Freethought & Rationalism Archive

storytime · 08-31-2008, 04:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sschlichter

Quote:

Originally Posted by storytime

According to the bible, "sin" is transgression of the law. And the law applied to Israelites only. No other people were subject to the law of the Hebrew God, probably because other people held their own laws in their own nations and gods.

Before law for Israelites, it was said that every man did that which was right in his own eyes. Sorta like the settlers who first came to America. Everyone ruled their own families, settlements, territories. Then came the states and lawful government.

Who then is a sinner? Only Israelites can be caterogized in that governing body of Israel. When they transgressed the law of Moses, then were deemed sinners. Judgment in punishments according to the transgression was given, and in recognizing of the larger and lesser crimes. "Picking up sticks" on the Sabbath carried the death penalty by stoning. I think there must have been more to this picking up of sticks that merely cleaning out a field or township area. Maybe it had something to do with magic. I'm guessing that Moses knew how to turn sticks into snakes from his learning magic in Egypt. So practicing magic on the Sabbath may be the offense connected with sticks. What do you think?

I think you are right on in considering what the law meant to those recieving them and extrapolating what is important to God from that. Sticks are not the issue. I also agree with you on the aspect of the law that is given for the governance of a people. Here things like the death penalty should be given their context.

However, sin is also treated (Old and New Testament) as a condition of the heart. God intended to bless other nations through the Jews and he showed numerous times the concern he had beyond the Jews (Jonah, for example). Sin is universal and according to Romans 1 - 3 even those without the written law have an innate sense of God's law - and are therefore without excuse in breaking it (as all have done).

~Steve

Yes, sin was said to be a condition of the heart but of that condition it was in context and secularized to the people of God, the Israelites. God has nor claims any other people. For example, the Edomites[Esau] were hated by God while God loved the Israelites[Jacob].

The prophets wrote in a biased purpose, prejudiced and hatefilled toward other people, and this hatred as they spoke and wrote it was credited to their god. By His command the Israelites were to kill and slaughter other people in the land of Canaan. God had nor held no pity or mercy for the Canaanites. His command was to kill all that had breath within them, even the animals and tear down all symbols of other gods. Keep in mind that the Hebrew god was created as a tribal god and his only people Israelites in sons of Jacob. In the NT, it was said that God did not change. By this evidence we know that God of the OT still hates those who do not conform to the tradition of Hebrew/Israelite/Jewish ideology. The condition of the heart of Israelites was to be in obedience to the commands of their God. And the basic tenet of command was killing other for Him. "Without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sin". In the eyes of God, it was a sin for the sons of Jacob to leave other non-Israelite people alive.

The killing of other people was not counted as an offense to the Hebrew God. Only killing their own brethren was considered "sin", a transgression. "Thou shalt not kill" is a commandment aimed to enforce life in Israel, not outside that tribal nation. And this because killing their own brethren decreased their population and therein decreased the power of their God.

"Salvation is of the Jews", and no others. Convert to Judaism or die. In Old and New Testaments conversion is still required. Jesus nor apostles taught Gentile(non-Jewish) doctrine, as non-Jewish doctrine was considered "idol worship", and other competing gods. So did God have concern of people beyond his own Jewish people? No, that wasn't to be part of the purpose for Israel dominance and power.

"Sin" is a Hebrew construct within Israelite laws. Those in the world who did not receive those laws were not accountable to those laws, and not accountable to transgression of those laws. "Where there is no law there is no sin". Your example of Jonah shows Jonah conforming to the Israelite god. His conversion, so to speak.

I think it a huge mistake for people to believe themselves as "sinners", because they have not recognized that the term is specifically applied to serve a purpose in law for Israelites pertaining to transgression, "offense". This taking on a religion that relates to only one people in their tribal identity does not benefit the world and trying to fit oneself into that tradition of Israel and trying to please that particular god only causes more death and ill will among people in the world.

Offensive behavior is universal. "Sin" belongs to the transgressions in law established for Israelites at Sinai. It's their ballpark.

HaRaAYaH · 08-31-2008, 05:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Malachi151

This thread still doesn't address the fact that according to the Bible no one goes to heaven (except Jesus and a few other select folks).

That's only from a Christian point of view. Judaism does not hold that at all....

HaRaAYaH · 08-31-2008, 06:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by storytime

Yes, sin was said to be a condition of the heart but of that condition it was in context and secularized to the people of God, the Israelites. God has nor claims any other people. For example, the Edomites[Esau] were hated by God while God loved the Israelites[Jacob].

