Did Jesus' Teachings Abolish the Old Testament Laws?

The view that R. Yehoshua bar Yosef the Galilean Nazir was 'Torah-observant' (with some clarifications ref: healing on Sabbaths &tc.) is clear from much of the Greek material placed into his mouth in the Nicene-approved canonical 'gospels'.

'Amen Amen I say unto you, he who does not observe every single statute of the Torah of Mosheh, and encourages others to disregard them, shall be called Least in the Kingdom -- but those who do observe every statute and law written in the Torah and encourages others to do so shall be called greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven...'

(from Matt. 5:19, part of the so-called Sermon on the Mount , fictional literary collection of Logia (spoken over a 4 year period, see parallels in Mark and Luke for some of the individual settings, closer to their original 'Sitz im Leben', or 'original setting in Life'), representing R. Yehoshua ('Iesous') as the New Moses, giving the New Law, to the New Israel, from, signficantly, a Mountain Top...).

Then the familiar (or not so familiar) axiom already discussed here,

"Do you think that the Son of Man (Aram. 'Bar-Enasha' from an Aramaic section of the Book of the Prophet Daniel 7:13-20) was sent to (lit. 'hew down') the Torah of Mosheh? Far from it: Rather the Son of Man was not sent to abolish the Torah, but to Expound upon (lit. 'add to') it. Amen I say unto you, not one jot, nor one tittle of the Torah shall be ignored that will not be added to (i.e. commented upon) by the Son of Man." (see Matt 5:17-22, part of the same Nazorean (anti Pauline) collection of Greek Logia ). So 'Iesous' (like his brother R. Yakkov bar Yosef, 'haTzaddiq, the Righteous/Just' WERE BOTH highly Torah-observant, at least according to "Matathiah"'s gospel / Acts and the earliest Patristic evidence about 'James the Just'. Tzaddiq is a name given to priests ('justified, righteous, ritually pure' cf: Melki-Tzadiq, 'King-Priest' of Gen chapter 15)

It is thought that after the (suicide?) of R. Yehudah bar Shimeon, Ish Keryiotah (Judas (Gr. Iscaritoh) son of Simon, 'the Man who Handed-Over'), a disciple named Matathiah was chosen by lots to replace him, who had not followed "Iesous" personally so had to collect his sayings and prophecy fulfilments -- hence the focus on the 'gospel of Matathiah' on Rabinnical sayings & fulfilments. This gospel also circulated with additional sayings under the title The Gospel of the Nazoreans', from Zechariah 6:9 ("Behold the Man, who is called the Nazir, 'Branch of David', who shall re-build the Temple of YHWH..." cf: Pilate's sneer in the 4th Gosspel) who were an anti Pauline, TORAH ABIDING, proto-Ebionite early Christian Palestinian group (similar to the Dead Sea Scroll Sect in belief system) who fled to Antioch and Egypt during & after the Jewish War of AD 66-72 when a number of their group were killed off in the fighting.

'In the Last Days', it was thought that the 12 tribes would have to be filled back in by selecting that Magical Number of followers (cf: 'and Moses selected 12 men to be with him, one per tribe', Numbers 13:14ff) , so they consulted dice/lots (probably by rolling dice &tc. to get a random number (a Lot Numberchosen by the Most High') then asking candidates for 'disciple replacement' to raise a random number of fingers in the air, and then counting fingers and choosing the person who had the keydigit raised, similar to the way they chose the Levitical priests in the weekly serving 'family of levites' for 'specific duties' (e.g. burning the incense etc., see Luke chapter 1) in the 2nd Temple, aka 'by Lots).

Either way, the Torah Abiding (Paul called them 'they of the circumcision')Nazorean writings still got into the canon alongside their Pauline enemies, and their own words in Greek (read the letters ascribed to Saul of Tarsus who never met Iesous in the flesh and hated the disciples / called them hypocrites, see Galatians chapter 2, 'Kephah-Peter and Jacob (James), those two so called pillars of the Church !"

