Freethought & Rationalism Archive

WVIncagold · 02-05-2008, 10:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WishboneDawn

Quote:

Originally Posted by WVIncagold

not afraid to go there at all. Your problem is with your own religious cult not us. You Incorporated and stole the Jewish god and made it a part of your world view so you have to take all its baggage that comes with it. Besides suggardaddy argues on the prophesies being his main focus and that is how you get to Jesus. If the Christians totally divorced themselves from the stolen Jewish god then they would not have to defend what makes up allot of their bible. But since you try to link him to the stolen Jewish god your always going to have to deal with the baggage that god brings with it.

It's ridiculous to frame this is as Christians stealing the Jewish gods. I shows a real misunderstanding of how societies and movements evolve.

Really I could accept that if the Jewish people no longer existed. Lets look and see if they do shall we? Oh ya theres this place called Israel there in the middle east. Filled with Jews who do not accept the Christians Messiah because he fulfilled NONE of their prophecy for being one. So what would you call taking something that does not belong to you. I steal your car, paint it a different color and replace the Honda emblems with Chevy, it isn't your car anymore right..it mine? Would you prefer misappropriation of a Omnipotent being? abduction of a sentient metaphysical meta human? Purloining a magical sky genie? Just another inconvenient truth Christians can't seam to reconcile, refuse to apologize for and perpetuate despite what is really happening. Besides My Jewish friends constantly remind me "The Christians stole our god and have not forgiven us for it."

WishboneDawn · 02-05-2008, 10:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amaleq13

On the contrary, it is quite clear that Christianity has "appropriated" Hebrew Scripture and "reinterpreted" it so that an executed failure can be considered the Messiah and Christians can be considered the "chosen ones" of God.

Unless one has faith in the "reinterpretation", it is entirely accurate to describe this as theft.

Wait a minute, I think you have a point. I feel the same way about how some Christians interpret scripture. We don't all interpret it that way, my Anglican church sponsored bible course had us reading the Herbrew Scriptues as the Hebrew Scriptures and made it plain they were Hebrew NOt Christian.

I was thinking more in terms of the origins of Christianity and since the first Christians were Jews, it's a little weird to be saying they stole from themselves.

But in terms of the way some Christians read the OT, playing with it to squeeze out Christian messages, I completely agree.

WishboneDawn · 02-05-2008, 10:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WVIncagold

Besides My Jewish friends constantly remind me "The Christians stole our god and have not forgiven us for it."

The first Christians were Jews.

Amaleq13 · 02-05-2008, 11:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WishboneDawn

Quote:

Originally Posted by WVIncagold

Besides My Jewish friends constantly remind me "The Christians stole our god and have not forgiven us for it."

The first Christians were Jews.

True but it never really caught on with many other Jews. Instead, it obtained its popularity among gentiles though arguably primarily of the "God fearer" variety of Jewish-wannabes.

The "theft" began with Paul who explicitly attempted to redefine believing gentiles as qualifying for the promises given to the chosen people of God.

Once that flood gate was opened, all bets were off and the benefits of being Jewish were shifted to Christ-believing gentiles.

Jane H · 02-05-2008, 01:01 PM

Paul wasn’t redefining anything as regards gentiles- it had always been anticipated that gentiles would take their lead from the new Jewish kingdom of God (Gen 22:18, Psalm 22:27, Isaiah 11:10 etc). I re-emphasise that the entire thrust of Jesus teaching in the NT was directed towards the redefinition of the C1 Jewish nationalistic idea, with the OP parable being a classic example. The Jewish story wasn’t ignored or rewritten; it had an unexpected ending.

Thus, when the early Jewish Christians concluded that the Kingdom of God had begun, it was natural to think in terms of the gentiles. Further interventions by the Holy Spirit (Acts 10) convinced the early church this was the right road to take, against immensely entrenched Jewish separatism. It is hard to underestimate the political, nationalistic and religious forces that had to be overcome for a Jewish movement to even think about involving the gentiles.

Where did this come from? What drove a group of Jews to radically interpret the story of their nation in this unexpected way? Some shocking, yet compelling event, which drove them to declare that a major turning point in the history of the Jewish nation, and the world, had occurred.

Amaleq13 · 02-05-2008, 01:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jane H

Paul wasn’t redefining anything as regards gentiles- it had always been anticipated that gentiles would take their lead from the new Jewish kingdom of God (Gen 22:18, Psalm 22:27, Isaiah 11:10 etc).

Do any of those passages indicate that these gentiles would not be required to follow the purity codes (eg circumcision, food rules)? No. Paul clearly was introducing a new definition for gentiles.

Quote:

The Jewish story wasn’t ignored or rewritten; it had an unexpected ending.

I didn't steal it, it just ended up in an unexpected location.

