The Ten Commandments (How is it Love?)
- Thread starter Aquinas
- Start date
Dondi
Well-Known Member
Yep, that's what Jesus basically said in Matthew 22:36-40:
36Master, which is the great commandment in the law?
37Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
38This is the first and great commandment.
39And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. 40On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.
The ten commandments, upon a closer look, appears to be divided into two sections: those commandments dealing with our relationship with God (Thou shall have no other gods before me, Thou shal not take the name of the Lord in vain, etc) and our relationship with each other (Thou shall not steal, thou shall not kill, honor thy father and mother, etc). So it's all aboyt our relationship with God and man. Everything else in the bible are teachings of how to do this.
36Master, which is the great commandment in the law?
37Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
38This is the first and great commandment.
39And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. 40On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.
The ten commandments, upon a closer look, appears to be divided into two sections: those commandments dealing with our relationship with God (Thou shall have no other gods before me, Thou shal not take the name of the Lord in vain, etc) and our relationship with each other (Thou shall not steal, thou shall not kill, honor thy father and mother, etc). So it's all aboyt our relationship with God and man. Everything else in the bible are teachings of how to do this.
Yea I kind of figured that out, but your help has enlighten me thakn you. Also the Ten commandments can be symbolic with our relationship with God. When we break the ten commandments we break our relationship with God and man. The only way we can reconcile that relationship is Grace or the atoning sacrifice which is from Jesus. But here is one thing that troubles me..
Since all of us have sinned and fell short in the glory of God, it means all of us had broken the relationship between us and God. This means sin, or seperation from God. To recieve grace is through faith and repentance. Is repentance a gift from God? Does it happen when we witness the kindess of God that can lead us to repentance?
Since all of us have sinned and fell short in the glory of God, it means all of us had broken the relationship between us and God. This means sin, or seperation from God. To recieve grace is through faith and repentance. Is repentance a gift from God? Does it happen when we witness the kindess of God that can lead us to repentance?
Dondi
Well-Known Member
Aquinas said:
Well, certainly God wants all men to repent, but I don't think He will violate our free will to do so. His invitation is open to all, but it's up to us to RSVP. Our faith comes into play when we get to the point of hopelessness, that is realizing that our condition of unrighteousness is such that we need God's introvention and humbly confess our dire need for forgiveness and change. Humbling ourselves involves stripping our pride and ego down so that God can work His redeptive work in our lives. He is merciful to forgive us and give us His Spirit to help us live according to His Word. He restores us whole and wipes our tears and guilt away. I think there is a state of grace that we need to be in continuously, relying God during every moment (which is hard to do sometimes), lest we fall back into our old pattern.
B
Bandit
Guest
Aquinas said:
in my experience, there is a genuine sense of sorrow there. strictly between me & God. (neat stuff here) different from just being sorry for being mean to someone. it goes deeper- much deeper & in that sorrow, or Godly sorrow, i find peace & joy & my soul is flooded with the mercies & love of God.
repentance is an awesome thing & it is one way to connect us to the living God.
forgiveness to & from others will bring unity with people, but not everyone understands this.
i see the following 8 commandments is how to fulfill the first two & vice versa.
Aquinas said:
Nothing symbolic about it. Unlike the Jews (keepers of the law), Jesus simplified it for us. (Keep these two and you keep them all. But being man and flawed you can't, so look to me and I will help you keep them all, and if you can't keep them, I will cover your mistakes).
Didn't mean we could do as we pleased, just meant if we screw up while trying to do His will, He would cover the blemishes.
Dondi
Well-Known Member
Quahom1 said:
Well and simply put, Q.
lunamoth
Episcopalian
I know, I don't usually write essays; hope you all don't mind. (Also, this is for Bruce DL).
This is the heart of Christ’s Gospel, the Good News. Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is near. And large portions of Jesus’ teachings were to tell us what the kingdom of heaven is like. What is it like? It’s unlike what we expect it to be. It is like a mustard seed. It is like yeast. Like treasure hidden in a field. Does it belong to the most powerful? To those who work the hardest? To the rich?
No. It belongs to the poor in spirit, to those who mourn, to the meek, to those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, to the merciful, to the pure in heart, the peacemakers, and to those who are persecuted for righteousness.
