelling argument that there is no more need for a covenant after it has been fulfilled, but that the fulfilling of a covenant did nothing to minimize its importance while in force. Then he applied that specifically to the Law covenant as it pertained to Christ freeing them from Law.
The very concept of "fulfilling" a law is absurd.
A covenant (the terms of a contract binding each party) can be breached, broken, or fulfilled. Did you not know that was what the Law of Moses was? That isn't like a traffic law at all, is it?
Respectfully,
AuldSoul
The purpose of law is to guide by establishing acceptable and unacceptable behavior.
The law has served its purpose when it has been integrated into ones nature - through habit - (written on one's heart).
Jesus is alleged to be such a person.
Unfortunately the law of Moses was a wacky accumulation of traditions and practices of Middle Eastern Nomads.
Jesus cut through all of that by saying that there is basically one law which is to love.
I don't think Paul was out of harmony with that. Paul was dealing with political situations in various congregations. A lot of his actions were situational and we don't have the facts on the situations he was in.
Sure he was for depriving certain members of fellowship. What should a congregation do with a "child molester" for example.
Hold on buckeroos!
Don't confuse the Law of Moses with Paul's interpretation.
The two aren't the same!
Paul's theology is Neo-Platonism at its core. There is nothing Judaic in its reasoning.
So, first off we need to separate the two things to clarify our thinking.
1.The Law of Moses
2.Paul's interpretation of the "meaning" of the Law of Moses.
So, let us talk about #1 and not #2 for a moment, shall we?
Okay....
The Law of Moses was a law that required PHYSICAL compliance in order for PHYSICAL enforcement to follow.
Circumcision was physical. Stoning was physical. Slaughtering an ox was physical. Ritual cleansing was physical.
Can we all agree on that? Can we agree not to mix up what the law ACTUALLY CONSISTED OF with our highly-Pauline-influenced interpretations?
The very concept of "sin" is concerned with BEHAVIOR.
BEHAVIOR IS PHYSICAL.
Please note that it is Greek thinking (Plato) to mix the "ideal" into the physical realm and regard the physical as a mere shadowy manifestation of the divine world. Alexander the Great carried Greek thought (i.e. philosophy) into the Middle East. It had a shattering impact on Judaism. Their theology was never the same.
Jesus came AFTER the influence of Greek Philosophy and even the Greek language swallowed up Judaism. Few Jews could speak Hebrew when Jesus and Paul were on the scene! Even the scriptures (Hebrew!) were now Greek (Septuigent).
We cannot view THE LAW OF MOSES backward through the lens of Roman/Greek thinking and not color how we see and define the reality of what it was.
Agreed?
Okay....
The nation of Israel is a misnomer until we see the people united under the concept of a BINDING LAW. For a law to be binding it must carry enforcement. How a law is administered (penalty) determines how strong the law actually is.
Why would anybody agree to obey a law without penalty? The authority behind law enforcement is the power of penalty and reward.
Citizens don't drive 55 m.p.h. because it is morally superior behavior to do so. Citizens drive 55 m.p.h. because the posted speed limit is enforced by fines and insurance rate hikes!
So too in Israel.
The "authority" behind the Law of Moses was the notion (sold to the citizenry by Levites) that they weren't making up the silly rules themselves. They told the citizens that it came from GOD.
(A sidebar here: The Levites had a free ride with all the perks by officiating "on behalf" of God's law.)
The enforcement of these laws was the physical penalty of punishment which could consist of having your head bashed in with a rock by your neighbors, or your parents! That was the incentive to obey the law.
(Note: the Laws of Hammurabi are remarkably similar to the "divine" laws Moses came up with. Hammurabi's law pre-dates Moses. Just a co-incidence??? Hmmmmm....)
Back to my point.
The Law of Moses was physical in every manifestation worth considering. The superstitious elements kept the rituals alive.
It is a ridiculously easy thing to claim God approves what you are doing if you represent your priestly services as having come from God in the first place. Of what does a "blessing" consist when you come right down to it???
Anytime something goes wrong with your "blessing" you can be blamed for it because of the "covenant" aspect of the Blessing and the Malediction. To wit: you bring hardship on yourself; God cannot be blamed for your malady.
It was an illusory relationship between Israel and God. The real and genuine actuality was this: Judaism consisted of Levitical quid pro quo under the banner of service to God.
Why do you think Israel was always being enticed into worshipping idols instead of engaging in ritual sacrifices at the Temple of Jehovah?
The blessings didn't happen!! It was all smoke and mirrors! The promises were lies! Even a dullard would figure it couldn't hurt to at least try one of the local deities instead. What did they have to lose? Jehovah's wasn't giving them anything.
When Alexander the Great brought Platonic thought into the Middle East it was the psychological end of Judaism.
A series of re-thinks was constantly applied to the entire "meaning" of what it meant to be a Jew.
