Christianity and the Old Testament

While I do not buy into everything you said there, I notice that there is a significant area of agreement between us...involving the feelings of the god with regard to "this is immoral and offends me" and "this is moral and does not offend me."

So...let me take two items and we can discuss them. At Leviticus 20-13, the god said to Moses:

Do you agree that AT VERY LEAST (in other words, forgetting the severe penalty)...the god still finds homosexuality to be an abomination?

Further along, at Leviticus 25:44ff, the gods says to Moses:

Do you agree that AT VERY LEAST...the god feels that buying, selling, and owning humans as slaves...is not offensive or morally wrong?

 

Can someone explain to me why god, in his infinite wisdom, should announce his intention of sending his son in a scattered selection of verses - scattered throughout centuries of - time in the OT instead of a clear prophecy.
Anyone studying the OT, Hebrew way of writing in poetry and parables, should be able to see these verses have nothing to do with Jesus.
Psalm 22 - a favourite - is David praying when he is in distress. And that happened often in David's life. David was near to death, desolate often. At one stage he was helpless - under threat of being cut of from god by Saul almost chasing him out of Palestine - and - in Jewish belief - that was out of the presence of god.
His hands and feet were pierced, leaving him helpless. He was faced often with 'Bulls of Bashan'.
v14 Read his agony when his beloved son turned against him and he had to flee from Jerusalem
These verses belong to David.
Micah does not say the ruler will be born in Bethlehem. The thousands (clans). Does Bethlehem Ephratah refer to the village, or the family of Bethlehem Ephratah, descendant of Judah. ! Chronicles 4. Was Bethlehem named after this clan?

Isaiah 53 is to do with the suffering of gods servant, Israel - as proclaimed in Isaiah. But 600 years ahead it is attributed to a Jewish preacher.

The Tanakh is Jewish Scripture, written by Jews, for the Jews, about the Jews, in the Jewish way. The fact that it is linked to the NT is purely down to Christianity. If the preacher had been able to complete his crusade instead of being raised to divinity he may have got away without crucifixion.

Now I have 800 plugs plants to pot up between now and tomorrow midday.

 

Good questions but.......
both the Jubilee year instituted by Moses as well as the calling of ancient King Cyrus of Persia..... and the predictions about him breaking chains and setting captives free that were made in Isaiah 42 - 46 indicate that G-d is working on changing the spiritual atmosphere of the whole world...... eventually....... so that slavery would no longer be the norm..........

One near death experiencer was shown an America by the year 2185 that sure seemed to have even more real freedom than we have at this time in the most democratic of the western nations.

 

I have little doubt that slavery, of the kind being spoken of here (and Leviticus), will be totally gone in the near future. Just a few isolated instances still remain.

There is, however, a pernicious ersatz slavery that is slowly infecting capitalistic societies...a product of unconscionable disparity in earning and even in wealth.

The value of human labor is lessened with each passing day...and that will inexorably lead to a kind of slavery from which we will not so easily extricate ourselves.

So...the question I asked Yabber...and ask all Christians...is appropriate...and is something with which swe will eventually have to deal.

I'd like to give some Christians a chance to chime in before going further. Hope they do.

 

Earlier nations practised the Year of Jubilee, the 7th day of rest (though not for religious reasons). Most that the non-existent Moses is supposed to instituted was already practised by other civilisations.

The Pentateuch that 'Moses' is supposed to have written has at least 4 different styles of writing. Clever chap this 'Moses'.

Of course the Pentateuch was written by scribes around the 7th century who used known places and events to write the stories. You've only got the read ancient history, archaeology and culture to see that. The scribes would have been from the Kingdom of Judah and some from the northern Kingdom. We know that some were left after the Assyrians overran the north. Those left were invited to worship at the Temple in Jerusalem, not at Shiloh. The difference can be explained by the northern Kingdom worshipping Elohim, and the south Jahweh.

 

Don't forget Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, Humpty Dumpty, Jack, Cinderella, Brer Rabbit.

 

Moses was so good that he even wrote about his own death and burial.

 

Naw, they're not in the Bible.

 

Frank....let me just say I'll try to answer your questions the way I understand. Yes, i believe homosexual relations are not the best God has for us. We were not intended to behave that way as we were not intended to steal, lie or cheat, but we do all those things. God loves us all,
As to the "slave question". Slavery in those times was far different than what most American equate it to now. Many desired to be slaves in those times as they would be fed and protected. It was a different culture. The Book of Titus must be read in that light. God values all human beings. When I read the Bible, I always desire to know, what is the "spirit" of what is being said. It takes effort. We need to know something about the times in which it was written. Fortunately I connect with some individuals that have far more knowledge than I have. They aren't trained to respect any certain denomination. They just want to understand the Truth. That is all I want.

 

Trevor....(the name of my oldest son) Would you explain to my why David used the reference to his hands and feet being pierced over 600 years before Romans invented crucifixion? Also you didn't mention the gambling for his clothing which took place at the cross not to mention the swollen tongue from dehydration and blood loss that Jesus definitely experienced. Do you forget many called Jesus Rabbi? Do you think that He and His disciples as well as parents were Jewish? Do you think the Joseph that was a Pharisee that supplied Jesus with a tomb was Jewish? I will maintain that David was given a vision of Jesus, his descendent, Savior and Messiah by God. David spoke often of his Savior and Messiah.
I know many Messianic Jews and they all would gladly show you the Messiah.

 

Yep, and i know Rabbis that believe Jesus is the Messiah.

