Did Jesus keep the Law?

[serveandsave]

There is much debate and argument brought about by the term “Jewish Law.” Many believe that Jesus did away with the Old Testament Laws and cite differences between Himself and the Pharisees as proof that Jesus didn’t follow the laws. What is misunderstood here is that Jesus was critical of the corruption the Pharisees had committed, distorting and adding their own rituals to the Law just as did the Romans, Greeks and so called Christians of the New Testament era.

Not the Law itself.

You can still see the pomp and ceremony taking place in the Jewish way of life today. Eg the ritualistic way services are carried out, the rituals that have been added to their very Holy Days. Take for instance the Passover meal. Compare today’s Passover meal with its menu, candles and finery and compare it to God’s specific instructions in Exodus.

Jesus would often cite the Laws of Moses and the prophets that kept them. Jesus never referred to them as Jewish Laws. People (mankind) have given the law that term because Moses was Hebrew therefore the laws must be Jewish and Jesus was born of a Jew therefore the Laws must be Jewish. Not so. They are the Laws of God meant for everyone. Moses was of the Hebrew tribes, but not necessarily Jewish.

Note Moses was Hebrew we first hear of Hebrews in Genesis 14.

14:13

And there came one that had escaped, and told Abram the Hebrew; for he dwelt in the plain of Mamre the Amorite, brother of Eshcol, and brother of Aner: and these were confederate with Abram.

Abraham was of Hebrew origin what ever form it took in his time. Abraham had a son that married and bore 12 sons to four women. Straight away one should realize that the genealogy would be slightly different among the four groups of children. The Jewish Nation didn’t have its beginning till Genesis 29 when one of the women named her son Judah.

29:35

And she conceived again, and bare a son: and she said, Now will I praise the LORD: therefore she called his name Judah; and left bearing.

I will attempt to show that Jesus did in fact keep the Laws of Moses with the following.

Did Jesus break the Sabbath?

Did Jesus Christ show His followers that the Ten Commandments were not the standard for Christian life?

Did He abolish the Law, or did He in word and deed demonstrate its true meaning for Christians today?

Most Christians would agree that Jesus Christ grew up in an environment steeped in Old Testament scriptures.

He knew, quoted them and would have at least had to have lived by them.

Some believe that Jesus kept the law so that others after Him would no longer need to.

Others say that He revealed new meaning through old laws.

Many, however, believe that Jesus made a "break" with the old Law, and in breaking the law established a new pattern of living for His followers.

There are even many who call themselves friends of Jesus say that He broke the law. Originally, however, during His lifetime on earth, it was His enemies who made that accusation.

Because Jesus performed miracles of healing on the Sabbath, some Pharisees accused Him of breaking the Sabbath.

Matthew 12:10

12:10

And behold, there was a man who had a withered hand. And they asked Him, saying, "Is it lawful to heal on the Sabbath?"--that they might accuse Him.

Mark 3:2

12:2

And when the Pharisees saw it, they said to Him, "Look, Your disciples are doing what is not lawful to do on the Sabbath!"

John records that Jesus performed a healing during one of the festivals in Jerusalem. John’s gospel records what happened next, when Jesus confronted His accusers:

John 5:17–18

5:17

But Jesus answered them, "My Father has been working until now, and I have been working."

5:18

Therefore the Jews sought all the more to kill Him, because He not only broke the Sabbath, but also said that God was His Father, making Himself equal with God.

From this, many assume that the Pharisees’ accusation that Jesus broke the Sabbath was correct, and that Christians as a result are free to do so.

Scripture also records that Jesus’ disciples were walking through a field on the Sabbath when they plucked and ate heads of grain. Seeing this, some Pharisees asked them:

Luke 6:2

6:2

And some of the Pharisees said to them, "Why are you doing what is not lawful to do on the Sabbath?"

Many accept that the Pharisees’ accusation is correct, and that by their actions Jesus and His disciples did not keep the Sabbath.

To understand what is at issue in these accounts, it is helpful to understand something of the rabbinical tradition that lay behind the Sabbath-breaking charges leveled against Jesus and His disciples. The Pharisaic tradition, by Jesus’ day, had developed into an array of petty rules having to do with the details of the law. It focused on physical works that had little to do with the spirit and intent of the law and which, in fact, often violated the law.

Matthew 15:1–9

15:1

Then the scribes and Pharisees who were from Jerusalem came to Jesus, saying,

15:2

"Why do Your disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? For they do not wash their hands when they eat bread."

15:3

He answered and said to them, "Why do you also transgress the commandment of God because of your tradition?

15:4

For God commanded, saying, 'Honor your father and your mother'; and, 'He who curses father or mother, let him be put to death.'

15:5

But you say, 'Whoever says to his father or mother, "Whatever profit you might have received from me is a gift to God"--

15:6

then he need not honor his father or mother.' Thus you have made the commandment of God of no effect by your tradition.

15:7

Hypocrites! Well did Isaiah prophesy about you, saying:

15:8

'These people draw near to Me with their mouth, And honor Me with their lips, But their heart is far from Me.

15:9

And in vain they worship Me, Teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.' "

Mark 7:1–13

7:1

Then the Pharisees and some of the scribes came together to Him, having come from Jerusalem.

7:2

Now when they saw some of His disciples eat bread with defiled, that is, with unwashed hands, they found fault.

7:3

For the Pharisees and all the Jews do not eat unless they wash their hands in a special way, holding the tradition of the elders.

7:4

When they come from the marketplace, they do not eat unless they wash. And there are many other things which they have received and hold, like the washing of cups, pitchers, copper vessels, and couches.

7:5

Then the Pharisees and scribes asked Him, "Why do Your disciples not walk according to the tradition of the elders, but eat bread with unwashed hands?"

7:6

He answered and said to them, "Well did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written: 'This people honors Me with their lips, But their heart is far from Me.

7:7

And in vain they worship Me, Teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.'

7:8

"For laying aside the commandment of God, you hold the tradition of men--the washing of pitchers and cups, and many other such things you do."

7:9

He said to them, "All too well you reject the commandment of God, that you may keep your tradition.

7:10

For Moses said, 'Honor your father and your mother'; and, 'He who curses father or mother, let him be put to death.'

7:11

But you say, 'If a man says to his father or mother, "Whatever profit you might have received from me is Corban"--' (that is, a gift to God),

7:12

then you no longer let him do anything for his father or his mother,

7:13

making the word of God of no effect through your tradition which you have handed down. And many such things you do."

John 7:19

7:19

Did not Moses give you the law, yet none of you keeps the law? Why do you seek to kill Me?"

Galatians 6:13

6:13

For not even those who are circumcised keep the law, but they desire to have you circumcised that they may boast in your flesh.

The scribes among the Pharisees created the rabbinical traditions.

The body of traditional law that they formulated, called the Halakah (preserved in the Mishnah), is extra-biblical. Although authoritative for Jews who follow Pharisaic tradition, much of the Halakah is not directly supported by Scripture, but is intended as a barrier around about the law, originally to prevent any possibility of its being broken.

Ironically, in an attempt to ensure their law-keeping by putting this barrier about the law, the Pharisees were breaking the law, for God had said:

Deuteronomy 4: 2

4:2

You shall not add to the word which I command you, nor take from it, that you may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you.

Deuteronomy 12: 32

12:32

Whatever I command you, be careful to observe it; you shall not add to it nor take away from it.

By adding the weight of their tradition to the law of God, they bound their own people, making it impossible to keep the laws

Matthew 23:4

23:4

For they bind heavy burdens, hard to bear, and lay them on men's shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers.



The Pharisees placed the authority of their traditions above that of Scripture itself, thus going against the word of God.

