Did Christianity lose its way?

[oldbadger]

The Abrahamic God explained how success could be won by keeping exactly to his laws, his way.
But as the Israelites fell away from these so the prophets came to restore order.
In Isaiah's time the land was corrupted and lawless and he called a restoration of law and order.
When the Baptist came his appearance was answering Isaiah's call.
When Jesus appeared he called for a return of the law but without the need for all those priesthood backhanders within the system of sacrifices.

So where did Christianity get all it's amazing ideas from......... ?

Here are just a small selection of verses from the bible to show a continuous message......... the laws............which Christianity then mangled, in my opinion.

GENESIS {18:19} For I know him, that he will command his children and his household after him, and they shall keep the way of the LORD, to do justice and judgment; that the LORD may bring upon Abraham that which he hath spoken of him.

EXODUS{18:19} Hearken now unto my voice, I will give thee counsel, and God shall be with thee: Be thou for the people to God-ward, that thou mayest bring the causes unto God: {18:20} And thou shalt teach them ordinances and laws, and shalt shew them the way wherein they must walk, and the work that they must do.

LEVITCUS {20:22} Ye shall therefore keep all my statutes, and all my judgments, and do them: that the land, whither I bring you to dwell therein, spue you not out. {20:23} And ye shall not walk in the manners of the nation, which I cast out before you: for they committed all these things, and therefore I abhorred them. {20:24} But I have said unto you, Ye shall inherit their land, and I will give it unto you to possess it, a land that floweth with milk and honey: I [am] the LORD your God, which have separated you from [other] people.

DEUTERONOMY {5:33} Ye shall walk in all the ways which the LORD your God hath commanded you, that ye may live, and [that it may be] well with you, and [that] ye may prolong [your] days in the land which ye shall possess. {6:1} Now these [are] the commandments, the statutes, and the judgments,

SAMUEL {22:22} For I have kept the ways of the LORD, and have not wickedly departed from my God. {22:23} For all his judgments [were] before me: and [as for] his statutes,

PSALMS {18:21} For I have kept the ways of the LORD, and have not wickedly departed from my God. {18:22} For all his judgments [were] before me, and I did not put away his statutes from me.

ISAIAH {40:3} The voice of him that crieth in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the LORD, make straight in the desert a highway for our God. {40:4} Every valley shall be exalted, and every mountain and hill shall be made low: and the crooked shall be made straight, and the rough places plain:

Matthew {3:3} For this is he that was spoken of by the prophet Esaias, saying, The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight.

Mark {1:3} The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight. {1:4} John did baptize in the wilderness, and preach the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins.

Luke {3:4} As it is written in the book of the words of Esaias the prophet, saying, The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight.

Matthew {11:12} And from the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven suffereth violence, and the violent take it by force. {11:13} For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John. {11:14} And if ye will receive [it,] this is Elias, which was for to come. {11:15} He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.

Matthew {5:17} Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. {5:18} For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. {5:19} Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever
shall do and teach [them,] the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

Matthew {21:32} For John came unto you in the way of righteousness, and ye believed him not: but the publicans and the harlots believed him: and ye, when ye had seen [it,] repented not afterward, that ye might believe him.

Matthew {7:12} Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets.

[Miles]

Peace to you,

Christ is HIMSELF the WAY (I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life.)

The law is not the way.

Religion is not the way.

Men are not the way.

The bible is not the way.

Christ is the Way.

As to something Christ said about the law:

[Replying to oldbadger in post #1]

Matthew {5:17} Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. {5:18} For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. {5:19} Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever
shall do and teach [them,] the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

Do you see the connection? It is in the bold.

Christ came to fulfill the law. Did He or did He not do this?

Don't know. Did he own slaves and beat them?

Exodus 21:2
When you buy a Hebrew slave, he shall serve six years, and in the seventh he shall go out free, for nothing.

Exodus 21:20-21
“When a man strikes his slave, male or female, with a rod and the slave dies under his hand, he shall be avenged. But if the slave survives a day or two, he is not to be avenged, for the slave is his money.

How about killing practicing male homosexuals? How many do you think Jesus killed or had killed, just the stipulated two, or more? After all Jesus came to fulfill the law and he certainly couldn't do that by sitting on some porch step spouting parables.

Leviticus 20:13
If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them.