So, Jesus, the Christ, did not come to abolish the law, not by one single stroke. What then are we to make of His teachings, which transformed nearly every one of the ten commandments as well as many of the purity laws that were subsequently revealed to Moses?
The law is clearly valued as treasure, and we are assured that Jesus did not come to abolish the law. But, there is new treasure, and this treasure is linked to the Kingdom of Heaven. The new teachings show the law in a new way, a way that leads from life to eternal life. This is very clearly stated in the story of the rich young man.
In the Gospel of John we hear quite a lot about eternal life, and usually it is linked to belief in Jesus.
So, this may mean that eternal life belongs to one who accepts Jesus as the Son of God. But, there is also something more. John shares what Jesus has to say about believing in Him:
And in case we didn’t get it the first time:
So, eternal life requires something more than the law. It requires belief in Jesus as the Son of God, which in turn means to obey God’s command to love each other. Pretty simple. So, what were all those teachings about in the Sermon on the Mount, and as recorded elsewhere in the Gospels? Was Jesus going against His word and changing the law?
No.
He was explaining how the law is about love. He was explaining how to achieve the Kingdom of heaven here on earth. Wide is the gate that leads to destruction, but the narrow gate of love leads to the Kingdom.
Don’t murder? Don’t even think bad thoughts about your brother.
Don’t commit adultery? Don’t even look at a woman in lust.
You’re allowed an eye for an eye? Yet you can choose to turn the other cheek. Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you. Forgive.
The points most often brought up to illustrate that Jesus really did change the laws are his teachings about divorce and his healing on the Sabbath. But did He really change those laws, or did He just explain them in the light of compassion? By Hebrew law a man could divorce his wife if he became displeased with her (Deut 24:1). The life of a divorced woman on her own would be very harsh if she was not able to remarry. So Jesus explains, don’t choose that option unless there has been a serious breach in trust.
Keeping the Sabbath might easily be considered the most important of the commandments after the commandments to love God and neighbor. Did Jesus really break the Sabbath? No, on at least two accounts. First, and most straightforward, when Jesus and his disciples are picking grain to eat on the Sabbath, He compares Himself to the temple priests who “desecrate the day and yet are innocent” because they are obligated to perform the Sabbath sacrifice. Jesus refers his critics to the words of the prophet Hosea 6:6 “For I desire mercy, not sacrifice.” Thus, if mercy is even more desired by God than sacrifice, the healings performed by Jesus on the Sabbath are delightful to Him, and further Jesus is the priest. The teaching is again about love and compassion; the Spirit of the law which gives life as Paul would say.
But, there’s a second and more important thing to keep in mind about Jesus' teachings about the Sabbath. Deuteronomy 5:12 describes the commandment about observing the Sabbath.
Observing the Sabbath is three things. On one out of seven days you rest and do no work. You give your household a day of rest as well. And you remember that God freed you from bondage in Egypt. Apparently the Pharisees and other observant Jews had lost sight of this day of rest and instead made it a day of ritualistic rest. The hypocrisy of their actions is pointed out by Jesus when he describes how they will save a sheep from a pit on the Sabbath, and “how much more valuable is a man than a sheep? Therefore, it is lawful to do good on the Sabbath.” Not a new teaching of the law, but an explanation of the law of love.
All of the laws have always been about love, but in part we lost sight of that. The teachings of Jesus revealed, uncovered, the love buried in the heart of the law. But, even with this good seed in hand we are too weak on our own to bring it to fruition. The crucifixion, death, and resurrection of Christ, the work done on the cross, plows the hard soil of our hearts so that seed can take root and flourish. So that we can realize the Kingdom of God that is near, within us (Luke 17:21)
peace,
lunamoth
(Also, this is for Bruce DL).This is the heart of Christ’s Gospel, the Good News. Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is near. And large portions of Jesus’ teachings were to tell us what the kingdom of heaven is like. What is it like? It’s unlike what we expect it to be. It is like a mustard seed. It is like yeast. Like treasure hidden in a field. Does it belong to the most powerful? To those who work the hardest? To the rich?
No. It belongs to the poor in spirit, to those who mourn, to the meek, to those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, to the merciful, to the pure in heart, the peacemakers, and to those who are persecuted for righteousness.
So, Jesus, the Christ, did not come to abolish the law, not by one single stroke. What then are we to make of His teachings, which transformed nearly every one of the ten commandments as well as many of the purity laws that were subsequently revealed to Moses?