Scripture scholar Joachim Jeremias affirms that for the Pharisees, the oral tradition was "above the Torah," and that the esoteric writings containing scribal teachings were regarded as inspired and surpassing the canonical books "in value and sanctity" (Jerusalem in the Time of Jesus, pp. 236, 238–239).

Alfred Edersheim also points out that traditional law was of "even greater obligation than Scripture itself" (The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah, Book I, 1.98).

What was the nature of these traditional ordinances?

"The Halakah indicated with the most minute and painful attention to detail, every legal ordinance as to outward observance.… But beyond this it left the inner man, the spring of actions, untouched…..Israel had made void the Law by its traditions. Under a load of outward ordinances and observances its spirit had been crushed" Edersheim continues: (Book I, 1.106, 1.108).

This Echoes what Jesus said in Mark 7:5–13.



The sometimes-absurd contradictions within Pharisaic law are especially apparent in the rules of Sabbath observance.

Edersheim writes: "On no other subject is Rabbinic teaching more painfully minute and more manifestly incongruous to its professed object."

Edersheim charges the scribes with "terribly exaggerated views on the Sabbath" and "endless burdensome rules with which they encumbered everything connected with its sanctity" (ibid., Book II, 2.52, 2.53).

"In not less than twenty-four chapters of the Mishna, matters are seriously discussed regarding Sabbath observance as of vital religious importance, which one would scarcely imagine a sane intellect would seriously entertain." Yet "in all these wearisome details there is not a single trace of anything spiritual, not a word even to suggest higher thoughts on God’s holy day and its observance" (ibid., 2.778–779).



For example, the law included detailed regulations regarding what constituted a "burden" that could not be carried on the Sabbath; for example, pieces of paper, horses hairs, wax, a piece of broken earthenware or animal food.

Generally a burden was anything as heavy as a dried fig, or a quantity sufficient to be of any practical use e.g. a scrap of paper large enough to be converted into a note or a wrapper.

It prescribed what might or might not be saved if one’s house caught on fire. Only those clothes that were absolutely necessary could be saved. But one could put on a dress, save it, then go back and put on another.

One could not ask a Gentile to extinguish the flames. But if he did so voluntarily, he should not be hindered.

One could eat food on the Sabbath lawfully only if it had been specifically prepared for the Sabbath on a weekday.

If a laying hen laid an egg on the Sabbath, it could not be eaten. But if the hen had been kept for fattening and not laying, the egg could be eaten, since it would be considered a part of the hen that had fallen off!

These set of laws considered studying the Mishna on the Sabbath more important than studying the Bible. The Hagiographa (the Old Testament "Writings") were not to be read on the Sabbath except in the evening.

And there are many other similar examples.



Of special interest to us are the laws regarding harvesting and healing on the Sabbath.

Even the slightest activity involving picking grain removing the husks, rubbing the heads, cleaning or bruising the ears or throwing them up in the hand was forbidden.

Yet if a man wanted to move a sheaf on his field, he had only to lay a spoon on it; then, in order to remove the spoon, he might also remove the sheaf on which it lay!



It should be noted that, unlike the Pharisees whose numbers were relatively few, most Jews of Jesus’ day paid little attention to these petty rules.

When the Pharisees complained about Jesus’ disciples plucking and eating heads of grain on the Sabbath, Jesus. As He often did was able to point out the contradictions in Pharisaic law. Jesus pointed out how David and his followers, famished and fleeing for their lives, ate the showbread when no other food was available, though it was normally only for the priests to eat.

Matthew 12:3–4

12:3

But He said to them, "Have you not read what David did when he was hungry, he and those who were with him:

12:4

how he entered the house of God and ate the showbread which was not lawful for him to eat, nor for those who were with him, but only for the priests?

Mark 2:25–26

2:25

But He said to them, "Have you never read what David did when he was in need and hungry, he and those with him:

2:26

how he went into the house of God in the days of Abiathar the high priest, and ate the showbread, which is not lawful to eat, except for the priests, and also gave some to those who were with him?"

Luke 6:3–4

6:3

But Jesus answering them said, "Have you not even read this, what David did when he was hungry, he and those who were with him:

6:4

how he went into the house of God, took and ate the showbread, and also gave some to those with him, which is not lawful for any but the priests to eat?"

1 Samuel 21:1–6

21:1

Now David came to Nob, to Ahimelech the priest. And Ahimelech was afraid when he met David, and said to him, "Why are you alone, and no one is with you?"

21:2

So David said to Ahimelech the priest, "The king has ordered me on some business, and said to me, 'Do not let anyone know anything about the business on which I send you, or what I have commanded you.' And I have directed my young men to such and such a place.

21:3

Now therefore, what have you on hand? Give me five loaves of bread in my hand, or whatever can be found."

21:4

And the priest answered David and said, "There is no common bread on hand; but there is holy bread, if the young men have at least kept themselves from women."

21:5

Then David answered the priest, and said to him, "Truly, women have been kept from us about three days since I came out. And the vessels of the young men are holy, and the bread is in effect common, even though it was sanctified in the vessel this day."

21:6

So the priest gave him holy bread; for there was no bread there but the showbread which had been taken from before the Lord, in order to put hot bread in its place on the day when it was taken away.

Even the Pharisaic law agreed with the original written law on this point, vindicating what David chose to do when his life was in danger (Edersheim, Book II, 2.58).

Jesus simply said:

Matthew 12:6–8

12:6

Yet I say to you that in this place there is One greater than the temple.

12:7

But if you had known what this means, 'I desire mercy and not sacrifice,' you would not have condemned the guiltless.

12:8

For the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath."

Of course, the Sabbath commandment is in a separate category from the sacrificial ordinances. Yet since the law permitted the feeding and watering of animals on the Sabbath to relieve unnecessary suffering, this principle would logically and naturally extend to human beings in this case, Jesus’ disciples who were partaking of the only food readily available at that time.

This controversy would never have been possible were it not for the Pharisees’ exaggerated views about actions forbidden or allowed on the Sabbath.

The priests in the Temple worked on the Sabbath, yet were guiltless.

Matthew 12:5

12:5

Or have you not read in the law that on the Sabbath the priests in the temple profane the Sabbath, and are blameless

The scribes knew this, but apparently did not clearly understand why it was so. Somehow, they missed the point that God instituted the Sabbath not only to give human beings rest from physical labors, but also to give them a time to devote to God by doing His works and serving Him.

The disciples’ actions were "clearly not a breach of the Biblical, but of the Rabbinic Law" (Edersheim, Book II, 2.56).

Jesus said that the Pharisees, not understanding the law, had "condemned the guiltless"

Matthew 12:7

12:7

But if you had known what this means, 'I desire mercy and not sacrifice,' you would not have condemned the guiltless.

Therefore the disciples and Jesus were falsely accused, and were not guilty of breaking the Sabbath or any Biblical Laws as charged.



Since healing might entail work, Pharisaic law permitted it on the Sabbath only if necessary to save life or prevent death.

Thus a plaster might be applied to a wound if the object was to prevent it from getting worse, but not to heal it.

Yet a splinter might be removed from the eye, or a thorn from the body, though no immediate danger to life was perceived.

Furthermore, an animal might be removed from a pit, or taken to water, on the Sabbath.



When the Pharisees accused Jesus of violating the law by healing on the Sabbath, He again was able to reveal their hypocrisy by using their own contradictory rules.

First, we will examine Jesus’ acknowledgement that He had been working.

The Sabbath law is, in part:

Exodus 20:9–10

20:9

Six days you shall labor and do all your work,

20:10

but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord your God. In it you shall do no work: you, nor your son, nor your daughter, nor your male servant, nor your female servant, nor your cattle, nor your stranger who is within your gates.

Notice that the work forbidden by the Sabbath law is "your work."

The law does not forbid works of service towards God.

