Where Christianity Diverges from Scripture

[SteveB]

Cool.
That's his issue not mine if he doesn't want to drop around for a beer or a glass of plonk and a chat.

It actually is your issue.
As far as a chat goes, you'll have to ask him yourself.

 

[J regia]

It actually is your issue.
As far as a chat goes, you'll have to ask him yourself.

Why is it my issue?
Surely if he's actually interested he could drive here or catch a taxi or use Shank's pony.

 

[SteveB]

Why is it my issue?
Surely if he's actually interested he could drive here or catch a taxi or use Shank's pony.

It's your violation of His Law that won't pass away until all is fulfilled.

 

[The Pixie]

Two things that are of great importance here.

1- Jesus fulfilled the Law.
2- you have not, and as such you are under condemnation from your failure to do so.

So can you tell me what "fulfilled" means in this context?

Does it mean "completed" as 4Him contends, and if so, what does it mean to complete the law? The law includes a prohibition against eating pork and against adultery; why does Jesus completing the law mean Christians can eat pork but not adultery?

This should be easy, as 4Him has already given his answer - or so he assures us - all you have to do is put it in your own words.

 

[J regia]

It's your violation of His Law that won't pass away until all is fulfilled.

Why should I obey/carry-out/execute/do/comply-with/fulfil the commandments in Leviticus 20:10 and Numbers 5:20-28 to terminate the pregnancies of adulteresses or to commit genocide (Deut 7:1-2) till heaven and earth pass?

 

[SteveB]

So can you tell me what "fulfilled" means in this context?

He lived in obedience to the law, and satisfied God's righteousness. This is demonstrated by the fact that YHVH having raised Jesus from the dead. If Jesus had not satisfied the righteousness of YHVH, he would have sinned, and thus failed to achieve the goal for which he had come to earth.
That YHVH did in fact raise Jesus from the dead, this is proof that he satisfied the righteousness of YHVH.

Does it mean "completed" as 4Him contends, and if so, what does it mean to complete the law?

He fulfilled every part of the law which was required.

The law includes a prohibition against eating pork and against adultery; why does Jesus completing the law mean Christians can eat pork but not adultery?

Different kind of impact.
Adultery, as all sexual immorality, impacts our heart.
Eating pork deals with the body's digestive tract.
If pork is not properly cooked, it can make us sick with parasites.

Sexual immorality, as Paul says in 1 Corinthians 6, joins our hearts to our sexual partner. As God has designed us to be connected at that level with one person who is the opposite gender to us, and then for a lifetime, to do so with multiple people breaks our hearts and makes it impossible to make the lasting connection between us, and the consequences are highly complicated due to the nature of love and happiness and human interaction.

This should be easy, as 4Him has already given his answer - or so he assures us - all you have to do is put it in your own words.

Done.

 

[SteveB]

Why should I obey/carry-out/execute/do/comply-with/fulfil the commandments in Leviticus 20:10 and Numbers 5:20-28 to terminate the pregnancies of adulteresses or to commit genocide (Deut 7:1-2) till heaven and earth pass?

Nobody ever said you did.

You are however held accountable for your views and attitudes and actions towards YHVH, your parents, your children, your neighbors and the people with whom you interact on a daily basis.

I.e., the ten commandments.

 

[The Pixie]

He lived in obedience to the law, and satisfied God's righteousness.

So in your view "fulfilled" means to obey and satisfied God's righteousness., given the text says Jesus obeyed the law.

Now, the second part is: Can you find any dictionary that agrees with that definition?

See, the point about this thread is that this is something where Christianity diverges from the Bible. The Bible says Jesus completed the prophecies in the Old Testament - Jesus fulfilled the book of The Law and the book of The Prophets.

Christianity insists that the verse says Jesus lived in obedience to the law, and satisfied God's righteousness, and so is obliged to invent this very off definition of fulfilled.

He fulfilled every part of the law which was required.

So now you are telling me "fulfilled" means "fulfilled". Well thanks for that Steve.

Different kind of impact.
Adultery, as all sexual immorality, impacts our heart.
Eating pork deals with the body's digestive tract.
If pork is not properly cooked, it can make us sick with parasites.

So your position is that Jesus "fulfilling" he law meant Christians no longer have to keep laws that impact the digestive tract, but do still have to impact laws that impact the heart, right?

Can you talk me though that? How do you know that? Where is it made clear that it is only laws that impact the digestive tract that were abolished, and not laws that impact the heart?

What about the law about wearing garments made of different types of thread? What about keeping the sabbath? What about the prohibition against stealing?

