Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jesus himself was Pharisaic. He didn't dispute the beliefs of the Pharisees, he condemned their actions.
really? some say that he was trying to teach people. i really dont know. some claim that it was a forewarning while others claim something entirely different.
he did say this:
Matthew 23:4 (KJV) For they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men's shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers.
This is not a thread for me, but I am compelled to state yet again that I don't take offence at much, but one thing that does rather offend me is the use of "Pharisees" as an example of greed, hypocrisy, pride, malice and indeed ignorance of their own teachings.
This is, I am prepared to go out on a limb to say, the second most reprehensible lie in the gospels. There were probably some who were no better than the average, and they may have been considered a nuisance by the authorities, but the picture drawn in the gospels is not drawn from life, but from an agenda of deliberate and consistent vilification by the writers of the gospels. I believe that it reflects the battle between what we might call Jewish Christianity (which was a belief in Jesus as the risen Messiah and sharing the same expectation of the last days, rising of the dead and the rule of the messiah, which was apparently the Pharisaicai view, except that Jesus' followers thought that it would be him coming back. And they observed the Jewish Law) and Pauline Christianity which rejected the Jewish Law. Paul himself evidently had a disagreement with the Jesus -group about this and went on merrily preaching his own 'Gospel' and warning any who would listen not to pay heed to any gospel other than the the one that he taught.
He cites a letter from James imposing almost nothing on Paul, but I doubt whether he is telling the whole story. The point however is that this disagreement between Jewish Christianity and gentile Christianity is underlying the Gospels, with a Jesus who is essentially Pauline and though, undeniably Jewish himself, hugely partial to Gentiles, praising their faithfulness, and implacably hostile to Judaism.
This is the background to the very biased and probably unfair depiction of the Pharisees. I'm as offended by the use of 'Pharisee' as a simile for greed and hypocrisy as i am at any other kind of anti - Semitism. Because those Pharisees are the basis of modern Jewish Rabbiinical religion.
Do you believe in heaven and hell? Life after death? Angels and spirits? Then you are pharisaic.
Acts.23
[8] For the Sadducees say that there is no resurrection, neither angel, nor spirit: but the Pharisees confess both.
That is what I would say, all those tens of thousands of Jewish believers were Pharisees as was a Pharisee who never stopped being a Pharisee. Acts 21 shows thousands of Pharisees who believed in Jesus and it says that theh became much more zealous to keep the law, and this makes perfect sense because all the curses and punishments had now been taken away, OF COURSE they became more zealous to keep the laws of Moses, and the Gentile converts were so ambitous to do the same things Jews did, they wanted to follow the culture and heritage of Jews so bad that they took it too far, especially when somebody said that keeping any law would save you, that is ridiculous. Nobody believes or teaches following any law for salvation, but somehow this subject gets debated . Some how people look at me as if I am legalistic whdn I don't keep the laws myself, and I sure wouldn't tell anyone that their salvation depended upon them being circumcized or something. Christians were given a huge break, but this doesn't seem good enough, now the Christian wants to make it a sin for even a Jew to try and keep the law, and the law is now despised. Jesus said that whoever doesn't keep the law of Moses to then teach other people not to keep it will be the least in the kingdom of heaven, but how many Christians really believe Jesus? Jesus told us that the Pharisees sit in the seat of Moses and that we should do whatever the high priest would have us do, but ask a high priest what a Gentile should do concerning the laws and the priest wouldn't have them doing much at all but that they should walk humbly, to love mercy and to not involve themselves in the worship of other gods...........Jesus told us that we better keep the laws better than those Pharisees in high places kept the laws.
The law is for things to go well for you, that's all. If somebody really wants to know the laws, they have to first love the law and be willing to study how all of it is practiced just like nobody will never understand the wheat harvest unless they understand how it is all done from beginning to end. You have to be willing to study it, and that is no use at all when you despise the law.
really? some say that he was trying to teach people. i really dont know. some claim that it was a forewarning while others claim something entirely different.
he did say this:
Matthew 23:4 (KJV) For they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men's shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers.
"Some say" lots of different things. Christianity is made up of 43,000 different denominations, so it's not surprising that you are confronted by differing opinions.
