God

[Tinkerpeach]

All of which came down to the nasty Republicans killing off 2% of the US population for political reasons while the Democrats were simply defending their home states. Sad.

Yes, I suppose that is your understanding of that quote...and I appreciate it as a reasonable understanding/interpretation. Important to note that the article in that appreciation being the indefinite rather than the definite..."a" reasonable understanding/interpretation...NOT "the" reasonable understanding/interpretation.

There is value for Christians who interpret the passage that way...while interpreting it in other reasonable ways present bumps in the road.

The interpretation I favor is that Jesus was assuring his audience that nothing in the law...not one letter, nor even a stroke of one letter...was to be changed because of his coming...until Heaven and Earth disappear.

Okay...the Earth definitely is still here, and I am assured by Christians that Heaven is still here and will last forever.

But parts of "the Law" have changed, as well it should...some occasioned by changes Jesus suggested.

More on this as the discussion proceeds.

Your interpretation is held by only Jews really.

The OT clearly states that the Messiah would replace the old laws and they would no longer be relevant

Jerimiah 31:31 clearly states the the old laws will be replaced

There is nothing to even interpret here as the Bible is extremely clear that the arrival of Jesus was the fulfillment of the law, Jesus Himself said that.

 

[gfm7175]

Jesus didn't address homosexuality

You keep telling yourself that.

 

[gfm7175]

Jesus didn't address homosexuality! And you can't spin it that he did!

You keep telling yourself that.

 

[Tinkerpeach]

All of which came down to the nasty Republicans killing off 2% of the US population for political reasons while the Democrats were simply defending their home states. Sad.

This is the most corrosive aspect of any religion: the threat.

I understand the threat quite well and realize it is a really effective means of strongarming someone into believing as the believer does. Believe as I do or face eternal torment.

It is, also, a VERY good indicator that the God they worship is not one who "so loved the world" but rather the vindictive mob-boss model. Since that doesn't make ANY theological sense to me I am forced to assume that version of God is NOT accurate.

I don’t care if people believe or not, that’s not my job so it’s not a threat it is merely a fact.

You are free not to believe but if you are wrong there is no going back.

Why don’t you simply ask God to give you the proof you desire and He probably will in His own time.

If nothing happens then you can rest at ease but isn’t the risk worth the try?

 

[Ross Dolan]

Your interpretation is held by only Jews really.

I am not a Jew...so that interpretation is NOT only held by Jews.

The OT clearly states that the Messiah would replace the old laws and they would no longer be relevant

The New Testament does not. Jesus says that he is not here to change the old laws in any way. Are you calling Jesus a liar?

Jerimiah 31:31 clearly states the the old laws will be replaced

As I said...the New Testament does not...and Jesus said that was not why he was here.

There is nothing to even interpret here as the Bible is extremely clear that the arrival of Jesus was the fulfillment of the law, Jesus Himself said that.

If it is clear...and if you are not calling Jesus a liar...then the laws do not change.

 

[Ross Dolan]

You keep telling yourself that.

I have a very extensive library of Bibles...and in none of them does Jesus address the issue of homosexuality...except that he says that the old laws do not change.

Now, some Christians claim the old laws ended...even though Jesus said they did not.

Kinda sets up a dilemma.

 

[Saint Guinefort]

I don’t care if people believe or not, that’s not my job so it’s not a threat it is merely a fact.

You are free not to believe but if you are wrong there is no going back.

Why don’t you simply ask God to give you the proof you desire and He probably will in His own time.

If nothing happens then you can rest at ease but isn’t the risk worth the try?

Can I ask if you get a little thrill out of telling people they are going to go to hell unless they believe as you do? I always assume it is that little niggling "superiority" that leaks through. You aren't passing along a "threat", no you're just tellin' it like it is. It just so happens YOU LUCKED OUT AND BELIEVED IN THE RIGHT GOD, the rest of the world is going to h-e-double toothpicks and will burn forever.

All because they chose NOT believe as YOU DO. They had the information, YOU TOLD 'EM! Good on ya!

Thanks for thinking of us.

 

[Tinkerpeach]

All of which came down to the nasty Republicans killing off 2% of the US population for political reasons while the Democrats were simply defending their home states. Sad.

Can I ask if you get a little thrill out of telling people they are going to go to hell unless they believe as you do? I always assume it is that little niggling "superiority" that leaks through. You aren't passing along a "threat", no you're just tellin' it like it is. It just so happens YOU LUCKED OUT AND BELIEVED IN THE RIGHT GOD, the rest of the world is going to h-e-double toothpicks and will burn forever.

All because they chose NOT believe as YOU DO. They had the information, YOU TOLD 'EM! Good on ya!

Thanks for thinking of us.

I get no thrill out of it, I simply don’t care.

We won’t care about those that didn’t make it once we get to Heaven, God tells us so.

So why would I care now?

 

[Cypress]

I have a very extensive library of Bibles...and in none of them does Jesus address the issue of homosexuality...except that he says that the old laws do not change.

