The God of Jesus, the God of the Old Testament

a reply to: DISRAELI

Not really I mentioned Much older writings and gods and "heroes" before the OT, that the OT Stole from.

Oldest writings from the OT are 3500 years.

Mere infants in the scene.

a reply to: Akragon

Well just as ive said a hundred times before, believe whatever makes you happy...

The gospels are "the word" of God, from the "WORD" of God...

The rest doesn't even come close...

The problem with this statement is that much of the Gospels are metered with the exact same pattern found in OT. The number multiples correspond with the OT lessons. So to remove the Gospels from the bible would remove a mathematically relevant piece of the puzzle.

Unfortunately for the case you are supporting, the meter is not a question of personal belief, but a matter of arthmatic continuity.

a reply to: jmdewey60

Im not refering to KJV.

originally posted by: Chamberf=6
Not really I mentioned Much older writings and gods and "heroes" before the OT, that the OT Stole from.
Oldest writings from the OT are 3500 years.

So I must repeat my earlier question; how does this affect my statement that the church has identified the God of the New Testament with the God of the Old Testament?
As I said, nothing to do with the subject in hand (namely, that Jesus identifies his God with the God of the Old Testament).

originally posted by: DISRAELI

originally posted by: Chamberf=6
Not really I mentioned Much older writings and gods and "heroes" before the OT, that the OT Stole from.
Oldest writings from the OT are 3500 years.

So I must repeat my earlier question; how does this affect my statement that the church has identified the God of the New Testament with the God of the Old Testament?
As I said, nothing to do with the subject in hand (namely, that Jesus identifies his God with the God of the Old Testament).

HE quoted the old testament....his geneolgy was told....about people (some of who were completely imaginary like, say Adam, Noah, David...etc.)

He supposedly went to temples and taught the Rabbis about the OT.
How is there Not a connection.???

Surely you know but may be ignoring the story of him being lost by his parents then being found Teaching the Rabbis at a Temple about the OT?

originally posted by: BELIEVERpriest
a reply to: Akragon

Well just as ive said a hundred times before, believe whatever makes you happy...

The gospels are "the word" of God, from the "WORD" of God...

The rest doesn't even come close...

The problem with this statement is that much of the Gospels are metered with the exact same pattern found in OT. The number multiples correspond with the OT lessons. So to remove the Gospels from the bible would remove a mathematically relevant piece of the puzzle.

Unfortunately for the case you are supporting, the meter is not a question of personal belief, but a matter of arthmatic continuity.

Yes I know all the theorys from Ivan panin, and Bruce Metzger...

And im pretty sure they've been debunked a long time ago... both cooked the results of their so called studies

a reply to: Chamberf=6
Whether the humans named in the stories were real or fictional, he identified the God in those stories as his own God.
(And the church, for the best part of two thousand years, has accepted that identification.)
That is the theme of this thread

Your added point about the child Jesus teaching in the Temple simply agrees with that theme, namely that Jesus identified the God of the Old Testament as his own God.

a reply to: DISRAELI

Hey Disraeli,

But I've been suggesting, earlier in this thread, that not everything in the Old Testament comes from the God of the Old Testament. Jesus himself distinguished between "They shall be one flesh" (which came from God) and "You can get rid of your wives" (which came from human "hardness of heart").
It may be possible to understand animal sacrifice in the same way, as a temporary compromise with "hardness of heart".

Like Jesus's statement about divorce being allowed due to the hardness of the Israelites hearts at the time, I think there are more than a few verses in the Old Testament that point toward the idea that Israel wasn't practicing/following God in an "ideal" or perhaps "perfect" fashion.

For example, regarding the sacrifice of animals:

Psalm 40:6

Many, O LORD my God, are the wonders which You have done, And Your thoughts toward us; There is none to compare with You. If I would declare and speak of them, They would be too numerous to count. 6Sacrifice and meal offering You have not desired; My ears You have opened; Burnt offering and sin offering You have not required. 7Then I said, "Behold, I come; In the scroll of the book it is written of me.…

1 Samuel 15:22

But Samuel replied: "Does the LORD delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices as much as in obeying the LORD? To obey is better than sacrifice, and to heed is better than the fat of rams.

Hosea 6:6

For I delight in loyalty rather than sacrifice, And in the knowledge of God rather than burnt offerings

I think there is a sense in which God meets us where we're at, while constantly trying to move us to where he wants us to be. Perhaps he met the Israelites "where they were at" and proceeded to move them to where he wanted them to be, towards a more perfect understanding of God himself, a higher "standard" and to a more complete knowledge of what he truly hopes for in and from his children.