The law is clearly valued as treasure, and we are assured that Jesus did not come to abolish the law. But, there is new treasure, and this treasure is linked to the Kingdom of Heaven. The new teachings show the law in a new way, a way that leads from life to eternal life. This is very clearly stated in the story of the rich young man.
The young man went away sad because it is so very hard to enter the Kingdom of Heaven, to have eternal life. Note there is no indication that Jesus is talking about the afterlife here. There is the life given through the law; and then there is Something More.
In the Gospel of John we hear quite a lot about eternal life, and usually it is linked to belief in Jesus.
So, this may mean that eternal life belongs to one who accepts Jesus as the Son of God. But, there is also something more. John shares what Jesus has to say about believing in Him:
God’s command leads to eternal life. And what is that command?
And in case we didn’t get it the first time:
So, eternal life requires something more than the law. It requires belief in Jesus as the Son of God, which in turn means to obey God’s command to love each other. Pretty simple. So, what were all those teachings about in the Sermon on the Mount, and as recorded elsewhere in the Gospels? Was Jesus going against His word and changing the law?
No.
He was explaining how the law is about love. He was explaining how to achieve the Kingdom of heaven here on earth. Wide is the gate that leads to destruction, but the narrow gate of love leads to the Kingdom.
Don’t murder? Don’t even think bad thoughts about your brother.
Don’t commit adultery? Don’t even look at a woman in lust.
You’re allowed an eye for an eye? Yet you can choose to turn the other cheek. Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you. Forgive.
The points most often brought up to illustrate that Jesus really did change the laws are his teachings about divorce and his healing on the Sabbath. But did He really change those laws, or did He just explain them in the light of compassion? By Hebrew law a man could divorce his wife if he became displeased with her (Deut 24:1). The life of a divorced woman on her own would be very harsh if she was not able to remarry. So Jesus explains, don’t choose that option unless there has been a serious breach in trust.
Keeping the Sabbath might easily be considered the most important of the commandments after the commandments to love God and neighbor. Did Jesus really break the Sabbath? No, on at least two accounts. First, and most straightforward, when Jesus and his disciples are picking grain to eat on the Sabbath, He compares Himself to the temple priests who “desecrate the day and yet are innocent” because they are obligated to perform the Sabbath sacrifice. Jesus refers his critics to the words of the prophet Hosea 6:6 “For I desire mercy, not sacrifice.” Thus, if mercy is even more desired by God than sacrifice, the healings performed by Jesus on the Sabbath are delightful to Him, and further Jesus is the priest. The teaching is again about love and compassion; the Spirit of the law which gives life as Paul would say.
But, there’s a second and more important thing to keep in mind about Jesus' teachings about the Sabbath. Deuteronomy 5:12 describes the commandment about observing the Sabbath.
Observing the Sabbath is three things. On one out of seven days you rest and do no work. You give your household a day of rest as well. And you remember that God freed you from bondage in Egypt. Apparently the Pharisees and other observant Jews had lost sight of this day of rest and instead made it a day of ritualistic rest. The hypocrisy of their actions is pointed out by Jesus when he describes how they will save a sheep from a pit on the Sabbath, and “how much more valuable is a man than a sheep? Therefore, it is lawful to do good on the Sabbath.” Not a new teaching of the law, but an explanation of the law of love.
All of the laws have always been about love, but in part we lost sight of that. The teachings of Jesus revealed, uncovered, the love buried in the heart of the law. But, even with this good seed in hand we are too weak on our own to bring it to fruition. The crucifixion, death, and resurrection of Christ, the work done on the cross, plows the hard soil of our hearts so that seed can take root and flourish. So that we can realize the Kingdom of God that is near, within us (Luke 17:21)
peace,
lunamoth
Last edited:
Devadatta
Well-Known Member
lunamoth said:I know, I don't usually write essays; hope you all don't mind.
This is the heart of Christ’s Gospel, the Good News. Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is near. And large portions of Jesus’ teachings were to tell us what the kingdom of heaven is like. What is it like? It’s unlike what we expect it to be. It is like a mustard seed. It is like yeast. Like treasure hidden in a field. Does it belong to the most powerful? To those who work the hardest? To the rich?
No. It belongs to the poor in spirit, to those who mourn, to the meek, to those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, to the merciful, to the pure in heart, the peacemakers, and to those who are persecuted for righteousness.