Indeed, the very reason we are commanded to cease from our own works on the Sabbath is so we may devote the time to the work of honoring and serving God; that we may:

Isaiah 58:13

58:13

"If you turn away your foot from the Sabbath, From doing your pleasure on My holy day, And call the Sabbath a delight, The holy day of the Lord honorable, And shall honor Him, not doing your own ways, Nor finding your own pleasure, Nor speaking your own words,

Here it is clear that it is our own works that is the course of our everyday business is what we are to avoid on the Sabbath. On the other hand, we are to honor God on the Sabbath. Giving honor to God often entails work but "good works."

A careful reading of Scripture reveals that we are to cease and rest from common or profane work on the Sabbath, so that the time may be devoted to God’s holy purpose. But implicit in the Sabbath command is that we do the work necessary to fulfill the spiritual aim and meaning of the Sabbath.

On the first Sabbath, God rested from His work of physical creation, but He did the work of creating the Sabbath, blessing and sanctifying it.

Genesis 2:2–3

2:2

And on the seventh day God ended His work which He had done, and He rested on the seventh day from all His work which He had done.

2:3

Then God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, because in it He rested from all His work which God had created and made.

Mark 2:27

2:27

And He said to them, "The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath.

The weekly Sabbaths and the annual Sabbaths were proclaimed to be "holy convocations" commanded assemblies for the purpose of gathering to hear God’s word taught, and for congregational worship.

Leviticus 23:2, 4

23:2

"Speak to the children of Israel, and say to them: 'The feasts of the Lord, which you shall proclaim to be holy convocations, these are My feasts.

23:4

'These are the feasts of the Lord, holy convocations which you shall proclaim at their appointed times.

This includes the "work" required to travel to the place of assembly, and to listen, learn and participate in the worship service. Those commissioned to teach did the work of reading and explaining God’s word. On such occasions, people customarily did the work of eating and drinking, sharing and rejoicing in the holy day and in the truth of God’s word’

Nehemiah 8:1–12

8:1

Now all the people gathered together as one man in the open square that was in front of the Water Gate; and they told Ezra the scribe to bring the Book of the Law of Moses, which the Lord had commanded Israel.

8:2

So Ezra the priest brought the Law before the assembly of men and women and all who could hear with understanding on the first day of the seventh month.

8:3

Then he read from it in the open square that was in front of the Water Gate from morning until midday, before the men and women and those who could understand; and the ears of all the people were attentive to the Book of the Law.

8:4

So Ezra the scribe stood on a platform of wood which they had made for the purpose; and beside him, at his right hand, stood Mattithiah, Shema, Anaiah, Urijah, Hilkiah, and Maaseiah; and at his left hand Pedaiah, Mishael, Malchijah, Hashum, Hashbadana, Zechariah, and Meshullam.

8:5

And Ezra opened the book in the sight of all the people, for he was standing above all the people; and when he opened it, all the people stood up.

8:6

And Ezra blessed the Lord, the great God. Then all the people answered, "Amen, Amen!" while lifting up their hands. And they bowed their heads and worshiped the Lord with their faces to the ground.

8:7

Also Jeshua, Bani, Sherebiah, Jamin, Akkub, Shabbethai, Hodijah, Maaseiah, Kelita, Azariah, Jozabad, Hanan, Pelaiah, and the Levites, helped the people to understand the Law; and the people stood in their place.

8:8

So they read distinctly from the book, in the Law of God; and they gave the sense, and helped them to understand the reading.

8:9

And Nehemiah, who was the governor, Ezra the priest and scribe, and the Levites who taught the people said to all the people, "This day is holy to the Lord your God; do not mourn nor weep." For all the people wept, when they heard the words of the Law.

8:10

Then he said to them, "Go your way, eat the fat, drink the sweet, and send portions to those for whom nothing is prepared; for this day is holy to our Lord. Do not sorrow, for the joy of the Lord is your strength."

8:11

So the Levites quieted all the people, saying, "Be still, for the day is holy; do not be grieved."

8:12

And all the people went their way to eat and drink, to send portions and rejoice greatly, because they understood the words that were declared to them.

Other work implicit in the command was done, too: even on the most solemn day of the year the Day of Atonement the priests did the work of slaying animals and offering sacrifices before God, according to the requirements of the law.

The work of honoring and worshiping God is not forbidden on the Sabbath. Indeed, it is the object of the Sabbath. That is why the priests could work on the Sabbath and not be guilty. Their work was a necessary part of the congregational Sabbath duty of honoring and serving God. It was, in that sense, not their work but God’s work that was being done.

On a Sabbath day early in His ministry, Jesus announced in summary form, the work He had been sent to perform. His work was preaching the gospel, healing both physically and spiritually and liberating from oppression.

Luke 4:18–19

4:18

"The Spirit of the Lord is upon Me, Because He has anointed Me To preach the gospel to the poor; He has sent Me to heal the brokenhearted, To proclaim liberty to the captives And recovery of sight to the blind, To set at liberty those who are oppressed;

4:19

To proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord."

The works Jesus did were not His works, but God’s works, which He had been sent to perform.

John 4:34; 9:4; 17:4

4:34

Jesus said to them, "My food is to do the will of Him who sent Me, and to finish His work.

9:4

I must work the works of Him who sent Me while it is day; the night is coming when no one can work.

17:4

I have glorified You on the earth. I have finished the work which You have given Me to do.

Healing was an integral part of Christ’s ministry. In perfect harmony with what the Sabbath rest pictures and with the gospel message, Jesus’ healings typified the physical and spiritual healings that Christ will perform during the Millennium, when the Kingdom of God is established on the earth.

Isaiah 35:5–6, 57:16–20

36:5

I say you speak of having plans and power for war; but they are mere words. Now in whom do you trust, that you rebel against me?

36:6

Look! You are trusting in the staff of this broken reed, Egypt, on which if a man leans, it will go into his hand and pierce it. So is Pharaoh king of Egypt to all who trust in him.

57:16

For I will not contend forever, Nor will I always be angry; For the spirit would fail before Me, And the souls which I have made.

57:17

For the iniquity of his covetousness I was angry and struck him; I hid and was angry, And he went on backsliding in the way of his heart.

57:18

I have seen his ways, and will heal him; I will also lead him, And restore comforts to him And to his mourners.

57:19

"I create the fruit of the lips: Peace, peace to him who is far off and to him who is near," Says the Lord, "And I will heal him."

57:20

But the wicked are like the troubled sea, When it cannot rest, Whose waters cast up mire and dirt.

Jeremiah 30:10, 17

30:10

'Therefore do not fear, O My servant Jacob,' says the Lord, 'Nor be dismayed, O Israel; For behold, I will save you from afar, And your seed from the land of their captivity. Jacob shall return, have rest and be quiet, And no one shall make him afraid.

30:17

For I will restore health to you And heal you of your wounds,' says the Lord, 'Because they called you an outcast saying: "This is Zion; No one seeks her." '

Ezekiel 47:8–10

47:8

Then he said to me: "This water flows toward the eastern region, goes down into the valley, and enters the sea. When it reaches the sea, its waters are healed.

47:9

And it shall be that every living thing that moves, wherever the rivers go, will live. There will be a very great multitude of fish, because these waters go there; for they will be healed, and everything will live wherever the river goes.

47:10

It shall be that fishermen will stand by it from En Gedi to En Eglaim; they will be places for spreading their nets. Their fish will be of the same kinds as the fish of the Great Sea, exceedingly many.

When Jesus healed on the Sabbath, He was not breaking the Sabbath, but fulfilling it and prophecy, because one is not at rest when afflicted, oppressed and bound by disease or infirmity.

As many scriptures show, God delights in redeeming and restoring the afflicted, and giving them the rest exemplified by His Sabbath.