 

Jewish Picture Language. Hands and feet pierced represented helplessness. Even Jesus used this language (parables). And the Romans didn't invent crucifixion. It was known and used by the Persians centuries before the Romans took it up. Darius used it around 500BCE to crucify around 3000 political opponents. Jesus wouldn't have been crucified by the hands. It would have been the wrists anyway. Another thing what sort of cross was Jesus crucified on. The Romans used 5 types from a simple stake to one with various crosspieces on. It wasn't till the 2nd century that the early church came up with the cross known today.
Sharing the spoils was one of the 'privileges' used by soldiers. And we only have the gospels writers to thank for this.
David was often thirsty and dehydrated from being chased by Saul. In one case a few with him risked their lives to get him water,
The gospel writers call Jesus Rabbi because they wrote decades later. The term Rabbi did not come in until after Jesus death. Not to be confused with the Babylonians Rab.
Jesus and his disciples were Jews. As was Joseph. Don't understand your point.
The genealogies of Jesus, Joseph and Mary in Luke and Matthew are both wrong. And I'm not talking about which line was which. No-one from Matthews list (which misses out 3 people) can inherit the throne because of Jeconiah's sin. And no-one from Luke's can because that goes back through Nathan who tried to deceive Solomon. Only through Solomons line is the 'kingship' allowed.
Frankly I don't place much emphasis on the story of David. I spent 6 months studying the Bible version against the cultural and historical history of the time. The story is GREATLY exagerrated by the Scribes. Probably to outshine the Rule of the Omri dynasty a little later. They were certainly more influential. Ignored by the writers because they were pagans.
I don't think David had a vision at all. The Jews always maintained that their Messiah would be a human.
David's idea of a Saviour is not what you would think of as a Christian. God, according to the Bible, saved David often. The Jews believed that they were responsible for their own sins - thus Yom Kippur and the period leading up to it.

The Tanakh and the Psalms are linked to the religion of Ugarit. The stories of Abraham and Moses were written later, as is evident by the mistakes the writers make.

The whole Tanakh is full of exaggerations if you study it against the background it was written on. Which makes it the work of man.

Anyway it's now 01.17 here. I'm off to bed.

 

Sweet Dreams. As you sleep, the culture of the time included wrists in the word for hands but that is aside from the point. I too have studied the Bible and the culture steadily for the last forty years. I hear regularly fro m others that have studied longer and have spent time in Israel. This is not being braggadocio or anything of that nature, because my beliefs are derived through faith, not historical knowledge. So you say the lneage must come through Solomon, who of course was the son of David......so what's the point?

 

Okay, Yabber...I threw you some hard stuff there...and you did the best you can. You did a decent job with it.

Bottom line, though, is that if you are a Christian...you have to accept that your god is greatly offended by homosexual activity among two men (to the point of decreeing death for the offense)...but has no problem with buying, selling, or owning humans as slaves.

So...Christians, despite all this New Covenant talk...ARE subject to aspects of the Old Testament...that they may not find so comfortable connecting with.

 

Is that why we see the prints of the nails in his hands? John 20:27. The Greek word for 'hands' literally means hands. Neither is the Greek word for wrists found in the NT.

Nathan and Solomon. In the line of succession David's son Nathan came before David's son Solomon but was excluded by Jahweh from being a direct ancestor. Which Luke includes in his direct lineage.

My first Sunday School class was during WWII. My first 'lay preacher' sermon was around 1958. I've studied the Bible, ancient history of the area, ancient culture of the area. During these studies which I've given to many groups, I realised that faith did not fit in with fact. I'm now agnostic. I can't have faith in what I know to be wrong.

If you wish to believe in things that History and Archaeology prove to be wrong - so be it.

Good 'Luck'.

 

That's not correct analysis. God cannot allow sin into his kingdom. Read First Corinthians 6:9-10. There are more things listed than just homosexuality. Paul uses examples of sin to make his point. The point is the sinner will not inherit the Kingdom of God. We all need to believe in Jesus and what He did to free us from our sin nature so we can be saved and live eternally with God. God loves people so much that he provided a way out of our sin problem. The devil has deceived many to believe God hates them because they are homosexual. That's a lie. God loves the homosexual just as much as the drunk, the drug addict, the prostitute, the thief, the murderer, the liar, the glutton, etc. God's love is the answer to the problem. The first step to being free is to acknowledge we are sinners.

 

If you want to think you are a sinner...think you are a sinner.

No skin off my nose.

Not sure why you said my analysis is not correct...it was spot on.

 

You're analysis isn't according to God's Word.

 

My analysis was spot on the word from the Bible. Whether that is the word of a god...or just the ravings of a fairly superstitious ancient group of Hebrews is another thing altogether.

 

Nope. You're deceived. You don't have the Holy Spirit. Without the Holy Spirit no one can understand the Word of God.

 

I think my analysis is spot on.

You disagree.

That happens.

 

When recitation of his religious dogma doesn't convince anyone, this one follows with his "I'm Special and You're Not" canard. How predictable. How shallow.

 

The Bible disagrees with you.

 

So that is where you get the amazing blinders to wear when it comes to the bad parts of the Bible which are rather extensive for a book with the so called good deeds and word of this god it talks about.

As for slavery did you read the OT passages slaves could be beaten and according to the language short of killing them within a day or two so that's bad, gentile slaves could be held as property for life as could women, they could buy slaves from foreigners and for Jewish male slaves they have a loophole to get them as slaves for life. Slavery is morally evil and therefore evil is condoned by god who could according to the Bibles attributes of god could have banned it outright easily enough by commanding it. Or am I wrong and he couldn't just order his people to not keep slaves.

 

Are you saying the Bible does not say that your god considers homosexual activity to be an abomination...but that owning another humans being is fine?

Are you actually saying that?