The Center for the Study of Global Christianity at Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary estimated 34,000 denominations in 2000, rising to an estimated 43,000 in 2012. These numbers have exploded from 1,600 in the year 1900. https://theway21stcentury.wordpress....ons-worldwide/
Which one represents what Jesus actually taught? As I have been pointing out, Jesus wrote down NOTHING. Everything that is being represented as "the things Jesus taught," are in reality things that other people claimed that Jesus taught years after Jesus was dead. In the fourth century the newly formed Catholic church was given the task by the Roman emperor Constantine of deciding which of all of the various works that represented themselves as being the things that Jesus taught would be accepted as Christian dogma. The result is the current 27 books of the NT. What Jesus taught, what Jesus believed and what Jesus represented was decided by individuals who were further in time from Jesus than you are from Napoleon. The original Yeshua upon whom modern Christianity is based may or may not have ever existed. If he existed he has long since been long lost to history over the course of the intervening centuries by Christians who busily worked to construct a mythological Jesus the Christ who would conform to their personal wants and desires. As a result the mythological Jesus is as varied as the 43,000 different denominations that claim to represent "true Christianity."
This is what you will be confronted with if you choose to follow the actual facts and evidence to your own conclusion. My honest conclusion by the time I was thirteen was that religion in general and Christianity specifically are far too contradictory and far too silly to have any real relationship to the truth. That does not mean that many of the things attributed to Jesus, such as "love thy neighbor," are not valid. But anyone who lives their lives according to the golden rule already believes that we should treat others as we would wish to be treated ourselves. It's not necessary to ACTUALLY believe that a corpse returned to life and subsequently flew away to attempt to live by the precept of do no harm to others. Living according to the golden rule is the necessary foundation of human morality for ALL functioning societies.
If you prefer NOT to be confused by the facts, then return to your church and only discuss the things you have been taught to believe with other individuals who were taught to believe exactly as you do.
This is not a thread for me, but I am compelled to state yet again that I don't take offence at much, but one thing that does rather offend me is the use of "Pharisees" as an example of greed, hypocrisy, pride, malice and indeed ignorance of their own teachings.
This is, I am prepared to go out on a limb to say, the second most reprehensible lie in the gospels. There were probably some who were no better than the average, and they may have been considered a nuisance by the authorities, but the picture drawn in the gospels is not drawn from life, but from an agenda of deliberate and consistent vilification by the writers of the gospels. I believe that it reflects the battle between what we might call Jewish Christianity (which was a belief in Jesus as the risen Messiah and sharing the same expectation of the last days, rising of the dead and the rule of the messiah, which was apparently the Pharisaicai view, except that Jesus' followers thought that it would be him coming back. And they observed the Jewish Law) and Pauline Christianity which rejected the Jewish Law. Paul himself evidently had a disagreement with the Jesus -group about this and went on merrily preaching his own 'Gospel' and warning any who would listen not to pay heed to any gospel other than the the one that he taught.
He cites a letter from James imposing almost nothing on Paul, but I doubt whether he is telling the whole story. The point however is that this disagreement between Jewish Christianity and gentile Christianity is underlying the Gospels, with a Jesus who is essentially Pauline and though, undeniably Jewish himself, hugely partial to Gentiles, praising their faithfulness, and implacably hostile to Judaism.
This is the background to the very biased and probably unfair depiction of the Pharisees. I'm as offended by the use of 'Pharisee' as a simile for greed and hypocrisy as i am at any other kind of anti - Semitism. Because those Pharisees are the basis of modern Jewish Rabbiinical religion.
Just sayin'.
Ole shaul never preached any gospel seperate from Yeshua.
And your implications have been noted.
Carefully laid snares are obvious in the Light of Truth.
How come you continue when the covenant given to all has spoken. Look around and take notice of the birds.