[edit on 10-8-2009 by Sigismundus]

reply to post by Sigismundus


Very interesting stuff. You know, you don't have to write the foreign version of the names of Jesus, Moses, Paul, or any of the other biblical personalities. It's easier for people to follow the names they already know. Other than that, I say good post.

reply to post by Sigismundus


Finally someone I can agree with here in this forum! 21 guns for you! Saluté! If my name was Jean, I would not write my name or respond to Jeannne, Sean or Jan eventhough all of these names have the same etymological origin and semantic meaning. Just like "a spade" (eng.) is not "et spyd" (no. "spear"), for eventhough it has the same etymology, the semantics are completely different, though related. And just like "a Spear" (eng.) is not the same as "en spire" (no. "a plant's shoot") or "et spir" (no. "tower/steeple") allthough the etymology is identical and it's semantics are related and payed for in blood, sweat and tears. Even though I like "Cain's beer" better than "Cain's spear", you would have to ask me to write it down to understand what was my best likeing, since they sound phonetically identical. No difference in Jesjuah ha'Mesjiach and Jesus Christ? Oh yeas, it's a great difference. And most of you who rebell agains Jesju's true name and title are infact English-speaking, why do you replace Jesju's name with a Greco-Latin one? If you call Jesju Jesus, why don't you also say he is Lucifer? The Greco-Latin bibles say he is!

Hipocrites like Saul Paulus and just about 99.9% of the people proud to be Christians and claiming blind faith and allegeance with the "Logos" or "the Word", can't even understand their own language, much less other languages, and they spit and scoff at Philology, Etymology, lingual semantics and Linguistic sciences, together with everything "Zion's".

Backwards engeneering the word Logos to Aramaic, gives us the word Millah, it is used only in Daniel (where we also uniquely find the concept of a "Son of Man") , and has a word count of 22, the number of regular chromosomes in humans and the number of letters in the Hebrew alef-bet. That's no coincidence. The first utterance or word spoken by God in Bere# or Genesis, means "Let there be light". The word for light in Hebrew is Owr. In my tongue the phonetically identical "Ord" means Word. Now read the prologue of the gospel of John again and understand in this, to you, probably new light

Originally posted by Locoman8
reply to post by Sigismundus

 

Very interesting stuff. You know, you don't have to write the foreign version of the names of Jesus, Moses, Paul, or any of the other biblical personalities. It's easier for people to follow the names they already know. Other than that, I say good post.

Well, it's also easier to kill your nemesis than to forgive him. Get real! Jesus, spoken in both Greek and Latin tongues sounds identical to "Yes, Zeus!", ever thought about that? No difference? "E lo, kom an, Locoman!" Do you understand what I just said?

reply to post by Neo Christian Mystic


Don't get smart with me. I was agreeing with the man's last post. I simply was trying to explain that some of the "less-educated" people on here will be scratching their heads with the ancient toung of the names of Christ and Moses. In fact, the proper english rendition for Yeshua, or Jeshua is Joshua. In hebrew they all mean "God is my salvation." Abraham means "Father of a multitude", Issac means "Laughing one" and Jacob means "He grabs the heels" or "supplanter". Names all have meanings in hebrew and I concentrate on what those meanings are more than weather is proper to use Jesus, Joshua, Yeshua, Jeshua, Ieshua, etc. So forgive me if I was trying to help simplify things for other readers.