The prophets wrote in a biased purpose, prejudiced and hatefilled toward other people, and this hatred as they spoke and wrote it was credited to their god. By His command the Israelites were to kill and slaughter other people in the land of Canaan. God had nor held no pity or mercy for the Canaanites. His command was to kill all that had breath within them, even the animals and tear down all symbols of other gods. Keep in mind that the Hebrew god was created as a tribal god and his only people Israelites in sons of Jacob. In the NT, it was said that God did not change. By this evidence we know that God of the OT still hates those who do not conform to the tradition of Hebrew/Israelite/Jewish ideology. The condition of the heart of Israelites was to be in obedience to the commands of their God. And the basic tenet of command was killing other for Him. "Without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sin". In the eyes of God, it was a sin for the sons of Jacob to leave other non-Israelite people alive.

The killing of other people was not counted as an offense to the Hebrew God. Only killing their own brethren was considered "sin", a transgression. "Thou shalt not kill" is a commandment aimed to enforce life in Israel, not outside that tribal nation. And this because killing their own brethren decreased their population and therein decreased the power of their God.

"Salvation is of the Jews", and no others. Convert to Judaism or die. In Old and New Testaments conversion is still required. Jesus nor apostles taught Gentile(non-Jewish) doctrine, as non-Jewish doctrine was considered "idol worship", and other competing gods. So did God have concern of people beyond his own Jewish people? No, that wasn't to be part of the purpose for Israel dominance and power.

"Sin" is a Hebrew construct within Israelite laws. Those in the world who did not receive those laws were not accountable to those laws, and not accountable to transgression of those laws. "Where there is no law there is no sin". Your example of Jonah shows Jonah conforming to the Israelite god. His conversion, so to speak.

I think it a huge mistake for people to believe themselves as "sinners", because they have not recognized that the term is specifically applied to serve a purpose in law for Israelites pertaining to transgression, "offense". This taking on a religion that relates to only one people in their tribal identity does not benefit the world and trying to fit oneself into that tradition of Israel and trying to please that particular god only causes more death and ill will among people in the world.

Offensive behavior is universal. "Sin" belongs to the transgressions in law established for Israelites at Sinai. It's their ballpark.

You are wildly off base:

First of all salvation in and of itself is a Christian term and idea. It really is foreign to Judaism. No "saving" is required. There is clearly a belief in after-life. Called the "world to come", entry is not exclusive to Jews and in fact it is easier for a gentile to get in than it is for Jews. The Jews have a boatload of rules and regulations and Gentiles only have the seven Noahide laws.

Next: Killing by and of gentiles is prohibited by the Noahide laws.

Finally to imply that Judaism follows Christianity in the belief in original sin is also as far off base as you could get. Judaism holds man is neither good nor bad but has tendencies in each direction. Life is the battle between the yetzer ha-ra (the evil inclination) and the hetzer ha-tov (the good inclination). The concept of sin in Judaism is nothing like it is in Christianity. You are couching your arguments in this light and makes the factually incorrect.

Doug Shaver · 08-31-2008, 07:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sschlichter

I would encourage to approach the text openly and come up with your own interpretation and then take into account the many other interpreations. Perhaps you hagve already done this.

Oh, yeah. Been there, done that. Lots of times.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sschlichter

If so, please share your interpretation of Romans 1 - 3.

You mean, tell you what I think Paul was thinking when he wrote it?

Doug Shaver · 08-31-2008, 07:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sschlichter

God could keep everyone in a box and make sure they never sin and never feel the consequences of their sin. It speaks to his charascter that he does not.

If that would be his only alternative to the present state of affairs, it speaks to a lot more than just his character.

storytime · 08-31-2008, 07:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HaRaAYaH

Quote:

Originally Posted by storytime

Yes, sin was said to be a condition of the heart but of that condition it was in context and secularized to the people of God, the Israelites. God has nor claims any other people. For example, the Edomites[Esau] were hated by God while God loved the Israelites[Jacob].

The prophets wrote in a biased purpose, prejudiced and hatefilled toward other people, and this hatred as they spoke and wrote it was credited to their god. By His command the Israelites were to kill and slaughter other people in the land of Canaan. God had nor held no pity or mercy for the Canaanites. His command was to kill all that had breath within them, even the animals and tear down all symbols of other gods. Keep in mind that the Hebrew god was created as a tribal god and his only people Israelites in sons of Jacob. In the NT, it was said that God did not change. By this evidence we know that God of the OT still hates those who do not conform to the tradition of Hebrew/Israelite/Jewish ideology. The condition of the heart of Israelites was to be in obedience to the commands of their God. And the basic tenet of command was killing other for Him. "Without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sin". In the eyes of God, it was a sin for the sons of Jacob to leave other non-Israelite people alive.

