Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,819 Year: 3,076/9,624 Month: 921/1,588 Week: 104/223 Day: 2/13 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Christian Laws
Richh
Member (Idle past 3738 days)
Posts: 94
From: Long Island, New York
Joined: 07-21-2009


Message 271 of 392 (517085)
07-29-2009 12:19 PM
Reply to: Message 269 by John 10:10
07-28-2009 10:05 AM


A principle based on a law doesn't automatically make the principle a law.
Love you neighbor as yourself is supposedly the spirit of the Mosaic Laws, which are the details or the letter.
Is there a difference between a 'commandment' and a law?
Edited by Richh, : Trying to HTML the quote
Edited by Richh, : No reason given.
Edited by Richh, : No reason given.
Edited by Richh, : No reason given.
Edited by Richh, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 269 by John 10:10, posted 07-28-2009 10:05 AM John 10:10 has not replied

  
Richh
Member (Idle past 3738 days)
Posts: 94
From: Long Island, New York
Joined: 07-21-2009


Message 272 of 392 (517146)
07-29-2009 11:20 PM
Reply to: Message 268 by purpledawn
07-28-2009 7:07 AM


Re: Whats your list?
A principle based on a law doesn't automatically make the principle a law.
Love you neighbor as yourself is supposedly the spirit of the Mosaic Laws, which are the details or the letter.
Is there a difference between a 'commandment' and a law?
Edited by Richh, : I re-posted this as I intended to reply to purpledawn in 271.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 268 by purpledawn, posted 07-28-2009 7:07 AM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 273 by jaywill, posted 07-31-2009 4:06 AM Richh has not replied
 Message 275 by purpledawn, posted 07-31-2009 6:24 PM Richh has replied

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 273 of 392 (517313)
07-31-2009 4:06 AM
Reply to: Message 272 by Richh
07-29-2009 11:20 PM


Re: Whats your list?
I have been thinking about this. I am not sure there is any substantial difference between "a commandment" and "a law".
What does it mean that the grace of God is training us in Titus 2:11,12?
How is this related to the concept of "Christian laws" as proposed on this dicussion? Does keeping of laws require training if there are laws to be kept ?
If there are not laws to be kept, what is this training of the grace of God to the Christians?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 272 by Richh, posted 07-29-2009 11:20 PM Richh has not replied

  
Peg
Member (Idle past 4930 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 274 of 392 (517347)
07-31-2009 9:45 AM
Reply to: Message 268 by purpledawn
07-28-2009 7:07 AM


