Can the God of Moses be reconciled with Jesus of Nazareth?

[Danmark]

If God is Eternal and changeless, can the God of Moses and Abraham be reconciled with the divinity of Jesus and his union with that God as declared in the doctrine of the trinity?
The 'Old Testament' God is clearly a tribal God. He is the God of the Hebrews. He punishes Pharaoh and his people and leads his people out of Egypt, destroying tribes along the way so his chosen people can take their land.
Yet Jesus tells the story of the good Samaritan and rewards the Canaanite woman's faith.*
How can the universal love preached by Jesus be reconciled with the tribal God of Moses and Abraham?

_______________________________
* The woman came and knelt before Him. Lord, help me! she said. He replied, It is not right to take the childrens bread and toss it to their dogs. Yes, Lord, she said, but even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their masters table.
Then Jesus answered, Woman, you have great faith! Your request is granted. And her daughter was healed from that very hour.
Despite initially showing the prejudice of his tribe, Jesus recognizes we are all one people.

[Danmark]

... Jewish tradition is completely inconsistent with the idea that "... the promised Jewish Messiah (Jesus) ... would extend his mercies to people of all nations."

I don't care about "Jewish Tradition", the Jews systamatically apostacized from their own scripture which eventually lead to them rejecting their own Messiah. Jesus had a lot to say about the "Jewish traditions of his day" none of which was favorable. I reject and disregard entirely any Jewish traditions that stand in opposition to the word of God.

The Tanakh is completely inconsistent with the idea that "... the promised Jewish Messiah (Jesus) ... would extend his mercies to people of all nations."

If the Tanakah (Hebrew bible) is "completely" inconsistent with this idea there would be zero scriptures that indicate otherwise. However, 1213 (see above) has already presented several passages from the Hebrew bible that support the view that Jehovah (YHWH) the God of the Hebrews, expressed his intention for a universal message.

I find it amusing that so many Christians are so dismissive of the religion that inspired them and their scriptures which they agree are 'the words of God.' Then they have the temerity to tell Jews they got it all wrong, and even insist on the ultimate silliness of mispronouncing Jewish words. It's really laughable and sad. Then they write and rewrite 'scripture' trying to fit their square pegs into round holes. As I wrote, painting a bullseye around an arrow does not make one an accurate archer. But this is what to expect from science deniers who don't believe in evolution or blood transfusions. Why should their understanding of these scriptures be any better than their understanding of science? THEIR faith is more important than fact.

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 11 by Danmark]

... and yet no presentation of scripture to support your claim, nor any rebuttal of the scriptures already presented.




JW

ps: I am not here to debate your emotions whether or not they are sandwiched between axiom, appeal to authority and sprinkled with a generous helping of ad hominem.

[tam]

Peace to you Danmark!

If God is Eternal and changeless, can the God of Moses and Abraham be reconciled with the divinity of Jesus and his union with that God as declared in the doctrine of the trinity?

I realize that most of Christendom believes in the trinity; but Christ did not teach it and there is no reason to believe it. Moses did not teach it either, nor Abraham, or anyone else.

The 'Old Testament' God is clearly a tribal God. He is the God of the Hebrews.

He is also the God of Noah, as well as the God of Adam and Eve, and also Abel; He was the God that Melchizadek served; and that Pharaoh recognized (the Pharaoh in Abraham's time) as God Most High. Not only that Pharaoh but also the Pharaoh in the time of Joseph, who placed Joseph in charge of all of Egypt when God told Joseph the meaning of Pharaoh's dream.

But God made a covenant with Abraham for Abraham's offspring (and then again with Isaac, and with Jacob). That covenant was made because of Abraham's faith (which Isaac also had; and Jacob). God does not break His word, so even though Israel is so often faithless, Abraham - the one with whom God made a promise - was faithful. So that promise will be kept. It is why (in Revelation) there are 144 000 guaranteed places from the tribes of Israel, to reign with Christ - though faith in Christ is also required.

The rest of those who reign as kings and priests with Christ are from every tribe, nation, people and tongue (as is also written in Revelation). Again, faith in Christ is also required. But there are 144 000 'seats' reserved from among the tribes of Israel.

He punishes Pharaoh and his people and leads his people out of Egypt, destroying tribes along the way so his chosen people can take their land.

A great crowd that was not Israel also left Egypt with Israel.

Now the sons of Israel journeyed from Rameses to Succoth, about six hundred thousand men on foot, aside from children. A mixed multitude also went up with them, along with flocks and herds, a very large number of livestock... Exodus 12:37, 38

Yet Jesus tells the story of the good Samaritan and rewards the Canaanite woman's faith.*

Yes.

But foreigners were allowed to join with Israel who wanted to do so, and who had faith in the God who Israel followed.

_______________________________
* The woman came and knelt before Him. Lord, help me! she said. He replied, It is not right to take the childrens bread and toss it to their dogs. Yes, Lord, she said, but even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their masters table.
Then Jesus answered, Woman, you have great faith! Your request is granted. And her daughter was healed from that very hour.
Despite initially showing the prejudice of his tribe, Jesus recognizes we are all one people.

It was not prejudice. He was sent first to Jews, and to the lost sheep of Israel - because the covenant was with Israel and the promises were offered first to them. He was also prophesied to be a light for the gentiles. So while the promise and the offer went FIRST to the Jews (who as a nation rejected Him; though individuals accepted Him), that promise was also offered to Gentiles; anyone who had faith in Him.


Peace again to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

[Willum]

[Replying to post 11 by Danmark]

... and yet no presentation of scripture to support your claim, nor any rebuttal of the scriptures already presented.

