Biblical inconsistency?

OSV.com ^ | 07-25-18 | Msgr. Charles Pope

[Salvation]

Biblical inconsistency? Jesus does not negate himself but rather gives different teachings on following the commandments

Msgr. Charles Pope

7/25/2018

Question: In Matthew 5:19, Jesus rails against relaxing or changing even the least of the commandments, and yet verse 19 also says that if one does, “[he] will be called least in the kingdom of heaven.” It seems the consequences should be “losing” the kingdom of heaven if Jesus is consistent with what follows in verse 20. Can you explain the seeming inconsistency? — Jim Flynn, via email

Answer: Two different teachings are being made here, hence it is not a matter of consistency.

In verse 19, the operative teaching is that while unrepented mortal sin excludes one from the kingdom of God, not all violations of the law are mortal. Even the Ten Commandments, while indicating grave sin in themselves admit of lighter matter.

For example, regarding the Seventh Commandment, stealing a large amount or something essential or irreplaceable is usually a mortal sin. However, taking something small or insignificant, while a sin, may not be a mortal sin that excludes one from the kingdom of God. Thus, if the Lord were to adopt your word, the condemnation might be too sweeping. It does not follow that if someone breaks the least of the commandments they necessarily lose the kingdom of God.

Further, you will note that there is a kind of parallelism or play of words at work here. The Lord is saying, in effect: “If you break even the least of my teachings, I am going to call you the least!” Preachers often use such sayings in order to be memorable.

For example, consider the following word stitch: “Say what you mean, and mean what you say. But don’t say it mean.” The word “mean” unites all three phrases, but in each case a slightly different sense of the word “mean” is used.

Here, the Lord is not only being careful not to imply that even small infractions would land us in hell, but he is also being artful, resourceful and memorable by his use of a parallelism.

As for verse 20, we encounter a different teaching: “I tell you, unless your righteousness surpasses that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will not enter into the kingdom of heaven.”

Here we are dealing with the problem of minimalism. Though the Pharisees fancied themselves meticulous observers of the law, they were very minimalist in their application of it. Jesus said they were hypocrites because they followed exacting laws about small things, such as tithing, but neglected weightier matters of the law, such as justice and mercy (cf. Mt 23:23). It is one thing to pay tithes; this is good and required. But neglecting the poor and failing to feed and teach them is far more important to God.

Jesus will develop this teaching against minimalism in the verses that follow in the Sermon on the Mount. For example, he will teach that it is not enough to avoid murder; the command requires we let God banish vengeful hatred from our hearts. It is not enough to avoid acts of adultery; we must allow God to give us chaste minds and hearts. It is not enough to avoid excessive retaliation; we ought to avoid retaliation altogether.

Therefore, the message of verse 20 is a call to exceed the minimalist notions of the law. Grace equips us for more, and we are expected to attain more by that grace. The old law could not save. Only the “new law” of grace can save or make us sufficiently holy to enter heaven.

Thus verse 19 speaks of little things, verse 20 of weightier things.

[imardmd1]

Nobody did any translating! Its in the original language: Hebrew, the only language spoken by the House of Judah at that time. The only language in which any disciple was literate.

Only a rank fool would say something like this, clearly supposing that his audience was equally naive and helpless to think straight.

Even Pontius Pilate knew better than that, affiximg a sign in three languages and alphabets to the Cross. And the disciples at Pentecost were heard by many pilgrims at the feast to speak in their mother tongues.

Please take a break. Go take a nap. Read some Hebrew yourself, if you can. Please stop inviting the disparaging remarks of others for your childish responses. Even a farm equipment salesman knows enough not to stand to the rear of his manure spreaders.

[metmom]

And you’ve seen them personally to verify their existence, have you?

[ealgeone]

Well, the whole Lucy thing is predicated upon a false notion to begin with.

[ealgeone]

Except for a bunch of secret manuscripts allegedly in Hebrew that nobody has ever seen.

Except for Dan Brown!

[boatbums]

Then provide us with the *original* Hebrew texts. Otherwise you are going on what you think would have been said if the texts had been in Hebrew and that just allows for anything goes. Easy way for you to make up your own doctrine and teaching and pass it off as God’s word. And I’m pretty sure God would not take to kindly to that.

Not only that, but we have the teachings of early church fathers (ECF) where they quote practically every single verse of the New Testament. It has been said that even if we had no extant copies of the New Testament books, we could recompile them just from their writings.

[rwa265]

I’m not sure what Philippians 3 has to do with our discussion. It doesn’t say anything about sin or confessing our sins.

imardmd1 pointed us to 1 John 1, which in verse 9 states, “If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.”

Is it your contention that God will credit the righteousness of Christ to our account without us confessing our sins?

[Iscool]

REALLY?

You don't think so???

[boatbums]

Yes, there’s a lot of consensus among the 10 or 20 thousand protestant denominations, lol.

[Luircin]

And believe me, I appreciate not having to deal with the easily disproven lies of a fake rabbi cluttering up my notices.

Of course, if you don’t want my additional attention, you could just choose not to reply to me.

[boatbums]

We’re on the same wavelength! ;o)

[Iscool]

Is it your contention that God will credit the righteousness of Christ to our account without us confessing our sins?

He already did...The moment we trusted him as our Savior...

