×
Login Register an account
Top Submissions Explore Upgoat Search Random Subverse Random Post Colorize! Site Rules Donate
4
11 comments block


[ - ] HughBriss 1 point 3.5 yearsDec 25, 2021 10:41:18 ago (+1/-0)

Starts off by quoting verses in Deuteronomy. No Christian needs to pay any attention to the Mosaic law. It only applies to jews.

On the other hand, there is only ONE specific thing Jesus told us to do to remember him, and celebrating his birth isn't it.

[ - ] doginventer [op] -1 points 3.5 yearsDec 25, 2021 10:46:48 ago (+0/-1)

17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
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.
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 5 KJV

[ - ] HughBriss 1 point 3.5 yearsDec 25, 2021 10:51:34 ago (+1/-0)

How far back do those verses go in old codices of Matthew? Are they original? Can they be found in the earliest extant copies? Or are they interpolations? Paul believed that Jesus came to fulfill the law as a new covenant and was outspoken about it. This issue created a rift between him and the other apostles.

Besides, was Jesus really telling non-jews that if they wanted to believe in him, they had to follow the Mosaic law? That makes no sense whatsoever.

[ - ] doginventer [op] -1 points 3.5 yearsDec 26, 2021 08:22:23 ago (+0/-1)


I’m not aware of any questions over the history of these verses, but even if there were, the same story is told throughout all scripture.
The only support for the doctrine of lawlessness comes from careful repurposing of some small isolated sections of texts which, as a whole, clearly advocate the keeping of the commandments.
What excuse would God have for banishing Satan from Heaven if he was going to allow others who reject His law to enter?
Try to find the clear unequivocal preaching of lawlessness and it simply is not there. The upholding of the commandments is stated repeatedly throughout all scripture, not as a means of salvation:

“Not of works, lest any man should boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.”
Ephesians 2 KJV

But as the condition of salvation:

12 For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law;
13 For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.
Romans 2 KJV

11 But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith.
12 And the law is not of faith: but, The man that doeth them shall live in them.
Galatians 3 KJV

24 Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.
James 2 KJV

15 If ye love me, keep my commandments.
John 14 KJV

Daily Verse and Comment for Matthew 4:4
https://www.theberean.org/index.cfm/main/default/id/5712/ver/KJV/matthew-4-4.htm
Daily Verse and Comment for Galatians 3:19
https://www.theberean.org/index.cfm/main/default/id/4512/ver/KJV/galatians-3-19.htm
Am I not dead to the law now that I am a follower of Christ? - iConnectFX™
https://iconnectfx.com/view/93bb07d5-173e-ec11-9969-0050568299de

[ - ] HughBriss 0 points 3.5 yearsDec 26, 2021 14:38:59 ago (+1/-1)

People are very selective about which laws they observe. Most Christians say the follow the ten commandments, but they really don't, not entirely. Who keeps the sabbath these days? And as far as circumcision goes, a number of Christians oppose that outright.

One can go on and on. Does anyone make animal sacrifices? Keep menstruating women in a separate hut for a few days? Observe the Jubilee? Observe the numerous festivals in the jewish calendar?

The Bible has a very confusing provenance, and how its contents came to be agreed upon was a contentious process, and it was enforced upon Christians at the threat of being branded a heretic, no small matter in the first millennium. You should take some time to find out who decided which books were canon, why they were determined to be canonical, and which ones were not and why. For example, the book of John's Revelation was nearly not agreed upon as canonical. Martin Luther, when he was translating the Bible to German, didn't think it was canonical, but kept it anyway. with four other books he had doubts about.

[ - ] doginventer [op] -1 points 3.5 yearsDec 27, 2021 08:49:10 ago (+0/-1)

[ - ] HughBriss 0 points 3.5 yearsDec 27, 2021 10:23:56 ago (+1/-1)

You cite a great deal of Hebrew and Aramaic scripture. I personally have no use for it. It's useful to know the cultural context of one tribe of people in that part of the world 2,000 to 3,000 years ago, but I don't find it relevant.