And here's a nice little kicker: Ignorance is no excuse for breaking the law

Leviticus 5:17
 “If you sin and break any of the commands that the Lord said must not be done, you are guilty. Even if you did not know about it, you are still responsible for your sin."

But in as much as the Earth is still around I have to conclude Jesus failed at his mission of fulfilling the law. Right?

.

[tam]

Peace to you,

Peace to you,

Christ is HIMSELF the WAY (I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life.)

The law is not the way.

Religion is not the way.

Men are not the way.

The bible is not the way.

Christ is the Way.

As to something Christ said about the law:

[Replying to oldbadger in post #1]

Matthew {5:17} Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. {5:18} For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. {5:19} Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever
shall do and teach [them,] the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

Do you see the connection? It is in the bold.

Christ came to fulfill the law. Did He or did He not do this?

Don't know. Did he own slaves and beat them?

Exodus 21:2
When you buy a Hebrew slave, he shall serve six years, and in the seventh he shall go out free, for nothing.

Exodus 21:20-21
“When a man strikes his slave, male or female, with a rod and the slave dies under his hand, he shall be avenged. But if the slave survives a day or two, he is not to be avenged, for the slave is his money.

Miles, I watched you have this conversation with JW, and I had to agree with JW on the following point:

Just because the law permitted a person to buy a slave (and then potentially beat them within certain limits) does not mean that you HAD to buy slaves or that you HAD to beat them.

How about killing practicing male homosexuals? How many do you think Jesus killed or had killed, just the stipulated two, or more? After all Jesus came to fulfill the law and he certainly couldn't do that by sitting on some porch step spouting parables.

Leviticus 20:13
If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them.

Again, JW was right on the following point: Just because the law said you must stone a man who lay with another man, does not mean that you had to personally go out and find one so that you COULD stone them.


But that being said, and despite what was written in the law (and the law was subject to the lying pen of the scribes; Jeremiah 8:8), we can know from Christ that it was (and is) permissible and even DESIRED BY GOD for one to show MERCY instead of stoning someone. Because that is the exact example that we have from Christ when someone else was brought to Him for a stoning offense.

Instead of stoning that person (the woman caught in adultery), He saved her life (making it impossible for anyone else to stone her), showed her mercy and forgave her.

This is in keeping with the God who desires mercy, not sacrifice. (Hosea 6:6)

Besides:

“‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’[c] 38 This is the first and greatest commandment. 39 And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’[d] 40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”

And here's a nice little kicker: Ignorance is no excuse for breaking the law

Leviticus 5:17
 “If you sin and break any of the commands that the Lord said must not be done, you are guilty. Even if you did not know about it, you are still responsible for your sin."

Ignorance is never an excuse for breaking a law. Ignorance can be taken into consideration when facing justice, but it does not mean that the person did not break the law.

If you are speeding, you are breaking the law. Even if you did not realize you were speeding. It is then up to the police officer if he gives you a ticket or a pass (or a judge if it goes to court).

But in as much as the Earth is still around I have to conclude Jesus failed at his mission of fulfilling the law. Right?

No. Heaven and earth would disappear before any jot or tittle got erased before all was fulfilled.



Peace again to you.

[Miles]

Peace to you,

Peace to you,

Christ is HIMSELF the WAY (I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life.)

The law is not the way.

Religion is not the way.

Men are not the way.

The bible is not the way.

Christ is the Way.

As to something Christ said about the law:

[Replying to oldbadger in post #1]

Matthew {5:17} Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. {5:18} For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. {5:19} Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever
shall do and teach [them,] the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

Do you see the connection? It is in the bold.

Christ came to fulfill the law. Did He or did He not do this?

Don't know. Did he own slaves and beat them?

Exodus 21:2
When you buy a Hebrew slave, he shall serve six years, and in the seventh he shall go out free, for nothing.

Exodus 21:20-21
“When a man strikes his slave, male or female, with a rod and the slave dies under his hand, he shall be avenged. But if the slave survives a day or two, he is not to be avenged, for the slave is his money.

Miles, I watched you have this conversation with JW, and I had to agree with JW on the following point:

Just because the law permitted a person to buy a slave (and then potentially beat them within certain limits) does not mean that you HAD to buy slaves or that you HAD to beat them.