Re: Whats your list?
purpledawn writes:
Then we must know what laws are actually God's! List them!
i already provided several of them in msg 1
purpledawn writes:
From what you have shown so far, I still contend that Christianity today does not have a legal system. Specifically from Message 114: There are no Christian laws, there are only Christian principles derived from the spirit of the ancient writings and the experiences of people who have gone before.
what is the purpose of the christian writings, in your opinion?
purpledawn writes:
People, whether part of a religion or religion free, are required to follow the laws of the their country or countries they visit. How those laws are made vary by country. Christians should be pulling their principles of behavior from the spirit of the Bible writers. Specifically from Message 114: We look at what the authors are trying to tell their audience and bring that spirit forward when obeying the laws of our own individual nations all the way down to our communities and families.
Yes christians do have to obey their human leaders, thats another christian law. Yet some government laws are contrary to Gods. Some governments have forbid the reading of the bible for instance, some demand all subjects to enroll in the armies for a certain time, some have legalized abortion etc
Obviously not all government laws are acceptable by Gods standards, how is it christians know which ones are not acceptable if there are no christian laws?
purpledawn writes:
Since mankind changes and civilizations evolve, the spirit of the message is the most that can be applied to current situations. The letter of ancient laws don't automatically fit into a current culture. Even the laws of early America don't necessarily fit current American culture. Laws are constantly changing to adjust to the needs of a changing society.
that wasnt the case in Jesus day. He followed a 2,000 year old mosaic law code and taught his disciples to do so more fully. The laws he taught are now 2,000 years old yet they can still be applied to day in our modern culture.
purpledawn writes:
Provide the verse that deals with Paul's issue and I'll address it.
Paul and Silas broke a Roman law concerning customs and they were put in jail for it. This shows that they were not concerned with obeying the laws of the land, as much as they were with obeying Gods laws...specifically the command/law to preach and teach.
quote:
Acts 16:19
Well, when her masters saw that their hope of gain had left, they laid hold of Paul and Silas and dragged them into the marketplace to the rulers, 20and, leading them up to the civil magistrates, they said: These men are disturbing our city very much, they being Jews, 21and they are publishing customs that it is not lawful for us to take up or practice, seeing we are Romans. 22And the crowd rose up together against them; and the civil magistrates, after tearing the outer garments off them, gave the command to beat them with rods. 23After they had inflicted many blows upon them, they threw them into prison, ordering the jailer to keep them securely. 24Because he got such an order, he threw them into the inner prison and made their feet fast in the stocks.
purpledawn writes:
Some were Jewish laws and other were just general principles. You haven't been able to show why something is a legal law of God.
I know you believe the mosaic law code was a legal system of God...what made it such?
purpledawn writes:
Some Bible writers had authority to make laws and some didn't. So explain why these authors, known and unknown, have the authority to make a legal law? Inspiration is not authority.
from an educated persons standpoint, many of the Bible writers were not exceptional men. mostly they were very ordinary so its only right to question what makes their writings authoritive. I think its an important question because if they really did write from God, then what they wrote must be true. I will start a new thread for that topic.
purpledawn writes:
Love you neighbor as yourself is supposedly the spirit of the Mosaic Laws, which are the details or the letter.
If that principle is now a law, what then are the details or the letter?
Do we then go back to the ancient laws for the details?
Whether you like it or not a legal system does need to be specific so that all are clear on what is expected. No guesswork. Love is not specific. Abiding is not specific.
yes i see what you are saying about the 'details' not being apparent, but thats what principles are. If you look at the mosaic law, they were very specific laws for specific situations. Take a look at the 10 commandments though that God gave to Moses, they are all principles.
Eg 'Honor your father and your mother' This is a principle without any details.
now look at the details of one of the the mosaic law pertaining to honoring mother and father, Exodus 21:15And one who strikes his father and his mother is to be put to death without fail.
in this law, its clear that we should not hit our parents.
However the principle to 'honor them' covers ALL possible acts. We have to use our imaginations with principles, we have to use our intellect, our understanding and our reasoning abilities. What constitutes 'honor' and what constitutes 'dishonor'
This is how the law becomes written on our hearts...its by our application of the principles, without the need for details. God has said that he will write his laws on our hearts and this can only be done through principles because they cover every possible scenario and when we apply a principle, we are doing it of our own accord because our own conscience tells us to. IOW we've made our own decision to act, nobody told us to do it, and no detailed law told us to do it...we did it ourselves because the law is written within.
Edited by Peg, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 268 by purpledawn, posted 07-28-2009 7:07 AM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 276 by purpledawn, posted 07-31-2009 8:06 PM Peg has not replied
 Message 277 by purpledawn, posted 07-31-2009 9:04 PM Peg has replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3458 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 275 of 392 (517427)
07-31-2009 6:24 PM
Reply to: Message 272 by Richh
07-29-2009 11:20 PM


Re: Whats your list?
A law: a binding custom or practice of a community : a rule of conduct or action prescribed or formally recognized as binding or enforced by a controlling authority Message 6
A command: 1 a: an order given
a: the ability to control: mastery b: the authority or right to command c (1): the power to dominate
A commandment: 1: the act or power of commanding
2: something that is commanded
A law may be a commandment, but a commandment isn't automatically a law.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 272 by Richh, posted 07-29-2009 11:20 PM Richh has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 287 by Richh, posted 08-03-2009 10:14 PM purpledawn has replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3458 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 276 of 392 (517438)
07-31-2009 8:06 PM
Reply to: Message 274 by Peg
07-31-2009 9:45 AM


Re: Whats your list?
quote:
purpledawn writes:
Then we must know what laws are actually God's! List them!
i already provided several of them in Message 1.
But you haven't given clear support that they are legal laws and that they are from God.
1. John 13:34 - Message 6
PurpleDawn writes:
1. Jesus is talking to his 11 disciples after Judas left and seems to mean amongst themselves, not necessarily others.
2. The verb "love" as used today carries a more limited meaning ( to hold dear) than the Greek "agapa" seems to carry. (to welcome, to entertain, to be fond of, to love dearly). Christian view of agape: In the New Testament, agap is charitable, selfless, altruistic, and unconditional. It is parental love, seen as creating goodness in the world; it is the way God is seen to love humanity, and it is seen as the kind of love that Christians aspire to have for one another. The Christian version is amongst Christians, not necessarily all mankind.
3. We don't really know how Jesus "loved" his disciples. There are no specifics for people to know what they are being judged against.
Peg writes:
Message 21
1. Jesus had more then just his 12 apostles as followers. The fact that Jesus commissioned the apostles to teach and baptize shows that it extended to all mankind.
2. The invitation goes out to all mankind. christianity isnt limited to one race. Its for all mankind and its extended to all mankind.
3. At John 15:13 Jesus said "No one has love [agpe] greater than this, that someone should surrender his soul in behalf of his friends. You are my friends if you do what I am commanding you."
2. Galatians 6:2 - Message 12
PurpleDawn writes:
Again you need to be specific. The law of Christ doesn't really mean anything if there isn't really any legal law. There is law of sin, law of death, law of the spirit, etc. These aren't legal laws.
This verse seems to refer more to a principle as opposed to an enforcable law. Paul is telling those who are spiritually strong to help those who are not. He said should, not must.
Peg writes:
Message 22
this verse in galatians shows that the 'law of the Christ' is closely aligned with love. 'Go on carrying the burdens of one another'
The way they treated each other would determine whether they were fulfilling the Law of Christ or not.
3. 1 John 4:21 - Message 13
4. 1 John 3:23 - Message 13
PurpleDawn writes:
These two fall under the love your neighbor rule.
5. Matt 28:18 - Message 13
PurpleDawn writes:
So what is the law? Jesus gave his disciples a job. This has nothing to do with us.
The disciples were supposed to teach people to obey everything Jesus had commanded them. Since the disciples didn't teach Paul, it is hard to say what the disciples taught the Jews or if they did their job.
Peg writes:
Message 25
The job that Jesus gave his diciples was to make more diciples by teaching and baptizing them.
All first century christians were evangelizers.
Peter said at 2:21In fact, to this [course] YOU were called, because even Christ suffered for YOU, leaving YOU a model for YOU to follow his steps closely.
Jesus was primarily a preacher. He taught people about Gods Kingdom. So a follower of Christ would also do this same work of evangelizing. The Apostles role was to teach all the disciples how to be preachers.
6. Eph 5:33 - Message 16
PurpleDawn writes:
Again the love one another scenerio. These, as the others, may be specifications under the love one another verse, but are they to be enforced by God?
Peg writes:
they certainly will be enforced by God and for good reason.
1 John 4:20, 21 "If anyone makes the statement: 'I love God,' and yet is hating his brother, he is a liar. For he who does not love his brother, whom he has seen, cannot be loving God, whom he has not seen. And this commandment wehave from him, that the one who loves God should be loving his brother also.
7. Acts 15:28 Message 15
8. Eph 4:29 - Message 16 (Same as #6.)
9. Romans 13:13 - Message 16
PurpleDawn writes:
What makes this a legal law?
Peg writes:
Message 23
this is a law because "for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authroities that exist have been established by God."
If we refuse to obey the civil authorities, then we are not recognizing the authority God has allowed them to have.
However, obedience is conditional. You may recall Jesus words "Pay therefore Caesars things to Caesar, But Gods things to God" Matt 22:15-21
this balances just how much obedience we give to the civil authorities. If a civil authority required something of us that was contrary to Gods laws, then we must 'Obey God as ruler rather then men' Acts 5:27-29...
10. 1 Timothy 3:3-12 - Message 16
PurpleDawn writes:
These are requirements for overseers and deacons in the early churches. What makes it a legal law that people are held account to before God?
Peg writes:
Message 23
notice how 'women' are included in that list....this shows that these requirements are not only for Overseers in the congregation, but for all christians in the congregation. they all were expected to abide by the laws and principles of the faith.
None of these writers claim to speak for God.
What makes these legal laws for every Christian today and what shows that they are from God?