I tend to agree with Marcion, who compiled the first book of scripture in 144 AD. After he was dead for several decades, he was excoriated and branded a heretic by the likes of Tertullian and others. I've always marveled at how anyone can use the word "heretic" with a straight face. One man's orthodoxy is another man's heresy, and vice versa.

Many, if not most, of Tertullian's arguments consist of his outrage at Marcion having a different opinion than his. He accepts the accuracy and legitimacy of the Hebrew scriptures unconditionally and uses that as his basis for his argumentation.

Marcion, who was not a jew, rejected the Hebrew scriptures out of hand because they were incompatible with the message of Jesus Christ. He is correct. The god of the Hebrew scriptures has an entirely different character and temperament than the God Jesus spoke of. The Hebrew scriptures are filled with stories of war, bloodshed, destruction, anger, jealousy, hatred, and revenge. This is noticeably absent in what Jesus taught.

His God is a God of love. Yahweh is not. They are therefore different deities.

This, in a nutshell, is why I reject the Hebrew scriptures. Trying to reconcile them with the message of Jesus is impossible.

[ - ] doginventer [op] -1 points 3.5 yearsDec 28, 2021 05:46:16 ago (+0/-1)

Absurdity of Marcion's Docetic Opinions; Reality of Christ's Incarnation.
The Five Books Against Marcion — Tertullian
Our heretic must now cease to borrow poison from the Jew -- "the asp," as the adage runs, "from the viper" [3208] -- and henceforth vomit forth the virulence of his own disposition, as when he alleges Christ to be a phantom. Except, indeed, that this opinion of his will be sure to have others to maintain it in his precocious and somewhat abortive Marcionites, whom the Apostle John designated as antichrists, when they denied that Christ was come in the flesh; not that they did this with the view of establishing the right of the other god (for on this point also they had been branded by the same apostle), but because they had started with assuming the incredibility of an incarnate God. Now, the more firmly the antichrist Marcion had seized this assumption, the more prepared was he, of course, to reject the bodily substance of Christ, since he had introduced his very god to our notice as neither the author nor the restorer of the flesh; and for this very reason, to be sure, as pre-eminently good, and most remote from the deceits and fallacies of the Creator. His Christ, therefore, in order to avoid all such deceits and fallacies, and the imputation, if possible, of belonging to the Creator, was not what he appeared to be, and feigned himself to be what he was not -- incarnate without being flesh, human without being man, and likewise a divine Christ without being God! But why should he not have propagated also the phantom of God? Can I believe him on the subject of the internal nature, who was all wrong touching the external substance? How will it be possible to believe him true on a mystery, when he has been found so false on a plain fact? How, moreover, when he confounds the truth of the spirit with the error of the flesh, [3209] could he combine within himself that communion of light and darkness, or truth and error, which the apostle says cannot co-exist? [3210] Since however, Christ's being flesh is now discovered to be a lie, it follows that all things which were done by the flesh of Christ were done untruly, [3211] -- every act of intercourse, [3212] of contact, of eating or drinking, [3213] yea, His very miracles. If with a touch, or by being touched, He freed any one of a disease, whatever was done by any corporeal act cannot be believed to have been truly done in the absence of all reality in His body itself. Nothing substantial can be allowed to have been effected by an unsubstantial thing; nothing full by a vacuity. If the habit were putative, the action was putative; if the worker were imaginary, the works were imaginary. On this principle, too, the sufferings of Christ will be found not to warrant faith in Him. For He suffered nothing who did not truly suffer; and a phantom could not truly suffer. God's entire work, therefore, is subverted. Christ's death, wherein lies the whole weight and fruit of the Christian name, is denied although the apostle asserts [3214] it so expressly [3215] as undoubtedly real, making it the very foundation of the gospel, of our salvation and of his own preaching. [3216] "I have delivered unto you before all things," says he, "how that Christ died for our sins, and that he was buried, and that He rose again the third day." Besides, if His flesh is denied, how is His death to be asserted; for death is the proper suffering of the flesh, which returns through death back to the earth out of which it was taken, according to the law of its Maker? Now, if His death be denied, because of the denial of His flesh, there will be no certainty of His resurrection. For He rose not, for the very same reason that He died not, even because He possessed not the reality of the flesh, to which as death accrues, so does resurrection likewise. Similarly, if Christ's resurrection be nullified, ours also is destroyed. If Christ's resurrection be not realized, [3217] neither shall that be for which Christ came. For just as they, who said that there is no resurrection of the dead, are refuted by the apostle from the resurrection of Christ, so, if the resurrection of Christ falls to the ground, the resurrection of the dead is also swept away. [3218] And so our faith is vain, and vain also is the preaching of the apostles. Moreover, they even show themselves to be false witnesses of God, because they testified that He raised up Christ, whom He did not raise. And we remain in our sins still. [3219] And those who have slept in Christ have perished; destined, forsooth, [3220] to rise again, but peradventure in a phantom state, [3221] just like Christ.