The killing of other people was not counted as an offense to the Hebrew God. Only killing their own brethren was considered "sin", a transgression. "Thou shalt not kill" is a commandment aimed to enforce life in Israel, not outside that tribal nation. And this because killing their own brethren decreased their population and therein decreased the power of their God.

"Salvation is of the Jews", and no others. Convert to Judaism or die. In Old and New Testaments conversion is still required. Jesus nor apostles taught Gentile(non-Jewish) doctrine, as non-Jewish doctrine was considered "idol worship", and other competing gods. So did God have concern of people beyond his own Jewish people? No, that wasn't to be part of the purpose for Israel dominance and power.

"Sin" is a Hebrew construct within Israelite laws. Those in the world who did not receive those laws were not accountable to those laws, and not accountable to transgression of those laws. "Where there is no law there is no sin". Your example of Jonah shows Jonah conforming to the Israelite god. His conversion, so to speak.

I think it a huge mistake for people to believe themselves as "sinners", because they have not recognized that the term is specifically applied to serve a purpose in law for Israelites pertaining to transgression, "offense". This taking on a religion that relates to only one people in their tribal identity does not benefit the world and trying to fit oneself into that tradition of Israel and trying to please that particular god only causes more death and ill will among people in the world.

Offensive behavior is universal. "Sin" belongs to the transgressions in law established for Israelites at Sinai. It's their ballpark.

You are wildly off base:

First of all salvation in and of itself is a Christian term and idea. It really is foreign to Judaism. No "saving" is required. There is clearly a belief in after-life. Called the "world to come", entry is not exclusive to Jews and in fact it is easier for a gentile to get in than it is for Jews. The Jews have a boatload of rules and regulations and Gentiles only have the seven Noahide laws.

Next: Killing by and of gentiles is prohibited by the Noahide laws.

Finally to imply that Judaism follows Christianity in the belief in original sin is also as far off base as you could get. Judaism holds man is neither good nor bad but has tendencies in each direction. Life is the battle between the yetzer ha-ra (the evil inclination) and the hetzer ha-tov (the good inclination). The concept of sin in Judaism is nothing like it is in Christianity. You are couching your arguments in this light and makes the factually incorrect.

I think you've misunderstood my post. Let me clarify a bit more. I'm reading from the KJV a Jewish story that offered salvation to Gentiles. How it was offered is through conversion to Judaism, unless you would think the Jewish people in the story were teaching a non-Jewish doctrine and Jesus was converting people to the gods of Rome.

In the context of Jewish redemption, remission for sins, this is the salvation being spoken of. Non-Jewish people would have had no concern about Jewish laws, redemption in Jewish laws etc. For example, Roman citizens would have not concerned themselves with Jewish traditional beliefs.

Noahide laws for Gentiles? Well, we certainly could argue that imposition. As an atheist and non Jewish person, I do not adhere to or recognize "Noahide Laws", just as I do not adhere to or observe Israeli/Jewish laws.

You said: "The concept of sin in Judaism is nothing like it is in Christianity." How so? Gentiles adopted the Jewish commandments even though they say the law is not applicable to them. And if the Christians do not define sin by its Jewish precepts, then where did they learn about "sin"?

HaRaAYaH · 08-31-2008, 08:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by storytime

I think you've misunderstood my post. Let me clarify a bit more. I'm reading from the KJV a Jewish story that offered salvation to Gentiles. How it was offered is through conversion to Judaism, unless you would think the Jewish people in the story were teaching a non-Jewish doctrine and Jesus was converting people to the gods of Rome.

If you are reading the KJV of anything then you are reading a Christian document. If you are reading the NT, you are reading a Christian document.

Quote:

Originally Posted by storytime

In the context of Jewish redemption, remission for sins, this is the salvation being spoken of. Non-Jewish people would have had no concern about Jewish laws, redemption in Jewish laws etc. For example, Roman citizens would have not concerned themselves with Jewish traditional beliefs.

Salvation in and of itself is a Christian idea. While Judaism posits an after life, it is clearly a this worldly religion. The Talmud teaches:

Quote:

Better one hour of repentance and good deeds in this world than all the time in the world to come.