So, Jesus, the Christ, did not come to abolish the law, not by one single stroke. What then are we to make of His teachings, which transformed nearly every one of the ten commandments as well as many of the purity laws that were subsequently revealed to Moses?
The law is clearly valued as treasure, and we are assured that Jesus did not come to abolish the law. But, there is new treasure, and this treasure is linked to the Kingdom of Heaven. The new teachings show the law in a new way, a way that leads from life to eternal life. This is very clearly stated in the story of the rich young man.
The young man went away sad because it is so very hard to enter the Kingdom of Heaven, to have eternal life. Note there is no indication that Jesus is talking about the afterlife here. There is the life given through the law; and then there is Something More.
In the Gospel of John we hear quite a lot about eternal life, and usually it is linked to belief in Jesus.
So, this may mean that eternal life belongs to one who accepts Jesus as the Son of God. But, there is also something more. John shares what Jesus has to say about believing in Him:
God’s command leads to eternal life. And what is that command?
And in case we didn’t get it the first time:
So, eternal life requires something more than the law. It requires belief in Jesus as the Son of God, which in turn means to obey God’s command to love each other. Pretty simple. So, what were all those teachings about in the Sermon on the Mount, and as recorded elsewhere in the Gospels? Was Jesus going against His word and changing the law?
No.
He was explaining how the law is about love. He was explaining how to achieve the Kingdom of heaven here on earth. Wide is the gate that leads to destruction, but the narrow gate of love leads to the Kingdom.
Don’t murder? Don’t even think bad thoughts about your brother.
Don’t commit adultery? Don’t even look at a woman in lust.
You’re allowed an eye for an eye? Yet you can choose to turn the other cheek. Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you. Forgive.
The points most often brought up to illustrate that Jesus really did change the laws are his teachings about divorce and his healing on the Sabbath. But did He really change those laws, or did He just explain them in the light of compassion? By Hebrew law a man could divorce his wife if he became displeased with her (Deut 24:1). The life of a divorced woman on her own would be very harsh if she was not able to remarry. So Jesus explains, don’t choose that option unless there has been a serious breach in trust.
Keeping the Sabbath might easily be considered the most important of the commandments after the commandments to love God and neighbor. Did Jesus really break the Sabbath? No, on at least two accounts. First, and most straightforward, when Jesus and his disciples are picking grain to eat on the Sabbath, He compares Himself to the temple priests who “desecrate the day and yet are innocent” because they are obligated to perform the Sabbath sacrifice. Jesus refers his critics to the words of the prophet Hosea 6:6 “For I desire mercy, not sacrifice.” Thus, if mercy is even more desired by God than sacrifice, the healings performed by Jesus on the Sabbath are delightful to Him, and further Jesus is the priest. The teaching is again about love and compassion; the Spirit of the law which gives life as Paul would say.
But, there’s a second and more important thing to keep in mind about Jesus' teachings about the Sabbath. Deuteronomy 5:12 describes the commandment about observing the Sabbath.
Observing the Sabbath is three things. On one out of seven days you rest and do no work. You give your household a day of rest as well. And you remember that God freed you from bondage in Egypt. Apparently the Pharisees and other observant Jews had lost sight of this day of rest and instead made it a day of ritualistic rest. The hypocrisy of their actions is pointed out by Jesus when he describes how they will save a sheep from a pit on the Sabbath, and “how much more valuable is a man than a sheep? Therefore, it is lawful to do good on the Sabbath.” Not a new teaching of the law, but an explanation of the law of love.
All of the laws have always been about love, but in part we lost sight of that. The teachings of Jesus revealed, uncovered, the love buried in the heart of the law. But, even with this good seed in hand we are too weak on our own to bring it to fruition. The crucifixion, death, and resurrection of Christ, the work done on the cross, plows the hard soil of our hearts so that seed can take root and flourish. So that we can realize the Kingdom of God that is near, within us (Luke 17:21)
peace,
lunamoth
Very nice, Luna. You know what matters, IMHO.
The passage on the sabath reminds me of the one having to do with pharisees withholding food from their parents to use for ritual purposes. Is this honoring your father & mother, he asks? (Your probably know where to find this.) Again, it's the contrast between mere law and what really matters, the love that powers it.