[ - ] HughBriss 0 points 3.5 yearsDec 28, 2021 09:59:53 ago (+0/-0)

You should provide a source when you quote something like this. For the curious, this is it:

https://biblehub.com/library/tertullian/the_five_books_against_marcion/chapter_viii_absurdity_of_marcions_docetic.htm

As he always did, Tertullian engages in pointless name-calling like this: "Marcionites, whom the Apostle John designated as antichrists ...". (1 John 2:18) Not only does he call them antichrists, he uses authority of scripture to back up his unfounded claim.

Further, he argues against something that Marcion never said or espoused. For example, this quote:

"...[T]hey denied that Christ was come in the flesh; not that they did this with the view of establishing the right of the other god (for on this point also they had been branded by the same apostle), but because they had started with assuming the incredibility of an incarnate God. Now, the more firmly the antichrist Marcion had seized this assumption, the more prepared was he, of course, to reject the bodily substance of Christ ...".

Nonsense. Marcion taught nothing of the sort. The only gospel in Marcion's bible is the majority of the book of Luke, which Marcion called the Evangelikon. You're doubtless aware of the contents of that gospel, which describes Jesus living as a man in the flesh, his very real crucifixion and death, his resurrection of the body. This is from Luke:

"Behold my hands and my feet, that I am myself: for a spirit has not flesh and bones, as you see me have. And while they still disbelieved for joy, and wondered, he said unto them, Have you here anything eatable? And they gave him a piece of a broiled fish, and of a honeycomb. And he took it, and ate before them."

But like Tertullian, you're arguing something that I never said and is completely off topic. I stated that the message of Jesus Christ is incompatible with the Hebrew scriptures, and that Yahweh is not the same deity as the God of the Greek scriptures.

[ - ] doginventer [op] 0 points 3.5 yearsDec 28, 2021 11:39:30 ago (+0/-0)

I stated that the message of Jesus Christ is incompatible with the Hebrew scriptures, and that Yahweh is not the same deity as the God of the Greek scriptures.

The next verse after the passage you quoted from Luke:

44 And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me.
Luke 24 KJV

In spite of the difficulties between translations I find that the consistency of the truth contained in the Greek and the Hebrew scriptures is clear and is well attested by scholars, particularly in the light of the Dead Sea scrolls.

Marcion is said to have claimed that the God of the old testament, YHVH, was not God the Father, but in order to do so he needed to reject almost the whole of scripture, new and old testament.
Of course I am reading in the light of my faith, but I am also convinced that the intellectual case for the rejection of ‘Marcion’s theory’ made by the great majority of those expert in scriptural and historical analysis is overwhelming.


31 And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.
Luke 16 KJV

[ - ] BikeLock 1 point 3.5 yearsDec 25, 2021 10:26:32 ago (+1/-0)

Yeah I'm gonna keep my comfy pagan Christmas traditions, and I don't really care.