You're absolutely right; however, Jesus said he came to fulfill the law, which I take to mean he would personally participate in making sure that each law was carried out. And how could Jesus participate if he did nothing? He couldn't. He had to have done something that spoke to each law, and in this case it would have been owning and beating a slave. If he didn't how else would he have fulfilled the law? Standing by while someone else owned and beat their slave certainly wouldn't qualify. Nope. J.C. himself would have to have become actively engaged in the act in order to qualify as fulfilling the law.

How about killing practicing male homosexuals? How many do you think Jesus killed or had killed, just the stipulated two, or more? After all Jesus came to fulfill the law and he certainly couldn't do that by sitting on some porch step spouting parables.

Leviticus 20:13
If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them.

Again, JW was right on the following point: Just because the law said you must stone a man who lay with another man, does not mean that you had to personally go out and find one so that you COULD stone them.

You'd be right if Jesus had not said he was going to fulfill the law. But he did, and as I pointed out above this would have entailed his participation in the death of both men, either personally killing them or persuading others to do it for him.

But that being said, and despite what was written in the law (and the law was subject to the lying pen of the scribes; Jeremiah 8:8), we can know from Christ that it was (and is) permissible and even DESIRED BY GOD for one to show MERCY instead of stoning someone. Because that is the exact example that we have from Christ when someone else was brought to Him for a stoning offense.

But that isn't what each law says, is it. None of the laws are qualified by some mercy clause wherein the transgressor can get off if you feel sorry for him, or some law can be skirted. There is nothing in the Bible saying beating your slave is never permissible. It says beating one's slave is permissible IF . . . . And as long as that "IF" remains in good stead, go ahead and beat away.

Instead of stoning that person (the woman caught in adultery), He saved her life (making it impossible for anyone else to stone her), showed her mercy and forgave her.

This is in keeping with the God who desires mercy, not sacrifice. (Hosea 6:6)

So would this be fulfilling the law? Hardly. The law says nothing about saving an adulteress from stoning so others won't stone her. And, if Jesus did so he would have failed to keep his commitment, plain and simple. He never said "I will change or ignore the law so I can fulfill it."

And here's a nice little kicker: Ignorance is no excuse for breaking the law

Leviticus 5:17
 “If you sin and break any of the commands that the Lord said must not be done, you are guilty. Even if you did not know about it, you are still responsible for your sin."

Ignorance is never an excuse for breaking a law. Ignorance can be taken into consideration when facing justice, but it does not mean that the person did not break the law.

Of course not. The verse is not about the act of breaking the law, but about the consequences; averting the consequence by claiming ignorance. It's deemed a No-No.

But in as much as the Earth is still around I have to conclude Jesus failed at his mission of fulfilling the law. Right?

No. Heaven and earth would disappear before any jot or tittle got erased before all was fulfilled.

So why would Jesus bother mentioning the disappearance of heaven and Earth if they weren't going to disappear after he got done fulfilling the law?

[JehovahsWitness]

CONDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS

A conditional sentence is a sentence that illustrates a cause and its (guaranteed, likely, or even highly unlikely) effect. "When it rains, the pavement gets wet". When imperatives (commands /instructions) are used to replace either clause of the first conditional, this makes what we call a conditional instruction. A conditional instruction tells you if the first thing happens, the second thing must be done.

If drop your plate, mop the floor

The only part that is imperative ("the command") is the second part, (mopping the floor) but this must be done ONLY if the first part (which is not an order) happens.



IF OR WHEN

By choosing WHEN (instead of "if" ) you are prediction what will happen but the imperative (the command) is still the dependent (second) part. For example, in most of Gods commandments, the Hebrew bible text does not provide the conjunction ("if" or "when") so it is down to the translator to choose according to the context . But regardless of the choice ("if" or "when") , the imperative (the command) is always in the dependent clause. Now let is look at two biblical commands

Exodus 21:2
When you buy a Hebrew slave, he shall serve six years, and in the seventh he shall go out free, for nothing.

Again, this is a conditional instruction. You only have to let the slave free , IF you buy a slave. You are not being commanded to buy a slave. Lets look at another example...

Exodus 21:20
“When a man strikes his slave, male or female, with a rod and the slave dies under his hand, he shall be avenged. .

Which reads in The Amplified Bible
“If a man strikes his male or his female servant with a staff and the servant dies at his hand, he must be punished

Here, the imperative is not striking the slave, the imperative is the punishment which is dependent on the hypothetical future of someone striking his slave. So the causative clause does not amount to permission to stike ones slave, instruction to strike ones slave, it is not an order to strike ones slave, and everyone doesn't have to have a slave (so they can strike them). The command is that in the event of one owning and fatally striking that slave, the master (imperatively) must be put to death.