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

This message is a reply to:
 Message 274 by Peg, posted 07-31-2009 9:45 AM Peg has not replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3458 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 277 of 392 (517441)
07-31-2009 9:04 PM
Reply to: Message 274 by Peg
07-31-2009 9:45 AM


Re: Whats your list?
quote:
what is the purpose of the christian writings, in your opinion?
Generally to promote their belief system. Specifically each writer had a purpose specific to their audience.
quote:
Yes christians do have to obey their human leaders, thats another christian law. Yet some government laws are contrary to Gods. Some governments have forbid the reading of the bible for instance, some demand all subjects to enroll in the armies for a certain time, some have legalized abortion etc
Obviously not all government laws are acceptable by Gods standards, how is it christians know which ones are not acceptable if there are no christian laws?
Again, to know that government laws are contrary to God's laws, we need to know what God's laws are specifically.
Then you should have no problem listing the Christian Laws.
Basically Christian Clergy are picking and choosing from the OT, sprinkling in some NT principles and religious leaders decide what is acceptable for their group.
quote:
that wasnt the case in Jesus day. He followed a 2,000 year old mosaic law code and taught his disciples to do so more fully. The laws he taught are now 2,000 years old yet they can still be applied to day in our modern culture.
Jesus also followed the Oral Law, whether you like it or not. The actual laws that Jesus taught were Jewish and I have shown you that already. He taught the Jewish law.
quote:
Paul and Silas broke a Roman law concerning customs and they were put in jail for it. This shows that they were not concerned with obeying the laws of the land, as much as they were with obeying Gods laws...specifically the command/law to preach and teach.
Where is the law from God that all Christian must preach and teach?
They may not have been concerned, but were they held accountable by God for disobeying the authorities? If not, why?
quote:
in this law, its clear that we should not hit our parents.
However the principle to 'honor them' covers ALL possible acts. We have to use our imaginations with principles, we have to use our intellect, our understanding and our reasoning abilities. What constitutes 'honor' and what constitutes 'dishonor'
Which goes along with what I've been saying: ...there are only Christian principles derived from the spirit of the ancient writings and the experiences of people who have gone before.
quote:
This is how the law becomes written on our hearts...its by our application of the principles, without the need for details. God has said that he will write his laws on our hearts and this can only be done through principles because they cover every possible scenario and when we apply a principle, we are doing it of our own accord because our own conscience tells us to. IOW we've made our own decision to act, nobody told us to do it, and no detailed law told us to do it...we did it ourselves because the law is written within.
IOW, Christians make up their own "laws". The problem with that is that it isn't consistent from Christian to Christian, from Protestant group to Protestant group, or from Catholic to Catholic.
There's nothing to guarantee that you have it right or that any Christian group has it all right.

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

This message is a reply to:
 Message 274 by Peg, posted 07-31-2009 9:45 AM Peg has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 278 by Peg, posted 07-31-2009 11:43 PM purpledawn has replied
 Message 279 by LucyTheApe, posted 08-01-2009 2:32 AM purpledawn has replied

  
Peg
Member (Idle past 4930 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 278 of 392 (517452)
07-31-2009 11:43 PM
Reply to: Message 277 by purpledawn
07-31-2009 9:04 PM


Re: Whats your list?
purpledawn writes:
Jesus also followed the Oral Law, whether you like it or not. The actual laws that Jesus taught were Jewish and I have shown you that already. He taught the Jewish law.
I agree he followed the Jewish laws, but I would like you to show me how he followed the 'oral' law. they are not one in the same.
The 'oral' laws were traditions added to the mosaic laws...eg the mosaic law required the washing of hands before eating a meal, however the oral law stated that a person should wash right up to the elbows.
The mosaic law said that no work was to be carried out on the sabbath, but the oral law stated what 'constituted' work. EG, It said that because doctors prescribed vinegar to patients who had a toothache, no one could use vinegar on the sabbath to heal his toothache becauase it constituted 'work'.
this is what the oral law was. It was additions to the mosaic law. So you'll need to provide me with some evidence to show that Jesus prescribed to the oral laws because my understanding is that the bible shows he only followed the mosaic law.
purpledawn writes:
Where is the law from God that all Christian must preach and teach?
They may not have been concerned, but were they held accountable by God for disobeying the authorities? If not, why?
the command was given by Jesus to his 12 disciples at Matthew 10:5-7 & Math 28:19-20. The command to preach was carried out by the apostles and non apostles as can be seen by the missionary tours of Paul and the disciples who went along with them.
Paul and Silas certainly wasnt held accountable for disobeying the authorities, rather they were miraculously released and the jailer who witnessed the event became a baptized believer. So God was still using them and blessing them in their evangelizing work.
purpledawn writes:
There's nothing to guarantee that you have it right or that any Christian group has it all right.
this is precicely why every christian needs to take responsibility for the way they apply the principles in their own lives. but to apply them, we must understand them. "Each of us will render an account for himself to God." said Paul at Romans 14:12. There is no room for sitting back in church and being told what we can and cant do. We need to know the bible, we need to know how Jesus lived, we need to know what the directions were from the Apostles with regard to our worship because all of it constitutes what God legally requires from us.
And ultimately he is the one who will be judging us so we need to try to get it right.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 277 by purpledawn, posted 07-31-2009 9:04 PM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 280 by purpledawn, posted 08-01-2009 8:55 AM Peg has replied

