Your position is that, whoever he was, he was not speaking about or from Judaism. I take issue with that position. — Valentinus
Your position is that, whoever he was, he was not speaking about or from Judaism. — Valentinus
I've pointed out a contradiction between Q and the Torah that I think is a fundamental one to the moral systems they prescribe. — Tzeentch
In the Sermon on the Mount Jesus makes clear his strict allegiance o the Law. Valentinus comment about a Jew wrestling with another Jew is central to understanding this allegiance in practice as seen in Talmud and Midrash, interpretation and commentary on the Law. Even the style of Jesus' comment fits the form. It is dialectical. — Fooloso4
The contradiction between 'an eye for an eye' and 'to turn the other cheek' is to me a fundamental one, because the two present entirely different approaches to responding to injustice. — Tzeentch
Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven.
But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart. If your right eye causes you to stumble, gouge it out and throw it away.
Your position is that, whoever he was, he was not speaking about or from Judaism. — Valentinus
This is not my position. — Tzeentch
I never said Jesus was not a Jew — Tzeentch
Or according to the spirit of the Law, rather affording so much importance to its letter. As any rabbi of the time, he had his own interpretation of the Torah. Things like: the sabat is made for man, not man for the sabat.Jesus is not rejecting the Law. He exhorts his followers to righteousness beyond the Law. — Fooloso4
The contradiction between 'an eye for an eye' and 'to turn the other cheek' is to me a fundamental one, because the two present entirely different approaches to responding to injustice. — Tzeentch
Then the neighbors got involved. — Valentinus
Or according to the spirit of the Law, rather affording so much importance to its letter. — Olivier5
For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. (Matthew 5:18)
So the people Jesus was talking to were not all fundamentalist followers of the Law of Moses to the letter. — Olivier5
As any rabbi of the time, he had his own interpretation of the Torah. — Olivier5
Things changed a lot during this time, even within Judaism. — Olivier5
You are using Grime's work to claim that there is an absolute contradiction between the the old and new books in regards to, as you say, their respective moral systems. — Valentinus
He says: — Fooloso4
Judaism never had the "official doctrines" that are found in Christianity — Fooloso4
He says many things, not all of which point to literalism. I mean, there's a certain ambiguity in Jesus, as recorded. — Olivier5
it is questionable that what is left are the teachings of Jesus rather than of those who were inspired by and may or may not have understood him. Those who may or may not have addressed their own concerns rather than his. — Fooloso4
The Torah is an official doctrine, though. — Olivier5
Until the Talmud sort of updated the whole thing. — Olivier5
the Torah appears to be a patchwork rather than a doctrine. — Fooloso4
. With knowledge of this diversity the idea that Jesus broke with or taught things contrary to Judaism becomes far less tenable. — Fooloso4
It's been a while since I watched those lectures, but as far as I know they never touch on this specific subject. — Tzeentch
Tzeentchquietism.
— Fooloso4
Drop the strawmanning already. — Tzeentch
Indeed, they align well with the House of Hillel, and against the House of Shammai. — Olivier5
But didn't we agree that Judaism at the time was plural? Jesus was certainly, along with the Essenes, opposed to the Sadducee leadership in the Temple. — Olivier5
He was radical alright. — Olivier5
He did change the world, in the end. — Olivier5
Jesus expected the end of days, quite clearly — Olivier5
Some interpreted the Kingdom of Heaven or Kingdom of God as an internal transformation rather than the geo-political transformation envisioned in some messianic views. — Fooloso4
It is not like figuring out the motives of a character in a novel. — Valentinus
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.