Job 34:28–29

34:28

So that they caused the cry of the poor to come to Him; For He hears the cry of the afflicted.

34:29

When He gives quietness, who then can make trouble? And when He hides His face, who then can see Him, Whether it is against a nation or a man alone?--

Bound by their false traditions, the Pharisees did try to make trouble for the Messiah, condemning Him for giving those whom He healed, rest from their afflictions.

Instead, they should have offered praise.

Speaking of ones afflicted and at death’s door, the psalmist wrote:

Psalm 107:19–22

107:19

Then they cried out to the Lord in their trouble, And He saved them out of their distresses.

107:20

He sent His word and healed them, And delivered them from their destructions.

107:21

Oh, that men would give thanks to the Lord for His goodness, And for His wonderful works to the children of men!

107:22

Let them sacrifice the sacrifices of thanksgiving, And declare His works with rejoicing.



Jesus answered those who accused him of breaking the Sabbath:

John 7:23–24

7:23

If a man receives circumcision on the Sabbath, so that the law of Moses should not be broken, are you angry with Me because I made a man completely well on the Sabbath?

7:24

Do not judge according to appearance, but judge with righteous judgment."



As we have seen, when John wrote that Jesus "broke the Sabbath," he was describing Jesus’ actions from the Pharisees’ perspective.

John 5:18

5:18

Therefore the Jews sought all the more to kill Him, because He not only broke the Sabbath, but also said that God was His Father, making Himself equal with God.

Compare John 9:14–16.

9:14

Now it was a Sabbath when Jesus made the clay and opened his eyes.

9:15

Then the Pharisees also asked him again how he had received his sight. He said to them, "He put clay on my eyes, and I washed, and I see."

9:16

Therefore some of the Pharisees said, "This Man is not from God, because He does not keep the Sabbath." Others said, "How can a man who is a sinner do such signs?" And there was a division among them.

Those who say Jesus did actually break the Sabbath are agreeing with Christ’s enemies, His accusers that Jesus’ miraculous works of healing were a breach of the Sabbath law. They are agreeing with Jesus’ accusers that He was a Sabbath-breaker. To be consistent, they must also agree with the Pharisees when they said of Christ:

9:24

So they again called the man who was blind, and said to him, "Give God the glory! We know that this Man is a sinner."

The blind man who had been healed knew better than that, saying:

9:31

Now we know that God does not hear sinners; but if anyone is a worshiper of God and does His will, He hears him.



When Jesus healed on the Sabbath, He was not violating the law of God. By His actions, He demonstrated the true application of God’s laws rather than Pharisaic traditions that "it is lawful to do good on the Sabbath."

Matthew 12:12

12:12

Of how much more value then is a man than a sheep? Therefore it is lawful to do good on the Sabbath."

The "law" that Jesus violated and did away with was the man-made laws imposed on the people by the Pharisees that was itself against the principles of God’s law. It is these laws that the term “Jewish Laws” apply to and not the laws given to us in the Old Testament.

Remember: Had Jesus Christ actually broken the Sabbath, He would have been sinning. But the Scripture says that He "committed no sin."

1 Peter 2:22

2:22

"Who committed no sin, Nor was deceit found in His mouth";

Had He sinned, He could not be our Savior. But He, being undefiled and separate from sinners, offered Himself without spot and without blemish to God for our redemption.

Hebrews 7:26; 9:14;

7:26

For such a High Priest was fitting for us, who is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and has become higher than the heavens;

9:14

how much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without spot to God, cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?

1 Peter 1:18–19

1:18

knowing that you were not redeemed with corruptible things, like silver or gold, from your aimless conduct received by tradition from your fathers,

1:19

but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot.

No, Jesus did not break the Sabbath or any other Old Testament laws, He did break additional un-Godly laws that the Jews imposed. He spent the Sabbath preaching, teaching, healing, honoring God and doing the good work of His ministry, the work of God.



The record of Scripture is that Jesus kept the Sabbath faithfully, as God intended it to be kept. In doing so, He set us an example.

1 John 2:6

2:6

He who says he abides in Him ought himself also to walk just as He walked.

What Jesus DID Teach?



At the beginning of His ministry, "Jesus came to Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God, and saying.

Mark 1:14–15

1:14

Now after John was put in prison, Jesus came to Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God,

1:15

and saying, "The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand. Repent, and believe in the gospel."



The word "kingdom" means government. Jesus was talking about the coming government of God over this earth. He commanded: "REPENT, and believe in the gospel!"



To "repent" means to be so sorry that you are not only willing to quit, but to turn around and go the other way. Of course we must repent of SIN. But what is sin? God answers:

1 John 3:4, KJV

3:4

Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.

1 John 3:4 (NKJV)

Whoever commits sin also commits lawlessness, and sin is lawlessness.



So we must repent of disobeying God’s Government, of breaking His LAW!

Again, notice Jesus’ own inspired words on the subject:

Matthew 5:17

5:17

"Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill.

In other words, Jesus in His own life perfectly performed the spiritual intent and purpose of God’s law. Why did He do this?



Let God answer!

In His inspired prophecy about the coming Messiah, Jesus Christ, Isaiah wrote:

Isaiah 42:21, KJV

42:21

The LORD is well pleased for his righteousness' sake; he will magnify the law, and make it honourable.

Isaiah 42:21, NKJV

42:21

The Lord is well pleased for His righteousness' sake; He will exalt the law and make it honorable.

To magnify does NOT mean to destroy but to show forth and enlarge an object or a thing to the fullest possible extent. Jesus perfectly fulfilled and magnified God’s law to show us its fullest spiritual application and also to set us an EXAMPLE that we should follow in His steps.

1 Peter 2:21

2:21

For to this you were called, because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that you should follow His steps:



Jesus continued in this same discourse:

Matthew 5:19

5:19

Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

So according to Jesus’ literal teaching, you have to both DO and TEACH even the LEAST of God’s commandments if you are to become great in His Kingdom.



Isn’t that PLAIN?



Throughout the rest of this teaching, commonly called the "Sermon on the Mount," Jesus continued to MAGNIFY God’s law and bring out the spiritual intent and purpose of that law for Christians with God’s Spirit.

How Jesus MAGNIFIED the Law

He showed that we are not only to restrain ourselves from literal murder, but that to even HATE a brother, involving as it does the spirit of murder, is bringing us into judgment before the spiritual law of God. He vividly illustrated how one can commit adultery not only by performing the literal act, but by LUSTING after a woman in his heart.

Matthew 5:21–31

5:21

"You have heard that it was said to those of old, 'You shall not murder, and whoever murders will be in danger of the judgment.'

5:22

But I say to you that whoever is angry with his brother without a cause F19 shall be in danger of the judgment. And whoever says to his brother, 'Raca!' shall be in danger of the council. But whoever says, 'You fool!' shall be in danger of hell fire.

5:23

Therefore if you bring your gift to the altar, and there remember that your brother has something against you,

5:24

leave your gift there before the altar, and go your way. First be reconciled to your brother, and then come and offer your gift.

5:25

Agree with your adversary quickly, while you are on the way with him, lest your adversary deliver you to the judge, the judge hand you over to the officer, and you be thrown into prison.

5:26

Assuredly, I say to you, you will by no means get out of there till you have paid the last penny.

5:27

"You have heard that it was said to those of old, 'You shall not commit adultery.'

5:28

But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart

5:29

If your right eye causes you to sin, pluck it out and cast it from you; for it is more profitable for you that one of your members perish, than for your whole body to be cast into hell.

5:30

And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and cast it from you; for it is more profitable for you that one of your members perish, than for your whole body to be cast into hell.

5:31

"Furthermore it has been said, 'Whoever divorces his wife, let him give her a certificate of divorce.'