  
LucyTheApe
Inactive Member


Message 279 of 392 (517459)
08-01-2009 2:32 AM
Reply to: Message 277 by purpledawn
07-31-2009 9:04 PM


Re: Whats your list?
purpeldawn writes:
Then you should have no problem listing the Christian Laws.
There are really only two christian laws:

  • Love God with all your heart, soul and with all your mind.
  • Love one another.
It's no menial task. It's not easy to do. It is a trial.
purpledawn writes:
Jesus also followed the Oral Law, whether you like it or not. The actual laws that Jesus taught were Jewish and I have shown you that already. He taught the Jewish law.
Jesus in fact removed himself from the Jewish Law. He hated the Jewish Law, it was those priests that sent him to his death.
It was traumatic for God to maintain his word through the Jewish people but he had to do it somehow.
purpledawn writes:
IOW, Christians make up their own "laws". The problem with that is that it isn't consistent from Christian to Christian, from Protestant group to Protestant group, or from Catholic to Catholic.
Jesus can reveal himself in any number of ways. God guarantees that his Word will outlive the present world. What other prophecy has lasted for 6 thousand years and continuing?

There no doubt exist natural laws, but once this fine reason of ours was corrupted, it corrupted everything.
blz paskal

This message is a reply to:
 Message 277 by purpledawn, posted 07-31-2009 9:04 PM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 281 by purpledawn, posted 08-01-2009 9:07 AM LucyTheApe has not replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3458 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 280 of 392 (517517)
08-01-2009 8:55 AM
Reply to: Message 278 by Peg
07-31-2009 11:43 PM


Re: Whats your list?
quote:
I agree he followed the Jewish laws, but I would like you to show me how he followed the 'oral' law. they are not one in the same.
Did that in Message 89. Read the article entitled "The Oral Torah and the Messianic Jew".
Jewish Law includes the oral and Mosaic Laws. Halakha
quote:
The 'oral' laws were traditions added to the mosaic laws...eg the mosaic law required the washing of hands before eating a meal, however the oral law stated that a person should wash right up to the elbows.
Where does it say in the Mosaic Law that everyone is to wash their hands before eating a meal? I don't see that hand washing before each meal for the general populace is in the Mosaic Laws.
As I said in Message 104, the Oral Torah also by tradition came from God to Moses. The Oral Torah is supposedly the interpretation of the written law.
Many verses in the Torah, require interpretation. Some even presuppose that the reader understands what is being referred to. Many terms used in the Torah are totally undefined, and many procedures are mentioned without explanation or instructions, assuming familiarity on the part of the reader. Some examples are listed below.
The discussion of shechita (kosher slaughter) in Deuteronomy 12 states "you shall kill of your herd and of your flock which God Lord has given you, as I have commanded you," but the Torah does not record an earlier commandment.
So what is your point concerning the topic?
quote:
the command was given by Jesus to his 12 disciples at Matthew 10:5-7 & Math 28:19-20. The command to preach was carried out by the apostles and non apostles as can be seen by the missionary tours of Paul and the disciples who went along with them.
How is a command to a specific group of men a law for all people throughout time? As I said, a law may be a command, but a command is not automatically a law.
quote:
Paul and Silas certainly wasnt held accountable for disobeying the authorities, rather they were miraculously released and the jailer who witnessed the event became a baptized believer. So God was still using them and blessing them in their evangelizing work.
The author of Acts apparently likes jailbreaks.
This story like the earlier one in Acts (Chapter 5) concerning the apostles isn't really about breaking a law. The Apostles didn't break a local law and Paul and Silas didn't actually break a local law. Just as the Sadducees brought the apostles in because they were jealous according to the story, the owner of the slave girl turned in Paul and Silas because they ruined his means of income (Acts 16:19).
I don't think either of these stories shows the followers broke local laws, but that the locals and local authorities were less than truthful about the actions of the followers.
I don't feel these stories support the idea that the followers of Jesus did not abide by local laws or that God condones breaking local laws.
quote:
this is precicely why every christian needs to take responsibility for the way they apply the principles in their own lives. but to apply them, we must understand them. "Each of us will render an account for himself to God." said Paul at Romans 14:12. There is no room for sitting back in church and being told what we can and cant do. We need to know the bible, we need to know how Jesus lived, we need to know what the directions were from the Apostles with regard to our worship because all of it constitutes what God legally requires from us.
And ultimately he is the one who will be judging us so we need to try to get it right.
So everyone interprets as they see fit. Only when we face God will we know if we got it right. Not really a good plan from a fair and just God.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 278 by Peg, posted 07-31-2009 11:43 PM Peg has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 282 by Peg, posted 08-01-2009 9:54 AM purpledawn has replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3458 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 281 of 392 (517521)
08-01-2009 9:07 AM
Reply to: Message 279 by LucyTheApe
08-01-2009 2:32 AM


