Did Jesus say the God of the OT is not the same God as mine??

by Diogenesister 16 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  Diogenesister

  Bart Erhman states, in this You Tube short presumably taken from the video series he has been doing with Megan Lewis*, that Jesus said the God of the OT, the God of Jeremiah, is not the (same)God as Jesus. Bart continues "Jeremiah's God killed (the children) - Jesus said let the children come to me. Jesus' God said turn the other cheek" - the OT God was war-like etc (paraphrasing Bart here a bit).

  It's always been the thing that stopped my fully embracing the Bible after leaving Watchtower. I think it's true of many...who can help but love Jesus? But the OG of the OT?? Without the concept of "who can know his ways" etc etc, there's no defence of so much cruelty he dishes out. Erhman is correct, he couldn't be more different than Jesus. Unless I'm going nuts I don't remember Jesus saying this?! Did he say it somewhere else??

  https://youtube.com/shorts/x0mvLO6pDgo?feature=share
  

  *(B.Phil, M.A. Assyriology & Near Eastern Studies) Megan runs the channel Digital Hammurabi with Dr. Josh Bowen.
• 

  slimboyfat

  Matthew 22

  Marriage at the Resurrection

  23 That same day the Sadducees, who say there is no resurrection, came to him with a question.24 “Teacher,” they said, “Moses told us that if a man dies without having children, his brother must marry the widow and raise up offspring for him. 25 Now there were seven brothers among us. The first one married and died, and since he had no children, he left his wife to his brother. 26 The same thing happened to the second and third brother, right on down to the seventh. 27 Finally, the woman died. 28 Now then, at the resurrection, whose wife will she be of the seven, since all of them were married to her?”

  29 Jesus replied, “You are in error because you do not know the Scriptures or the power of God.30 At the resurrection people will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven. 31 But about the resurrection of the dead—have you not read what God said to you, 32 ‘I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob’? He is not the God of the dead but of the living.”
• 

  cofty

  who can help but love Jesus?

  Me.

  The challenge is trying to ignore centuries of xtian tradition about Jesus and see the person of the gospels.

  He was a failed apocalyptic prophet. He taught his followers to literally walk away from their wives children and businesses and follow him. He didn't mean what we do by 'follow'.

  He came to divide families. He was as convinced that the end would come in the lifetime of his disciples as the WT are about their apocalyptic ravings. He was a dangerous deluded fool.
• 

  pokertopia

  It's a matter of epistemology. When it rains, In view of farmer it's called blessing, but at the same time, In view of a daily worker it's a curse. Perception varies depending on their situation. Jesus recognized God as a father, and the people of Israel recognized God as one who sticks to the law, so they gave different evaluations of the same God
• 

  Diogenesister

  Thank you all for your replies.

  What do you think of Bart stating this, though? I just can't think why he said it (although clearly the two are very different).
• 

  Disillusioned JW

  Diogenesister, Bart now says that Jesus never considered himself to be God (nor even the Son of Man of heaven). Bart says that the original disciples of Jesus never considered Jesus to be God either.
  
• 

  LV101

  Never heard a farmer call rain a blessing -- my Dad called it survival but he didn't have time for religious indoctrination -- nor would he listen to it.
• 

  Diogenesister

  Diogenesister, Bart now says that Jesus never considered himself to be God (nor even the Son of Man of heaven). Bart says that the original disciples of Jesus never considered Jesus to be God either.

  Disillusioned JW I think Bart will become more and more divorced from orthodox Christian beliefs.... the closer he gets to retirement!!!
  
  
• 

  cofty

  Bart's views could not be further from orthodoxy. Always have been. Unless you go way back to his youth.
• 

  Diogenesister

  • Bart's views could not be further from orthodoxy. Always have been. Unless you go way back to his youth.

    Yes my little dig didn't make it clear he finds evidence sufficient for a 'historical Jesus' in the sense of one - or many - historical apocalyptic first century prophets with a very common first name.. Hardly enough for any believing Christian*.

    *But then how is that, in any real sense, being a historicist?? I'm sure that many historians who wouldn't claim to believe in a "historical Jesus' similarly wouldn't deny for a minute that there were loads of first century apocalyptic prophet's with the (very common) first name Joshua? I'm confused.....I don't understand why this gulf between academics of the two camps. There doesn't seem (to me) to be any real difference.

    Link Dislike Like