I am especially curious given Jesus said he was not abolishing any laws at all.

What about the prohibition against slavery, which Christians have now adopted. Did Jesus supposedly "fulfilling" the law mean chattel slavery is no longer allowed?

 

[SteveB]

So in your view "fulfilled" means to obey and satisfied God's righteousness., given the text says Jesus obeyed the law.

Now, the second part is: Can you find any dictionary that agrees with that definition?

Dictionary.com

verb (used with object), ful·filled, ful·fil·ling. to carry out, or bring to realization, as a prophecy or promise.

to perform or do, as duty; obey or follow, as commands.

Miriam Webster dictionary

Definition of fulfill transitive verb

1a: to put into effect : EXECUTE He fulfilled his pledge to cut taxes.

b: to meet the requirements of (a business order) Their order for more TVs was promptly fulfilled.

c: to measure up to : SATISFY She hasn't yet fulfilled the requirements needed to graduate.

See, the point about this thread is that this is something where Christianity diverges from the Bible. The Bible says Jesus completed the prophecies in the Old Testament - Jesus fulfilled the book of The Law and the book of The Prophets.

And he did.

Christianity insists that the verse says Jesus lived in obedience to the law, and satisfied God's righteousness, and so is obliged to invent this very off definition of fulfilled.

Seems to me that you simply never bothered actually reading the dictionary.

So now you are telling me "fulfilled" means "fulfilled". Well thanks for that Steve.


So your position is that Jesus "fulfilling" he law meant Christians no longer have to keep laws that impact the digestive tract, but do still have to impact laws that impact the heart, right?

I never said anything about christians not having to live in agreement with the law.

According to Romans 3:31, we fulfill the law by faith.
According to Romans 8:3-8 the only way for us to satisfy the ordinance of the law is by walking in the Spirit, which is only possible by focusing our thoughts on spiritual things.
According to Romans 13:8-10, we who love fulfill the law.

According to Jesus, in Matthew 22:35-40, the law is fulfilled in loving YHVH with our whole heart, soul, mind and strength.
He went so far as to say that the entire law and prophets hang on those two commandments.

Can you talk me though that? How do you know that? Where is it made clear that it is only laws that impact the digestive tract that were abolished, and not laws that impact the heart?

I already have.

What about the law about wearing garments made of different types of thread? What about keeping the sabbath? What about the prohibition against stealing?

What part of what they're saying are you offended by?

I am especially curious given Jesus said he was not abolishing any laws at all.

Which is why I'm asking what part are you offended by?

What about the prohibition against slavery, which Christians have now adopted. Did Jesus supposedly "fulfilling" the law mean chattel slavery is no longer allowed?

Where do you think we came up with this one?
You really need to read to know where and why.
Start with the gospel of John. You'll find it in there.

 

[J regia]

Nobody ever said you did.
You are however held accountable for your views and attitudes and actions towards YHVH, your parents, your children, your neighbors and the people with whom you interact on a daily basis.

I.e., the ten commandments.

But the ten commandments etc are obviously just man-made since they didn't apply to Abraham et al and their ancestors.
Which is why it wasn't morally wrong for Abraham to be commanded to butcher and cook his son as a sacrificial meal even if the god chose to eat an old ram instead, or for Cain-an to kill his brother Abel, or for Noah's father to murder a young man (Gen 4). And why it wasn't morally wrong for Abraham to have a sexual relationship with his sister Sarah and commit adultery with Hagar.

 

[SteveB]

But the ten commandments etc are obviously just man-made since they didn't apply to Abraham et al and their ancestors.

This was previously explained to you several months ago. If you're going to play games of ignorance you're not going to help yourself.

Which is why it wasn't morally wrong for Abraham to be commanded to butcher and cook his son as a sacrificial meal even if the god chose to eat an old ram instead, or for Cain-an to kill his brother Abel, or for Noah's father to murder a young man (Gen 4).

Why don't you just ask him.

And why it wasn't morally wrong for Abraham to have a sexual relationship with his sister Sarah and commit adultery with Hagar.

Again, this was explained to you a few times several months ago.

 

[J regia]

This was previously explained to you several months ago. If you're going to play games of ignorance you're not going to help yourself.

IOW the ten commandments etc are obviously just man-made since they didn't apply to Abraham et al and their ancestors

Why don't you just ask him.

Because the bible doesn't say that it was morally wrong for Abraham to butcher and cook his son as commanded, or for Cain-an to kill his brother Abel or for Noah's father to murder a young man (Gen 4).