Re: Whats your list?
quote:
There are really only two christian laws:
* Love God with all your heart, soul and with all your mind.
* Love one another.
What makes them actual laws, as opposed to just principles of behavior to better enable individuals to follow laws.
quote:
Jesus in fact removed himself from the Jewish Law. He hated the Jewish Law, it was those priests that sent him to his death.
Please show support for this statement.
quote:
Jesus can reveal himself in any number of ways. God guarantees that his Word will outlive the present world. What other prophecy has lasted for 6 thousand years and continuing?
Still doesn't show consistency or fairness. So what is the point concerning Christian laws?

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

This message is a reply to:
 Message 279 by LucyTheApe, posted 08-01-2009 2:32 AM LucyTheApe has not replied

  
Peg
Member (Idle past 4930 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 282 of 392 (517524)
08-01-2009 9:54 AM
Reply to: Message 280 by purpledawn
08-01-2009 8:55 AM


about the oral law
purpledawn writes:
Read the article entitled "The Oral Torah and the Messianic Jew". Jewish Law includes the oral and Mosaic Laws
I just want to point out that the 'oral law' had nothing to do with Moses. It was a concept that only developed a few centuries before our common era. The belief was that God gave two Laws to Moses, one written and one oral. The Pharisees promoted the idea and the Sadducees and the Essenes opposed it.
When Rome destroyed jerusalems temple in 70CE, the Pharisees were the only sect that survived. There was no longer a Sadduceean priesthood so the Pharisees had control and chose tradition and interpretation, aka 'the oral law' to superceed the written Mosaic Law. This is what led to the Mishnah and Talmud being written and used in Judaism.
Purpledawn, the point is that the Talmud and Mishnah did not exist in Jesus day. How can you claim that Jesus followed something that did not exist. He read and followed the Mosaic law (hebrew scriptures) The Mishna and Talmud were not part of the Hebrew scriptures in the first century.
You know what they mean when they say the 'oral law was given to moses by tradition'....it was a belief by some and nothing more. Most jews of the time rejected the idea outright.
purpledawn writes:
How is a command to a specific group of men a law for all people throughout time? As I said, a law may be a command, but a command is not automatically a law.
the command to preach was first given to the apostles, but it was extended to the disciples as the gospel records that a group of 70 disciples went preaching two by two's. That group were sent out by Jesus to preach. (Luke 10:1) Just before that passage at the end of Luke 9, there is one man who says' to Jesus 'permit me first to go and bury my father then I will become your disciple' and Jesus reply was "Let the dead bury their dead, but you go into the city and declare abroad the kingdom of God"
So the command was clear, and it wasnt just for the 12 apostles to do the preaching, it was for all the disciples and all future christians.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 280 by purpledawn, posted 08-01-2009 8:55 AM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 283 by purpledawn, posted 08-01-2009 12:02 PM Peg has replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3458 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 283 of 392 (517546)
08-01-2009 12:02 PM
Reply to: Message 282 by Peg
08-01-2009 9:54 AM