Quote:

Originally Posted by storytime

Noahide laws for Gentiles? Well, we certainly could argue that imposition. As an atheist and non Jewish person, I do not adhere to or recognize "Noahide Laws", just as I do not adhere to or observe Israeli/Jewish laws.

I'm not saying as an atheist you are required to do anything. I am pointing out that acceptance of Judaism is not required for eternal life and that is clearly a theological difference with Christianity.

Quote:

Originally Posted by storytime

You said: "The concept of sin in Judaism is nothing like it is in Christianity." How so? Gentiles adopted the Jewish commandments even though they say the law is not applicable to them. And if the Christians do not define sin by its Jewish precepts, then where did they learn about "sin"?

In Christianity sin is an affair of the heart. In Judaism it has nothing to do with the heart. It's the deed. Sin is really defined as "missing the mark". Exactly like archery. You do the best you can, but you occasionally miss the mark. Repentance which in Hebrew is called teshuvah which means return. Return to the law.

Quote:

"Repentance" means regret and contrition for sins or omissions of good deeds; and the resolve to start afresh.[2] Many phrases in English literature [and in the literature of other languages] sound this theme of repentance: "To turn over a new leaf," "to become a new man."

"Teshuvah" means something very different. It emphasizes not the idea of "newness," but of return.[3] A Jew is intrinsically good and wants to do good; sin is completely antithetical to his nature.[4] If he does transgress, the transgression does not impugn his essential self but is a foreign thing that has adhered to him.

Teshuvah, then, is the return to that essential, real self of a Jew. While a person is a composite of body and soul, in a Jew the soul is primary and the body secondary; and that soul is no less than "a part of G-d above."[5] Teshuvah is therefore the reforging of the essential union between the soul and its source, a union which was temporarily in abeyance through sin. In other words, a Jew, through teshuvah, reveals his true self and reasserts the soul's mastery over the body.

This is why teshuvah is relevant to all Jews,[6] even the completely righteous. Teshuvah is not just "repentance," the desire to atone for wrongdoing and start afresh, which would not apply to the completely righteous who do no wrong. Instead, the Alter Rebbe writes,[7] teshuvah is the concept of "the spirit shall return to the G-d who gave it"[8]: the soul continually strives to come closer to G-d, its source. And just as G-d is infinite, so, even the completely righteous Jew, can rise ever higher in his apprehension of G-dliness. He, too, is always doing teshuvah - returning to his source.

Teshuvah is relevant also to the completely wicked. No matter how low he has fallen, hope is never lost. He can always do teshuvah for he need not perform any revolutionary act, create a new existence. He need merely return to his inner self.

http://www.sichosinenglish.org/books...destiny/03.htm

sschlichter · 08-31-2008, 09:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by storytime

Quote:

Originally Posted by sschlichter

I think you are right on in considering what the law meant to those recieving them and extrapolating what is important to God from that. Sticks are not the issue. I also agree with you on the aspect of the law that is given for the governance of a people. Here things like the death penalty should be given their context.

However, sin is also treated (Old and New Testament) as a condition of the heart. God intended to bless other nations through the Jews and he showed numerous times the concern he had beyond the Jews (Jonah, for example). Sin is universal and according to Romans 1 - 3 even those without the written law have an innate sense of God's law - and are therefore without excuse in breaking it (as all have done).

~Steve

Yes, sin was said to be a condition of the heart but of that condition it was in context and secularized to the people of God, the Israelites. God has nor claims any other people. For example, the Edomites[Esau] were hated by God while God loved the Israelites[Jacob].

The prophets wrote in a biased purpose, prejudiced and hatefilled toward other people, and this hatred as they spoke and wrote it was credited to their god. By His command the Israelites were to kill and slaughter other people in the land of Canaan. God had nor held no pity or mercy for the Canaanites. His command was to kill all that had breath within them, even the animals and tear down all symbols of other gods. Keep in mind that the Hebrew god was created as a tribal god and his only people Israelites in sons of Jacob. In the NT, it was said that God did not change. By this evidence we know that God of the OT still hates those who do not conform to the tradition of Hebrew/Israelite/Jewish ideology. The condition of the heart of Israelites was to be in obedience to the commands of their God. And the basic tenet of command was killing other for Him. "Without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sin". In the eyes of God, it was a sin for the sons of Jacob to leave other non-Israelite people alive.