They obviously do NOT do away with God’s law but rather make it all the more binding!

Matthew’s fifth chapter ends with Jesus’ instruction:

5:48

Therefore you shall be perfect, just as your Father in heaven is perfect.

Obedience to God and His law is the keynote in the entire Sermon on the Mount. Jesus declared:

Matthew 7:21

7:21

"Not everyone who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord,' shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven.



Later, notice Jesus’ own words, His teaching on how to be saved.

Matthew 19:16–17

19:16

Now behold, one came and said to Him, "Good Teacher, what good thing shall I do that I may have eternal life?"

19:17

So He said to him, "Why do you call Me good? No one is good but One, that is, God. But if you want to enter into life, keep the commandments."

Then Jesus proceeded to name some of the Ten Commandments from the Old Testament.

19:18

He said to Him, "Which ones?" Jesus said, "'You shall not murder,' 'You shall not commit adultery,' 'You shall not steal,' 'You shall not bear false witness,'

19:19

'Honor your father and your mother,' and, 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself.' "

God’s Government Has Laws



Speaking about the New Testament Gospel, which He preached, Jesus stated:

Luke 16:16–17

16:16

The law and the prophets were until John. Since that time the kingdom of God has been preached, and everyone is pressing into it.

16:17

And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for one tittle of the law to fail.

Here Jesus clearly showed that God’s Kingdom or GOVERNMENT is inseparably connected with God’s Law. He showed that the law would NEVER fail! Then He went on to show what law He was talking about by commenting on the commandment concerning adultery one of the Ten Commandments!



16:18

Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is divorced from her husband commits adultery.

So the good news of God’s Kingdom is inseparably related to the Law of God as contained in the Ten Commandments. Jesus always magnified and kept THIS LAW during His lifetime. He said:

John 15:10

15:10

If you keep My commandments, you will abide in My love, just as I have kept My Father's commandments and abide in His love.

After His resurrection; Christ was commissioning His disciples to preach His message to ALL NATIONS certainly including the Gentiles. Jesus commanded:

Matthew 28:19–20

28:19

Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,

28:20

teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age." Amen.



Here Jesus is clearly and plainly telling His apostles to go out to all nations preaching exactly the SAME message of obedience to God’s LAW and His government as He Himself had taught them!



But carnal-minded men REBEL at the teaching of obedience to God’s commandments. They say it is IMPOSSIBLE for human beings to obey God’s law. They come up with many different excuses for disobeying the commandments of God and teach that you are saved by a sentimental acceptance of Christ’s NAME or PERSON without any real obedience to Him or God as your Lord and MASTER!

Jesus Set a Perfect Example



Remember that a Christian is one who literally follows the example of Jesus Christ! Jesus was the "light" that God sent into the world to show man HOW he ought to be living.

John 1:9

1:9

That was the true Light which gives light to every man coming into the world.



Peter was inspired to write:

1 Peter 2:21–22

2:21

For to this you were called, because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that you should follow His steps:

2:22

"Who committed no sin, Nor was deceit found in His mouth";

Jesus OBEYED God. He did NO SIN and sin is the "transgression of the law." He obeyed God and suffered persecution willingly and in all this set us an EXAMPLE that we should follow His steps!



The Apostle John wrote:

1 John 2:6

2:6

He who says he abides in Him ought himself also to walk just as He walked



This passage clearly shows that the true Christian must LIVE just as Jesus Christ did live following His example



So we are LITERALLY to follow the inspired EXAMPLE of Jesus Christ’s perfect life! And we have seen that Jesus DID KEEP the Ten Commandments”LITERALLY.

John 15:10

15:10

If you keep My commandments, you will abide in My love, just as I have kept My Father's commandments and abide in His love.

If you really study the inspired record of Jesus’ life carefully, you will see that Jesus prayed constantly on both knees to God the Father, and fasted when He was in need of being especially close to God.

Mark 1:35, 2:20, 9:29

1:35

Now in the morning, having risen a long while before daylight, He went out and departed to a solitary place; and there He prayed.

2:20

But the days will come when the bridegroom will be taken away from them, and then they will fast in those days.

9:29

So He said to them, "This kind can come out by nothing but prayer and fasting."

You will see where Jesus literally OBEYED the fourth commandment setting us an example.

Luke 4:16, 31

4:16

So He came to Nazareth, where He had been brought up. And as His custom was, He went into the synagogue on the Sabbath day, and stood up to read.

4:31

Then He went down to Capernaum, a city of Galilee, and was teaching them on the Sabbaths.



You will see where Jesus refused to be drawn into worldly wars and politics.

John 18:36–37

18:36

Jesus answered, "My kingdom is not of this world. If My kingdom were of this world, My servants would fight, so that I should not be delivered to the Jews; but now My kingdom is not from here."

18:37

Pilate therefore said to Him, "Are You a king then?" Jesus answered, "You say rightly that I am a king. For this cause I was born, and for this cause I have come into the world, that I should bear witness to the truth. Everyone who is of the truth hears My voice."

You will see that Jesus OBEYED the commandments of God both in the letter AND in the spirit.

That He lived a life of GIVING and SERVICE.

That He conducted Himself as an ambassador of a foreign kingdom or government, God’s Government in heaven, which will soon come to replace ALL governments on this earth. Therefore, Jesus had no part in the religions, politics, wars and disputes of His time.



True Christians are LITERALLY to follow His awe-inspiring example! AND Paul was inspired to write:

Hebrews 13:8

13:8

Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever.



How You CAN Follow Christ’s Example!



John 14:15

14:15

"If you love Me, keep My commandments.



However, you must surrender your will to Him, and you must REPENT of your lawlessness and ACCEPT CHRIST as your SAVIOR and as your Lord and MASTER!

Then you must yield and strive to be an effective instrument in His hands!



Now can you understand?



By keeping the commandments, you allow CHRIST to live through you by you keeping the commandments all over again. Just as He did over 1,900 years ago! It is His righteousness operating through you, when you have willingly yielded to Him as His instrument.



Let Christ’s Word give the true answer!

1 John 5:3

5:3

For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments. And His commandments are not burdensome.



You CAN follow the perfect example of Jesus Christ. You CAN yield to let Jesus live the same kind of life in you, which He DID live over 1,900 years ago by keeping the same laws of God, worshipping on the same Holy Days which God ordained, remaining separate from this world’s society, politics and wars, and through constant Bible study, earnest prayer, occasional fasting, and consistent spiritual overcoming and GROWTH, you can yield to let God fashion you in His spiritual image, to be born of Him in the resurrection, as His LITERAL SON and possessed of His very nature!



This is, in fact, the very PURPOSE of your existence!

Who are the True Christians?

Down through history, God has always set apart and marked those who truly serve Him by keeping His commandments and His LAWS. The Apostle John was inspired to write:

1 John 2:4

2:4

He who says, "I know Him," and does not keep His commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.



The true God does not even hear our prayers unless we keep His commandments!

1 John 3:22

3:22

And whatever we ask we receive from Him, because we keep His commandments and do those things that are pleasing in His sight.

God further states:

2 John 1: 9–11

1:9

Whoever transgresses and does not abide in the doctrine of Christ does not have God. He who abides in the doctrine of Christ has both the Father and the Son.

1:10

If anyone comes to you and does not bring this doctrine, do not receive him into your house nor greet him;

1:11

for he who greets him shares in his evil deeds.



This true teaching, the matter of OBEDIENCE to the true God and His LAW, is of PARAMOUNT importance in the eyes of God! Even in the final book of your Bible, the book of Revelation, this standard of OBEDIENCE is used as a sign of IDENTITY of God’s true Church down through the ages.



Notice! Speaking of the true Church, which has to flee from the Devil at the time of the end, God says:

Revelation 12:17

12:17

And the dragon was enraged with the woman, and he went to make war with the rest of her offspring, who keep the commandments of God and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.