Sincerely,
Devadatta
seattlegal
Mercuræn Buddhist
Agreed.Devadatta said:
Jesus came to fulfill the law--one can observe the letter of the law without understanding the spirit of the law--action motivated by love.
Jeremiah 31:31-34 said:
lunamoth
Episcopalian
Thank you Deva and seattlegal.
peace,
lunamoth
peace,
lunamoth
bananabrain
awkward squadnik
we understand the ten commandments as being divided into two sections - those between human and human and those between humans and G!D. the first five are for G!D. the second five are for humans. interestingly, that makes the Sabbath and honouring your parents also about G!D rather than about humans. there is a lot of commentary about this.
incidentally, you should note that the actual ten are generally not the same ten by jews and christians. there is a good article on it in wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ten_Commandments
other than this, a lot of your arguments seem to me to hold up the "pharisees" as straw men - in fact there can be many other explanations for these applications of the law than the ones you give. i've also explained elsewhere the circumstances in which one can break the Sabbath and it seemed to me that the specific occasions mentioned in connection with jesus are highly arguable. perhaps they are case studies, rather than hard-and-fast examples of correct behaviour?
and, of course, we don't agree that this "new covenant" is christianity. jews understand this prophetic statement to be aimed at the sinning jews of the biblical period - the "new covenant" would refer to a time when jews took our laws seriously and carried them out correctly.
b'shalom
bananabrain
incidentally, you should note that the actual ten are generally not the same ten by jews and christians. there is a good article on it in wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ten_Commandments
other than this, a lot of your arguments seem to me to hold up the "pharisees" as straw men - in fact there can be many other explanations for these applications of the law than the ones you give. i've also explained elsewhere the circumstances in which one can break the Sabbath and it seemed to me that the specific occasions mentioned in connection with jesus are highly arguable. perhaps they are case studies, rather than hard-and-fast examples of correct behaviour?
and, of course, we don't agree that this "new covenant" is christianity. jews understand this prophetic statement to be aimed at the sinning jews of the biblical period - the "new covenant" would refer to a time when jews took our laws seriously and carried them out correctly.
b'shalom
bananabrain
lunamoth
Episcopalian
Hi Bananabrain,
Thank you for sharing your perspective and the wiki article.
I would agree that there are many other applications of the law, and I admit to not have studied any. I think I am obviously coming from a Christian perspective on this, such as from Wiki
About the pharisees what you say also strikes me as true, although it is not just me holding them up to be strawmen, but the authors of the Gospels. I've always figured that the criticisms could not apply to all the observant Jews of the time, but to some subset. Certainly the same could be said about Christians of today, some of whom act quite pious while neglecting the needs of widows and orphans, etc. In fact, I'm sure that description applies to most of us to some extent.
Of course!
peace,
lunamoth
Thank you for sharing your perspective and the wiki article.
I would agree that there are many other applications of the law, and I admit to not have studied any. I think I am obviously coming from a Christian perspective on this, such as from Wiki
This is the tradition I was raised in, thus probably the main one permeating my psyche. I have to say though that I reject the idea that the commandments are 'only productive of condemnation' apart from the gift of the Holy Spirit. On the other had, I believe the Spirit is the motivator for all of us to follow the law, out of love of G-d and one another.
About the pharisees what you say also strikes me as true, although it is not just me holding them up to be strawmen, but the authors of the Gospels. I've always figured that the criticisms could not apply to all the observant Jews of the time, but to some subset. Certainly the same could be said about Christians of today, some of whom act quite pious while neglecting the needs of widows and orphans, etc. In fact, I'm sure that description applies to most of us to some extent.
bananabrain said:
Of course!
peace,
lunamoth
lunamoth said:Hi Bananabrain,
Thank you for sharing your perspective and the wiki article.
I would agree that there are many other applications of the law, and I admit to not have studied any. I think I am obviously coming from a Christian perspective on this, such as from Wiki
This is the tradition I was raised in, thus probably the main one permeating my psyche. I have to say though that I reject the idea that the commandments are 'only productive of condemnation' apart from the gift of the Holy Spirit. On the other had, I believe the Spirit is the motivator for all of us to follow the law, out of love of G-d and one another.