JW

ps: I am not here to debate your emotions whether or not they are sandwiched between axiom, appeal to authority and sprinkled with a generous helping of ad hominem.

Thou shalt not commit adultery.
Let those without sin, cast the first stone.

Good enough?

[Replying to post 13 by tam]

The story of Noah is a Sumerian children's story, with no geological evidence.
It has been shown archaeologically and historically that there were no Jews in Egypt.

So who's God is it after all?

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 11 by Danmark]

... and yet no presentation of scripture to support your claim, nor any rebuttal of the scriptures already presented.

JW

ps: I am not here to debate your emotions whether or not they are sandwiched between axiom, appeal to authority and sprinkled with a generous helping of ad hominem.

Thou shalt not commit adultery.
Let those without sin, cast the first stone.

Good enough?

Good enough to prove you can type, as for the question under debates, namely

The Tanakh is completely inconsistent with the idea that "... the promised Jewish Messiah (Jesus) ... would extend his mercies to people of all nations."

... it will probably require some kind of commentary on your part since I fail to see the relevance in the two passages you refer to (especially as it is generally understood the second is not part of the original bible text) regarding the above point I was contesting.


JW

[Willum]

[Replying to post 15 by JehovahsWitness]

Well, completely, to me, is expressed well in the absolutes in the Bible.
Unrepentant sins prevent you from going to even.
Nothing is perfect except God.
Etc..

Now most people will realize the absolute of the commandment:
Thou shalt not commit adultery.
The punishment is stoning.

Now everyone will also recognize this is a primitive and monstrous punishment, but you know the Bible and absolutes... God says something it must be obeyed.

Then Jesus comes along, and ARBITRARILY changes this cardinal law, or at least is dismissive of it.

"Let he who is without sin..."

Now let me finish by asking, how many cases of adultery are settle by stoning or other death penalty?

Oh, well.

As to not being part of original text, you may pick and choose which parts are real or not, but as far as I am concerned it is all equally fake. I am not sure what purchase you have to convince me one part of your infallible word of God is more valid than another...

[Danmark]

But God made a covenant with Abraham for Abraham's offspring (and then again with Isaac, and with Jacob).

Exactly! That is a perfect example of why I claim the Bible represents tribal religion. ONE guy supposedly made a deal with a god to get preferential treatment for his descendants. This is the essence of what makes a religion tribal.

[Danmark]

[Replying to post 11 by Danmark]

... and yet no presentation of scripture to support your claim, nor any rebuttal of the scriptures already presented.




JW

ps: I am not here to debate your emotions whether or not they are sandwiched between axiom, appeal to authority and sprinkled with a generous helping of ad hominem.

What 'ad hominem?' The attack is to the JW science denying religion, not to an individual. JW's deny science. This is part of their doctrine. They do not believe in the science of evolution or medicine. Regarding their absurd interpretation of scripture, it is part of their very name. They completely misunderstand Exodus 3:13-14:

Then Moses said to God, If I come to the people of Israel and say to them, The God of your fathers has sent me to you, and they ask me, What is his name? what shall I say to them? God said to Moses, I am who I am. And he said, Say this to the people of Israel: I am has sent me to you.

Moses asks God his name. God quite clearly refuses. Instead he says, in effect, I am beyond naming, "I am who I am." JW's jump on this and insist on making a name out of the words of God's refusal to give a name. Not only does this seem to me to be ridiculous, I can understand why some would suggest it is blasphemous. It is a typically human reaction to try to make an idol, whether of words or stone, out of the transcendent.

Jews get this. They understand their own religion, hence the tetgragramation is not even pronounced.

"Religiously observant Jews and those who follow conservative Jewish traditions do not pronounce "", nor do they read aloud transliterated forms such as Yahweh...."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetragrammaton

[tam]

But God made a covenant with Abraham for Abraham's offspring (and then again with Isaac, and with Jacob).

Exactly! That is a perfect example of why I claim the Bible represents tribal religion. ONE guy supposedly made a deal with a god to get preferential treatment for his descendants. This is the essence of what makes a religion tribal.

Well, God made a 'deal' with that one guy because of that one guy's faith. He made 'deals' with others because of their faith, as well. Including Noah, including those who exercised faith in Him by leaving Egypt with the Israel, etc. So this IS consistent with people being able to enter into a new covenant with Christ - not because of tribalism - but because of faith. (I am also reminded that these are also those through whom the seed - the Messiah - would come)


The promise made to Abraham that include his offspring (those that Abraham loves) comes from love also. Hence the promises are for us and for our children.


In any case, making a covenant with someone based upon their faith is consistent with bringing people (from all nations, tribes, people and tongues) into the new covenant because of their faith.


Make sense?

Peace again to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

[Willum]

[Replying to post 19 by tam]

Not even remotely.
Think about what God needs to be in order for him to fulfill what he is required to be able to do:
Resurrection for example.

To have that kind of power, he would have to be so far above us as to be nigh incomprehensible.
For example:

Did you know that there were two ant colonies in Manitoba that believe you, Tam, are the all-mighty God?
They war about which one of them follows your doctrine more assiduously, and often come to pinchers over your holy scripture. They say the one who gets hit with storm and drought worse are the ones you believe in, and believe you will protect them from insecticide if they follow your path, and even an ant heaven.
Which one of them is correct Tam? The one who have have worshiped you for months, but claim you sent your only begotten son to save them, or the one who has worshiped you for years and still awaits your TRUE benediction?

Now, as ridiculous as this is, the idea of the God you describe having such a covenant is even more preposterous. This God must be far more above you, than you are above the ant, correct?