3 ms·

Are you suggesting Jesus never saw himself as YHWH? According to Jesus, "What would Jesus do?" and "What would YHWH do?" are one and the same, see John 14: "P

Are you suggesting Jesus never saw himself as YHWH? According to Jesus, "What would Jesus do?" and "What would YHWH do?" are one and the same, see John 14: "Philip said, “Lord, show us the Father and that will be enough for us.”" "Jesus answered: “Don’t you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, ‘Show us the Father’?"

bjourne 9y ago
No. I am suggesting that the stories of Jesus (written by the evangelists) exposes a different and more humane moral philosophy than those written in the OT. Turn the other cheek is incompatible with an eye for an eye.
- jorangreef 9y ago
  "Turn the other cheek is incompatible with an eye for an eye." Only if you remove or add to the context in which both were given. The principle of eye for an eye was to __restrict__ compensation to the value of the loss, where the wickedness of man would otherwise tend to overreach. One has only to see Lamech for an early example of judicial overreach: "If Cain shall be avenged sevenfold, truly Lamech seventy and sevenfold." And if you study the Sermon on the Mount in context, you will see that Jesus was not in fact referring to the OT when he said, "you have heard that it was said, "An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth" but I say to you..." but rather to the Pharisees' weakening, distortion and misuse of the OT. The historical Jesus (according to all the earliest accounts, for which there is superfluously excellent textual reliability according to textual criticism) had a very high view of the OT, and deepened the OT, see the context of the Sermon on the Mount: "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the __Pharisees__ and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven." If I were predisposed to look for puerile contradictions in the Bible, I am sure I would find as many as I would give time, but Jesus himself saw none. I would encourage you to take Jesus more seriously.
  - bjourne 9y ago
    > The principle of eye for an eye was to __restrict__ compensation to the value of the loss No. The principle was to restrict the scope of revenge. Yes, in the OT gouging someone's eye out to "compensate" for one of your family members having their eye gouged out was "fair compensation." But the NT turns completely against that idea. That's what "turn the other cheek" means. While the Bible is so full of contradictions that you certainly can find support in some verse for whatever theory you want to prove, the concept of mercy and forgiveness is just not emphasized as much in the OT as it is in the NT.
    - jorangreef 9y ago
      "The principle was to restrict the scope of revenge." I think rather the principle is one of justice. Lamech is an example of revenge (not justice). Revenge is never given to men by God ("It is mine to avenge; I will repay"). "But the NT turns completely against that idea." No, not at all, or when last did you read the Bible carefully? Jesus taught plainly that to turn against the words of Moses at all even in the slightest is to turn against Jesus himself. Jesus taught plainly that if you won't accept the words of Moses, you won't accept Jesus' own resurrection from the dead. "the concept of mercy and forgiveness is just not emphasized as much in the OT as it is in the NT." That is a gross misrepresentation of the OT. You've fallen for Marcion's error and worse. With the merciful you show yourself merciful; with the blameless man you show yourself blameless; with the purified you show yourself pure; and with the crooked you make yourself seem tortuous. For you save a humble people, but the haughty eyes you bring down.

bjourne 9y ago

No. I am suggesting that the stories of Jesus (written by the evangelists) exposes a different and more humane moral philosophy than those written in the OT. Turn the other cheek is incompatible with an eye for an eye.

jorangreef 9y ago
"Turn the other cheek is incompatible with an eye for an eye." Only if you remove or add to the context in which both were given. The principle of eye for an eye was to __restrict__ compensation to the value of the loss, where the wickedness of man would otherwise tend to overreach. One has only to see Lamech for an early example of judicial overreach: "If Cain shall be avenged sevenfold, truly Lamech seventy and sevenfold." And if you study the Sermon on the Mount in context, you will see that Jesus was not in fact referring to the OT when he said, "you have heard that it was said, "An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth" but I say to you..." but rather to the Pharisees' weakening, distortion and misuse of the OT. The historical Jesus (according to all the earliest accounts, for which there is superfluously excellent textual reliability according to textual criticism) had a very high view of the OT, and deepened the OT, see the context of the Sermon on the Mount: "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the __Pharisees__ and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven." If I were predisposed to look for puerile contradictions in the Bible, I am sure I would find as many as I would give time, but Jesus himself saw none. I would encourage you to take Jesus more seriously.
- bjourne 9y ago
  > The principle of eye for an eye was to __restrict__ compensation to the value of the loss No. The principle was to restrict the scope of revenge. Yes, in the OT gouging someone's eye out to "compensate" for one of your family members having their eye gouged out was "fair compensation." But the NT turns completely against that idea. That's what "turn the other cheek" means. While the Bible is so full of contradictions that you certainly can find support in some verse for whatever theory you want to prove, the concept of mercy and forgiveness is just not emphasized as much in the OT as it is in the NT.
  - jorangreef 9y ago
    "The principle was to restrict the scope of revenge." I think rather the principle is one of justice. Lamech is an example of revenge (not justice). Revenge is never given to men by God ("It is mine to avenge; I will repay"). "But the NT turns completely against that idea." No, not at all, or when last did you read the Bible carefully? Jesus taught plainly that to turn against the words of Moses at all even in the slightest is to turn against Jesus himself. Jesus taught plainly that if you won't accept the words of Moses, you won't accept Jesus' own resurrection from the dead. "the concept of mercy and forgiveness is just not emphasized as much in the OT as it is in the NT." That is a gross misrepresentation of the OT. You've fallen for Marcion's error and worse. With the merciful you show yourself merciful; with the blameless man you show yourself blameless; with the purified you show yourself pure; and with the crooked you make yourself seem tortuous. For you save a humble people, but the haughty eyes you bring down.