And, at the very END of your Bible, as His final message to YOU, God states:

Revelation 22:14

22:14

Blessed are those who do His commandments, that they may have the right to the tree of life, and may enter through the gates into the city.



True Christianity then, the Christianity of Christ is a WAY of life! It involves the Life as Jesus Christ lived. By truly worshipping God in the way He tells us to.



We are to "walk with God" on a daily basis, reflecting Jesus Christ in every facet of our lives. We will overcome the downward pull of sin that is the transgression of the law. And so God Himself will prepare us and qualify us to RULE with Christ in the coming Kingdom of God, soon to be set up on this earth!

Revelation 2:26–27

2:26

And he who overcomes, and keeps My works until the end, to him I will give power over the nations--

2:27

'He shall rule them with a rod of iron; They shall be dashed to pieces like the potter's vessels'-- as I also have received from My Father;



For real Christians are called not just to be "nice" people. Rather we are called to join with Christ in RULING this world and bringing genuine peace and JOY to the earth when Christ’s Kingdom becomes a glorious reality at His Second Coming. That is the very purpose for us to learn and keep Gods Laws, for how can we rule if we ourselves haven’t learnt or kept those some laws.

[Accountable]

Hello. Do you often introduce yourself by publishing your book?

[chonsigirl]

Hi there, why don't you take one point at at a time?:)

[Accountable]

sixyearsleft wrote: I wish the time traveling Devil would go back in time again and destroy what he created, the Apostle Paul and the Gosples are a very weak faith indeed, i tend to study our real history and not just another pagan story, forgive me for being so blunt but the real story Of jesus is yet unknown or hidden.
Hidden where? (honest question asked out of sincere curiosity)

[OpenMind]

Hello, ServeandSave. Welcome to this Forum. Please allow me to refer to you in future as SAS. Others here refer to me as OM which I am happy to accept.

That was quite a phenomenal introduction. A well-argued essay.

Are you a preacher, a man of the cloth, or a theocrat? Do you subscribe to a particular Christian church?

Do you come here to this forum with a set purpose in mind, or are you simply trying to stimulate debate?

[Accountable]

sixyearsleft wrote: I dont know where it would be hidden, but there's 18 years missing in the jesus story, the Apostle paul did'nt support Jesus up untill a few years after he accended who did not mention anything about Jesus' birth. But then Paul didn't mention anything about Jesus' life and ministry either--except Jesus' last supper with his disciples before his arrest, his death on the cross, and his resurrection from the grave. We would know almost nothing about the actual life and ministry of Jesus if we had only Paul's letters to rely on,

then came the Gosples in 65, dont you think that the familiy of jesus should play a part? incredably they dont, the story as it goes is not credible to say the least, there is to much information missing or as i say, hidden.
I'm too simple for such depth that these conversations usually reach. I rely on the stories of Jesus for my guidance ... on the rare occassions that I actually crack the book. The writings of Paul smack of flawed human thinking, to me.

[Bronwen]

s&s, why don't you just post the Encyclopaedia Britannica while you're at it?

serveandsave wrote: For real Christians are called not just to be "nice" people. Rather we are called to join with Christ in RULING this world and bringing genuine peace and JOY to the earth when Christ’s Kingdom becomes a glorious reality at His Second Coming. That is the very purpose for us to learn and keep Gods Laws, for how can we rule if we ourselves haven’t learnt or kept those some laws.I'm not sure what you're saying here. Maybe if you had been a bit more succinct it would be easier to 'get your drift'.

Are you saying that Christians are bound by the Mosaic Law?

Also, Jesus promised to return QUICKLY, within the lifetime of at least some of His contemporaries. Why do you imagine that promise was not fulfilled?

[SOJOURNER]

S&S:

That's way, way too much to read and answer all at once. I like Chonsi's suggestion of taking one point at a time. I'd be delighted to post to your thread if you submitted it in smaller pieces.

Welcome to FG! I hope you'll stick around. :-6

SoJo

[chonsigirl]

Well, I seem to remember Jesus getting picked on by those Pharisees by disobeying the Law-picking ears of corn on the Sabbath, healing on the Sabbath, etc.

[chonsigirl]

Hi Six!:)

Oh, Jesus after the money changers must have ruffled a few of them................

[chonsigirl]

Hmm, Rucus Breaks Out On Wall Street! Story on 11 news!

[chonsigirl]

Jesus paying his taxes.....................go catch a fish! i wish paying them was that easy for me!

[OpenMind]

sixyearsleft wrote: I think he's trying to say that Jesus broke from the traditional jewish law to create a new world religion,



If so, this is incorrect, he is replacing the Apostle Paul with Jesus, Paul was responsible for the world religion, it is he who broke the traditional jewish faith.


Jesus did declare that he could tear down the exising church and build a new one in three days.

I enjoyed SAS's post as he did not steer away from the text of the Bible. he showed that jesus did not break the ten commandments, only the law of the scribes and pharisees. He also showed how the scibes and the pharisees did break the ten commandments. SAS did this in reference to the law of the Sabbath. As far as I have read these sections of the Bible, I agree whole heartedly with SAS.

Further, the christian churches have done exactly the same as the scribes and the pharisees insofar as they have interpreted the sayings of Jesus and made rules and regulations over and above Jesus. Further, instead of being plain messengers, they imported onto themselves authority and power.

Jesus gave us two new commandments greater still than the original ten commandments. Jesus did not say that they replaced the ten commandments, he simply stated them in answer to the question asked of him, 'which of these is the greatest commandment?'

As for the truth of the Bible, as far as I know, the only problem is not so much the accuracy of the existing text, but rather what has been left out. Even so, who can prove it one way or the other without actually living by the scriptures to see what happens? Not an easy task, even Jesus would rather not have gone through his ordeal and asked God to take the responsibility from him.

Such an unusual person, yet, the Messiah was never expected to be a man in the ordinary sense.

[spot]

chonsigirl wrote: Hmm, Rucus Breaks Out On Wall Street! Story on 11 news!That was Abbie Hoffman, the nearest thing to Jesus in living memory. The sixth paragraph at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abbie_Hoffman describes the time it happened. You don't often get parables enacted these days.

[Accountable]

OpenMind wrote: Jesus did declare that he could tear down the exising church and build a new one in three days.

I enjoyed SAS's post as he did not steer away from the text of the Bible. he showed that jesus did not break the ten commandments, only the law of the scribes and pharisees. He also showed how the scibes and the pharisees did break the ten commandments. SAS did this in reference to the law of the Sabbath. As far as I have read these sections of the Bible, I agree whole heartedly with SAS.

Further, the christian churches have done exactly the same as the scribes and the pharisees insofar as they have interpreted the sayings of Jesus and made rules and regulations over and above Jesus. Further, instead of being plain messengers, they imported onto themselves authority and power.

Jesus gave us two new commandments greater still than the original ten commandments. Jesus did not say that they replaced the ten commandments, he simply stated them in answer to the question asked of him, 'which of these is the greatest commandment?'

As for the truth of the Bible, as far as I know, the only problem is not so much the accuracy of the existing text, but rather what has been left out. Even so, who can prove it one way or the other without actually living by the scriptures to see what happens? Not an easy task, even Jesus would rather not have gone through his ordeal and asked God to take the responsibility from him.

Such an unusual person, yet, the Messiah was never expected to be a man in the ordinary sense.There's a documentary on the History channel right now discussing this. Coincidence??

[OpenMind]

Accountable wrote: There's a documentary on the History channel right now discussing this. Coincidence??