Again, this was explained to you a few times several months ago.

And that's because the ten commandments etc are just man-made and didn't apply to Abraham.

 

[SteveB]

IOW the ten commandments etc are obviously just man-made since they didn't apply to Abraham et al and their ancestors

No. It does however mean that you playing dumb is embarrassing to yourself.

Because the bible doesn't say that it was morally wrong for Abraham to butcher and cook his son as commanded, or for Cain-an to kill his brother Abel or for Noah's father to murder a young man (Gen 4).

Ah yes. Ignorance does indeed have a deleterious impact on people who want to show themselves as intellectuals.

And that's because the ten commandments etc are just man-made and didn't apply to Abraham.

You should consider that God and Abraham were friends and talked face to face.

 

[J regia]

No. It does however mean that you playing dumb is embarrassing to yourself.

Ah yes. Ignorance does indeed have a deleterious impact on people who want to show themselves as intellectuals.

You should consider that God and Abraham were friends and talked face to face.

IOW the ten commandments etc are just man-made since they didn't apply to Abraham et al and their ancestors.

 

[rossh]

This came up in a thread recently, and I was challenged to find some example. I have a few. If anyone wants to add more, then please do!

1 Satan is under God's control

Christianity tells us that Satan is working against God, but the Bible actually makes clear that Satan is just doing God's work - thus in the last chapter of Job, it makes clear that all the troubles that befell Job were due - ultimately - to God.

2 When you die you go to heaven

Christianity tells us that when we die, if we are good, we go to heaven right then. However, the Biblical position is that the dead are all in Sheol, and the righteous do not go to heaven until the day of judgement - and in fact, rather than go to heaven, the kingdom of God will come to earth

3 The Trinity

Christianity maintains the Trinity, but it is absent from the Bible. Sure, God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit are mentioned in the same sentence, but no where does it say they are the same thing.

4 Give up your wealth

Jesus was clear that his follower should give up their material goods, and trust in God to provide. Luke 12:33 Sell your possessions and give to the poor. ... Christians (besides monks and nuns) do not do that.

5 Die that day

God told Adam if he ate the fruit, he would die that day. Christians pretend he meant something else, as Adam did not die the day he ate the fruit.

6 Fulfill

Christians pretend "fulfill" has some weird meaning so that Jesus fulfilling laws means those laws no longer need to be observed.

7 Generation

In a similar manner, Christians pretend "generation" has some weird meaning so that when Jesus said "This Generation Shall Not Pass", he was not wrong.

8 Flat earth and firmament

The Bible is clear in numerous places that the earth is flat; the sun, moon and stars are just points of light on a solid dome.

9 Snake in Eden

Christianity pretends the snake in the garden of Eden was Satan, but the text does not say that, and the fact that God cursed all snakes for what the snake did makes clear this was not Satan.

10 References to Satan

In fact, Christianity claims many verses are about Satan, when this is simply not true. Isaiah 14:12-15 and Ezekiel 28:12-19, for example, are purely about the king of Babylon and the king of Tyre respectively.

No 1, so why no proof of this supposition, surly there is Scripture to prove this claim ? We do know that Lucifer was Gods most beautiful angel and as such he supposed that he was Himself God.. Ezk 28, Isa 14..

 

[rossh]

No 1, so why no proof of this supposition, surly there is Scripture to prove this claim ? We do know that Lucifer was Gods most beautiful angel and as such he supposed that he was Himself God.. Ezk 28, Isa 14..

Why ask me for proof I was no where near those people. But you can also have " faith, trust and or belief " ..

 

[The Pixie]

No 1, so why no proof of this supposition, surly there is Scripture to prove this claim ?

Sure, it is in the last chapter of Job, as I said.

Specifically, verse 11, where it is clear that every Satan did to Job was ultimately due to God.

Job 42:11 Then all his brothers, all his sisters, and all who had known him before came to him, and they ate bread with him in his house; and they sympathized with him and comforted him for all the adversities that the Lord had brought on him. ...​

We do know that Lucifer was Gods most beautiful angel and as such he supposed that he was Himself God.. Ezk 28, Isa 14..

No, no, no! That is what Christianity pretends the text says, but the truth is that those verses are not about Satan at all.

"Lucifer" is a sarcastic taunt at the King of Babylon, and is not even used in modern translations - the word "lucifer" is absent from most Bibles these days. And yet Christians are convinced the word is Biblical!

Isaiah 14 is about the King of Babylon, as verse 4 makes clear. Ezekial 28 is about the King of Tyre, as verse 2 makes clear. These are, once more, examples of how Christianity has warped the text to mean something different, perhaps claiming that these kings are "types", whatever that means. The text are specifically about men, not Satan.

