Prophet
breaking the statutes of my local municipality
Do you have any obvious examples of where Torah law would shore up Christianity?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
The prophets tell us that THE SCRIBES HAD CHANGED THE GOD'S LAW
- Thread starter Porque77
- Start date
Do you have any obvious examples of where Torah law would shore up Christianity?
CMike
Well-Known Member
I don't understand the question?
I'm not concerned about shoring up Christianity. Christians are people though, and we have suffered long enough with a perverted form of marriage law, laws about slaves, laws about treating other people decently. We claim we don't believe in Law but live like we do, and that is hypocritical. We believe laws are good and necessary and follow many Torah laws that we have adopted into our societies, yet we deny the necessity and even the value of Torah study. In that denial we refuse to study, so we garble Jesus commentary upon laws or Paul's either. Wife abuse has been a serious problem because of this, and also we were involved (because of it) in dehumanizing slaves in the USA. Girls fear marrying 'The wrong man' and fantasize about finding 'Mr. Right', because guys think they own their wives. They think that is the law they must follow, while at the same time they deny following laws! Our denial of Law has also gotten us to support unnecessary wars and to oppress other cultures such as natives of America. Whether or not it shores up Christianity this denial of the Law has to change, so that people's lives can improve.Prophet said:
Last edited:
CMike
Well-Known Member
You mean like this?
Judaism 101: A List of the 613 Mitzvot (Commandments)
Love and Brotherhood
26.To love all human beings who are of the covenant (Lev. 19:18) (CCA60). See Love and Brotherhood.
27.Not to stand by idly when a human life is in danger (Lev. 19:16) (CCN82). See Love and Brotherhood.
28.Not to wrong any one in speech (Lev. 25:17) (CCN48). See Speech and Lashon Ha-Ra.
29.Not to carry tales (Lev. 19:16) (CCN77). See Speech and Lashon Ha-Ra.
30.Not to cherish hatred in one's heart (Lev. 19:17) (CCN78). See Love and Brotherhood.
31.Not to take revenge (Lev. 19:18) (CCN80).
32.Not to bear a grudge (Lev. 19:18) (CCN81).
33.Not to put any Jew to shame (Lev. 19:17) (CCN79).
34.Not to curse any other Israelite (Lev. 19:14) (by implication: if you may not curse those who cannot hear, you certainly may not curse those who can) (CCN45).
35.Not to give occasion to the simple-minded to stumble on the road (Lev. 19:14) (this includes doing anything that will cause another to sin) (CCN76).
36.To rebuke the sinner (Lev. 19:17) (CCA72).
37.To relieve a neighbor of his burden and help to unload his beast (Ex. 23:5) (CCA70). See Love and Brotherhood.
38.To assist in replacing the load upon a neighbor's beast (Deut. 22:4) (CCA71). See Love and Brotherhood.
39.Not to leave a beast, that has fallen down beneath its burden, unaided (Deut. 22:4) (CCN183). See Love and Brotherhood.
The Poor and Unfortunate
40.Not to afflict an orphan or a widow (Ex. 22:21) (CCN51).
41.Not to reap the entire field (Lev. 19:9; Lev. 23:22) (negative) (CCI6).
42.To leave the unreaped corner of the field or orchard for the poor (Lev. 19:9) (affirmative) (CCI1).
43.Not to gather gleanings (the ears that have fallen to the ground while reaping) (Lev. 19:9) (negative) (CCI7).
44.To leave the gleanings for the poor (Lev. 19:9) (affirmative) (CCI2).
45.Not to gather ol'loth (the imperfect clusters) of the vineyard (Lev. 19:10) (negative) (CCI8).
46.To leave ol'loth (the imperfect clusters) of the vineyard for the poor (Lev. 19:10; Deut. 24:21) (affirmative) (CCI3).
47.Not to gather the peret (grapes) that have fallen to the ground (Lev. 19:10) (negative) (CCI9).
48.To leave peret (the single grapes) of the vineyard for the poor (Lev. 19:10) (affirmative) (CCI4).
49.Not to return to take a forgotten sheaf (Deut. 24:19) This applies to all fruit trees (Deut. 24:20) (negative) (CC10).
50.To leave the forgotten sheaves for the poor (Deut. 24:19-20) (affirmative) (CCI5).
51.Not to refrain from maintaining a poor man and giving him what he needs (Deut. 15:7) (CCN62). See Tzedakah: Charity.
52.To give charity according to one's means (Deut. 15:11) (CCA38). See Tzedakah: Charity.
Business Practices
170.Not to do wrong in buying or selling (Lev. 25:14) (CCN47).
