David B

So now it's ok to covet your neighbour's wife's ass? Or kill? Take the name of thew lord in vain?.....

David B

luminous

There is no problem with this passage. Jesus uses exageration to prove his point. It's like someone saying "I'd rather die then speak in public." To substantiate this, notice that neither Paul nor any of the non-gospel writers take this literally and expound on it. Also, I have not heard of a single case in early Christianity to today where a Christian cut off his arm our gouged out his eye because of sin. Christians always understood this passage to be figurative and exagerration.

luminous

That's a separate issue. I'm simply pointing out that there is no problem with the passage. If Christians were supposed to obey the Law forever, that phrase wouldn't have been there. Of course you could argue that it was added later on make Christianity attractive to non-Jews, but that's a separate issue as well.

anthony93

I've always thought the verses that assert some criterion for salvation other than 'faith' ( and I disagree that faith==belief ) are much more important since the 'sins' discussed previously can/are taken to mean that the face one shows the world is not the basis for rightouness but the private thoughts are (something the pulpit pounders conveniently pass over.

For example idea that everyone is equally condemned because of the original sin of Adam & Eve. Yes I realise this is a (Augustinian) theological position but I would point out that if there are those that are in some sense 'rightous' that 'Justification by faith' alone isn't correct.
Matthew: 9 : 11 And when the Pharisees saw it, they said unto his disciples, Why eateth your Teacher with the publicans and sinners?
Matthew: 9 : 12 But when he heard it, he said, They that are whole have no need of a physician, but they that are sick.

Also such passages as the parable of the wedding guests:

Matthew: 22 : 9 Go ye therefore unto the partings of the highways, and as many as ye shall find, bid to the marriage feast.
Matthew: 22 : 10 And those servants went out into the highways, and gathered together all as many as they found, both bad and good: and the wedding was filled with guests.
Matthew: 22 : 11 But when the king came in to behold the guests, he saw there a man who had not on a wedding-garment:
Matthew: 22 : 12 and he saith unto him, Friend, how camest thou in hither not having a wedding-garment? And he was speechless.
Matthew: 22 : 13 Then the king said to the servants, Bind him hand and foot, and cast him out into the outer darkness; there shall be the weeping and the gnashing of teeth.
Matthew: 22 : 14 For many are called, but few chosen.
(ASV, my empahsis, obviously)

or how about :
Matthew: 7 : 19 Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.
Matthew: 7 : 20 Therefore by their fruits ye shall know them.
Matthew: 7 : 21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father who is in heaven.
Matthew: 7 : 22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy by thy name, and by thy name cast out demons, and by thy name do many mighty works?
Matthew: 7 : 23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

which seems to say that just confessing Christ is not a guarantee of salvation.

And like I mentioned, I think these verses should be much more important to Christians since they are the ones who hold hope of resurection

luminous

I think you're mistaken. Look at the whole passage:

This passage has nothing to do with how to obtain salvation. It deals with determining whether someone is saved or not. It basically says that you will know who is saved and who is not based on their actions, or "fruits".

Peter Watts

Liviu, your analysis seems correct to me.
Jesus used metaphor and similes and even allegories to make points to people. "If thy right eye offends thee, pluck it out ..." is one such literary device for driving home the point that this life is temporal, while what happens to our eternal soul is far more important.

Joe Bloe

So that verse is really saying "until heaven and earth disappear, or until the next year or so when I'm done here and everything else continues on as usual, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law, but then it will be completely abolished."

Hmm, I don't know, it just seems to me that the phrase "until everything is accomplished" especially in the context of talking about "until heaven and earth disappear" and putting so much emphasis on the point that not even the tiniest part of it would change, probably is talking about a little more than just what Jesus would or would not manage to accomplish in the next year or so and seems to imply that completely abolishing it isn't what's on his mind.

You'd think (or, I'd think, anyway) that if God had anything to do with the writing of this stuff it would be less ambiguous. Maybe a little less exaggeration would have helped us understand what he was really getting at.

Philadelphia Lawyer

Yes.

In addition, the rest of the chapter (verses 21 through 48) says that a person should do more than the Law requires, not less. It's not enough to just refrain from killing, you shouldn't get mad at anyone either; it's not enough to refrain from committing adultery, you must not even "look on a woman to lust after her." The Law lets you get a divorce merely by creating a written instrument, but Jesus says you shouldn't get divorced except on grounds of fornication; the Law says it's OK for you to swear oaths using the name of the Lord, but Jesus says it isn't. The law says an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth, but Jesus says to turn the other cheek. Finally, Jesus says it's not good enough to just love your neighbour or your brother, you have to love your enemy too. Jesus wants you to be "perfect." There's no hint that Jesus intends that there is anything prohibited to you by the Law that it's now OK for you to do.

JoyJuice

"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.

He's not refering to his death, and moreover if Jesus is fully human, how can he be sinless when that one thing from the idea of original sin that makes use human; is our sinful human nature? To be sinless is not to be human.

robto

First of all, I didn't say there was a problem with the passage, I said it's one that's ignored by most Christians. Or, at least, they don't take it literally, which you obviously agree with.

On the second point, you're dead wrong. There were early Christians who castrated themselves for Christ, including Origen of Alexandria . Somehow people always manage to see passages of the Bible that they agree with as meant literally, and those they disagree with as "figurative and exagerration."