Jews and Judaism became......RATIONAL!! (At least a few of their great thinkers did.)
Jews realized that the Messianic aspect was the ONLY aspect that could bring blessings and results.
Do you know what I am saying?
ONLY THROUGH AN ACTUAL PERSON (Messiah, king, military leader who actually does something) would the Jews be able to acquire blessings of freedom and prosperity.
THE IDEAL was always that God would do it miraculously and it never happened. This only left the last resort of MAKING BLESSINGS HAPPEN through human agency and calling it a miracle.
That is the real meaning of the Messianic hope.
Jesus was only one of many such hopes that died by various ends.
It was the Greek Philosophy interpretation of what a Messiah was in Paul's speeches and writings that created an alternate way of dealing with all those centuries of failure that appealed to the Jews and Gentiles alike.
Paul "spiritualized" the promises and made them look like a great long-term solution rather than an abject failure.
The downtrodden who needed hope and miracles bought Paul's hokum.
And guess what? It has been re-re-interpreted over and over again by sects and branches of Christianity again and again. But, the kicker is this: WE DON'T GET ANY BLESSINGS!!
Why?
BECAUSE THE REWARDS ARE ALWAYS IN THE NEAR FUTURE.
The gimmick is the return of Jesus the Messiah. For the Jews it had been the "coming of the Messiah" and for Christians it is the "return of the Messiah".
Nothing ever happens!
Get it?
It is carrot and stick and nothing more.
The Jehovah's Witness brand of carrot and stick merely makes the reward (and possible punishment) seem more IMMINENT! End Times is a big market. A very big market. But, you have to keep it alive with vitality of promises and prophecies.
When they don't happen (1884, 1914, 1925, 1975) you just start all over again.
Now do you get it?
Terry
Terry,
What does the word "covenant" mean in modern Law? Do we also have a Law covenant? If so, in what way? Who are the parties to the covenant and what are the terms?
If you want to state that the Law of Moses can't be fulfilled, then you are stating automatically that it was not a covenant, which the law itself says it is. A covenant can be fulfilled, it is not like laws of today.
Exodus 19:3-6—And Moses went up unto God, and the LORD called unto him out of the mountain, saying, Thus shalt thou say to the house of Jacob, and tell the children of Israel; Ye have seen what I did unto the Egyptians, and how I bare you on eagles' wings, and brought you unto myself. Now therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people: for all the earth is mine: And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation. These are the words which thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel.
Trying to apply the standards of today's laws to the Jew's view of the Law Covenant is an attempt in ignoring 3,000 years of religio-political advances. It smacks of intellectual dishonesty, in my opinion. Unintentional, I am sure, however the issue remains one of historical context not fanciful application of modern day context superimposed onto a historical discussion. Just because what you say makes sense in modern times does not mean it would make sense at that time.
In fact, you could have been stoned as one who denied that the Messiah rescue the people as a new covenant. Or you could have been expelled from the synagogue in later times under Roman rule. Not based on Paul, but based on Isaiah:
Isaiah 42:1-7—Behold my servant, whom I uphold; mine elect, in whom my soul delighteth; I have put my spirit upon him: he shall bring forth judgment to the Gentiles. He shall not cry, nor lift up, nor cause his voice to be heard in the street. A bruised reed shall he not break, and the smoking flax shall he not quench: he shall bring forth judgment unto truth. He shall not fail nor be discouraged, till he have set judgment in the earth: and the isles shall wait for his law.
Thus saith God the LORD, he that created the heavens, and stretched them out; he that spread forth the earth, and that which cometh out of it; he that giveth breath unto the people upon it, and spirit to them that walk therein: I the LORD have called thee in righteousness, and will hold thine hand, and will keep thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people, for a light of the Gentiles; To open the blind eyes, to bring out the prisoners from the prison, and them that sit in darkness out of the prison house.
I really think you aren't considering the Scriptures in your discussion about the Scriptures.
Respectfully,
AuldSoul
If you want to state that the Law of Moses can't be fulfilled, then you are stating automatically that it was not a covenant, which the law itself says it is. A covenant can be fulfilled, it is not like laws of today.
IF......
...........THEN.
Unilateral covenant; one person agrees to act.
Bilateral covenant; two people interact.
The important consideration of the Law of Moses is its purpose.
The Law was not offered or accepted in order to TERMINATE upon complete observance.
The Law was offered and accepted to achieve two things (the BI in Bi-lateral)
1.God receives his worship in the way it pleases him to be worshipped.
2.Israel gets favoritism from God
The silly premise of Paul regarding Jesus is that Jesus made the law go away. Paul asserts this happened because the perfection of Jesus' sinlessness did away with the need for ritual behavior.
Nonsense!
This would mean ONLY BELIEF IN JESUS was necessary to restore God's favor to man and NOT BEHAVIOR as well.
Who would dispute that righteousness is behavior?