171.Not to make a loan to an Israelite on interest (Lev. 25:37) (CCN54).
172.Not to borrow on interest (Deut. 23:20) (because this would cause the lender to sin) (CCN55).
173.Not to take part in any usurious transaction between borrower and lender, neither as a surety, nor as a witness, nor as a writer of the bond for them (Ex. 22:24) (CCN53).
174.To lend to a poor person (Ex. 22:24) (even though the passage says "if you lend" it is understood as obligatory) (CCA62).
175.Not to demand from a poor man repayment of his debt, when the creditor knows that he cannot pay, nor press him (Ex. 22:24) (CCN52).
176.Not to take in pledge utensils used in preparing food (Deut. 24:6) (CCN58).
177.Not to exact a pledge from a debtor by force (Deut. 24:10) (CCN59).
178.Not to keep the pledge from its owner at the time when he needs it (Deut. 24:12) (CCN61).
179.To return a pledge to its owner (Deut. 24:13) (CCA63).
180.Not to take a pledge from a widow (Deut. 24:17) (CCN60).
181.Not to commit fraud in measuring (Lev. 19:35) (CCN83).
182.To ensure that scales and weights are correct (Lev. 19:36) (affirmative).
183.Not to possess inaccurate measures and weights (Deut. 25:13-14) (CCN84).
Property and Property Rights
267.Not to sell a field in the land of Israel in perpetuity (Lev. 25:23) (negative).
268.Not to change the character of the open land (about the cities of) the Levites or of their fields; not to sell it in perpetuity, but it may be redeemed at any time (Lev. 25:34) (negative). See Levi.
269.That houses sold within a walled city may be redeemed within a year (Lev. 25:29) (affirmative).
270.Not to remove landmarks (property boundaries) (Deut. 19:14) (CCN85).
271.Not to swear falsely in denial of another's property rights (Lev. 19:11) (CCN30).
272.Not to deny falsely another's property rights (Lev. 19:11) (CCN36).
273.Never to settle in the land of Egypt (Deut. 17:16) (CCN192).
274.Not to steal personal property (Lev. 19:11) (CCN34).
275.To restore that which one took by robbery (Lev. 5:23) (CCA68).
276.To return lost property (Deut. 22:1) (CCA69).
277.Not to pretend not to have seen lost property, to avoid the obligation to return it (Deut. 22:3) (CCN182).
Criminal Laws
278.Not to slay an innocent person (Ex. 20:13) (CCN32). See Life.
279.Not to kidnap any person of Israel (Ex. 20:13) (according to the Talmud, this verse refers to stealing a person, distinguished from Lev. 19:11, regarding the taking of property) (CCN33).
280.Not to rob by violence (Lev. 19:13) (CCN35).
281.Not to defraud (Lev. 19:13) (CCN37).
282.Not to covet what belongs to another (Ex. 20:14) (CCN40).
283.Not to crave something that belongs to another (Deut. 5:18) (CCN41).
284.Not to indulge in evil thoughts and sights (Num. 15:39) (CCN156).
Prophet
breaking the statutes of my local municipality
No, not like that. I never asked for a list of Torah law but thank you for the interesting read. I was responding to Brickjectivity who was positing that we are left grasping for context on Jesus because we rely too much upon Paul. I was asking for something like an example of a situation where ignorance of Torah law can cause harm to a Pauline Christian.
Prophet
breaking the statutes of my local municipality
I read that list of Torah law which CMike posted. I would guess all people on this forum who haven't studied Torah law yet were raised by guardians with some semblance of kindness already know that they ought to not murder, kidnap, steal, or cheat. You seem to be saying that because we know that we ought to not do selfish things but still do, we must study Torah law, as if it is the original cause of moral knowledge within us (a sentiment you'll have difficulty proving). I am afraid I'm not sold yet. You've named many societal problems that exist in my country--this I will not deny. What you've skipped is the exact method in which study of Torah law will heal any of this.
Not what meant. I'm saying that Jesus and Paul make comments about a Law that Christians have not bothered to study, so they misunderstand. Therefore they take Jesus and Paul's statements without a context, and this becomes for them the letter of the law without the spirit. Example: Many Christians don't believe in divorce no matter what, because they have read what Jesus said to the Pharisees about the divorce law but have not studied the law first. They therefore pervert marriage into a kind of inequality instead of a union. Jesus comments are not enough to understand what the divorce law was about, so they are only half of the conversation. The law which protects vulnerable people and attempts to create some equality in the marriage, that law is often put aside. That leads to a 'Marriage' that isn't based upon equality. Then the benefits of marriage are undermined.Prophet said:
I am only explaining one example, the above divorce law.
