ROYAL SCAM: The Law of Moses _becomes_the Messianic Hope (thanks to Plato) (page 4)

TopHat

Fifth century Judaism became a fragmented melange of opinions.

Opinions? Something like your opinions on others beliefs Terry? I haven't seen any proof, just your opinions.

peacefulpete

Tophat, please explain what you require for proof that Hebrew theology of the 5th/6th century was not monolithic.

TopHat

I suppose proof will be somewhere in the scriptures....other than a book of opinions of someone who wants you believe his/her opinion.

And TopHat are you not enspousing your opinions as the only right ones? Terry is simply presenting information and it up to us to examine and compare. Rational thought requires material from many sources be examined and thought about. Why is that a problem for you?

Are you an adherent to a fundamentalist Christian group or something? I take it you don't like the current belief system in the bible being the only word of God to be questioned. Well question it we will, if you do any reading at all there are as many bible scholars who say the bible is not the word of God as much as it is the word of man. Then you have the other biblical scholars that feel it is. It is a matter of choice and that can only come after examining it more closely. If your offended then why read Terry's comments at all, I could care less about your bible thumping attitude. The world of man kind has been putting up with that far too long.

Balsam

TopHat

You see balsam, you have formed an opinion about me that is totally false. I personally thought I was having a lively debate with Terry. His opinion about Plato, Christ and Law of Moses. How does he come about with his opinion? Thump, thump, thumpity, thump, thump. All I want is proof from the scriptures.

Terry

Opinions? Something like your opinions on others beliefs Terry? I haven't seen any proof, just your opinions.

With you is the Bible (as we now know it) a "given"?

That is the only conclusion I can come up with.

It would not hurt to at least trip around the net and read histories of early Christianty first; then, read about how the Bible came to be. You don't have to believe what you read--just see what the scholars who devote their lives to investigation have acquired by way of a strong theory of what the Bible is.

Then, with that background we can discuss and debate and chew the fat---okay?

T.

Quentin

All I want is proof from the scriptures.

Good luck on that one...the received text, as we have it, is convoluted and wear some. Tis the reason for so many biblical ideologies and beliefs. Everybody's got a better wheel, dontcha know... that's my kibitzes for the day....carry on...carry on...

peacefulpete

You want proof from the Bible that ancient Jews had a diverse theology, contradictory views about the worship of Yahweh, questions and divering interpreations of the "Law"? Even a cursory reading of the prophets reveals that the writers often fought against what they perceived as devience or misinterpretation. Usually the prophets are themselves described as the minority voice and as such are probably to be viewed as the reformers rather than the traditionalists. For just a simple example compare the view of animal sacrifices found in Ex.20:24 and Numbers 28-29, where they are required, detailed, and said to delight Yahweh, with that of the writer of Jer. 7:21, 8:8:

"Thus says YAHWEH of hosts, the God of Israel: "Add your burnt offerings to your sacrifices, and eat the flesh yourselves. For in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt, I did not speak to your ancestors or command them concerning burnt offerings and sacrifices ... How can you say, ?we are wise, for we have the law of Yahweh, when, actually, the lying pen of the scribes has worked falsely?"

There is a marked change here recorded as taking place. In the earlier works Yahweh is not only pleased but requires elaborrate animal rites both for forgiveness and for thanksgiving. Yahweh is depicted much like the other gods in being supported/nourished by his worshipers. He responds with rain and blesings of fertility. In the later inclusions in the OT we find a growing discomfort with describing Yahweh as desiring or needing blood and drink offerings. In fact the Jeremiah passages above feel it an apostasy to suggest Yahweh would ever order or desire animal sacrifices. The writer here (and in other passages) perceieved his god as more sophisticated and interested in devotion and human charity rather than rites. From our modern perspective this later view is natuarally more attractive.

I post this as a simple easy to recognize example of the OT contributors having very different theological outlooks. Many more could be and have been discussed.

TopHat

Obviously , The people were straying from God. So he sent his prophet to give them a warning and to set them on the right path to worship the true God. Some listened and some didn't. Does that mean Plato had infulence over Christ teachings?

peacefulpete

So who was not listening the writer of Exodus or the writer of the Jeremiah passage?

ROYAL SCAM: The Law of Moses _becomes_the Messianic Hope (thanks to Plato)

Share this