Oh, and Locoman is my screen name, not a real one. If you wanna get technical, it's a mixture of spanish and english. Full english would read "Crazyman" and full spanish would read "Loco hombre". Don't try to kid yourself with your play on words. Jesus sounding like zeus? In english they do, but the hebrew Yeshua looks nothing like zeus. You want some real trivia on a play of words? Take Moses, which means "Drawn from the water". Now most people would put the Exodus at the time of Pharaoh Ramses but closer studies put the time of the Exodus during the reign of Ahmose I - Thutmose II. You notice the last for letters of their names? MOSE and the first four letters of MOSEs? They were related through adoption. There's you a play on words.

reply to post by Locoman8


"E lo, kom an" is Norwegian dialect from the south and sounds just the same as locoman. It means "I laughed, comeon!" The thing is that Jesjuah or Yeshua sounds like the confirmation of God's words "I am who I am" - "Yes, you are".

Jesus said in Greek or Latin however may mean "Yes sues" allthough he sets free, the oposite. In Norwegian, "Yes, is sucked" and read backwards it becomes "Sucks himself", certainly the name worthy for a god and a priest-king, don't you think? But I guess you're all fine with that.... Latin is a completely godless and perverted language, it was the language of the Roman upperclass, the official language of the Cæsar and his senators and tribunals etc. Jesju was a workingclass hero. Latin is dead and gone. As an English speaking person, why don't you use the English variant of Jesjuah? Like Josh or Joshua? When I call him Jesju it is the Hebrew name, shortened to hide the last syllable, out of simplicity and respect, and with good meanings in my own tongues, like my two main tongues: Norwegian and English. Though, ironically enough, one of my names is an ancient Latin one....

[edit on 14/8/2009 by Neo Christian Mystic]

reply to post by Neo Christian Mystic


I do prefer "Joshua" over "Jesus". The only argument I was making was that using the translation "Jesus" does not take away from who He was and is. I named my baby boy "Joshua David" because of the meaning of the two words "God is my salvation, beloved." Not to mention both names are strong names as Joshua of the Old Testament fought to drive out the canaanites out of the holy land to establish the nation of Israel, and David being the greatest king of Israel and the decendent of Christ. Joshua fits as the true name of the messiah as a new version of the OT Joshua.... fighting to remove evil from the kingdom. Amen.

P.S. I agree with you on the latin thing.

God says "I am who I am"
Joseph and Mary said: "Yes you are!"
And all popes go: "Yes, Zeus!"

Can't you see that this is somewhat sick?

Look at the main temple in Pergamon in todays Turkey, where the angel of Jesju says the throne of Satan is. It is a Zeus temple, where Zeus was seen sitting on a giant throne with his lightningbolts in his right hand staring down at the public. The only thing left today is basically the foundation, and it is basically a copy of the buildingplan of the Temple of Solomon, as it was given to David his father directly from God. If you want I could search through my material to find a picture of the "blueprints"....

Hey Locomon--

I believe you really need to study German so you can read 'Mein Kampf' in the original language and savour all of its juices: I find it very interesting you should like the name 'Yehoshua / Joshua' from the book of the same name in the Hebrew canon.

If you can read these original languages you should be able to see at a single glance that there is in fact very little difference in the kind of xenophobic-racist vomit found placed into the mouth of this 'Joshua' and the kind of bile spilled by Adolf Hitler actually,--but you would first have to know a little about to read and understand ultra-intensive verbs (hitpaels) in unpointed paleo-Hebrew.

Here's a sample, for you and all others like you on this thread who think that the Genocide and Exermination policies of the so-called Holy Torah of the Jews is a GOOD thing, and one to emulate:

'Exterminate them all, leave nothing alive that breathes...men, women, children and Animals...' (Deut 20:16-18) anonymously written in the same 7th century BC paleoHebrew dialect with the same bad spelling, syntax, crude grammar and vile xenophonbia as the book of 'Joshua'

8: 24 And it came to pass, when Israel had ended the extermination of all the inhabitants of Ai in the field, in the wilderness wherein they chased them, and when they were all fallen by the edge of the sword, until they were genocided, that all the Israelites returned unto Ai, and attacked it with the edge of the sword. 25 And so it was, that all that were exermiated that day, both of men and women, were 12,000, even every single man within the city of Ai, since Joshua did not hold back his hands, when he stretched out the spear, until he had utterly exterminated and genocided every single inhabitant of Ai.

