Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: hogwaller
We must remember the argument that the Gospel writers were making. Each of the first three Gospel writers, and to some extent John, were writing, at least in part to each of the other Jewish sects and were trying to bring them along with their veiw of the world which was through Christ. Matthew in particular was willing to take the other sects in his and our religion to task in the debate.

There were a number of Jewish denominations around the time of Christ. Included in these were the Pharisees, the Sadesses (sp?), the Zealots, the Essenes, etc.

Many Biblical students believe that Christianity is another brance of Judiasm. In fact, much of what Christians believe appears to be very closely related to what the Essenes professed.

The Dead Sea Scrolls are probably Essene writings. Obviously Jewish students have some different views of the import of those scrolls than do Christian writers, but as I understand it, there is little difference in litteral translation, but some moderately significant difference in emphisis between the Jewish and the Christian translations.

As some guy (not me) has said, in about 70 A.D. several Jewish sects fled Jerusalem after its fall. One of those sects were or became the Christians.

While Christians may be 6th cousins, thrice removed, to Islam through Ismael, we are siblings (or at least first cousins) of Jews. I believe (and hope) that Christians have a wider, shorter road to Heaven than do Jews, but that Jews, who have chosen to live by the old, tougher rules, are not ipso facto precluded from making it to Heaven.

Christ's major argument with the Pharisees is that they paid too much attention to the letter of the law and ignored the spirit of the law.

Chapter 15 of Matthew provides in part, "Just then a Canannite woman from that region came out and started shouting, 'Have mercy on me, Lord, Son of David; my daughter is tormented by a demon.' But he did not answer her at all. And his disciples came and urged him, saying, 'Send her away, for she keeps shouting after us.' He answered, 'I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.' But she came and knelt before him saying, 'Lord, help me.' He answered, 'It is not fair to take the children's food and throw it to the dogs.' She said, 'Yes, Lord, yet even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their master's table.' Then Jesus answered her, 'Woman, great is your faith! Let it be done for you as you wish.' And her daughter was healed instantly."

At least early in his preaching, Christ was not positively disposed to the Gentiles. As far as I can determine, Christ lost this arugment with this Gentile woman and it is the only arugment he ever lost. I am certin that there are others who disagree with my assessment of the situation.

As I recall, Christ had some significant arguments with the Pharisees and with most other religous "leaders" of the day, but the had some significant agreements with them also. For instance, according to Luke, Christ stayed behind in Jerusalem to discuss theological issues of the day with the then powers that were in the Temple while his mother and Joseph headed home. His take on the then religous Powers that Be (or were) seemed to be a reasonably friendly.

The long and the short of it to me is that Christ did not have much truck with slavishly following any fixed set of religous rules when that action did not promote the world as God saw fit, but that Christ had some small sympathy (but not a lot) with those who tried to do right, took some pains to figure out what God wanted to be done, but at the end of the day made an honest mistake. Of course, at the very best, each of us is going to be called upon to make judgment calls.

My take on the New Testament is that so long as we believe and make a reasonable effort to do right and use some reasonable judgment in that direction, Christ's suffered and died for us and that we will be ok at the last call. On the other hand, if we refuse to believe, or if we pay lip service to our belief and make no effort to do right, or if we insist on justifying all that we do, no matter what Christ has said, we may have some trouble later on.

Irrespective of my rantings, I hope all you Freepers have a Happy Christmas.

29 posted on 12/25/2001 5:02:54 PM PST by Tom D.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies ]


To: *Christian_List; *Religion; Bibchr
bump
30 posted on 12/25/2001 5:20:44 PM PST by Free the USA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies ]

To: Tom D.
As I recall, Christ had some significant arguments with the Pharisees and with most other religous "leaders" of the day, but the had some significant agreements with them also.

Jesus Christ met each person at the point of their need. Pharisees were called to task for lacking humility, a rich young ruler was called to surrender his wealth to make room in his soul for God, His own disciples were chastised for lacking faith, and a brash Christian-hating zealot named Saul was called to surrender his whole life to glorify God.

What Jesus Christ never did was relax the law to allow people to feel comfortable wallowing in their favorite sins. He fulfilled the requirements of the law and gave all mankind a means of escaping the penalty--but strictly on His terms, never theirs.

Any man who believes he has found a Pharisee should look first in the mirror of the Word of God and stand humbled.

32 posted on 12/25/2001 5:35:01 PM PST by Kevin Curry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson