Jesus and the Mosaic Law...

by mP 128 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

Deputy Dog

mP
... i thought you impllied they broke few ?
Jesus said his diciples were evil.
I believe they broke them all.
Jas 2:10
For whoever keeps the whole law but fails in one point has become accountable for all of it.
mP

mP
... i thought you impllied they broke few ?
DeputyDog:
Jesus said his diciples were evil.
I believe they broke them all.
Jas 2:10
For whoever keeps the whole law but fails in one point has become accountable for all of it.
MP:
You cant argue with logic like that. I guess ince i have broken a few parking laws, i must be guilty of murder and treason. Lucky i dont live in texas because i would be ready for the death penalty.
mP

MP: Firstly Jesus was quooting lev 19:18 when he said love thy neighbour.
http://www.jw.org/en/publications/bible/leviticus/19
‘You must not take vengeance nor have a grudge against the sons of your people; and you must love your fellow as yourself. I am Jehovah.
MP: The jews in the torah has exactly the same law and yet they could rape and had slaves.
Apog:
The point of the Samaritan parable was to answer the question, "But who really is my neighbor?" The commandment you quoted above only applied to fellow Jews. Jesus was encouraging the Jews to widen their concept of who could be their neighbor.
MP:
Im sorry his love thy neighbour was NOT new. I have shown he was quoting Leviticus. How can you say its new, if its a direct quote ? Again nowhere does Jesus say do this and ignore the Torah, as previously discussed he never cancels or repalces the Torah but merely quotes it.
Apog:
Taking slaves and stealing wives from foreign populations would no longer be acceptable under this new way of looking at things. Make no mistake, this was a revolutionary suggestion and it absolutely represented something new to the Jews. Sadly, it's a lesson that Israel still fails to apply to this day.
mP:
Im sorry i will accept and agree the parable of the good Samaritan is about being a good neighbour, however there is no implication or mention of slaves. They felt back then that slavery was perfectly fine and it was, because GOd instituted it in the Torah. No where does Jesus say anything to correct this evil.
Where does Jsus condemn slavery ?
mP

Apos:
Well, how are we defining pedophilia? Marrying a child? Perhaps, but usually people are referring to molestation of children, not simply marrying them. Molestation was obviously going against Jesus' whole message of love and didn't need a specific call-out. Who actually thinks molestation is okay and would believe that Jesus condoned it because he didn't specifically mention it?
MP:
Pedophilia was considered good back then. I have provided links that show entire societies were built up on it as the normal family way. We today have progresed and define many things as evil that were perfectly fine back then. Slavery and equality for women are perfect examples and pedophilia is yet another.
If your going to argue that love thy neighbours means no slavery then how to you explain moses and the torah who said exactly the same hting and had slaves ? This cannot be denied. Jesus was not introducing anything new, it was a one liner and thats it. The remainder of the gospel stories show that Jesus was perfectly compatible and respected the Torah and enver says he is replacing it.
Show me scriptures dont give me your escatology.
mP

MP: If you went back and studied the good Samaritan parable yoou will see that Jesus was extremely rude to the women
APOG:
Huh??? I was talking about the good Samaritan parable in Luke 10, told in response to a Jewish man's question to Jesus. You're apparently referring to the Canaanite woman in Matthew 15 and Mark 7, whose daughter was possessed. Jesus was known to test men and women, Jews and non-Jews with his words. Insulting it may have been, but when the woman responded humbly, he was moved and healed her daughter.
MP:
Sorry i was thinking of the sick Samaritan women who asks for help and later says she equtes herself with dogs taking the scraps fromt he floor after Jesus ignores her. I did a bad job of making this clear, apologies, but its good to see that your realise jesus was not that nice to women especially non jewish women.
Apognophos

