Summations Only

I don't disagree with that, but I don't see how that relates to what you said in your post 147. How is what Jesus said not true?I think the concept of the high image of Himself comes from our earthly perspective. Yes Jesus says that He is the one anointed by God but His message is that is anointed by God as he has been given the job of serving God and people. He isn't saying that He is anointed by God because He is wonderful but that He is anointed because God the Father is wonderful and that God has called Him to be the servant of all.As it says in Matthew 20:

quote:

---

26Not so with you. Instead, whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant,27and whoever wants to be first must be your slave--28just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many."

---

Also of course that was the point of washing the disciples feet, a job done by the lowest of servants.

quote:

---

I don't disagree with that, but I don't see how that relates to what you said in your post 147. How is what Jesus said not true?

---

Because - according to you - Jesus said they they disagreed with Deuteronomy. But they don't. They just disagree with Jesus.

You said earlier: That is what I was querying. I can't see where I have said that anything that Jesus said wasn't true.He is essentially saying that they are looking in the right places but they are not understanding it in the right way. He is saying that if they truly understood and believed what Moses was saying that they would believe Him, (Jesus), because Moses was referring to Him.

quote:

---

That is what I was querying. I can't see where I have said that anything that Jesus said wasn't true.

---

But you've agreed that it WASN'T true.

quote:

---

He is essentially saying that they are looking in the right places but they are not understanding it in the right way. He is saying that if they truly understood and believed what Moses was saying that they would believe Him, (Jesus), because Moses was referring to Him.

---

For that to be true there would have to be something that - correctly interpreted - pointed to Jesus in those verses. But there isn't. The only thing that the Pharisees disagree with is Jesus' claim that it is about him - but that is not even hinted at in the text.

We seem to be talking past each other because I don't know what it is that you are saying that I agreed wasn't true.I siad that Jesus was saying that if they understood the verses in Deuteronomy correctly they would understand that it is about Him. We just disagree on that as does Jesus according to the book of John and Luke according to the book of Acts. Actually we don't get a response when Jesus makes that claim but I think we are safe in assuming that they would disagree. Jesus certainly implies that.

quote:

---

We seem to be talking past each other because I don't know what it is that you are saying that I agreed wasn't true.

---

That the Pharisees don't believe Moses, obviously.

quote:

---

I siad that Jesus was saying that if they understood the verses in Deuteronomy correctly they would understand that it is about Him.

---

If you are claiming that there is something in those verses that identifies Jesus then produce it. If you are not, then the Pharisees aren't disagreeing with anything in the text and Jesus is wrong to say that they are.

Well I'm sure the Pharisees would argue that they believed Moses but Jesus is saying that they don't believe the truth of what Moses is saying. OK Here again is Deuteronomy 18.

quote:

---

15 "The LORD your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among you, from your brethren--him you shall heed-- 16 just as you desired of the LORD your God at Horeb on the day of the assembly, when you said, 'Let me not hear again the voice of the LORD my God, or see this great fire any more, lest I die.' 17 And the LORD said to me, 'They have rightly said all that they have spoken. 18 I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their brethren; and I will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I command him. 19 And whoever will not give heed to my words which he shall speak in my name, I myself will require it of him.

---

Can I definitively say that this is about Jesus? No. It appears that Jesus believed that it was referring to him and so did Luke when he wrote Acts 3.

quote:

---

22 Moses said, 'The Lord God will raise up for you a prophet from your brethren as he raised me up. You shall listen to him in whatever he tells you. 23 And it shall be that every soul that does not listen to that prophet shall be destroyed from the people.' 24 And all the prophets who have spoken, from Samuel and those who came afterwards, also proclaimed these days. 25 You are the sons of the prophets and of the covenant which God gave to your fathers, saying to Abraham, 'And in your posterity shall all the families of the earth be blessed.' 26 God, having raised up his servant, sent him to you first, to bless you in turning every one of you from your wickedness."

---

If you choose to say that it doesn't refer to Jesus then that's fine. It appears that the writers believed it was and so they may have been mistaken. It appears Jesus believed it if indeed He was even quoted correctly. I agree that this isn’t knowledge in the sense that there is any kind of objective proof. Objectively we know that The Bible exists and we don’t seem to disagree on what it says, however we subjectively come to our conclusions about what we believe and don’t believe about it and in this case it appears we have come to different conclusions.We are kinda off topic here but as it is a discussion about how to interpret something from the Bible I suppose it does fit into the discussion of how we should understand the scriptures.

quote:

---

Well I'm sure the Pharisees would argue that they believed Moses but Jesus is saying that they don't believe the truth of what Moses is saying.

---

Unless there is something actually in those verses that the Pharisees don't believe then they would be right and Jesus would be wrong.

quote:

---

Can I definitively say that this is about Jesus? No. It appears that Jesus believed that it was referring to him and so did Luke when he wrote Acts 3.

---

The question is not whether it is definitively about Jesus, the question is whether there is any part of it that the Pharisees didn't believe. Apparently the answer is no - they just disagreed with Jesus' claim that it was about him. In that case Jesus is wrong - it's him they won't believe, not Moses.

quote:

---

If you choose to say that it doesn't refer to Jesus then that's fine.