That is what I would say, all those tens of thousands of Jewish believers were Pharisees as was a Pharisee who never stopped being a Pharisee. Acts 21 shows thousands of Pharisees who believed in Jesus and it says that theh became much more zealous to keep the law, and this makes perfect sense because all the curses and punishments had now been taken away, OF COURSE they became more zealous to keep the laws of Moses, and the Gentile converts were so ambitous to do the same things Jews did, they wanted to follow the culture and heritage of Jews so bad that they took it too far, especially when somebody said that keeping any law would save you, that is ridiculous. Nobody believes or teaches following any law for salvation, but somehow this subject gets debated . Some how people look at me as if I am legalistic whdn I don't keep the laws myself, and I sure wouldn't tell anyone that their salvation depended upon them being circumcized or something. Christians were given a huge break, but this doesn't seem good enough, now the Christian wants to make it a sin for even a Jew to try and keep the law, and the law is now despised. Jesus said that whoever doesn't keep the law of Moses to then teach other people not to keep it will be the least in the kingdom of heaven, but how many Christians really believe Jesus? Jesus told us that the Pharisees sit in the seat of Moses and that we should do whatever the high priest would have us do, but ask a high priest what a Gentile should do concerning the laws and the priest wouldn't have them doing much at all but that they should walk humbly, to love mercy and to not involve themselves in the worship of other gods...........Jesus told us that we better keep the laws better than those Pharisees in high places kept the laws.
The law is for things to go well for you, that's all. If somebody really wants to know the laws, they have to first love the law and be willing to study how all of it is practiced just like nobody will never understand the wheat harvest unless they understand how it is all done from beginning to end. You have to be willing to study it, and that is no use at all when you despise the law.
Take leave and tell me why scheshem is sacred before you speak Torah ole friend.
Its difficult enough to speak of emet shemot while so many are testing the spirit.
Perhaps in the spirit of knowledge and understanding the Lords Will may be found in the men called to drink.
If only the weakness of the flesh were to reveal the strength of the Lord.
Ole shaul never preached any gospel seperate from Yeshua.
And your implications have been noted.
Carefully laid snares are obvious in the Light of Truth.
How come you continue when the covenant given to all has spoken. Look around and take notice of the birds.
I watched the birds. it ain't an easy life for them. And ole Shaul did (arguably) preach a gospel different from Yeshua. Even Acts (which is very partial) shows his disciple Peter who never while he was with Jesus ate anything unclean, in spit of what Mark says, and James had a word with Paul when he arrived in Judea to say it was a problem that he was teaching contrary to Jewish law and how are they going to cover that up? Carefully covered up misrepresentations in the Bible are made obvious in the light of examination.
I can give you the references if you can't bring them to mind.
That is what I would say, all those tens of thousands of Jewish believers were Pharisees as was a Pharisee who never stopped being a Pharisee. Acts 21 shows thousands of Pharisees who believed in Jesus and it says that theh became much more zealous to keep the law, and this makes perfect sense because all the curses and punishments had now been taken away, OF COURSE they became more zealous to keep the laws of Moses, and the Gentile converts were so ambitous to do the same things Jews did, they wanted to follow the culture and heritage of Jews so bad that they took it too far, especially when somebody said that keeping any law would save you, that is ridiculous. Nobody believes or teaches following any law for salvation, but somehow this subject gets debated . Some how people look at me as if I am legalistic whdn I don't keep the laws myself, and I sure wouldn't tell anyone that their salvation depended upon them being circumcized or something. Christians were given a huge break, but this doesn't seem good enough, now the Christian wants to make it a sin for even a Jew to try and keep the law, and the law is now despised. Jesus said that whoever doesn't keep the law of Moses to then teach other people not to keep it will be the least in the kingdom of heaven, but how many Christians really believe Jesus? Jesus told us that the Pharisees sit in the seat of Moses and that we should do whatever the high priest would have us do, but ask a high priest what a Gentile should do concerning the laws and the priest wouldn't have them doing much at all but that they should walk humbly, to love mercy and to not involve themselves in the worship of other gods...........Jesus told us that we better keep the laws better than those Pharisees in high places kept the laws.
The law is for things to go well for you, that's all. If somebody really wants to know the laws, they have to first love the law and be willing to study how all of it is practiced just like nobody will never understand the wheat harvest unless they understand how it is all done from beginning to end. You have to be willing to study it, and that is no use at all when you despise the law.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hannibal Flavius
Acts 21 shows thousands of Pharisees who believed in Jesus and it says that theh became much more zealous to keep the law, and this makes perfect sense because all the curses and punishments had now been taken away, OF COURSE they became more zealous to keep the laws of Moses, and the Gentile converts were so ambitous to do the same things Jews did, they wanted to follow the culture and heritage of Jews so bad that they took it too far, especially when somebody said that keeping any law would save you, that is ridiculous.
