Jesus and the Ten Commandments

[Willum]

So team, I think we all agree that the Ten Commandment are God's most cardinal unbreakable laws.

As God's son and a piece of him - whatever anyone may say, violating those commandments should be impossible - if he were real, I am sure we all agree.

So, let's see how many of them Jesus advocates breaking?

You shall have no other gods before Me.
You shall not make idols.
You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain.
Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy.
Honor your father and your mother.
You shall not murder.
You shall not commit adultery.
You shall not steal.
You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.
You shall not covet.

and what it means.

[Willum]

[Replying to post 70 by tam]

Welp, it is final then, we have established Jesus is a man-made construct. Thank you Tam, I think you made it clear even to your fellow Christians - those who can read a little impartially anyway.

I hadn't even finished with the number of Commandments he violated. But it is very clear he does not support the Ten Commandments, blasphemes and thus can't be the son of God.

[tam]

[Replying to post 71 by Willum]

Stoning someone is not part of the ten commandments; and my Lord never blasphemed.


Peace again...

[Willum]

[Replying to post 71 by Willum]

Stoning someone is not part of the ten commandments; and my Lord never blasphemed.


Peace again...

This is like the tenth time Christians have made that claim in this OP. It is easy to say, but the Bible contradicts you.

He blasphemed, and stoning someone is punishment for the Ten Commandments.
He blasphemed by violating several of the Ten. If I am wrong, use the Bible to contradict where he did not endorse graven images of the divine Caesar in tribute to that Caesar.

The truth is more than just saying it is so, because that's what you want.

[tam]

[Replying to post 71 by Willum]

Stoning someone is not part of the ten commandments; and my Lord never blasphemed.


Peace again...

This is like the tenth time Christians have made that claim in this OP. It is easy to say, but the Bible contradicts you.

I'm waiting then for you to show where Christ blasphemed or even broke the ten commandments.

He blasphemed

Where?

, and stoning someone is punishment for the Ten Commandments.

The ten commandments are a list of what a person shall or shall not do.


And... as stated in my previous post...there is no law against love. Showing mercy is not breaking any of the ten commandments and it is in keeping with the golden rule AND the law of love. (which is the law that Abraham had written on his heart)

He blasphemed by violating several of the Ten.

Such as?

He did not commit murder; He did not steal; He did not bear false witness against anyone; He honored His mother and Father (God); He loved God with His whole heart; He loved His neighbor as Himself (heck, He loved His enemies as well, gave His life even for those who put Him to death); He honored the Sabbath and kept it holy (resting from our own work and desire and will; and instead doing the work of the Father and His will); He did not commit adultery; He had no other God (He bore witness only to His Father as God; and He obeyed His Father in all things).

I think I got them all.

If I am wrong, use the Bible to contradict where he did not endorse graven images of the divine Caesar in tribute to that Caesar.

I'm pretty sure that is your own idea; and certainly your own claim. Which means you have to prove your idea to be true. But no matter how many times you have tried to do so with me or others, you have not proven your claim, and you will not do so. You have told us all what you THINK, but that doesn't make what you think TRUE.

You have an unproven idea - and one that goes against all that Christ said and taught about His Father.

The truth is more than just saying it is so, because that's what you want.

Exactly.




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

[tam]

double post...

[Willum]

[Replying to post 74 by tam]

Read the OP.
Caesar was a god with a temple in Jerusalem.
Caesar's coins had pictures of him and declared him a god. They were graven images and the medium of his worship.

So, when Jesus gave his speech, not far from a temple to Jove/Caesar - where tithes were collected, he put Caesar first... rend to Caesar.
Those coins were graven images.

That's two commandments blasphemed against.

So, as you can see, Jesus was a construct.

But this had been repeated, please read the OP.

[bluethread]

[Replying to post 68 by bluethread]

When you find yourself in a hole, it is usually advisable to stop digging.

Why didn't he stone her? For the same reason we (personally) don't arrest shoplifters. We are not a judge, jury or executioner.

Are we there yet?

Though you could be right, if we ignore what is inconvenient about the Bible, and only pay attention to what we want it to say, then, sure, perhaps he was making a false accusation.

Let's play that situation out, a man accuses a woman of adultery, and it is untrue.
She gets pissed, there is no man who adultered with her, he gets tagged bearing false witness...

Yep, could happen. I'll ponder it further on my way to the Moon tomorrow, business trip and not much to do on it.

I didn't say she didn't commit adultery and we don't have to play out the scenario. I am saying that she was not found guilty by two or more witnesses, who were willing to bet their lives on it. That is the requirement for a stoning to take place. The witnesses must caste the first stones. According to the law, the witnesses are the executioners. If they are not willing to caste the first stones, they are not legal witnesses. It doesn't matter why they did not caste the first stones. The fact is they did not caste the first stones.

[tam]

I am unsure how you can say Jesus creating a false set of circumstance in order to prevent the punishment of an adulteress does not contradict "Thou shalt not commit adultery."

He did it with some subtlety, Willum. At no point does he say you must not stone her. Instead, he simply suggests who should go first, which is infringing no rule. It is possible that a few might have considered themselves without sin and eligible to throw the first stone, but as Jesus suspected, no one came forward.

Notice he did NOT say: only those without sin should throw. That would be changing the rules. Instead, he invites them to come forward to carry out the penalty but by their own self-judgement, no one would volunteer to throw first. I think he was rather clever.

Yes. Because that was what the law was supposed to do - cause one to self-examine. To be a MIRROR (not a pointing finger). The law did not (and could not) save anyone from the consequences of sin... the law REVEALED to them their sins. Or at least it was supposed to, but as is too often the case today as well, man looks at the speck in his brother's eye, while paying no attention to the log in his own eye.




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

[Willum]

[Replying to post 77 by bluethread]
Doesn't matter what you said: It matters what the Bible says.

If they are not willing to caste the first stones, they are not legal witnesses.

Now you are making things up.
Do you think Roman provinces were ruled by mobs roving the streets?

[Replying to post 78 by tam]

One needs to admire the lengths believers are willing to go through to leave their beliefs intact.

Because that was what the law was supposed to do - cause one to self-examine.

For example, Tam's magical law above, one that allows one to self-examine in order to escape breaking your local law.

For some reason laws, human nature, adultery, and many many other bits of reality take a holiday when someone's belief is threatened.

[bluethread]

[Replying to post 77 by bluethread]
Doesn't matter what you said: It matters what the Bible says.

If they are not willing to caste the first stones, they are not legal witnesses.

Now you are making things up.
Do you think Roman provinces were ruled by mobs roving the streets?

Try to focus. They did not say, "Ceasar in the law commanded us, . . . " They said, "Moshe' in the law commanded us . . .". What Moshe' also said in he law was, (Deut. 17:7a) "The hands of the witnesses shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterward the hands of all the people. ". If no one caste the first stone, there were no legal witnesses and no stoning.