---

It's not what I say that matters, it's what Deuteronomy says.

quote:

---

It appears that the writers believed it was and so they may have been mistaken. It appears Jesus believed it if indeed He was even quoted correctly. I agree that this isn’t knowledge in the sense that there is any kind of objective proof. Objectively we know that The Bible exists and we don’t seem to disagree on what it says, however we subjectively come to our conclusions about what we believe and don’t believe about it and in this case it appears we have come to different conclusions.

---

The question is whether it is true that the Pharisees rejected the words attributed to Moses, as Jesus (apparently) claimed. Nothing you say above gives any indication that they did at all. If they only disagreed with Jesus' subjective opinion rather than the text of Deuternomy then Jesus was wrong exactly as I have said.So I am going to ask you again to address the point rather than evading it. What part of Deuteronomy 18:15-19 did the Pharisees disbelieve ?

I have finally sorted out what you're getting at. I'm even slower than usual. Ya, you're right. The problem was my circular thinking on the issue which is odd as I started the thread criticizing Biblical literalism.I started with the view that what they didn't believe was that Jesus was the Messiah and so I set with that in mind and you have correctly corrected me. On a more careful reading of the John 5 44-47. It appears to me now that Jesus is referring to the whole of the Torah in context. Jesus was constantly referring to passage from the Hebrew Scriptures icluding the Torah. From these He understood a very different message than what the Pharisees taught. (Actually we keep talking about the Pharisees when actually it seems He was talking to Jews that were antagonistic towards Him which likely would include Pharisees.)He says in verse 44 that they are seeking glory from one another and not from God. Jesus is saying IMHO, (even more humble than it was before), that they disbelieve Moses in regards to the whole of the Torah taken in context.He is also saying, that if they really did believe Moses then they would see that what Jesus taught is consistent with that and then they would believe Him.There is no doubt that there is a great deal in the Torah that is not consistent with what Jesus taught which I’m sure you would point out but then I’m not a literalist and I think that this shows that Jesus wasn’t either. It seems to me that He expects the Jewish leaders to understand that as well and be able to discern what is of God within the context of all of their Scriptures.

The problem with that explanation is that Jesus says that they don't believe what Moses says about HIM. Now since even the fundamentalists can't find anything in the Torah that specifically points at Jesus it really isn't very plausible that it's actually true.It's far more likely that - if Jesus actually said it (and I wouldn't be very confident on that point - if I shared your views I would probably say that he didn't) that the Pharisees believed but - but quite reasonably didn't think it was about Jesus.

A major theme of Jesus interactions with the Pharisees is that Jesus was accusing them of being hypocrits who interpreted the scriptures in ways that inured to the Pharisees benefit.I don't think it is possible to refute Jesus arguments by noting that the Pharisees didn't find or wouldn't admit to finding Jesus in the scriptures. That would be entirely consistent with Jesus take on things.

quote:

---

I don't think it is possible to refute Jesus arguments by noting that the Pharisees didn't find or wouldn't admit to finding Jesus in the scriptures. That would be entirely consistent with Jesus take on things.

---

It's not about refuting Jesus' arguments, it's about this one claim. And the fact that there aren't any clear references to Jesus is rather a problem for it. As I said, how can we tell that the Pharisees actually disagree with the scripture, as Jesus (if he said it) says rather than the idea that it is about Jesus ?

I see it this way. Jesus understands that the Torah message is one of love and peace. I know that there is a lot of other stuff in there as well but it is my contention that Jesus wasn't a literalist either and understood the Torah to be consistent with what He was preaching.Jesus IMHO is saying that the Pharisees have ignored the message of the Torah and are going their own way which is their idea that if we keep all of these laws meticulously that Yahweh will return and give them victory over their enemies. So, for this reason, Jesus is saying that they don't believe Moses. As an adjunct to that He is saying that because they don't believe Moses that they don't recognize Him as Messiah because His message is so different from the one that they espouse. I actually do have confidence that Jesus has been correctly quoted, although not necessarily word for word nor in terms of the sequence of things that He said. With the resurrection the sayings of Jesus would have been carefully kept in either written form or by oral tradition, and would have been the source for the Gospel accounts. (IMHO)In order for them to believe that Jesus was the messiah they would have to change their conceptions of God almost completely as did Paul and likely Nicodemus.So yes, I agree that they would believe that particular passage but they wouldn't see Jesus in it as they were looking for a messiah that didn't resemble Jesus at all.

The quote that I believe we are discussing: I don't believe there is any serious doubt that the Pharisees as a group did believe or profess to believe the scripture, but didn't believe the scripture was about Jesus. I'm at a loss to understand your position on this.As to whether the message does clearly refer to Jesus, that's a completely separate argument, and not one I'm addressing here. I would expect that a Christian would accept that Jesus was correct and that the Pharisees were wrong despite the lack of evidence for the proposition.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Then you have agreed that Jesus was wrong, because he said that they disbelieved the passage.