The killing of other people was not counted as an offense to the Hebrew God. Only killing their own brethren was considered "sin", a transgression. "Thou shalt not kill" is a commandment aimed to enforce life in Israel, not outside that tribal nation. And this because killing their own brethren decreased their population and therein decreased the power of their God.

"Salvation is of the Jews", and no others. Convert to Judaism or die. In Old and New Testaments conversion is still required. Jesus nor apostles taught Gentile(non-Jewish) doctrine, as non-Jewish doctrine was considered "idol worship", and other competing gods. So did God have concern of people beyond his own Jewish people? No, that wasn't to be part of the purpose for Israel dominance and power.

"Sin" is a Hebrew construct within Israelite laws. Those in the world who did not receive those laws were not accountable to those laws, and not accountable to transgression of those laws. "Where there is no law there is no sin". Your example of Jonah shows Jonah conforming to the Israelite god. His conversion, so to speak.

I think it a huge mistake for people to believe themselves as "sinners", because they have not recognized that the term is specifically applied to serve a purpose in law for Israelites pertaining to transgression, "offense". This taking on a religion that relates to only one people in their tribal identity does not benefit the world and trying to fit oneself into that tradition of Israel and trying to please that particular god only causes more death and ill will among people in the world.

Offensive behavior is universal. "Sin" belongs to the transgressions in law established for Israelites at Sinai. It's their ballpark.

I do not see that in the OT at all,

God's 'hatred' of Esau has nothing to do with him personally. It was about selection. Jacob was selected for a purpose and Esau was not. The God of Isreal is painted from the very beginning, not as a national God but as the God of all creation. The Jews were intended to be an instrument of God's care, not just the recipients.

* God's covenant with Abraham (Gen 12) is that through God, he would bless all nations thru Abraham.

* the Jews were intended to be a light to the gentiles. (and were in many ways)

(Isa 42:5) This is what the true God, the LORD, says -
the one who created the sky and stretched it out,
the one who fashioned the earth and everything that lives on it,
the one who gives breath to the people on it,
and life to those who live on it:
(Isa 42:6) "I, the LORD, officially commission you;
I take hold of your hand.
I protect you and make you a covenant mediator for people,
and a light to the nations,

* and sin existed long before Judaism and long before the law. Cain was not jewish, yet God had requirements of him.

(Gen 4:7) Is it not true that if you do what is right, you will be fine? But if you do not do what is right, sin is crouching at the door. It desires to dominate you, but you must subdue it."

* Jonah is a prefect example of this. The God of Isreal was also the God of the Assyrians (regardless of whether they knew it.) not just a national God. Jonah's reaction is a key to the discomfort that they would have had with this notion. (their God's traitorous concern for their enemies)

(Jon 1:2) "Go immediately to Nineveh, that large capital city, and announce judgment against its people because their wickedness has come to my attention."

(Jon 3:10) When God saw their actions - they turned from their evil way of living! - God relented concerning the judgment he had threatened them with and he did not destroy them.

* Paul sums it up this way. (Rom 3:23) for ALL have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.

~Steve

sschlichter · 08-31-2008, 09:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doug Shaver

Quote:

Originally Posted by sschlichter

I would encourage to approach the text openly and come up with your own interpretation and then take into account the many other interpreations. Perhaps you hagve already done this.

Oh, yeah. Been there, done that. Lots of times.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sschlichter

If so, please share your interpretation of Romans 1 - 3.

You mean, tell you what I think Paul was thinking when he wrote it?

yes, what does Paul say in Romans 1-3 in your interpreatation.

spamandham · 08-31-2008, 09:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by storytime

In the context of Jewish redemption, remission for sins, this is the salvation being spoken of.

The salvation being spoken of is not remission of sin, but resurrection. The focus of the gospel story is Jesus' resurrection as the first fruits - proof that the Kingdom of God had already arrived, that the general resurrection was already happening, and that divine justice was imminent. Since divine justice was imminent, martyrdom could be seen as wisdom rather than foolishness. This is why Paul focuses on Jesus resurrection and has very little to say about Jesus beyond that.

Near the end of the book "Excavating Jesus (or via: amazon.co.uk)", Crossan/Reed argue persuasively that the idea of bodily resurrection combined with divine justice ushering in the kingdom of god, were indeed Jewish ideas in the centuries leading up to the common era.

The idea that Jesus was an atoning sacrifice developed later, when it was clear that death had not been conquered afterall and a new theology was spun from a prior apocalyptic one.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.