The Old Testament has little about Satan, and what there is indicates an angel working under God's authority.

 

[The Pixie]

Dictionary.com

verb (used with object), ful·filled, ful·fil·ling. to carry out, or bring to realization, as a prophecy or promise.

to perform or do, as duty; obey or follow, as commands.

Miriam Webster dictionary

Definition of fulfill transitive verb

1a: to put into effect : EXECUTE He fulfilled his pledge to cut taxes.

b: to meet the requirements of (a business order) Their order for more TVs was promptly fulfilled.

c: to measure up to : SATISFY She hasn't yet fulfilled the requirements needed to graduate.


And he did.

But that is just what most people do, Steve. I obey the law, and I am sure you do too. We both fulfill the requirements of the law. It is the bit that Jesus did uniquely that is missing here.

I never said anything about christians not having to live in agreement with the law.

Most Christians say the laws of the OT, such as the prohibition on eating pork and shellfish, do not apply, and use this verse to rationalise that.

It sounds like maybe you agree with me that this verse does no such thing. If you want to say Jesus fulfilled the law, that is to say, he obeyed the law, then I think that is a little strained, but I will not press the point.

However, if you go the next step and say that the verse means Jesus "completed" the law, and therefore it no longer has to be observed, that that has gone beyond what the text actually says and into the realms of nonsense. And that seems to be a step you do not take, so maybe we have no argument here.

 

[rossh]

Sure, it is in the last chapter of Job, as I said.

Specifically, verse 11, where it is clear that every Satan did to Job was ultimately due to God.

Job 42:11 Then all his brothers, all his sisters, and all who had known him before came to him, and they ate bread with him in his house; and they sympathized with him and comforted him for all the adversities that the Lord had brought on him. ...​

No, no, no! That is what Christianity pretends the text says, but the truth is that those verses are not about Satan at all.

"Lucifer" is a sarcastic taunt at the King of Babylon, and is not even used in modern translations - the word "lucifer" is absent from most Bibles these days. And yet Christians are convinced the word is Biblical!

Isaiah 14 is about the King of Babylon, as verse 4 makes clear. Ezekial 28 is about the King of Tyre, as verse 2 makes clear. These are, once more, examples of how Christianity has warped the text to mean something different, perhaps claiming that these kings are "types", whatever that means. The text are specifically about men, not Satan.

The Old Testament has little about Satan, and what there is indicates an angel working under God's authority.

11 Then all his brothers and sisters came to him, also all who had known him before, and they ate a meal with him in his house. They consoled and comforted him for all the evils ADONAI had inflicted on him. Each one gave him a piece of silver and a gold ring.
lol,, the OT is not Christianity...

 

[SteveB]

But that is just what most people do, Steve. I obey the law, and I am sure you do too. We both fulfill the requirements of the law. It is the bit that Jesus did uniquely that is missing here.


Most Christians say the laws of the OT, such as the prohibition on eating pork and shellfish, do not apply, and use this verse to rationalise that.

It sounds like maybe you agree with me that this verse does no such thing. If you want to say Jesus fulfilled the law, that is to say, he obeyed the law, then I think that is a little strained, but I will not press the point.

However, if you go the next step and say that the verse means Jesus "completed" the law, and therefore it no longer has to be observed, that that has gone beyond what the text actually says and into the realms of nonsense. And that seems to be a step you do not take, so maybe we have no argument here.

There are 3 basic divisions in the law.

Moral code

Ceremonial code

Sanitary/dietary code.

The ceremonial code is specifically for the Hebrew people.

A read of the sanitary/dietary code and common sense shows what is valid.

Eg., I'd never eat undercooked pork because I don't want to get trichinosis.
I don't eat shellfish during the off seasons, because I don't want to get sick.

In that time and era, we have no idea what they knew about these things. So outlawing them makes sense to me--aka common sense-- and as such I have no problem whatsoever with it.

The moral code however is for everyone.
The manner and attitude you have towards God determines how you view yourself. The manner and attitude that you view yourself determines how you view your parents and your family members and your friends and neighbors.

So the first 3 commandments are important because they define your entire world view and how you treat others.
The next commandment is about your view of yourself.
The next one is about your parents, and the rest are about everyone else in your life.

So, it strikes me that you really need to take the time to read, learn, engage in discussion with YHVH, so you can understand why his laws are important for you, your mental, emotional, spiritual and overall health and wellbeing.