Re: about the oral law
quote:
Purpledawn, the point is that the Talmud and Mishnah did not exist in Jesus day. How can you claim that Jesus followed something that did not exist. He read and followed the Mosaic law (hebrew scriptures) The Mishna and Talmud were not part of the Hebrew scriptures in the first century
They didn't exist as written documents, but supposedly they did exist as an oral tradition. I can't refer to an ancient oral tradition, I can only refer to the written version and what is considered to have been in place at that time. ABE: Halakhah: Jewish Law
You also can't prove what was and wasn't included in the ancient oral tradition. You can only point to what has been written about the oral tradition.
quote:
You know what they mean when they say the 'oral law was given to moses by tradition'....it was a belief by some and nothing more. Most jews of the time rejected the idea outright.
Tradition also says that Moses wrote the first five books. If you accept one, why not the other?
You don't like it when I discuss the reality of the Bible writings, you want to stick with tradition; but when I try to go with the tradition you want to look at reality. Please be consistent within a discussion.
Reality is that Ezra probably wrote the Laws of Moses.
Ezra is credited, by Jewish tradition, with the compilation of the books of the Old Testament. In this ancient apocryphal acount of 2nd Esdras, or 4th Ezra, the books of the Old Testament are not only said to be put together by Ezra, but actually "channeled", or written by him! If this account is not historically accurate, it is at least allegorically correct in its assertion that some redactor, about the time of Ezra, wrote down a hodge podge of religious traditions and cultic practices and called it the "Law of Moses".
Ezra had authority given to him by man, but did he have authority given to him by God?
quote:
So the command was clear, and it wasnt just for the 12 apostles to do the preaching, it was for all the disciples and all future christians.
The first incident you quoted was for the 12. The second you quoted was for the 70 people. The commands were for the specific individuals at the time. The verses do not support the idea that the command reaches into the future.
Edited by purpledawn, : ABE: Halakhah: Jewish Law

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

This message is a reply to:
 Message 282 by Peg, posted 08-01-2009 9:54 AM Peg has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 284 by Peg, posted 08-03-2009 3:54 AM purpledawn has replied

  
Peg
Member (Idle past 4930 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 284 of 392 (517880)
08-03-2009 3:54 AM
Reply to: Message 283 by purpledawn
08-01-2009 12:02 PM


Re: about the oral law
purpledawn writes:
You also can't prove what was and wasn't included in the ancient oral tradition. You can only point to what has been written about the oral tradition.
i can prove that the writers of the Hebrew Scriptures knew nothing of the oral law...im pretty sure they didnt make one single mention of it and The priestly sect of the Saducees did not accept it at all.
Why do you think the Priestly class, the ones who were entrusted with relaying the law, refused to accept the oral law?
if it really came from God, they would have written it down the way the Pharisees wrote it down after the destruction of the temple in 70ce.
purpledawn writes:
Tradition also says that Moses wrote the first five books. If you accept one, why not the other?
we dont need 'tradition' to know who the writer of the law was...he identifies himself in the books he wrote. Thats the difference.
purpledawn writes:
You don't like it when I discuss the reality of the Bible writings, you want to stick with tradition; but when I try to go with the tradition you want to look at reality. Please be consistent within a discussion.
Reality is that Ezra probably wrote the Laws of Moses.
lol our discussions do go around in circles at times i'll admit. The problem is that you take you 'reality' from modern jewish sources and I take my reality from the bible.
They cant both be right.
The information you linked there about Ezra is quite inaccurate.
Its correct in that Ezra did write the law of moses...but wrong in that Ezra was the author, He didnt create a new book, he was a skilled copyist of the law.
Actually if you read the bible you would see that in 642BCE, an original copy of the 'law of Moses' was discovered in the temple at Jerusalem. It had been preserved for 871 years in . Ezra made reference to the same incident of the book being found at 2Chronicles 34:14-18. This proves that the original 'Law of Moses' was still around in Ezra's time 500's BCE...he didnt need to create a new law.
purpledawn writes:
The first incident you quoted was for the 12. The second you quoted was for the 70 people. The commands were for the specific individuals at the time. The verses do not support the idea that the command reaches into the future.
sure, it may not seem that way on face value...however the outcome of the preaching work was that it would be preached in ALL the earth in the time of the end. That 'time of the end' was a future time...its still a future time today and the kingdom message continues to spread right around the earth. There is not a nation on earth today who do not have access to a bible. This shows that the good news is being preached in all the inhabited earth for a witness to all the nations...
Matthew 24:14,19"This good news of the kingdom will be preached in all the inhabited earth for a witness to all the nations; and then the end will come... Go therefore and make disciples of people of all the nations, baptizing them"
and when the preaching work is complete, then the end will come
Edited by Peg, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 283 by purpledawn, posted 08-01-2009 12:02 PM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 285 by purpledawn, posted 08-03-2009 6:31 AM Peg has replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3458 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 285 of 392 (517888)
08-03-2009 6:31 AM
Reply to: Message 284 by Peg
08-03-2009 3:54 AM