Reading the law and understanding where Jesus gets his teachings from is analogous to the way babies drink milk become strong so they can eat for themselves. The NT is actually a mosaic of references to Jewish scriptures, not a work meant to be read on its own. Take the Beatitudes. Sure the beatitudes sound awesome by themselves, but absolutely every word of the beatitudes requires background knowledge or there is no depth. Anything Jesus says from the Beatitudes is based in and alludes to other scriptures, specifically to the Law. (Yes!) When the Christian reads the story about Jesus teaching beatitudes the Christian is supposed to be referring to scripture to see where Jesus gets the teachings from therefore learning (like babies do) how to feed themselves for themselves, that is how to draw truths from the Law like Jesus.
Last edited:
Prophet
breaking the statutes of my local municipality
Pardon my skepticism, but marital abuse and unequal treatment of women predates Christianity, and seems rather irrespective of religion or creed. Treatment of wives as property seems pretty tame in Christianity as opposed to fundamentalist Islam. In my view, prevalence of marital abuse is irrespective of religion and is instead related to moral ignorance and economic destitution.
I have never studied Torah law. Here is my simple understanding of the Beatitudes: Those who are have-nots, seemingly cursed to lack for all of this life, are actually blessed because the haves live in eternal anxiety of losing these things which bind them to the physical illusion and their selfish desires. What have I missed or gotten wrong?
That is the only example I'm providing. Marriage is union for the purpose of giving children the best upbringing possible, maximizing their futures. It requires equality rather than a master-slave relationship, and Christians have not recognized this in general which proves they (we) could do better. Since we could do better why settle for less? Why cripple the future when we can make it better? I haven't suggested anything difficult.Prophet said:
You are asking me to transform you by 'Telling you what you missed'. My brain is only so big! You are fairly resistant, and if I succeed in convincing you I'll start thinking I'm too big for my britches. Then any advantage I have will be lost, besides you won't be changed. Also if I Bible-thumped you, you could be damaged. I'd rather that you continue to live and be happy while I continue to be smug without explanation. There is no way that I can transform you when it is the 'Holy Spirit' that transforms, and the Law is a dispensation of the 'Holy Spirit'. Its transforming power is attested in Psalms, but generally also in History. Wherever laws are good people learn how to be good, and those good laws teach them to be better. Good laws transform you for good, while bad laws don't. As a Christian why wouldn't you want to seek God in the manner that was provided for you to do so?
Prophet
breaking the statutes of my local municipality
No, you certainly haven't suggested anything difficult, but I feel I have reason to fear you are aggrandizing the merits of Torah study as a cure all for social ills you perceive as "Christian" a bit far. I do have some agreement with you on a minor point when you said lack of Torah knowledge leaves some of us grasping for context with much that Jesus says. It goes without saying in my opinion that we should seek knowledge. However, where our disagreement persists is that I cannot wrap my mind around the bridge you're building between abuse amongst Christians and their ignorance of Torah law. Another problem I have is that you cannot demonstrate marital abuse to be a uniquely or even particularly "Christian" problem.
(Aside: if you want to debate it, I'm of the opinion that the position presented in Matthew 5 on divorce is an interpolation, but for purposes of this debate, I'll suppose Jesus had real concerns about divorce law.)
While I won't contest that I'm a hard sell, you'll find that I'm a dead sucker for common sense and reason (FRUBALS!).
It remains that you said, in particular, that Christians lack for context on the Beatitudes causing misunderstandings. I presented my own possible misunderstanding of the Beatitudes hoping for a better example of Torah law fills the gaps. There are at least a few lines in the Beatitudes I'll readily admit I do not understand, and Torah study would likely make me understand. However, I was confident in presenting my simplified understanding of the Beatitudes, even for the lines I lack context on, because all the lines that I DO understand manage to say the same thing.We now come to the basic disagreement we have. Where does good come from? You seem to say good comes from good laws. I vehemently disagree. I would ask you, with all of your Torah knowledge, to explain what Jesus says here:
Here's my understanding: Jesus is performing reductio ad absurdum on the beliefs of legalist Jews. He is telling Pharisees that if they think goodness comes from avoiding prohibited actions it would only make logical sense for them to cut off any body part which might tempt them to sin. Cut off your hands so you cannot steal. Pluck out your eyes so you cannot covet. Cut off your penis so you cannot commit adultery. If you truly believe adherence to law is the same as goodness, Jesus dares you to cut off body parts to show your dedication.
This sounds like an extremely anti-legalistic message to me.
Porque77
The Gospel is God's Law
What you say makes no sense, because when Jeremiah said that the law had been changed by the scribes, were Jewish scribes, BC, who had changed the Law.
