FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 03:12 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 09-02-2008, 09:24 PM   #141
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: San Bernardino, Calif.
Posts: 5,435
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sschlichter View Post
I guess it is kind of a large passage. Maybe we could discuss in smaller segments.
OK. I'll get started, and when I've done enough for one post, I'll put it up and see where it takes us.
Doug Shaver is offline  
Old 09-03-2008, 11:09 PM   #142
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 2,608
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sschlichter View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by storytime View Post


They are cut-off, period. The instruments of that blessing were concluded in the one seed called Jacob-Israel.

Jesus did not change the covenant made with Abraham. The law of Moses which came 450 years after the covenant made with Abraham did not make void the ritual of circumcision. Both law and circumcision can be viewed as the two witnesses before the throne of God.

Paul didn't change law or circumcision. He merely made the attempt to pacify the Gentiles in a faith only doctrine which was false as evidenced by OT scripture which states that both circumcision of flesh and heart is the required protocol in order for anyone to be recognized as "a people" or person of God. "God does not change".

"A people" holds its definition in Israel. For there was only one people (one seed) that God recognized as his own in the sons of Jacob-Israel. The Hebrews captured their God in their ideal image, and so made no way for His escape. So, when Paul took his gospel to the Gentiles, he didn't offer them equality with the Jews. What he offered them was conversion to Christ, a Jew. And Jesus the Jew preached Judaism. Jesus expected all to follow him in his way, truth and life-style of Judaism. Which meant any uncircumcised Gentiles were expected to take up their cross and be circumcised, and keep the law of Moses. To the Jew first, and also to the Gentile convert to Judaism.
You have not addressed any of the references to foreign nations that I supplied in your theory.

also, you view of Paul's teaching of the importance of circumcision conflicts with the words of Paul. Please explain how you can harmonize these vberses with your theory.

(Rom 2:28) For a person is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision something that is outward in the flesh,

(Rom 4:9) Is this blessedness then for the circumcision or also for the uncircumcision? For we say, " faith was credited to Abraham as righteousness."
(Rom 4:10) How then was it credited to him? Was he circumcised at the time, or not? No, he was not circumcised but uncircumcised!
(Rom 4:11) And he received the sign of circumcision as a seal of the righteousness that he had by faith while he was still uncircumcised, so that he would become the father of all those who believe but have never been circumcised, that they too could have righteousness credited to them.
(Rom 4:12) And he is also the father of the circumcised, who are not only circumcised, but who also walk in the footsteps of the faith that our father Abraham possessed when he was still uncircumcised.
(Rom 4:13) For the promise to Abraham or to his descendants that he would inherit the world was not fulfilled through the law, but through the righteousness that comes by faith.

(I Cor 7:19) Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing. Instead, keeping God's commandments is what counts.

(Gal 5:6) For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision carries any weight - the only thing that matters is faith working through love.

(Gal 6:15) For neither circumcision nor uncircumcision counts for anything; the only thing that matters is a new creation!

Of nations as inheritance to Abraham and his seed are listed in Gen.15:18-21

"In the same day the Lord made a covenant with Abram, saying, Unto thy seed have I given this land, from the river of Egypt unto the great river Euphrates: The Kennites, and the Kenizzites, and the Kadmonites, and the Hittites, and the Perizzites, and the Rephaim, and the Amorties, and the Canaanites, and the Girgashites, and the Jebusites."

Is there any other nationalities of people that Abraham and his seed inherited?

About Rm.2:28, Paul could have just as easily explained it this way:

Ask a Jewish rabbi if he is a hypocrit or a real Jew inwardly who follows his traditional customs of food laws and sabbath keeping, etc. Or does he merely parade himself in public for show, as a Jew outwardly, boasting his circumcision. It seems that Paul was speaking of hypocrisy (taking the name of the Lord God in vain), compared to matters of the heart that determined devotion and loyalty to their god. One must have the desire[love] to please god just as Abraham through faith, and to obey in follow through with the proper actionable behavior called works.

Was a Jew considered worth anything if he did not produce fruit [works] fit for the kingdom of God? Or was he considered as stubble, fully dry, ready to be burned because of his unproductivity? It doesn't look to me as if the Jewish god had any use for Jews unless they produced [worked] for him, to keep his name great among the nations[of Israel]. For God, to keep God alive, was expedient to His purpose.
storytime is offline  
Old 09-04-2008, 12:07 AM   #143
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 2,608
Default

"Must you be sinless to make it into heaven?"