About the pharisees what you say also strikes me as true, although it is not just me holding them up to be strawmen, but the authors of the Gospels. I've always figured that the criticisms could not apply to all the observant Jews of the time, but to some subset. Certainly the same could be said about Christians of today, some of whom act quite pious while neglecting the needs of widows and orphans, etc. In fact, I'm sure that description applies to most of us to some extent.
Of course!
peace,
lunamoth
I opine that if the the commandments were capable of being kept, "apart from the gift of the Holy Spirit", we would keep them. However this appears not to be the case, as Christ made it quite clear that if the commandments were broken in the mind's eye, then they were broken by a man, period.
On the other hand, I must vigorously agree with you concerning the "piety" of some Christians. They make me nauseated to be around them. Do you know this "false piety" I'm trying to describe?
In fact, the first time I met such, I garnered that their concept of "Christianity" was something I wanted nothing to do with. I even prayed to God, "don't ever let me be that way...I'd rather be something else if that is what Christianity is all about." For a time I wondered if one could follow Jesus, yet not be a Christian, or if the two had to go hand in hand (shudder to think). Fortunately He showed me the path I should take, instead of telling me to leave the fold.
I know at first it sounds like I'm judging (and in a way, I am), but I just do not want to live my life that way. So I told God all this, then asked Him to show me how to live (in such a way that I could live with myself). He did.
As far as Pharisees being strawmen, like any other group, there are bad apples in the barrel, but that does not make for the whole barrel to be spoiled. The Sanhedrin of that time in Jesus' life had enough bad apples to cause a whole lot of trouble. Their main goal was to stop this "usurper" from stealing their thunder, glory and power, as leaders. The majority wanted to just let things be, and a few actually attempted to confront and stop the driving force for Jesus' removal from the scene.
But analogous to the American revolution vs. the Colonial revolt, B-B will see things different than we do, in this area concerning Jesus, the priests, and all that "allegedly transpired".
The irony here is that the difference between Christianity and Judeasm, is a matter of interpretation of history of the times, and the resultant meanings.
I also find it ironic that Islam calls both Christians and Jews the people of "The Book", but their Qur'an does not contain any semblance of the literal translation (word for word), of the Old testament within their "book". Mostly the Qur'an concentrates on the morals as opposed to the literal stories. But I suppose that is food for another thread...
my thoughts
v/r
Q
lunamoth
Episcopalian
Quahom1 said:I opine that if the the commandments were capable of being kept, "apart from the gift of the Holy Spirit", we would keep them. However this appears not to be the case, as Christ made it quite clear that if the commandments were broken in the mind's eye, then they were broken by a man, period.
On the other hand, I must vigorously agree with you concerning the "piety" of some Christians. They make me nauseated to be around them. Do you know this "false piety" I'm trying to describe?
In fact, the first time I met such, I garnered that their concept of "Christianity" was something I wanted nothing to do with. I even prayed to God, "don't ever let me be that way...I'd rather be something else if that is what Christianity is all about." For a time I wondered if one could follow Jesus, yet not be a Christian, or if the two had to go hand in hand (shudder to think). Fortunately He showed me the path I should take, instead of telling me to leave the fold.
I know at first it sounds like I'm judging (and in a way, I am), but I just do not want to live my life that way. So I told God all this, then asked Him to show me how to live (in such a way that I could live with myself). He did.
As far as Pharisees being strawmen, like any other group, there are bad apples in the barrel, but that does not make for the whole barrel to be spoiled. The Sanhedrin of that time in Jesus' life had enough bad apples to cause a whole lot of trouble. Their main goal was to stop this "usurper" from stealing their thunder, glory and power, as leaders. The majority wanted to just let things be, and a few actually attempted to confront and stop the driving force for Jesus' removal from the scene.
But analogous to the American revolution vs. the Colonial revolt, B-B will see things different than we do, in this area concerning Jesus, the priests, and all that "allegedly transpired".
The irony here is that the difference between Christianity and Judeasm, is a matter of interpretation of history of the times, and the resultant meanings.
I also find it ironic that Islam calls both Christians and Jews the people of "The Book", but their Qur'an does not contain any semblance of the literal translation (word for word), of the Old testament within their "book". Mostly the Qur'an concentrates on the morals as opposed to the literal stories. But I suppose that is food for another thread...
my thoughts
v/r
Q
Good points all, Q. In my typical way, I agree with what you say about not being able to keep the commandments except by the help of the Spirit. What I disagree with is the idea that keeping the commandments leads to condemnation outside of Christianity. By the love of the Spirit we are motivated to keep the commandments, and by grace of God we are forgiven when our selfish desires, or our ignorance, get in the way of that.