[kosciusko51]

LOL. See post 274.

[Mark17]

I shall deliver from purgatory those who have been devoted to the Rosary.

Hmmmm. Pardon me Els, if I don’t buy that. 😁🤣 I have, however, been to Purgatory already, so I don’t worry about going there. It’s in Colorado, and the skiing is great. 👍

[boatbums]

Miles who?

I found this interesting article that questions the "foremost expert" attribution on Miles Jones:

https://www.biblearchaeology.org/post/2012/09/26/Was-An-Archaeological-Forgery-Mistakenly-Portrayed-As-Authentic.aspx

After my article was posted online, Dr. Miles Jones came forward to take responsibility for translating the name “Yahweh” on the tablet. Jones has a Ph.D. in (modern) foreign language education from the University of Texas at Austin. In Dr. Jones’ biographical information there is no mention of any background or training in Hebrew or any other Semitic languages, especially South Semitic, or Thamudic, the language of the inscribed stone. This language needs to be mastered before one can properly translate this text.

Dr. Jones self-published a non-peer reviewed book entitled The Writing of God. In the book Jones attempted to interact with my above-mentioned article. He tried to dismiss the possibility that this inscription was a forgery because: “In Saudi Arabia there is no antiquities market selling artifacts to tourists. There are no tourists in Saudi Arabia” (2010:147). The statement is incorrect on two counts. First, Dr. Macdonald, writing from personal experience, informs me that: “His [Jones’] statement that there are no fakes or forgeries in Saudi Arabia merely displays a complete ignorance of the situation in the Middle East, and he is very naïve if he really believes that because something is against the law in any country (even with draconian punishments) some people will not take the risk of law-breaking for profit” (personal correspondence, October 24, 2009, emphasis added).

Second, contrary to Jones’ statement, there are many foreign tourists visiting the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia every year. The statistics from 1996 to the last recorded Hajj (2011) state that there were well over one million foreigners each year that made the pilgrimage to Mecca for the Hajj. Interestingly, the owner of the object in question was given the inscribed artifact by the Saudi prince who was the governor of Mecca (2010:147), the same city where the Hajj takes place.

Jones further attempts to convince the reader that Macdonald’s and Younger’s identification of the letters and translation of the word YHWH are incorrect. Yet, an understanding of the ancient language in question leads one to the conclusion that the artifact is not genuine. For example, the diacritical marks underneath the letters “wḥẖy” are in the text of the article. But the Semitic letter H with a line under it (ẖ) and the Semitic letter H with a dot under it (ḥ) are two different Semitic letters rather than the plain Semitic letter H, like in the word YHWH. So the letters that made up the word on the inscribed object do not spell “YHWH,” whichever direction it is read. Jones also said that “the ‘dot’ under the H is a pit in the stone” (2010:148). However, the diacritical marks underneath the letter “H” are scholarly convention for familiar modern Latin letters to represent Semitic letters and do not appear in the ancient lettering! Further, it has nothing to do with the pit in the stone.

Jones also attempts to dismiss the suggestion by Dr. Kahn that the object with the inscription was “recently scultured” [sic] by saying “the patina within the grooves of the engraving is the same color as the rest of the stone, a sign of its age. It is not a newly made gash in the stone” (2010:148). Yet, it is common knowledge among antiquities collectors that a modern forgery can be buried in the ground for a year or more after it is made in order to give it the appearance of age and patina.

[Mark17]

It must be a terrible feeling knowing you are without Heaven.

It WAS a terrible feeling. That is why I am no longer a catholic. 👍
Of course, I don’t know for sure, but sometimes I think that people who belong to false religions, would rather go to Hell, than to spend eternity in Heaven with us. I have no way to know if that is true or not, but that is what I think.

[boatbums]

Oh, E-S, you are the one who needs to WAKE UP!

Just think for a minute about this: if Hebrew was the ideal, chosen-by-the Holy Spirit language by which God would communicate ALL His revealed truths, then how could ANY man, woman, organization, demon, angel, power or principality confound that purpose??? Don’t we still have copies of all the Old Testament books in Hebrew?

In your zeal to promote your cult and its leader Michael Rood, you have fallen into a terrible and heretical ditch that threatens your eternal salvation. I pray that you do awaken to the accursed gospel you are held captive to and come into the light of the glorious Gospel of the grace of God through faith in Jesus Christ.

[metmom]

That article is a clearly deliberate deception.

Prove it.

Something beyond your say so.

List the guy's credentials.

[metmom]

Is it your contention that God will credit the righteousness of Christ to our account without us confessing our sins?

Yes.

When we turn to Christ and repent and confess, and are born again/born from above, then we become new creatures in Christ and Christ's righteousness is credited to our account.

We don't lose it when we sin. It's a permanent transaction, which is why our salvation is secure and we cannot lose it based on works or lack thereof, or sin that we commit and don't confess.

[kosciusko51]

That being said, we are encouraged to confess our sins, as in the Lord’s Prayer, James 5:16, and 1 John 1:9.

[editor-surveyor]

.
PhD in Linguistics, PhD post secdondary education.

Analysis of Mt Sinai accepted by the Saudi antiquities Ministry!

He is absolute top dog in ancient written languages. He has no peer in that discipline.