Jeremiah lived hundreds of years before Christ. Christians were not yet born. The prophet Jeremiah says so:
"...but my people know not the ordinance of the LORD. "How can you say, 'We are wise, and the law of the LORD is with us'? But, behold, the false pen of the scribes has made it into a lie". (Jeremiah 8:7-8)
The commandments of Jesus Christ abolished death sentences and bondage of the Old Testament. And they were abolished because they were not commandments of God.
The Gospel do not commands men to be slaves to other men. But the Old Testament allows the slavery.
Porque77
The Gospel is God's Law
Do not think that slavery of women and Jewish laws are so different things, because the ancient Jews had every right over women. The women were like slaves of men, as are many women in Islam.
In these days, in some Islamic towns, are stoning women accused of adultery. And those laws are the laws of the Old Testament ...
Jesus abolished those laws to kill people. You can see what scripture says:
"And the scribes and the Pharisees bring a woman taken in adultery; and having set her in the midst, they say unto him, Teacher, this woman hath been taken in adultery, in the very act. Now in the law Moses commanded us to stone such: what then sayest thou of her? And this they said, trying him, that they might have whereof to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground.
But when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her. And again he stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground. And they, when they heard it, went out one by one, beginning from the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman, where she was, in the midst. And Jesus lifted up himself, and said unto her, Woman, where are they? did no man condemn thee? And she said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said, Neither do I condemn thee: go thy way; from henceforth sin no more. Again therefore Jesus spake unto them, saying, I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in the darkness, but shall have the light of life". (Juan 8:3-12)
With this teaching, Jesus abolished the Old Testament commandments that ordered kill people for various reasons. So far we have collected some examples of Old Testament commandments that Jesus abolished, but the argument that Jesus had with the Jews because of the law, is much broader and at this discussion is devoted a large part of the Gospel. Jesus taught us the true law of God.
No I don't perceive Christians as the source, but 'Christian' implies that a person is the salt of the Earth. It is schizophrenic to then expect Christianity to be hum drum about social progress. If Christianity is not making a difference -- then the 'Salt has lost its flavour'.Prophet said:
I don't specifically mention abuse of women. What I mention is the in-equality of Christian marriages, the denial of the Torah as something vanquished by Jesus and the ironic dependence upon social laws by Christians to support the Christian lifestyle. Its very two faced, and it is the cause of serious social injustice among Christians. My example is that women are or have been afraid to get married and must obsess over choosing a permanent partner while the men have viewed marriage as a way of locking in a woman so that she cannot escape. Now because of that the legal system in my country (USA) has had to counter that inequality, and politicians have had to oppose Christians politically in order to legalize divorce. Now that divorce is in place and there are psychologists talking about it and people understand it better -- now finally the Christian ( representatives of Jesus Christ) community is catching up and admitting that --- maybe divorce is to best in extreme cases. We are only about one or two thousand years late! Now then 'Christians' have lived through many centuries without any consideration of the principles of divorce in the law so that unbelievers through force of their consciences have had to straighten Christians out? That is the opposite of what 'Christian' is expected to mean, unbelievers helping believers! Then when you point out that ignorance of the Law is a big deal the Christians want to know why, and the answer is that ignorance is darkness, spiritual darkness, mental darkness or whatever kind of darkness John 3 refers to. To which they reply "But why is it darkness?"
I'm sure you're very reasonable, and I don't at all claim to be better. Study of the law was pressed upon me, and otherwise I probably wouldn't have done it myself. The benefits are good though.While I won't contest that I'm a hard sell, you'll find that I'm a dead sucker for common sense and reason (FRUBALS!).
Ok here are some possible connections between the Beatitudes of Matthew 5 and the Law which may help expand upon the beatitudes.
5:4 Blessed are the poor in spirit for theirs is the kingdom of heaven
-- The opposite would be 'Fat in spirit' referring to pride. In the law, fat is cut from the sacrifices and burned. the faithful will burn their pride as a sacrifice.
5:5 Blessed are the meek for they will inherit the Earth
-- Abraham had no home, and neither did the Jews who were wanderers nor did Jesus. Nor should a Christian consider their home to be permanent or their own. This is about opening one's home to the indigent. In the law the Levite has no inheritance with Israel's other tribes, because they have a better inheritance. The Levite has the duty of caring for the poor as does apparently, the Christian.
5:6 Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness for they will be filled
-- Psalm 1:2 "...but his delight is in the Law of the LORD and in his law he meditates day and night and shall be like a tree planted by rivers giving fruit in season."