If your going to argue that love thy neighbours means no slavery then how to you explain moses and the torah who said exactly the same hting and had slaves ? This cannot be denied. Jesus was not introducing anything new, it was a one liner and thats it. The remainder of the gospel stories show that Jesus was perfectly compatible and respected the Torah and enver says he is replacing it.
I already pointed out that Jesus went beyond the Law with his parable of the good Samaritan and said that all men were their "neighbors", not just Jews. Are you sure you don't want to read that account again? It's Luke 10:25-37. This expansion on the Law was something Jesus did multiple times, as PSacramento already explained to you in a few posts on page 4. Please take the time to read Matthew 5:21-48. Jesus did not abolish the Law, he expanded it to a new level but remained true to its divine principles.
That being said, I agree that Jesus didn't fully condemn slavery. What he did say clearly precludes fighting against another people and taking slaves from them, but Paul showed that the basic arrangement of having a slave was not forbidden by Jesus. It seems that if someone was already a slave, or came into servitude through financial debt, they were to remain in this arrangement even if the master and slave were Christian. I will say, though, that a Christian master would have to be kind to his slave. Also, not all slaves or servants in history had the same roles, so I hope you're not equating a household servant with a slave being forced to plow a field under the burning sun all day. But it's true that if Jesus had spoken clearly against slavery, Paul would not have been able to write what he did to Onesimus and Philemon.
but its good to see that your realise jesus was not that nice to women especially non jewish women.
I don't realize that at all. As I said, Jesus tested both men and women with his words. Remember when he turned away a whole crowd by telling them they had to eat of his flesh and drink of his blood? Do you know why he did that? It was to reveal what was in their hearts; they were only there to get fed or see a miracle, so they turned away in confusion and disgust, whereas Jesus' apostles remained because of their faith. Later, Jesus told Peter that he was Satan when he tried to dissuade Jesus from sacrificing himself. Those were stronger words than anything he spoke to a woman. Why are you getting offended by words that didn't even offend the people who were being spoken to? That's rather over-sensitive of you.
Ultimately, Jesus' actions speak louder than his words. He did heal (exorcise) the Canaanite woman's daughter after testing her humility. He also explicitly revealed himself as the Messiah for the first time when speaking to the Samaritan woman at the well. Sorry, but those are not the actions of someone who was "not that nice to women".
Deputy Dog

mP
You cant argue with logic like that.
That's not my "logic". That's just what the bible ( in this case, James brother Jesus) says. Your argument is with the bible not "my logic".
Lucky i dont live in texas because i would be ready for the death penalty.
Jesus was saying in Matt 5 ("will be liable to the hell of fire")it's worse than that. It doesn't matter where you live.
mP

APOG:
I already pointed out that Jesus went beyond the Law with his parable of the good Samaritan and said that all men were their "neighbors", not just Jews. Are you sure you don't want to read that account again?
MP:
Thats fine, but you also implied i believe that you cant have slaves and rape if you love your neighbour and i have shown that this is not true as per the Torah. Lev 19:18 says love your nieghtbour and afew pages away it says go rape and enslave them.
APOG:
t's Luke 10:25-37. This expansion on the Law was something Jesus did multiple times,
MP:
Ill repeat again, jesus did not say anything new, he was repeating selected portions of the OT. His love they neighbour is a word for word quote from Leviticus. He is not expanding hte law, he is quoting from it.
Where is the expansion, what exactly did he change if its a quote from Moses ?
mP

MP:but its good to see that your realise jesus was not that nice to women especially non jewish women.
APOG
I don't realize that at all. As I said, Jesus tested both men and women with his words. Remember when he turned away a whole crowd by telling them they had to eat of his flesh and drink of his blood? Do you know why he did that? It
MP:
What exactly is that point of being rude and walking away and almost ignoring the sick Samaritan simply because of her race ? What kind of example is that showing for everyone else ? AM i too ignore people in my community because of their race to test them for what exctly ? That example doesnt help anybody and is apologetic nonsense.
mP

APOG & PS
This expansion on the Law was something Jesus did multiple times, as PSacramento already explained to you in a few posts on page 4. Please take the time to read Matthew 5:21-48. Jesus did not abolish the Law, he expanded it to a new level but remained true to its divine principles.
MP:
Im sorry by quoting the law and say it doesnt need to be changed means he is endorsing it. This is of course troublesome because of hte broken parts that are cruel like slavery and rape. I hope you agree the only correct thing for Jesus to say was that Moses law was wrong and contained many evil components and he should have pointed them out. Failing to point them out to any degree is pathetic especially when he has hte time to encourage payment of taxes.
Just think how life was back then, half the population was a slave, many of the people in his audience were slaves, or perhaps some in the background were slaves. Many no doubt had bad masters, and perhaps had suffered a beating, a rape or knew of others that did. What kind of blindness does it take to completely ignore them ? How can someone preaching a message completely ignore the largest group of people in his audience ?
How can anyone possible say Jesus was good when meters away there was a slave who needed help or their freedom ? If you went back in time with a machine gun wouldnt you take the slave away and give them their freedom by force ? What is wrong with Jesus that he has the power and the authority but worries about paying tax to the rich romans ? YOu do realise that in Ancient Rome, Rich people bought the right to collect from an area. IF they paid the government a large sum, this means they would squeeze every last drop from their zone. Naturally they hired people like Matthew to get the job done.
So why is Jesus worried about the plight of these extremely rich people ? Is there any excuse for this evil ?

Jesus and the Mosaic Law...

Share this