CONCLUSION A basic understanding of how language works helps bible readers avoid the mistake of confusing an imperative with a conditional instruction. This will avoid people concluding God instructed everyone to to do something when that was not the case

RELATED POSTS

Why is it important to be able to identify conditional instructions?
viewtopic.php?p=1111778#p1111778

Did Jesus break the law because he didnt kill any homosexuals?
viewtopic.php?p=1108359#p1108359

Is not demanding the death penalty for all beatings of slave "effectively" de facto permission ?
viewtopic.php?p=1078846#p1078846

Does the Hebrew bible condone beating one's slaves?
viewtopic.php?p=1078537#p1078537

Does the Hebrew bible say owners may beat their slaves?
viewtopic.php?p=1078598#p1078598

Does the Hebrew bible say it's OK to beat a slave ?
viewtopic.php?p=1078758#p1078758

Did God ORDER absolute immunity for slavebeaters ?
viewtopic.php?p=1079551#p107955

To learn more please go to other posts related to...

SLAVERY, SLAVE BEATING and ...THE MOSAIC LAW

[oldbadger]

Jeremiah, like Isaiah, was most sad the the people had turned away from the law [...] And like Isaiah he called for an adjustment of the laws...And that is what the Baptist and Jesus called for

Please produce a single scripture where Jesus or ANY of the Prophets "called for an adjustment of the laws" .

• The Prophets called the people to return to the Law and repent of their sins in breaking the laws and Jesus in particular spoke out against the religious corruption in his day, but NONE of them, including Jesus ever "called for an adjustment of the laws"

JW

Just one? OK.
Matthew {9:13} But go ye and learn what [that] meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice: for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.

There are others, but let's see just one more:-
Jeremiah {31:31} Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah: {31:32} Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day [that] I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD: {31:33} But this [shall be] the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.

[oldbadger]

Yes, Christianity has lost its way. My basis for this declaration is the movement back to tribalism and the desire of some to return to a theocracy. Jesus of Nazareth stands out from most religious figures in that he represented a departure from tribal religion to universal; from a religion representing the Hebrew tribes, to one that includes all people.

Jesus was for his own people, the working class Jews.

We can see this in Jesus preaching that the law can be summarized as loving God and loving your neighbor as yourself. Another example is the Beatitudes where Jesus focuses on spiritual things, on attitude vs meticulous devotion to the minutiae of rituals. He preached the spirit of the law as opposed to the literal. We see this in his parables and answers to the Pharisees. In response to their complaints about his disciples 'working' on the Sabbath because they picked heads of grain while walking thru the fields. He reminded them “The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath.”

You could summarize many countries' laws as 'loving or caring for each other'.
He definitely wanted to end or change a corrupt priesthood.
But he was speaking/axcting for his own people.

He taught that all men, no matter from what tribe, are our neighbors. He jokes and tests the Canaanite woman by saying “It is not right to take the children’s bread and throw it to the dogs.”*
When she shows faith by returning his joke, "Even the dogs get the scraps from the table," he praises her faith and heels her daughter even tho' she is not an Israelite.

You think he was joking? And you think that he admitted gthe whole world because he admired a woman's reply to him?

Unfortunately today too many Christians seem more concerned about whether you are a Jehovah's Witness, or LDS, or Baptist, Pentecostal, Anglican or Roman Catholic, then they are about following Jesus and loving all.
Too many Christians today worship the Golden Calf of the prosperity gospel or the engage in idol worship of a political leader. Their emphasis has become on rules, on being anti abortion, or smoking or drinking, or on excluding LGBTQ folks or anyone who does not fit into a traditional binary sexual identity. Too many Christians have lost their way by wanting to impose their personal interpretation of the Bible and "God's Laws" in fine detail, rather than simply love their neighbors and give aid to the poor and homeless.

To the extent Christians have followed this path, Christianity has lost its way.

True........ in these ways much of Christianity has damaged itself so badly. While totally ignoring the many poor laws in Leviticus and Deuteronomy so many Christians have become fanatical about others. They have cherry-picked from the laws.

__________________________
*"Dog" being a common epithet for a gentile

Yes....different ages used different metaphors and idioms.

[oldbadger]

Peace to you,
Christ is the Way.

