[Blood of Tyrants]

I'll give you one thing, when G-d gave the law to the Jews, many laws benefitied the Jews by commanding them to ritually cleanse theselves and their food in a time when personal hygiene was not considered important. These laws kept the Jews healthier than the average person and allowed them to thrive.

However, it is the focus on the nit-picky details of the law, which many of the Sanhedron used as a weapon to condemn others, such as when the disciples gathered a few grains of wheat on the Sabbath in order to eat, which Jesus Christ condemned. A person's focus should be on loving G-d and His children instead of how to properly operate a gas stove on the Sabbath so as to avoid a very narrow definition of "work".

I do not condemn you for your strict adherence to the law. I have read enough of the bible to know that G-d chose the children of Israel to be His own.

[safisoft]

However, it is the focus on the nit-picky details of the law, which many of the Sanhedron used as a weapon to condemn others, such as when the disciples gathered a few grains of wheat on the Sabbath in order to eat, which Jesus Christ condemned. A person's focus should be on loving G-d and His children instead of how to properly operate a gas stove on the Sabbath so as to avoid a very narrow definition of "work".

Your view is merely a repeat of hundreds of years of misunderstanding. The field incident you cite, is a classic Christian misunderstanding of the First Century approach to the Sabbath, and of who the Pharisees were. It comes as a shock to most Christians that the Pharisees were the ones that protested to Nero over the stoning of 'James' the brother of Yeshua. The Pharisees were the ones that walked out of the trial of Yeshua because they knew by Torah that it was not permissible to have such a trial in the night. Yes, some Pharisees were 'in-name-only', but the Talmud also identifies such as hyporcites.

The Sabbath halakah was not like it is today. There was debate about whether one could pick grain on the stalk forone's self, and the Talmud reflects such discussions.

As for being 'nit-picky' - my original post to you was regarding your intolerance for what YOU saw as over zealous obedience. Tell me, why is it that so many conservative Christians think that drinking alcohol is a moral issue - when Scripture does not? Chapter and verse please. No, instead it is a cultural issue from the 19th Century Second Great Awakening. How about the beating up of members and propelling them into the pews on Sunday mornign with the anacronistic reading of "Foresake not the gathering of yourselves together" from the Epistle to the Hebrews. Somehow making them think that CHURCH ATTENDANCE is a sign of righteous behavior. Tell me, is that 'nit-picky'?

The fact is, you can't separate culture from biblical observance, and because something seems different (read JEWISH), you automatically think it is some sort of 'works salvation' issue.