Problems With Deut Laws

What's the morality of Jesus talking to Moses and Elias, if Jesus was the only one that existed?

I don't think it's difficult to understand that the authors of the NT took the narrative to be very literal..... Why didn't Jesus correct it?

 

Figuratively.. Jesus has joined with Moses and Elias.

 

They are not ignored.

So what were the commands? The commands were not to murder, to engage in sex outside of marriage, and to not drink blood etc. I think what you are referring to are the penalties for these things. Should it be death?

Christ answered this rather well when he saved the woman caught in adultery. He asked who was without sin to cast the first stone and everyone backed down.

 

Jesus has joined with other mythical characters to have a mythical conversation?

 

You know Margot, the point is this..... If the bible is in any way divinely inspired, it most certainly is done so figuratively.
I don't have a problem with grasping this idea, I actually find a wealth of historical value reading the bible......
The problem is that if it was a divine plan to offer a figurative and narrative expression, it is an awful idea to do so..... Certainly a brilliant God would understand all the abuses of the mind that would result from it?
If you are correct, the population that would actually have understanding of the true value would be minuscule while the majority would be left in mass confusion which would also lead to great atrocities......

This doesn't demonstrate any sort of mindfulness having come from God, in fact it is quite a cruel offering.

 

Since you didn't answer my post, I'll ask again, do you think the trinity is God? Also why did Jesus not correct them about abraham, and moses? Why go to such great lengths to create all of the geneaologies about Jesus, if Abraham never existed?

If Abraham didn't exist, and he's in the bloodline of Jesus, then at what point does the people in His bloodline start existing?

 

Oh? So yet get truth, moral truth, out by saying, "This is EXACTLY what happened?"

Tell me, are there serious interpretive differences in the Bible? Do Christians have great debates about the concept of grace? Atonement? Love? Charity? Etc.?

What a great way to get that message out, eh?

 

The symbolisms and stories were likely well understood by the people of the first century, don't you think?

If the stories had been written down for English speaking Americans in the year 2000 AD.. seems to me the message might be completely lost on Jesus audience????

 

How long do you think the concepts surrounding Buddhism have been around?
The interesting thing is that it was an oral tradition for about 300 to 500 years before it was ever documented.
The point I am making is that if you study the Pali Canon and read the collection of books, there is far less confusion in what should take on a literal, figurative, symbolic or narrative meaning.....
Of course Buddhism has it's own issues in ascribing to concepts of Karma and Karmic attachment..... Every religious adherence has a crutch, however; unlike Christianity, Buddhism isn't completely hobbled..... If you don't believe this to be true, just listen to what your 'fellow' Christians are saying and the mass confusion surrounding it......
Early Buddhism was not about divinity, it was about the mind's search for truth.... Far less confusion along such a path.
We know the capacity of the mind of this time, if it were divinely inspired; certainly it could offer a profound brilliance where there would be no question regardless of it's path......
Right now Margot, all you are doing is making excuses for something that doesn't make any sense to the capacity of the mind regardless of time; whether literal, symbolic or narrative.

 

I really don't know a thing about Buddhism.. so your post it wasted on me.

 

Part of the great thing about a mind that is unencumbered, it is able to explore the beauty of expression coming from multiple sources and vantage points......

 

What a lie. Deuteronomy is part of the inspired and God breathed Word. It can not be ignored and should be read as a part of the entire Bible.

It is authority. Jesus backs up everything..in the New Testament.

 

Leviticus and Deuteronomy were invented by the Levites to increase revenue at the Temple and prevent the Hebrews from assimilating into the Babylonian culture. The two books were written during and after the Babylonian exile.

 

And here it is Margot, are you listening?

The only thing that was inspired is confusion, why would we have to dig through all of this just to realize a buried truth?
Someone's not thinking, it was either God.... or it's you!

 

What is confusing for you about the time and authorship of Leviticus and Deuteronomy?

Why do you think Jesus turned over the tables of the money changers and cursed the Pharisees?

 

Margot, let me see if I can make sense of this for you.

We know that Jesus was teh Messiah. How?

Because he fulfilled all the requirements of the Prophecy. A Prophecy requires ... Prophets.

The Prophets and their history are found in the Old Testament.

I have no doubt that there are clearly things in the OT that are theatrical in nature, but the Prophets, the History of the Jewish people (at least in the aggregate) is correct.

It simply cannot be ... poof ... Israel is formed and Jesus pops out. Indeed, that is not what Jesus states at all. Israel has a history, a lineage of kings and culture, and nothing in the archeological record indicates that the linegae put forth in the Torah and Talmud is specious or flat wrong - epscially the prophets.

The Messiah is the fulfillment of a promise .... a promise made to Moses in the Gensis (among other places). Jesus fulfills that requirement quite literally.

 

To Christians .. yes.. but the Jews flatly deny that Jesus fulfilled ANY of the OT prophesies.

 

So why do Matthew, Mark, Luke and John almost word for word reference Deuteronomy and site Moses while also accrediting Jesus to be the prophet it spoke of, if Jesus was so displeased with it's authorship?
Somewhat contrarian to your argument.

Deuteronomy 18
18I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him.
19And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him.
Acts 3
For Moses truly said unto the fathers, A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear in all things whatsoever he shall say unto you.
23And it shall come to pass, that every soul, which will not hear that prophet, shall be destroyed from among the people.

Does this demonstrate understanding, even in it's own time?

 

Same circle, different story?

 

Moses doesn't name the prophet and there were many between the 5oo and 200 BC who warned the Hebrews.

Just saying .. the Jews say that Jesus fulfilled NONE of the prophesies concerning the Messiah.

http://www.politicalforum.com/religion/229429-what-messiah-supposed-do.html

 

If it was invented, why do the authors of the NT reference it as it pertains to the divinity of Jesus?
They discuss prophecy and lineage, why go into such detail if it was understood that it was all a fabrication?
Why do they reference and site Moses if he is a fabricated character?

 

Another reminder to you!
Your argument!

 

You are arguing in circles right now Margot!

 

You aren't Jewish

 

Why wouldn't they cite Moses? Its part of the whole teaching narrative that creates history and identity for the ancient Hebrews.

Stories of redemption are very powerful ...