As to something Christ said about the law:

[Replying to oldbadger in post #1]

Matthew {5:17} Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. {5:18} For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. {5:19} Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever
shall do and teach [them,] the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

Do you see the connection? It is in the bold.

Christ came to fulfill the law. Did He or did He not do this?

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

Hello Tammy,
That is your interpretation of what Jesus said.
The law had long been ignored by the priesthood, the Jewish leaders.
To fulfill the law meant to bring it back, imo.

[JehovahsWitness]

.
Matthew {9:13} But go ye and learn what [that] meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice: for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.

QUESTION: Did the fact that Jesus quoted Hosea 6:6 effectively constitute a revoking of the laws which established a temple based system of sacrifice?

Jesus twice quoted Hosea 6:6 which reads as follows:

"For I desire mercy, not sacrifice, and acknowledgment of God rather than burnt offerings." - NIV

However, never once did Jesus do so in the context of whether or not sacrifices should literally be offered. Both quotation were to the religious leaders of his day, who scrupiously kept the Mosaic law (which included ritualistic sacrifices) but did not do so from a place of love or moral excellence.

Notice Jesus words in MATTHEW 9:13 Jesus said: "Go, then, and learn what this means: I want mercy, and not sacrifice. For I came to call, not righteous people, but sinners" Notice Jesus is not apply Hosea 6:6 to the ceasing of offering sacrifices but his application was to be merciful to sinners? In short he did NOT say "Go, then, and learn what this means: I want mercy, and not sacrifice. For I don't want you to make any sacrifices any more".

And again at MATTHEW 12: 7: where Jesus declared "However, if you had understood what this means, I want mercy and not sacrifice, you would not have condemned the guiltless ones." Notice Jesus didn NOT say "if you had understood what [Hosea 6:6] means, you would not have still been offering blood sacrifices." Jesus implied the MEANING of Hosea is not to "condemn the guiltless ones". In other words, Hosea is not about discouraging the use of sacrifices, it meaning was about encouraging mercy and love along with those sacrifices.

CONCLUSION: To use Jesus' reference to Hosea 6:6 as support for the discontinuation of the Mosaic laws on sacrifices is to disregard his (Jesus') own conclusions as to the point of Hosea's words. Both Hosea and Jesus were merely highlighting that sacrifices made by those that are immoral or dismissive of Divine values have invalidated their sacrifices in the eyes of God

RELATED POSTS : http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 62#p963662

Does Hosea 6:6 imply that God from the 6th century BCE no longer wanted the Mosaic law covenant (with it's system of sacrifices) to be obeyed?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 42#p800942

Does Jesus quote at Mat 9:23 effectively constitute a revoking of the laws which established a temple based system of sacrifice?
viewtopic.php?p=1111789#p1111789

Can Psalms 51: 16-17 be used to support the view that the Mosaic law requirement of offering blood sacrifices had been revoked?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 50#p853350

Does Proverbs 6:16 signal the end for the need for blood sacrifices as stipulated by the Mosaic law or contradict the principle of the ransom sacrifice as provided by Christ?
viewtopic.php?p=853803#p853803

Does Micah 6:6-8 indicate the Mosaic Law had been revoked and that as of the 6 century BCE animal sacrifices [burn offerings] were no longer a requirement for the Israelites?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 19#p801019

Does Mark 12:33 indicate the Mosaic Law had been revoked and that as of the 6 century BCE animal sacrifices [burn offerings] were no longer a requirement for the Israelites?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 68#p917468

Do 1 Samuel 15.22; Mark.12.33; Proverbs 21:2-3 indicate the Mosaic Law had been revoked ?
viewtopic.php?p=853355#p853355

Did the Jews have the authority to amend/adapt the Mosaic law?
viewtopic.php?p=1111929#p1111929

Who abolished the law?
viewtopic.php?p=1112037#p1112037

To read more please go to other posts related to ...

THE MOSAIC LAW, REMISSION OF SACRIFICE and ...RANSOM

[JehovahsWitness]

Jeremiah, like Isaiah, was most sad the the people had turned away from the law [...] And like Isaiah he called for an adjustment of the laws...And that is what the Baptist and Jesus called for

Jeremiah {31:31} Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel...

Do new and adjusted mean the same thing? If you adjust your tie, is that the same as getting a new tie?

[brunumb]

If you adjust your tie, is that the same as getting a new tie?

No. But if you adjust a law it becomes a new law.