Re: about the oral law
quote:
i can prove that the writers of the Hebrew Scriptures knew nothing of the oral law...im pretty sure they didnt make one single mention of it and The priestly sect of the Saducees did not accept it at all.
I didn't say the writers of the Hebrew Scriptures knew anything about the oral law. I agree the oral law came about after Ezra wrote the "laws of Moses" or when the rabbinic era started. I agree the Sadducees did not accept the oral law. We were talking about Jesus. The oral law was around at that time. Since it wasn't written down at that time, we can't know what was included at the time. All we have is what was written down concerning the oral law. Please keep on track.
quote:
if it really came from God, they would have written it down the way the Pharisees wrote it down after the destruction of the temple in 70ce.
Not if they believe God told them not to, which is what they believed.
quote:
we dont need 'tradition' to know who the writer of the law was...he identifies himself in the books he wrote. Thats the difference.
Sure you do. I've already shown you that Moses didn't write the Mosaic Laws in Message 283. Ezra did.
Laws of Moses.
Ezra is credited, by Jewish tradition, with the compilation of the books of the Old Testament. In this ancient apocryphal acount of 2nd Esdras, or 4th Ezra, the books of the Old Testament are not only said to be put together by Ezra, but actually "channeled", or written by him! If this account is not historically accurate, it is at least allegorically correct in its assertion that some redactor, about the time of Ezra, wrote down a hodge podge of religious traditions and cultic practices and called it the "Law of Moses".
A story about Moses doesn't mean he wrote it. Exodus has about 4 different authors. If you follow Jewish tradition that Moses wrote the first five books, then you should follow the Jewish Tradition that the oral law was given to Moses.
quote:
Actually if you read the bible you would see that in 642 BCE, an original copy of the 'law of Moses' was discovered in the temple at Jerusalem. It had been preserved for 871 years in . Ezra made reference to the same incident of the book being found at 2 Chronicles 34:14-18. This proves that the original 'Law of Moses' was still around in Ezra's time 500's BCE...he didnt need to create a new law.
Please follow through. Yes the Book of the Law was found. Notice at the end of 2 Chronicles we have the fall of Jerusalem. Destruction, fire, theft, ... In 4 Ezra 14:21 the author notes that that law had been destroyed.
[21] For thy law is burnt, therefore no man knoweth the things that are done of thee, or the work that shall begin.
In the book entitled "A History of the Jews" by Paul Johnson, Johnson notes that intellectual Jewish Reformers, about 170 bce, understood that the Law they had was not very old and did not go back to the time of Moses. (Page 101)
What is your point concerning the Christian Laws?
quote:
sure, it may not seem that way on face value...however the outcome of the preaching work was that it would be preached in ALL the earth in the time of the end. That 'time of the end' was a future time...its still a future time today and the kingdom message continues to spread right around the earth. There is not a nation on earth today who do not have access to a bible. This shows that the good news is being preached in all the inhabited earth for a witness to all the nations...
Matthew 24:14,19 "This good news of the kingdom will be preached in all the inhabited earth for a witness to all the nations; and then the end will come... Go therefore and make disciples of people of all the nations, baptizing them"
and when the preaching work is complete, then the end will come
When you change the plain text reading, you are creating your own story and changing the command. What authority do you have to change God's commands.
Quite frankly, if you can change the command(s) at your whim, it's not a law.

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

This message is a reply to:
 Message 284 by Peg, posted 08-03-2009 3:54 AM Peg has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 286 by Peg, posted 08-03-2009 9:18 PM purpledawn has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024