Not showing here in the UK, it's in intermission. Obviously, the History channel doesn't broadcast simultaneously around the world (presumably, this would allow for the time differences). I would be interested in the outcome of it though. I will have to check the schedule. Very uncanny to be showing now. On the other hand, there have been a lot of documentaries broadcast on the terrestrial channels in recent years concerning the validity and authority of the Bible.

[Accountable]

sixyearsleft wrote: There's also a film coming out on the 6/6/06 called the beast directed by filmmaker Brian Flemming.



The theory that Jesus Christ never existed, while largely unknown to most lay Christians, is gaining credibility among scholars. Historians do not consider the Gospels to be historically accurate accounts. The authors of the Gospels, writing 40 to 90 years after the supposed life of Christ, never intended for their works to be read as biographies. There are no credible non-Christian references to Christ during the period in which he is said to have lived.





http://www.thebeastmovie.com/
I'm sure I'd heard that there are other official documents verifying Jesus' existence, regardless of his authenticity of holiness. Josephus, or something like that?

[chonsigirl]

Accountable wrote: I'm sure I'd heard that there are other official documents verifying Jesus' existence, regardless of his authenticity of holiness. Josephus, or something like that?
I think Josephus talked about Him, but that I would have to look up.

I do not have Josephus at home-never would have it since he was traitor in a way-during the whole Masada episode. I will look for an online edition today.

[OpenMind]

sixyearsleft wrote: There's also a film coming out on the 6/6/06 called the beast directed by filmmaker Brian Flemming.



The theory that Jesus Christ never existed, while largely unknown to most lay Christians, is gaining credibility among scholars. Historians do not consider the Gospels to be historically accurate accounts. The authors of the Gospels, writing 40 to 90 years after the supposed life of Christ, never intended for their works to be read as biographies. There are no credible non-Christian references to Christ during the period in which he is said to have lived.





http://www.thebeastmovie.com/


This seems to me to be an obvious plot to use for a film discrediting Christianity. So, I would be interested in seeing the basis of its argument.

On top of this, I have read that documents exist that show that Jesus was married. Of course, I have never seen them, nor can I say what name is used on the documents, so I cannot verify this anymore than I can verify that Jesus existed at all.

[memebias]

OpenMind wrote: This seems to me to be an obvious plot to use for a film discrediting Christianity. So, I would be interested in seeing the basis of its argument.


I doubt if its arguments are radically different than those you'll find in the standard "Jesus is a myth" debates you'll hear elsewhere - nothing new, but with added Hollywood glitz.

I'll go and see it just to hear the opinions of the historian Richard Carrier.

[OpenMind]

memebias wrote: I doubt if its arguments are radically different than those you'll find in the standard "Jesus is a myth" debates you'll hear elsewhere - nothing new, but with added Hollywood glitz.



I'll go and see it just to hear the opinions of the historian Richard Carrier.


I would be interested in your review and comments, Meme.

[memebias]

OpenMind wrote: I would be interested in your review and comments, Meme.


You'll have to wait till June at the earliest for a review of the movie, but I've got plenty of comments of my own regarding the mythical Jesus theory

[OpenMind]

memebias wrote: You'll have to wait till June at the earliest for a review of the movie, but I've got plenty of comments of my own regarding the mythical Jesus theory


What's your standing on it, Meme.

I tend to believe that Jesus existed, even if, perhaps he had a different name. If nothing else, his execution would have been recorded.

[memebias]

OpenMind wrote: What's your standing on it, Meme.

I tend to believe that Jesus existed, even if, perhaps he had a different name. If nothing else, his execution would have been recorded.


I used to assume a historical Jesus existed, minus supernatural powers, maybe a radical Jewish agitator who became too much of a pain the nuts for the Jewish establishment and the Romans.

But the more I looked into it, the more I’ve moved to the idea of Jesus as a myth. There are too many holes in the idea of a historical Jesus.

[spot]

memebias wrote: But the more I looked into it, the more I’ve moved to the idea of Jesus as a myth. There are too many holes in the idea of a historical Jesus.All Josephus does, if I remember, is refer to the cruxifixion of three unnamed men one of whom survived the experience.

We've mentioned the no-Jesus and one-Jesus explanations of history - nobody's yet commented on the many-Jesus point of view. If the Gospel stories (as opposed to the Gospels) are from several times and places, then they tell several myths, not one, and the Gospel writers have conflated them into a tale of a single saviour. There's reasoned argument out there supporting that idea, especially when it comes to the birth stories.

I don't regard any of them as destructive of Christian faith.

[OpenMind]

memebias wrote: I used to assume a historical Jesus existed, minus supernatural powers, maybe a radical Jewish agitator who became too much of a pain the nuts for the Jewish establishment and the Romans.

But the more I looked into it, the more I’ve moved to the idea of Jesus as a myth. There are too many holes in the idea of a historical Jesus.


A perplexing thing, eh? Yet, I can't imagine the Roman Catholic church making it all up. Some part of it has to be true. If a lie, then it would be unique if no part of it is based upon truth. As the old saying goes, all lies are based upon truth. This still holds good even today.

Will we ever have the facts? Somehow, I think that having the facts would destroy the essence of the idea of having faith.

It's very difficult to research this without a lot of time and the resources and means to find the relevant documents.

[spot]

OpenMind wrote: Some part of it has to be true. If a lie, then it would be unique if no part of it is based upon truth. As the old saying goes, all lies are based upon truth.And when did you stop believing in Father Christmas? What part of the story of Santa Claus and his pretty elves is based on fact? If the potential layer of truth regarding the historical Jesus is as totally divorced from the current tales the Church tells as Saint Nicholas of Myra's history has become, then there's not much difference between the truth and a lie, is there.

[OpenMind]

spot wrote: And when did you stop believing in Father Christmas? What part of the story of Santa Claus and his pretty elves is based on fact? If the potential layer of truth regarding the historical Jesus is as totally divorced from the current tales the Church tells as Saint Nicholas of Myra's history has become, then there's not much difference between the truth and a lie, is there.


Have you read through all this thread. Spot?

My standing on the matter is different to what you appear to think. Nonetheless, if it is all an elaborate lie, then it would be just as you say. That's how things are distorted, just like in Chinese Whispers.

So, what is your standing, Spot? Or are you just sounding off at me? Mine was given in an earlier post on this thread.

[spot]

OpenMind wrote: Have you read through all this thread. Spot? [...] are you just sounding off at me?Other than the first post in the thread, yes. And of course I'm not sounding off, whatever that means. I was drawing a parallel with your suggestion that all lies are based on truth, and pointing out how wildly they can depart from the initial "fact" even when the fact can be gleaned elsewhere.

What's my standing? I have no authority at all.

Damn, writing in English can be so tricky. Either that means "who authorized you to speak : nobody at all" or "what do you think : I think there's no accurate information to base an opinion on". If you're asking my opinion, I think there's only beliefs (which I avoid and shun) and faith (which I embrace). There's certainly no certainty regarding the transmission of the historical record. I do find the notion of conflated stories from different eras and locations attractive, having read Kemal Salibi's blockbusters in my formative years.

[memebias]

OpenMind wrote: A perplexing thing, eh? Yet, I can't imagine the Roman Catholic church making it all up. Some part of it has to be true. If a lie, then it would be unique if no part of it is based upon truth. As the old saying goes, all lies are based upon truth. This still holds good even today.


A very good case can be made that they didn't have to make it all up, and that Christianity is a syncretic belief system. I've not found one major Christian belief that could not be found in earlier religions.

Even Justin Martyr the early Church Father had to acknowledge the similarities between Christianity and Paganism, he wrote in chaper 21 of his First Apology:

"When we say that the Word, who is first born of God, was produced without sexual union, and that he, Jesus Christ, our teacher, was crucified and died, and rose again, and ascended into heaven; we propound nothing different from what you believe regarding those whom you esteem sons of Jupiter (Zeus)."