So I think a fair "evaluation" of the behavior and practices of the Israelites at any given time in history needs be in the context of what the "norm" was at the time and how their behavior contrasted with that of those around them. For example, were they moving away from a violent/evil/rotten norm? Were they being led progressively to a higher and better "place"?

If one allows for that, then of course their behavior, standards, understanding of God and etc are going to compare unfavorably to the teaching of Jesus, as the "fulfillment of the law", and the standards/etc of those who follow his teachings. In some ways it would be just as a performance by a first year student on the piano is going to compare unfavorably to a performance by someone who has spent a life time studying and practicing the piano. (At least in most cases).

I don't speak with any authority on the subject, but those were just some thoughts I've had about the matter. Take them for what they're worth.

I look forward to seeing how you develop your idea, Disraeli.

a reply to: DISRAELI

I also mentioned Mythras, Apollo, and other that that great Fake Christian Emperor worshiped...even his scribe said it.

a reply to: Chamberf=6

Who do you think made the decisions then?

Jews at war with the Roman till then, or the emperor who wanted to draw his empire into something cohesive?

Constantine...he said he embraced Christianity, helped define it, the made statues of himself idolizing Mythras and Apollo.

a reply to: Akragon

Panin and Metzger followed letter counts. Im talking about syllable metering for the purpose of memorization and recitation. That has not been "debunked". And as I said before, the Mayan calendar (derived from the Solar Hebrew Calendar) was crafted to fit the meter. This calendar is 5248 years old. When we reach year 5250, you will know it.

a reply to: imwilliam
I agree with you about the sacrifice of animals, and I've been working on a number of future threads developing the idea and showing how their understanding of sacrifice was gradually transformed.

a reply to: Chamberf=6
And I've already mentioned that this doesn't affect my statement about how the church has understood the Old and New Testaments as belonging to the same God.

a reply to: DISRAELI

I've been working on a number of future threads developing the idea and showing how their understanding of sacrifice was gradually transformed.

I look forward to reading them Disraeli. The violence in the Old Testament seems to be a real stumbling block to many, as demonstrated in several recent threads here on ATS, including this one. I sympathize with them and I think it's a matter that deserves a thoughtful and coherent response. I never developed one myself, just stopped short once I'd satisfied my own questions on the matter.

Regards & Respect,

William

originally posted by: BELIEVERpriest
a reply to: Akragon

Panin and Metzger followed letter counts. Im talking about syllable metering for the purpose of memorization and recitation. That has not been "debunked". And as I said before, the Mayan calendar (derived from the Solar Hebrew Calendar) was crafted to fit the meter. This calendar is 5248 years old. When we reach year 5250, you will know it.

Fair enough... I love it when people tell me "I will know" as if some future event is coming to convince the world as per revelation...

We shall see brother, my mind is always open to possibilities... and unfortunately NONE of these prophecies have ever came true... ever

We've been waiting for 2000 years, and we will wait another 2000 years.... And Christians will be living in space or on the moon, still preaching about how the end is just around the corner...

So....

a reply to: DISRAELI

But I've been suggesting, earlier in this thread, that not everything in the Old Testament comes from the God of the Old Testament.

Exactly. Even at the time of Jesus there were those who claimed that the Torah and the Temple priests were no longer representing "The One True God".

So, it's not that Jesus' father was a different God than the one on the Old Testament, except, Jesus' father was different than the "God" in the Old Testament.

Jesus didn't teach animal sacrifice for atonement.
Jesus didn't teach the virtue of the death penalty.
Jesus taught mercy and promoted rehab and healing.
Jesus told the Pharisees they worshiped the wrong God.

originally posted by: windword

Jesus told the Pharisees they worshiped the wrong God.

No, he did not.
The gist of the message was rather "You don't understand our God, I understand him better than you do".
That was why he kept quoting the statements made by their shared God in oredr to make his point.

a reply to: DISRAELI

The teachings of the former God contradict the later God(Jesus). How very synonymous with organised religion!

The Bible is simply a book, written by Man, including all his fallibilities, nothing more, nothing less!

a reply to: andy06shake
"Contradict" is too strong. The truth is more subtle than that.
The teaching in the Law combines elements which are carried over into the New Testament (e.g. "Love your neighbour as yourself) with elements which are not so carried over.
Jesus himself distinguishes between "They shall be one flesh", as coming from God, and "You can get rid of your wives", as coming from human "hardness of heart".
The connection between the two sets of teachings is that one evolves into the other.
In my series on "God's Law", I described it as a "teaching" process.

a reply to: DISRAELI

These are all Mans laws through, none of which i imagine would be applicable to any omnipotent deity. I'm not questioning the idea of intelligent design or even the existence of a God/Gods, just humanity interpretation of such aka organised religion.