10:28 And that day Joshua took Makkedah, and murdered them all by the edge of the sword, and the king he murdered too and genocided all in that place that had breath of life-- yea he exterminated every one, including their King: (dtito genocidal ravings also in Joshua 10:38-39)

Joshua 11: 8 And YHWH delivered them all into the hands of the Israelites who immediately genocided every one of them, and even chased them unto great Zidon, and unto Misrephothmaim, and unto the valley of Mizpeh eastward; and they exterminated every one of them, yeal they left them none alive that breathed. For Joshua did EXACTLY as YHWH had ordered him to do: yea, he even hamstrung all of their horses, and he burnt their chariots with fire, according to the word of YHWH. "

Still like the guy who wrote this vomit? If so you should REALLY love Adolf !!










[edit on 17-8-2009 by Sigismundus]

reply to post by Sigismundus




Don't even compare me with liking Hitler! The whole point of the takeover of the Caananites is that these people were sacrificing their own childern in the fire to idols and doing very immoral things. It's the same reason God brought the flood in the time of Noah. Hitler murdered Jews and tried to dominate the world. Jews haven't tried taking over the world. They are just trying to live in their small piece of land in peace. You can say what you want about Joshua or the characteristics of God, but don't compare these personalities with Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, or Hussein! All people who tried to take over the world by killing whoever got in their way.

reply to post by Sigismundus


if a person who burns their child alive for a rock is one of the many "innocent" people joshua and the nation killed, then doesnt that make hitler innocent too?

if someone had assassinated hitler, wouldnt you herald him a hero?

so why is joshua suddenly evil?

Originally posted by Locoman8
reply to post by Sigismundus

 

Don't even compare me with liking Hitler! The whole point of the takeover of the Caananites is that these people were sacrificing their own childern in the fire to idols and doing very immoral things. It's the same reason God brought the flood in the time of Noah. Hitler murdered Jews and tried to dominate the world. Jews haven't tried taking over the world. They are just trying to live in their small piece of land in peace. You can say what you want about Joshua or the characteristics of God, but don't compare these personalities with Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, or Hussein! All people who tried to take over the world by killing whoever got in their way.

So if people kills, we can kill them just like that? An eye for an eye? I look forward to the process -- you won't have eyes left....

To me genocide is genocide is genocide is genocide is genocide is genocide. No matter if the target of the extermination is an Amalekite, or a Girgi#e, or a Jubusite, or an Amorite or a gay European, or a 'gypsy' or a political criminal, or a Turko-Ukrainian ancestrally converted 'Ashkenazi Jew' or a mentally ill individual.

Read the heinous books of Deuteronomy & Joshua written by the same author(s) (if you have to...read them in English, if that's all you can read); then read Mein Kampf (in English if that's all you can read).

If you read the texts closely, there is no difference. Genocide is Genocide, and it is WRONG.

Period. And dragging in some vicious bronze snake idol & pole loving xenophobic, sexist middle eastern clan god to justify the crime makes it 10 times worse.

Originally posted by Sigismundus
If you read the texts closely, there is no difference. Genocide is Genocide, and it is WRONG.

think what you want.

to say that murder is wrong even in extreme cases shows a lack of even a basic sense of justice

reply to post by Sigismundus
Could you give a couple of examples of the hitpa'el verbs you are talking about?
In wikipedia it is saying they are intransitive and normally used reflexively, as in I am doing something myself. Do you mean that God is using that type of speech? and if so, I would be very interested in this.
Also, how can you tell that Jud. and Deut. are primitive, as in being earlier, instead of primitive, as in being later, as may be the case with people living in exile, in let's say, Babylon and was an attempt to rewrite history by making God look more powerful and effective than He may have really been?