Now, some Christians claim the old laws ended...even though Jesus said they did not.

Kinda sets up a dilemma.

I don't think it's a good idea to hold 21st century values as the standard to judge 1st century people.

I don't think we can expect Jesus to be an active crusader for gay rights.

I think it is significant he never spoke about gays. That suggests to me he didn't consider it significant or even worth the time to merge into the moral vision he was interested in teaching

 

[Tinkerpeach]

All of which came down to the nasty Republicans killing off 2% of the US population for political reasons while the Democrats were simply defending their home states. Sad.

I don't think it's a good idea to hold 21st century values as the standard to judge 1st century people.

I don't think we can expect Jesus to be an active crusader for gay rights.

I think it is significant he never spoke about gays. That suggests to me he didn't consider it significant or even worth the time to merge into the moral vision he was interested in teaching

Jesus didn’t speak on 99% of the issues in the world.

He didn’t speak on pedophelia but do you think He didn’t care about it?

Homosexual was already addressed in the OT so He didn’t need to address it again

 

[IBDaMann]

There's an Assumption that homosexual sin is worse than heterosexual sin!

Where is this assumption, besides "there" and not "here"? Chater and verse.

 

[Tinkerpeach]

All of which came down to the nasty Republicans killing off 2% of the US population for political reasons while the Democrats were simply defending their home states. Sad.

All sin is equal but it’s the failure to repent that makes it worse.

 

[Melchizedek = Michael]

I don't think it's a good idea to hold 21st century values as the standard to judge 1st century people.

I don't think we can expect Jesus to be an active crusader for gay rights.

I think it is significant he never spoke about gays. That suggests to me he didn't consider it significant or even worth the time to merge into the moral vision he was interested in teaching

Excellent point !

 

[Melchizedek = Michael]

Jesus didn’t speak on 99% of the issues in the world.

He didn’t speak on pedophelia but do you think He didn’t care about it?

Homosexual was already addressed in the OT so He didn’t need to address it again

What's the difference between homosexuality sin and heterosexual sin?

 

[Melchizedek = Michael]

Where is this assumption, besides "there" and not "here"? Chater and verse.

In peoples minds

 

[IBDaMann]

Jeez.

I wonder if there are any gods.

I know some people blindly guess there is at least one...and some blindly guess there are none...

...so I wonder which is correct.

You omitted atheists, who don't even guess.

 

[IBDaMann]

What's the difference between homosexuality sin and heterosexual sin?

It's an entirely different lifestyle choice of sin.

 

[IBDaMann]

In peoples minds

Are you pretending to speak for other people?

 

[Cypress]

Jesus didn’t speak on 99% of the issues in the world.

He didn’t speak on pedophelia but do you think He didn’t care about it?

Homosexual was already addressed in the OT so He didn’t need to address it again

Trump ass kissers are always trying to conflate gays with pedophilia.

You don't seem to know this, but adult men were marrying 13 and 14 year old girls in the ancient world as common practice

You're not a mind reader on what Jesus thought.

What we have, and what we can judge him on are the words, parables, and aphorisms he is reported to have said.

 

[gfm7175]

Yes, I suppose that is your understanding of that quote...and I appreciate it as a reasonable understanding/interpretation. Important to note that the article in that appreciation being the indefinite rather than the definite..."a" reasonable understanding/interpretation...NOT "the" reasonable understanding/interpretation.

There is value for Christians who interpret the passage that way...while interpreting it in other reasonable ways present bumps in the road.

The interpretation I favor is that Jesus was assuring his audience that nothing in the law...not one letter, nor even a stroke of one letter...was to be changed because of his coming...until Heaven and Earth disappear.

Okay...the Earth definitely is still here, and I am assured by Christians that Heaven is still here and will last forever.

But parts of "the Law" have changed, as well it should...some occasioned by changes Jesus suggested.

More on this as the discussion proceeds.

I really do think that this particular understanding of those verses completely glosses over the final words of each of them, which are: "I came to accomplish [the Old Testament's] purpose." [and] "...until [the Old Testament's] purpose is achieved".

This begs two questions: "What is the purpose of the Old Testament?" "How is the purpose of the Old Testament accomplished?" What's interesting is that later on in the book of Matthew (Matthew 11:13), Jesus makes another reference to the same "law and prophets" which is referenced here in Matthew 5. In Matthew 11, Jesus states: "For all the Prophets and the Law prophesied until John (the Baptist)"... The LAW OF MOSES prophesied?! IOW, what's being said here by Jesus is that the entirety of the OT prophetically anticipated the arrival of him. Now that Jesus has arrived (and lived and died and rose again), the anticipation (OT) has been fulfilled (NT).

Jesus is the true temple. Jesus is the true unblemished blood sacrifice. Jesus, via his innocent death on the cross, ushered in the New Testament era of fulfillment to complete the Old Testament era of anticipation.

Now what is still left to be fulfilled is Jesus' "second coming" (this time as a King), as prophesied mainly in Daniel (OT) and Revelation (NT).