Ezekiel 33 pretty well answers that question. It also explains the going in and out of Judaism. iow, a return is always possible as the doors [gates] are always open and never shut.(NT)

In Romans 1-3, Paul is addressing his Jewish brethren who are citizens of Rome and Greece [ or Greeks]. Paul himself was both a Jew and citizen of Rome, thus his appeal to Caesar prevented the Jews from stoning him to death. Jesus wasn't so lucky in that regard and was judged and convicted under Jewish law as Judaean.

What is a sin? Transgression of law. Reading the NT, I find the whole story is in transgression of OT law given to Jews[Israel] at Sinai. Jesus makes himself equal to God in direct contradiction of established doctrine. Peter's vision is lies because God had caused visions to cease (Ez.12:23-28, 13:1-3). Paul lies about uncircumcised Gentiles being accepted by God as a people. (Which would have made two groups of people and two namesakes, of which nothing can be found in OT to validate that claim).

I agree with Pete(mountainman) that this is a totally invented story created for the benefit of the Roman Emperor Constantine and inflicted with the wickedness of Euesbius and whoever else in their purpose of building manageable wealth and expansion of the empire by/through a conspiracy. Also, deceiving the Jews into believing a different doctrine through a Jewish god-man who they thought would satisfy the Jewish idea of resurrection and Messiah. Probably ignorant Jews who were unlearned in scriptures was the target of this new inventive religion. "Sin" was then inflicted without law to the Gentiles, as the character Paul presented his god as no respector of persons.

What then is "sin" to non-Jewish people? BIG fat and fanciful lies in a bastardized Judaism.
storytime is offline  
Old 09-04-2008, 06:55 AM   #144
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: West Virginina
Posts: 4,349
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HaRaAYaH View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by WVIncagold View Post
I disagree HaRaAYaH if it is commanded and without the OT the NT has no meaning so Xians don't get a free pass. Just because they decide to be Jewish lite does not mean they are exempt. When they stole your religion they also must accept the baggage that comes with it and yet they do not. While i agree it is not the death penalty we are talking about what we are talking about is sin. What makes wool and cotton together a sin? Again I reiterate it is all about control. Sin is nothing but a control mechanism enabling the few elitist to reign over a mass public.
You really are wildly off the mark. First, these rules only apply to Jews and Christians are not Jews. They are no longer bound to the Torah laws the way Jews are. How Christians view the Torah and the laws contained therein is up to them.

I guess you want a discussion of "sin" from a Jewish point of view and that's fine, I think you will be surprised. But first, please tell me what you think sin is? Are all "sins" the same?
I do not believe i to be off the mark at all. Xians stole the jewish religion, then they decidied it was way to restrictive and then decided they did not need to follow those things declared as sin so they became Jewish Lite all the worship but only half the guilt. I beleieve i have stated several times what i believe sin to be. made up rules in order to govern people. There are listed 600 sins i posted earlier. It is all about control of the people by the elite authority. There is no other purpose. There is no such thing as sin except for that found in the books of bronze age sheep herders. Sin does not exist so therefore all sin is the same yes, make believe hooyey. I have several jewish friends although they are humanist and no longer practice so i doubt you will suprise me but i am open to leraning new forms of hooyey.
WVIncagold is offline  
Old 09-04-2008, 06:59 AM   #145
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: N/A
Posts: 4,370
Default

Hmm. Well, there's an idea; replace confirmation with circumcision.

It should certainly put a stop to all the little atheists getting confirmed; or, at least, give those who can't duck out of it something REAL to complain about!

You wouldn't half feel hurt if you went through that and then decided you were an atheist
Roger Pearse is offline  
Old 09-04-2008, 07:12 AM   #146
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: West Virginina
Posts: 4,349
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sschlichter View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug Shaver View Post
That's going to take me a while. I'll get back to you on it as soon as I can.
I guess it is kind of a large passage. Maybe we could discuss in smaller segments.
please do it in another thread you are derailing this one quite a bit as it is.
WVIncagold is offline  
Old 09-04-2008, 07:07 PM   #147
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 2,608
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Pearse View Post
Hmm. Well, there's an idea; replace confirmation with circumcision.

It should certainly put a stop to all the little atheists getting confirmed; or, at least, give those who can't duck out of it something REAL to complain about!

You wouldn't half feel hurt if you went through that and then decided you were an atheist
All the little atheists getting confirmed?

Roger, do you consider yourself a sinner?
storytime is offline  
Old 09-04-2008, 08:02 PM   #148
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Metro Detroit, MI
Posts: 3,201
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WVIncagold View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by sschlichter View Post

I guess it is kind of a large passage. Maybe we could discuss in smaller segments.
please do it in another thread you are derailing this one quite a bit as it is.
The discussion of what Romans says about sin is derailing in a thread about sin in a biblical criticism forum? that's interesting?
sschlichter is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:51 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.