Controversy on Christianity Today's website

[robrecht]

Cats can be trained?

[One Bad Pig]

My apologies OBP, seems we have been misreading each other. Seems we may actually be in agreement regarding the woman and have just been talking across each other...but Jesus lays the same blame against the man = on divorce both become involved in adultery (or as Moses puts it in respect of the woman defilement)... Though Moses made allowances for the man to remarry with impunity, under Moses' law the woman is disadvantaged.

How so? Deut. 24:2 clearly envisions the possibility of the woman being able to remarry.

Under Jesus' teaching neither the man nor the woman can remarry without committing adultery ie: they cannot revoke their social contract with each other, which in Jesus' teaching is God ordained and therefore is obligated upon them. Under Moses' ordinances and the allowance of polygamy the issue becomes somewhat clouded. Moses made provision for the firstborn of a woman who becomes the hated wife, once the husband takes another wife while remaining married to the first.

This is a possible interpretation of Deut. 21:15-17. On the other hand, there was no reason for a man to remain married to a hated wife. Polygamy was certainly frowned upon for kings (Deut. 17:17).

Under Jesus' teaching, one male, one female makes one flesh according to God's will.

Yes.

So, by implication, polygamy is also against God's will...

I agree that polygamy is against God's will, but I'm not sure how that follows.

Thus, by implication, to avoid adultery, one is stuck with his first (and only) wife until death...Which is probably why Moses instituted his divorce ordinance as only death of one or the other could release either party from their contract ie: as a prevention of murder of his wife by the husband. However, one would think that the "Thou shalt not murder" commandment and the penalties that Moses imposed if one did, should have been disincentive enough... Instead, Moses, as Jesus indicates openly defied the will of God (YHWH)...

Where does Jesus indicate that Moses openly defied the will of God? This appears to be more of your anti-Mosaic bias.

[One Bad Pig]

Cats can be trained?

They just require different motivation than other animals.

[KingsGambit]

It's easy to train a cat, just not easy to have any control over how you do so. It's easy to train your cat to expect a meal at 5:30 every morning, especially if that's not your intention...

[37818]

I believe Jesus sometimes contradicted the Law, in the sense that he improved upon it, fulfilled it, but did not violate it. . . .

No. But Jesus did explain the Law as to its true meaning. And as to why no one can be saved by keeping it.

"[Jesus] opened his mouth, and taught them, saying, . . . Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach [them], the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed [the righteousness] of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven." -- Matthew 5:17, 18.

[robrecht]

No. But Jesus did explain the Law as to its true meaning. And as to why no one can be saved by keeping it.

"[Jesus] opened his mouth, and taught them, saying, . . . Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach [them], the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed [the righteousness] of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven." -- Matthew 5:17, 18.

I agree that Jesus explained the Law as to its true meaning. I'm less sure that you can find some kind of sola fide doctrine in the teachings of Jesus, but, then again, I disagree with Luther's interpretation of sola fide as supposedly found in St Paul's writing and I esteem the writings of St James more highly than (those of) Luther.

[apostoli]

Cats can be trained?

Sure can! Proof is the existence of kitty-litter.

A curiosity: here in Oz we had a TV show called the Inventors, that gave inventors of yet to be manufactured product the chance to advertise their invention/s to the public and could be investors. One product I remember with amusement was a toilet seat for cats, that fitted over a standard toilet seat! The demonstration had a cat use the toilet and even flush the toilet (a separate invention that had had been incorporated with the seat for marketing purposes). That was years ago. Don't know what became of the invention. Maybe the manufacturers of kitty-litter bought the patent rights ;-}

[robrecht]

Sure can! Proof is the existence of kitty-litter.

A curiosity: here in Oz we had a TV show called the Inventors, that gave inventors of yet to be manufactured product the chance to advertise their invention/s to the public and could be investors. One product I remember with amusement was a toilet seat for cats, that fitted over a standard toilet seat! The demonstration had a cat use the toilet and even flush the toilet (a separate invention that had had been incorporated with the seat for marketing purposes). That was years ago. Don't know what became of the invention. Maybe the manufacturers of kitty-litter bought the patent rights ;-}

I think kitty litter is the successful training of people by cats, who probably are the ones who bought the patent rights to the toilet seat for cats.

[apostoli]

I think kitty litter is the successful training of people by cats, who probably are the ones who bought the patent rights to the toilet seat for cats.

Ignoring patent rights, I think you may have a valid proposition. People are often trained into a particular train of thought and once that it accomplished they can be led by marketeers by the collar. The reward and punishment combination = Moses' law... Albeit, Moses' law focuses on the negative and is more about unjustified punishment (for the sake of social cohesion) than justified reward...

[robrecht]

Ignoring patent rights, I think you may have a valid proposition. People are often trained into a particular train of thought and once that it accomplished they can be led by marketeers by the collar. The reward and punishment combination = Moses' law...