Jesus didn't fulfill the traditional Jewish messianic expectations and gentiles were supposed to completely convert to obtain the benefits of being one of the "chosen".

This is far more than simply an "unexpected ending". It is a complete rewrite.

Quote:

What drove a group of Jews to radically interpret the story of their nation in this unexpected way?

Paul's motivation appears to have been obtaining gentile converts. Go figure.

Quote:

Some shocking, yet compelling event, which drove them to declare that a major turning point in the history of the Jewish nation, and the world, had occurred.

Yes, Jews weren't buying it. How shocking.

Toto · 02-05-2008, 01:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jane H

.... Some shocking, yet compelling event, which drove them to declare that a major turning point in the history of the Jewish nation, and the world, had occurred.

Such as the destruction of the Temple?

Dogfish · 02-06-2008, 04:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by reniaa

Quote:

Originally Posted by WishboneDawn

Good point. We're sort of of looking at it with modern eyes and getting all bent out of shape. The ancient world wasn't PC in the least.

So true and sometimes I feel like banging my head against walls when you know it's cultural differences of modern eyes verses ancient ones that your trying to get past so you can address the inner points of the arguement but never get there because of the pc sidetracking /arhhhhh frustrating lol

So your god's words can only be understood in the context of the time it was written? Why is that? Why would he, if he wants us to understand him, make it so easy to mis-understand him?

Dogfish · 02-06-2008, 04:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by reniaa

Quote:

Originally Posted by WishboneDawn

What proof is there that what was written IS what Jesus said? I tend to think the safest path is to acknowledge that what we're reading is what the gospel authors wanted us to read, whether it's what Jesus said or not, and talking about it as DCHindley is, is the best acknowledgement of that.

Why is it safest to assume it's not jesus's words and life they wrote about? from your opinion or DCHindley, again it is just supposition. We have 4 gospels on jesus's life, but we stand back and say it's better not to believe just in case those guys must have made it up copied off each other etc.
Basically we have a choice to decide if we believe these words are inspired and accurate renditions of jesus's life of just fictional myths of men.

but again you offer no proof these are not accurate, just opinions of men.

the proof for me is that they exist and are there.

Because there is no evidence outside the bible that he existed? Do you believe every work of fiction because "they exist and are there"?

I really liked Cornwell's Sharpe's novels, but i do not believe he existed until it is proven otherwise. That would be immature and naive of me.

Dogfish · 02-06-2008, 05:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by reniaa

Quote:

Originally Posted by WVIncagold

But wouldn't god in his infinite wisdom foresaw this "modern eye" since he allows predicting futures as argued by sugar and arnaldo? Or is the lack of ability for the earlier prophets to see "modern eyes" therefore show they cannot predict, let alone a large change in moral values?(Considering the sacrifice of animals to negate sin) Try being a skepie when your told that everything the bible means it doesn't say and everything it says it doesn't mean then you will know frustration

. I am still waiting on the primer that gives a quick reference to when a horse is a horse and not a unicorn or a weapon or a tank. Here is the problem when you try to bring old archaic values into a world that no longer subscribes to outmoded morals and foundations. Most people today couldn't sacrifice and animal or even know where to go buy one.

He does exactly what you say but you find it in Jesus's words in the NT but you guys know you can only stick to oT stuff as you know you wouldn't be able to find fault with jesus's humanitarian words. He argues in a modern way looking at motives and reasons behind the protection of laws but it always gets bypassed in these forums, If we discuss jesus it's always his existence and what he speaks is always overlooked almost as if you are afraid to go there?

Maybe because he didn't say anything original. So what else it there to discuss?

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

02-05-2008, 01:01 PM	#85
Jane H Regular Member Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: UK Posts: 186	Paul wasn’t redefining anything as regards gentiles- it had always been anticipated that gentiles would take their lead from the new Jewish kingdom of God (Gen 22:18, Psalm 22:27, Isaiah 11:10 etc). I re-emphasise that the entire thrust of Jesus teaching in the NT was directed towards the redefinition of the C1 Jewish nationalistic idea, with the OP parable being a classic example. The Jewish story wasn’t ignored or rewritten; it had an unexpected ending. Thus, when the early Jewish Christians concluded that the Kingdom of God had begun, it was natural to think in terms of the gentiles. Further interventions by the Holy Spirit (Acts 10) convinced the early church this was the right road to take, against immensely entrenched Jewish separatism. It is hard to underestimate the political, nationalistic and religious forces that had to be overcome for a Jewish movement to even think about involving the gentiles. Where did this come from? What drove a group of Jews to radically interpret the story of their nation in this unexpected way? Some shocking, yet compelling event, which drove them to declare that a major turning point in the history of the Jewish nation, and the world, had occurred.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.