The Jesus that is depicted in the Gospels was represented as accepting and subscribing to Pharisaic beliefs. The author of Gospel Matthew went out of his way to establish that Jesus represented the fulfillment of the Zoroastrian prophecy of the coming saoshyant (savior) that would sit in judgement of humankind at the ushering in of the kingdom of God. The belief in the coming savior was widely held by non Jewish hellenistic people, as was the belief in the continuation of life after death in heaven by many hellenistic people.
Matthew 2:1-2 (Greek Interlinear Translation)
OF-the yet Jesus being born in BETHLEHEM OF-the Judea in DAYS OF-HEROD THE KING lo! MAGians
(magi/magoi)from the east came-along into Jerusalem saying ?-where IS BEING-BROUGHT-FORTH KING OF-THE JUDA-ans WE-PERCEIVED for OF-HIM the star in the east and WE-CAME TO-worship to-Him. http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineI...NTpdf/mat2.pdf
The MAGians/Magoi, or magi, were Zoroastrian priests, come, according to Gospel Matthew, to sanctify and establish the long awaited coming of the prophesied Zoroastrian saoshyant (savior).
Magi
Wikipedia
Magi
Magi (/'me?d?a?/; singular magus /'me?g?s/; from Latin magus) denotes followers of Zoroastrianism or Zoroaster. The earliest known use of the word Magi is in the trilingual inscription written by Darius the Great, known as the Behistun Inscription. Old Persian texts, pre-dating the Hellenistic period, refer to a Magus as a Zurvanic, and presumably Zoroastrian, priest. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magi
The Jesus of the Gospels clearly held Pharisaic beliefs. The historical Yeshua, if he existed at all, has been lost to history. So we have no way to know WHAT he actually believed.
Last edited by Tired of the Nonsense; 10-22-2018 at 05:02 PM..
"Some say" lots of different things. Christianity is made up of 43,000 different denominations, so it's not surprising that you are confronted by differing opinions.
The Center for the Study of Global Christianity at Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary estimated 34,000 denominations in 2000, rising to an estimated 43,000 in 2012. These numbers have exploded from 1,600 in the year 1900. https://theway21stcentury.wordpress....ons-worldwide/
Which one represents what Jesus actually taught? As I have been pointing out, Jesus wrote down NOTHING. Everything that is being represented as "the things Jesus taught," are in reality things that other people claimed that Jesus taught years after Jesus was dead. In the fourth century the newly formed Catholic church was given the task by the Roman emperor Constantine of deciding which of all of the various works that represented themselves as being the things that Jesus taught would be accepted as Christian dogma. The result is the current 27 books of the NT. What Jesus taught, what Jesus believed and what Jesus represented was decided by individuals who were further in time from Jesus than you are from Napoleon. The original Yeshua upon whom modern Christianity is based may or may not have ever existed. If he existed he has long since been long lost to history over the course of the intervening centuries by Christians who busily worked to construct a mythological Jesus the Christ who would conform to their personal wants and desires. As a result the mythological Jesus is as varied as the 43,000 different denominations that claim to represent "true Christianity."
This is what you will be confronted with if you choose to follow the actual facts and evidence to your own conclusion. My honest conclusion by the time I was thirteen was that religion in general and Christianity specifically are far too contradictory and far too silly to have any real relationship to the truth. That does not mean that many of the things attributed to Jesus, such as "love thy neighbor," are not valid. But anyone who lives their lives according to the golden rule already believes that we should treat others as we would wish to be treated ourselves. It's not necessary to ACTUALLY believe that a corpse returned to life and subsequently flew away to attempt to live by the precept of do no harm to others. Living according to the golden rule is the necessary foundation of human morality for ALL functioning societies.
If you prefer NOT to be confused by the facts, then return to your church and only discuss the things you have been taught to believe with other individuals who were taught to believe exactly as you do.
You obviously think, like so many others, that morality is the essence of religion. But morality and religion are separate things. People think that everything in the Old Testament is religion. It is not. The OT is a collection of various aspects of a culture -- its history, its mythology, philosophy, and its legal code. And its religious beliefs.
So now we seem to be stuck with the idea that anything in the OT is religion.
Moral codes exist in all social animal groups, not just humans. Other animals don't have bibles and churches, but they have rules and morality, and altruism.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