Nice save. And while the experience in the desert may be compared to Moses trying to herd cats, the question still remains, were the second set of tablets different from the first? And aside from the decalogue, which of the laws, commandments, or precepts of Moses are to be understood as the Word or Law of God?

[apostoli]

Nice save. And while the experience in the desert may be compared to Moses trying to herd cats, the question still remains, were the second set of tablets different from the first? And aside from the decalogue, which of the laws, commandments, or precepts of Moses are to be understood as the Word or Law of God?

As an observation two maybe three versions of the Decalogue are attributed to Moses (what YHWH handed to Moses we may never know but conservatism has us hold to that related in Exodus). They are similiar, but in wording are not identical. Several commentators I've encountered remark that only one of the commands declares a direct benefit for obeying it (have a read of them and Jesus' teaching and you'll highlight to yourself which one!), apart from that one, none of the commands of the Decalogue prescribe direct personal benefit or punishment; albeit the consensus is that if they are all obeyed there is societal benefit, or if disobeyed societal deficit.

Imo, none of Moses' ordinances were ordained (yet alone inspired) by God (though, in speculation they may have been sanctioned by God. In the same way YHWH sanctioned the construction of David's Temple which led to the destruction of Israel and Judea). Imo, the evidence for foreign (pagan?) influence in Moses' decrees is very loud!!! The evidence starting with Exodus 18. (A question: why was it that Aaron and his wife were so antagonistic towards Moses' Midian wife/s - and why is it after reading such we read in scripture of the attempted genocide of Midian society? The later, though justified in Moses' name, I attribute to the priestly class that followed Aaron (a possible interpolation by Ezra and/or his scribes to support their assumed position)).

Just in case Rberman or the like intervenes in my remark. Let me state, I hold the Ot & NT to be inspired within the definition that A.Paul gave. Imu, the OT texts reveals the failure of mankind when left to their own devices (eg: Moses' & David's imaginations).

[One Bad Pig]

Just in case Rberman or the like intervenes in my remark. Let me state, I hold the Ot & NT to be inspired within the definition that A.Paul gave. Imu, the OT texts reveals the failure of mankind when left to their own devices (eg: Moses' & David's imaginations).

That's an ...imaginative reading of St. Paul.

[apostoli]

Just in case RBerman or the like intervenes in my remark. Let me state, I hold the Ot & NT to be inspired within the definition that A.Paul gave. Imu, the OT texts reveals the failure of mankind when left to their own devices (eg: Moses' & David's imaginations).

That's an ...imaginative reading of St. Paul.

No imagination required. Merely reading comprehension...

"All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work." (2 Tim 3:16-17)

Imo, we learn from other peoples mistakes and on reflection of such our own mistakes. Possibly why all of civilised society these days (whether Christian, Muslim or Jew) rejects Moses' extremes and recognises Moses' and David's failures.

Question: In your opinion, why did YHWH choose as Israel's messiah, a statutory rapists (under God's law but under Moses' law merely an adulterer) and murderer (under civil law but not necessarily under Moses' law) such as David, who usurped (over-rode) Moses' Levitical-Cohen system, had himself made highpriest and had himself worshipped in equivalence to God (according to scripture cp. 1Ch 29:20)?

[Obsidian]

Several commentators I've encountered remark that only one of the commands declares a direct benefit for obeying it . . . , apart from that one, none of the commands of the Decalogue prescribe direct personal benefit or punishment; albeit the consensus is that if they are all obeyed there is societal benefit, or if disobeyed societal deficit.

Imo, none of Moses' ordinances were ordained (yet alone inspired) by God . . . .

The reward and punishment combination = Moses' law... Albeit, Moses' law focuses on the negative and is more about unjustified punishment (for the sake of social cohesion) than justified reward...

Hebrews 2:2
For if the word spoken by angels was stedfast, and every transgression and disobedience received a just recompence of reward . . . .

[apostoli]

How so? Deut. 24:2 clearly envisions the possibility of the woman being able to remarry.

That is true! Though once the woman had been defiled (whether by marriage or rape) she was at a huge disadvantage. For instance: the priests were forbidden from marrying a defiled woman. There a many inconsistencies in Moses' ordinances. For instance: On one hand he prohibits a man from marrying his brothers wife (no qualifications provided by Moses) and elsewhere he demands that a brother marries his brother's wife (qualifications provided).

This is a possible interpretation of Deut. 21:15-17. On the other hand, there was no reason for a man to remain married to a hated wife. Polygamy was certainly frowned upon for kings (Deut. 17:17).

Obviously, David was ignorant of such...

Where does Jesus indicate that Moses openly defied the will of God? This appears to be more of your anti-Mosaic bias.

Have a read of Mark 10...and then lets see if I am biased against Moses or simply following Jesus' teaching...