If won't go as far as to say that Christianity is an exact Xerox copy of an earlier religion, but the parallels between it and other religions are revealing.

[memebias]

All Josephus does, if I remember, is refer to the cruxifixion of three unnamed men one of whom survived the experience.


Are you sure it's Josephus you're thinking of Spot? I don't recall the passage.

We've mentioned the no-Jesus and one-Jesus explanations of history - nobody's yet commented on the many-Jesus point of view. If the Gospel stories (as opposed to the Gospels) are from several times and places, then they tell several myths, not one, and the Gospel writers have conflated them into a tale of a single saviour. There's reasoned argument out there supporting that idea, especially when it comes to the birth stories.


Quite possible Spot, let's not forget that the Jews were expecting a Messiah, and there were more 'Messiahs' in 1st century (and earlier) Judea than fleas on a dog. It can't be ruled out that different birth stories were conflated into one.



I don't regard any of them as destructive of Christian faith.


Just as a matter of interest, what would you consider destructive of Christian faith?

[spot]

memebias wrote: Are you sure it's Josephus you're thinking of Spot? I don't recall the passage.Josephus, Life: 76

And when I was sent by Titus Caesar with Cerealins, and a thousand horsemen, to a certain village called Thecoa, in order to know whether it were a place fit for a camp, as I came back, I saw many captives crucified, and remembered three of them as my former acquaintance. I was very sorry at this in my mind, and went with tears in my eyes to Titus, and told him of them; so he immediately commanded them to be taken down, and to have the greatest care taken of them, in order to their recovery; yet two of them died under the physician's hands, while the third recovered.

Whether the Josephus references to both Jesus and James are subsequent interpolations to the text, nobody seems to be quite sure. They seem rather too good to be true.

memebias wrote: Just as a matter of interest, what would you consider destructive of Christian faith?Bloody Christians, of course. What else is quite so powerful an image in that context?

[memebias]

spot wrote: Josephus, Life: 76


Cheers. Not that apologists should be jumping up and down at the mention of three crucified. Not unless they want to invoke Dr. Who and move Jesus' death forward in time.

Whether the Josephus references to both Jesus and James are subsequent interpolations to the text, nobody seems to be quite sure. They seem rather too good to be true.


Whats really too good to be true is that the Jesus and James references were unknown to the leaders of the early Christian church right up until the time they were magically 'discovered' by the Church Father Eusabius, 250 or so years after the alleged death of Jesus.

Bloody Christians, of course. What else is quite so powerful an image in that context?


I can but hope...

[Ted]

That some early Christian beliefs came from other religions is not even in question as far as the Bible is concerned. Several things are known to be borowed: one of them being the creation stories.

As for the other points, it is whatever one chooses to believe.

Shalom

Ted:-6

[spot]

Ted wrote: That some early Christian beliefs came from other religions is not even in question as far as the Bible is concerned. Several things are known to be borowed: one of them being the creation stories.It's quite apparent, Ted, that it is questioned, That's why we have literalists, after all.

Ted wrote: As for the other points, it is whatever one chooses to believe.And there's your problem. Where does a sense of community get to, if Christianity is whatever one chooses to believe? Somewhere, at some level, there has to be agreement within a community of believers. Where agreement is absent, there is no communion. I don't know of a single statement that's subscribed to by all denominations, much less all members of the body of Christ, and that includes the creeds. It's a shabby assembly, when you look at it. I'd rather see myself as outside of the body than as an infection.

[Ted]

spot:-6

My point about whatever one wants to believe is a general reference to anyone: Buddhists, Muslims, Jews etc. What one believes in a personal opinion. Yes of course there are disagreements even within the church. So be it. That started shortly after the crucifixion if one so believes. J D Crossan.

My personal position as a Christian-pluralist is my personal position but it is accepted by my church generally.

Generally among the mainline churches there is a sense of community and communion. Though, much to my disappointment, not all churches practise inter communion and I find that sad. None of that however takes away from the central theme of the Christian faith; the "Kingdom of God". Chlurches are working together to sort out their differences. There will always be some differences just as there was between Paul and James. They agreed to disagree on a few matters because they were not central to the faith.

"It's a shabby assembly" has not been my experience at all. However, if that is what you choose to believe go for it. As for calling it an infection, once again that has not been my experience.

If you look at the great commandment you will find that not only do most Christians regardless of denomination but most of the other great faiths in the world accept that.

One can always be negative if one chooses or look for the positives if one chooses. My glass is half full not half empty.

Shalom

Ted:-6

[spot]

Ted wrote: None of that however takes away from the central theme of the Christian faith; the "Kingdom of God".This is, I'd agree, the central theme of the Christian faith; the "Kingdom of God". Christians tend, historically, toward the viewpoint of God as all-powerful in that sense of Kingship. It is, after all, a core expression of the Gospels, even though they reject the notion of the Messiah's Kingship being of this world. There's a very small subset of Christianity that would regard God as weak or even powerless, but that's the sense with which I'm most comfortable. I'd like to see it explored more fully.

[memebias]

Ted wrote: That some early Christian beliefs came from other religions is not even in question as far as the Bible is concerned. Several things are known to be borowed: one of them being the creation stories.


As I said Ted, it's not the case of "several things", there's not one major point in the life of Jesus and early Christian doctrine that cannot be found elsewhere in pre-Christian thought and literature. I'll give you another example -

Romulus, the founder of Rome.

Both were incarnated gods, both became incarnate in order to establish a kingdom on earth - for Romulus, it was the Roman Empire; for Christ, the Kingdom of God.

Both had a supernatural darkness at the time of their deaths (Mk. 15:33).

Both were killed by a conspiracy of the ruling powers

Both were executed on the word of 72 men. (Romulus - Roman senate; Jesus, the Sanderhin, plus Judas)

Both corpses vanished when sought for i.e. the empty tomb.

Both appeared to a close follower after their resurrection, both on an important road (Proculus on the road to Alba Longa; Cleopas on the road to Emmaus)

Both roads were exactly 14 miles long - one leading to Rome, the other from Jerusalem

Both connected their resurrections with moral teachings

Both "appeared" around the break of dawn; both ascended to heaven (e.g. Lk. 24:50-55, Acts 1:9-11)

Both were hailed "God, Son of God, King, and Father";

In a public Roman ceremony, the names of those who fled in fear when the body of Romulus vanished, were recited in public . Just as we "know" the names of those who fled in fear when the body of Jesus vanished (Mk. 16:8)

The Romulus story tell us that people kept their silence for a long time after the resurrection appearance and only later proclaimed Romulus a risen god. Just as the women "told no one" and the Christians waited fifty days before proclaiming their "discovery" to the public: (Acts 1:3, 2:1-11.)

Romulus was dismembered. Although Jesus is not dismembered, his clothes were, (Mk. 15:24). Clothing was a common metaphor for the body in Jewish thought.

(With acknowledgement to R. Carrier for most of the above.)



As for the other points, it is whatever one chooses to believe.


That's a very tolerant and inclusive attitude Ted, but sooner or later we have to decide that black isn't white merely because we can believe it is if we want to.

The mythical Jesus theory is an elephant in the room, and at some stage it has to be addressed by anyone claiming Jesus existed.

Ted, you remind me very much of another Christian I used to debate with on Usenet. He, as like you, was intelligent and articulate. He accepted that science had replaced the Genesis story, evolution was true, the flood never happened, etc..

But as soon as he opened the New Testament all his critical faculties went out of the window and he believed talking demons could inhabit a human body. Not because there is evidence for this, but because the bible said so.

To me, that an intelligent, seemingly rational person had the ability to erect a wall of unquestioning faith around something that is clearly a Bronze Age superstition is baffling - and slightly scary.