[edit on 18-8-2009 by jmdewey60]

reply to post by Sigismundus


You can think what you want but I think "cold-blooded" murderers should be given a death sentence. I think child molesters should be given the death sentence. I think rapists should be given the death sentence. This kind of punishment for these crimes would probably make a person think twice before doing it.

That being said, I think someone sacrificing their own children to a statue should be sentenced to death. Is lethal injection of a death-row inmate considred genocide to you? Hitler was demon-posessed and was a pre-anti-christ in a sense.... the same way Nero or even King George III was.

Personally, I think I need to stop this conversation with you because you are (from the looks of it) an athiest that tries to antagonize christians and get them worked up. If you want to believe a certain way, that's fine with me but don't criticize or put down those who don't think the way you do.

reply to post by Sigismundus


Not to get too far side tracked form the main theme, but I had to jump in here and defend God for his actions, as if the sovereign of the universe with perfect justice needs any help anyway.

But when the archaeologists did a dig where the Canaanites once lived, what was discovered was so bad that the archaeologists remarked why didn't God wipe them out sooner! If God had them wiped out it was because they were evil
and unable to be reformed, God can see these things humans can't.

Yet in the rare instance that non-Israelites were seen by God to be reformable he spared them, Rahab in Jericho a prostitute, but not just her her whole family that sided with her risking there lives by betraying their fellow Jerichoans to protect the Israelite spies.

Some intelligent Egyptians that protected their first-born from the tenth plague and then left with Moses via the Red Sea, leaving behind a devastated Egypt.

The Gibeonites were also spared, as they were a reformable people that accepted that the God of Israel was real and would not and could not be stopped.

Joshua's treaty with the Hivites After the destruction of Jericho and Ai, the people of Gibeon (Hivites) sent ambassadors to trick Joshua and the Israelites into making a treaty with them. According to the Bible, the Israelites were commanded to destroy all inhabitants of Canaan. The Gibeonites presented themselves as ambassadors from a distant, powerful land. Without consulting the high priests, Israel entered into a mutual pact with the Gibeonites. Joshua realized he had been deceived, but he kept the letter of his covenant with the Gibeonites to let them live;

If you would submit and listen to the God of Isreal he would spare you Jew or not, however the bible shows that very few ever did.
These people also never had the benefit of the ransom sacrifice at that time either. Thankfully all human today do, whether they use it is another story.

Originally posted by Blue_Jay33
But when the archaeologists did a dig where the Canaanites once lived, what was discovered was so bad that the archaeologists remarked why didn't God wipe them out sooner! If God had them wiped out it was because they were evil
and unable to be reformed, God can see these things humans can't.

And what was the discovery, that horrified these archaeologists?

Hi Blue Jaye--

Be very very very very careful about quoting Hebrew scriptures as 'positivistic factual-history' that we moderns think about today; these writings are not history at all but more 'self-serving stories' i.e. hagaddic midrashic interpretations of oral traditions that mix myth history and morality together in a complex web of zionist propaganda and clearly show every evidence of having been worked over by later hands several times over many succeeding generations in the course of their convoluted history.

Unfortunately the books of the 'Old Testament' (the so-called post-Javneh 'canonical' Hebrew Scriptures (c. 90CE) of the modern post-2nd Temple Rabinnic Jews used today, are mainly derived, unfortunatley, from the Leningrad Codex reflecting the AD 980 Masoretic pointed text which is most often cited by them as 'scripture' and for the most part ignoring the older text versions of the books cites found amongst the fragments of the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Sammaritan Pentateuch and the Vorlage Hebrew & Aramaic underlay to the LXX-Greek Septuaginta foundat Qumran) do not in any way reflect the actual 'on the ground' archaelogical remains in the Levant.

This is especially important when reading the books of so-called 'history' relating to the so-called Conquest (Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, written in the same bad Hebrew style, with the same grammar, bad spelling, syntax, world-view, vocabulary and sentence structures) moreover written in a comparatively late un-poointed paleo-Hebrew dialect (from about 550BC) i.e. more 700 years after the years of the purported events they relate, and full of anachronisims which give away their late-dates.