-- Psalm 19:7 "The law of the LORD is perfect, refreshing the soul. The statutes of the LORD are trustworthy making wise the simple."
5:7 Blessed are the merciful, for they will be shown mercy.
-- Lev 23:22 "When you reap the harvest of your land, do not reap to the very edges of your field or gather the gleanings of your harvest. Leave them for the poor and for the foreigner residing among you. I am the LORD your God." ( 'LORD your God' implies judgement if this is not done, otherwise mercy. )
5:8 Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God.
-- Deut 10:16 "Circumcise your hearts, therefore, and do not be stiff-necked any longer...He defends the cause of the fatherless and the widow, and loves the foreigner residing among you, giving them food and clothing."
I don't disagree with you on that (except that I do disagree with your opinion of the people Jesus was speaking to). I'm actually referring to Matthew 19 which alludes to Deuteronomy 24. In that chapter if a man is displeased with his wife he is required to pay her off and set her free with a divorce. He's not permitted to force her to stay with him when he's not treating her properly. To this Jesus comments that divorce was permitted because of hard hearted men and that it is still adultery even though he gives her the divorce. Jesus does recognize that divorce was provided to account for that hard heart, showing that he is familiar with the law and commenting upon it.
Last edited:
CMike
Well-Known Member
:no:
They were prophets. They prophesized about the furture.
Yeah...a real religion of love.
Luke
27"But these enemies of mine, who did not want me to reign over them, bring them here and slay them in my presence."
The Torah contains the laws that G-D gave the jews.
Whatever jesus and his minions "changed" is part of their own religion and has no part of the G-D mentioned in the Torah.
CMike
Well-Known Member
Obviously your god has nothing to do with my G-D.
Deuterenomy
Deuteronomy - Chapter 13 (Parshah Re'eh) - Tanakh Online - Torah - Bible
Chapter 13
1. Everything I command you that you shall be careful to do it. You shall neither add to it, nor subtract from it.
Also my G-D can't be killed by Romans, like yours was.
Prophet
breaking the statutes of my local municipality
There are a lot of world views that profess Jesus as their prophet. There are some Christians who believe in selflessness, love, and equality to all as core values. There are also some Christians excuse their omissions from universal love with a belief that God will torture or cast out non-Christians for all eternity, excusing their own support for wars that destroy families and lives. I think the Christianity that Jesus was calling "salt of the earth" was demonstrably less diverse than the myriad of institutionalized religion that identifies with Christianity today.
From Matthew 7:
21“Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?’ 23Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’
In short, I think Jesus was addressing a much smaller group as proponents of radical progress, including but certainly not limited to marital equality, when he identified his followers as "salt of the earth". Institutionalized religion seems quite the opposite as a proponent of change but rather stagnation.
Then, I would ask, what kind of man do you think Jesus could be addressing with 'reductio ad absurdum' with this if not the legalist Pharisee?
Another passage with the same message leaves no room for doubt that it addresses the legalist Pharisee who might have a problem with a man tending to his parents' fields on a Saturday. From Matthew 15:
This is, IMO, a scathing review of legalism.
Last edited:
CMike
Well-Known Member
I think the arguement is rediculous.
The issue was regarding washing your hands before you eat.
Honoring your mother and father is a seperate issue.
Did jesus have attention deficet disorder?
Btw what is a legalist legalist Pharisee (jew)?
Prophet
breaking the statutes of my local municipality
I fear that I may think the same of your own counter-argument in the event that you share it in its entirety but I'll reserve my judgement until I can discount your argument rationally.
I fear you miss the forest for the trees. The issue at hand was neither cleanliness nor familial respect. The issue was the utter failure of blind guides to the law to recognize the difference between the law of God (love all, serve all), and mere human conventions Jews had made into law for human needs (like the ban on pork, washing hands, and observance of the Sabbath).
When Pharisees scoffed at Jesus' disciples failure to adhere to Torah law by eating with dirty hands, Jesus in turn scoffed at the Pharisees failure to recognize the difference between the Law of God and mere rules of men, rejecting their authority to be recognized as givers of the law by calling them blind guides.
If Jesus is to be trusted, a hypocrite.
I look forward to your opposing explanation of what is being said in Matthew 15.
Last edited:
Tumah
Veteran Member
I find this difficult to believe, but true nonetheless: I don't think you know what that passage in Matthew is saying if you are describing it as "tending to his parents' fields on a Saturday.
Prophet
breaking the statutes of my local municipality
Like CMike, I also find your opinion highly interesting and would love for you both to give me the rationale behind your flat rejection.
I would also be highly interested in hearing what you think Jesus is saying in Matthew 15:1-9 so that we could compare notes.