To get your feet wet in this subject (which to judge from your posts must be very new to you !) read some of the more recent books out by Professor Israel Finklestein of Tel-Aviv University when you get a chance (he is one of the leading Israeli archaeologist scholars who has spent several decades handling the material close up and personal) in particular (good for a beginner in these studies !) one (useful for a beginner) is called:

The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology's New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Its Sacred Texts, 2001, The Free Press, New York City, ISBN 0-684-86912-8.

You will be shocked, as most people new to this field invariably are, what a different story the archaelogical remains tell from the myths and fables and self-serving zionism we find in the Tanakh.

Remember...STORY not HISTORY is what we are reading in these texts so don't ever ever ever ever quote the text as literal history. It would be like taking a poem and trying to literalise every syllable. It is very bad science !

It's no secret the fifth book of the 'pentateuch' was added at a later stage as when the four first four books were written like a compendium of tales and knowledge carried systematially like art and oral lore as captured by El-Mosjeh.

After the Babylon captivety, which was a kind of nazi-system, nothing was left of "cultural Israel", and most of the captives of the twelve tribes "messiah" Cyrus released, went North and West, ie. Europe, but a remnant few of the most religious and nationalistic Jews ('Jew' is short for Judah tribe and should be concidered a minor Judean sect within Israel who now lives according to the prophecy in foreign nations from the center to the outer limits), went back to Ha-Eretz and rebuilt the temple according to what "the Seveny" could remember (perhaps why the floor plan of the Temple of Solomon today is more or less identical with the Zeus temple of Pergamon, where John says Satan lives?), probably a laconic try at rephrasing what Misjwa'el and Gibre'el had been working on while in Babylon and left to Dan in Asia Minor, when they witnessed it, trying to remembering their own language and math from the LXX, the Greek Septuagint, and later when we faught the Romans, the Vulgata, ppon which every cardinal swears in direct revolt against Jesju, but in fine company with their nonexistant playdoll 'Jeezez' (?Jesus Barrabas¿ a friend of Saul Paulus, who was released in Jesju' place?), I won't even write the 'Name' in context of what I fweel after Jesju showed me why.

Anyway, it's common knowledge that the fifthe book of Mosjes, was added later. Deuteronomy was the Babylonian Bible, and was added to the four books of Moses since it was the bestseller, just like the NT. If you changed, let's say, every 666th letter in the bible, or added one accorsing to an intricate system of choice, you could legally according to American (insurance? and constitutionalGWB--greatwhitebastard.us!)law, be forced to svear uppon in §, leading you directly via a direct highway to hell given Jesju's really is dead and doesn't give you favour in the court….

Is it[z] you, "are" the Dragon by the shore?

Was it really Cain who made blood flow and wet the Earth back in the outer courts of Edein, and not Abal (the moissing link and Satan of humanity) --who wet the Earth (alias Geb and good Tob, and his lover lover of heaven, the mysterious skies and heavens, Nut and her laws, or times, who cried the tears of the Flood and whose lights forevermore remembered by Tob'hreb, Hu or Jahveh unleasched uppon Earth, and the next we know Geb and Nut married and left the scene, giving birth to Asar. Same origins as Cæch/-ctzar, or Kaisar in koin'Greek.) with perfect blood?!? I'd drink the blood of just-aboat anything living! Through via mindes crack aor wayr through! And that's just-aboåt what you'll get frm the real secret. Restin est diplomae. Understannnnd!?!

[edit on 19/8/2009 by Neo Christian Mystic]

and added contextual indifferencies...

[edit on 19/8/2009 by Neo Christian Mystic]

added an and, just for Black'n'white.

[edit on 19/8/2009 by Neo Christian Mystic]