Overtly pious people who then refuse to help another are irritating, and it is an easy trap to fall into. I think that sharing our stories and building each other up can help us stay out of that trap. But I also think about Bob x's points in the 'knowledge of good and evil' thread--we very often fail to comprehend all the unintended impact, for good and bad, our best intentions have on others. Perhaps this is a strength in keeping the law: it minimizes the mistakes we make when we have the best of intentions.
peace,
lunamoth
lunamoth said:Good points all, Q. In my typical way, I agree with what you say about not being able to keep the commandments except by the help of the Spirit. What I disagree with is the idea that keeping the commandments leads to condemnation outside of Christianity. By the love of the Spirit we are motivated to keep the commandments, and by grace of God we are forgiven when our selfish desires, or our ignorance, get in the way of that.
Overtly pious people who then refuse to help another are irritating, and it is an easy trap to fall into. I think that sharing our stories and building each other up can help us stay out of that trap. But I also think about Bob x's points in the 'knowledge of good and evil' thread--we very often fail to comprehend all the unintended impact, for good and bad, our best intentions have on others. Perhaps this is a strength in keeping the law: it minimizes the mistakes we make when we have the best of intentions.
peace,
lunamoth
Hmmm, in many of the Middle Eastern countries, it is against the law to touch a woman, not your family or wife, yet women get hit by cars, or blown up by bombs, and military men not only touch these injured women, but often times perform artificial resperation, or emergency surgery, or emergency dental work. Clearly they broke the "law". Clearly the "impact" of these men breaking the "law" is not left un-noticed by those who follow that "law". But, the "medics" who break that law could care less when a life is at stake (a double breaking of the law). Perhaps the "law" should be absolutely adhered to, and the injured should die or suffer as a result (fat chance, if the means to fix or alleviate the problem are available...)
Does that mean we stop "breaking the law"?
Sometimes, laws are stupid. Jesus stated unequivically, Love God, Love neighbor (and implied, all else will fall into place). What He meant was/is if one can keep these two simple but profound laws, everything else is gravy. Nevermind what others think, just do what is right.
The hardest part however, is knowing what is right for others that are not Christian...
v/r
Q
lunamoth
Episcopalian
Was thinking about this thread recently.
I know many people equate love with emotion and today many go on to say that it's all just evolution-ingrained instinct. We feel love because it helps us raise our young and protect each other to survive, end of story.
And maybe laws are equated with logic and reason. We think about how we want our societies to function and then make laws to conform everyone to that vision.
But I think it is the other way around.
Love is intentional and takes reason. It requires the choice and will to work for the best for others. Sometimes others near us that we don't particularly like, sometimes others who are so far from us we can't feel much at all about them. But we still want them to have good lives, life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
Laws, on the other hand, come into play when emotions rule. It's easy to say our ethics are ruled by respect and love for all people, but when we are afraid or angry it is not so easy to stick to those ethics. So, the law draws the hard line in the sand for us and implies an added consequence, some kind of enforcement, to shape us into our ethical standards even when we can't reason our way to doing the right thing.
Love also takes self sacrifice and discipline. Sure, you can do what you want (all things are permissible), but out of consideration for others we might give up some of those liberties. Maybe give up quite a few. I know as a mother I've given up many things willingly out of love for my family.
But, evolution has ingrained in us a selfishness. We are, in a sense, incomplete. The same instincts that got us to master our environment and reach great heights in technology, sublimity in the arts, and sophisticated understandings about everything from the farthest stars to the mysterious workings of subatomic particles, those same instincts make it very hard for us to not torture our enemies when we are afraid or even be uncivil in our conversations when we feel personally insulted.
We know love is the way, we hate laws. But the laws are the fall-back position when reason fails.
I know many people equate love with emotion and today many go on to say that it's all just evolution-ingrained instinct. We feel love because it helps us raise our young and protect each other to survive, end of story.
And maybe laws are equated with logic and reason. We think about how we want our societies to function and then make laws to conform everyone to that vision.
But I think it is the other way around.
Love is intentional and takes reason. It requires the choice and will to work for the best for others. Sometimes others near us that we don't particularly like, sometimes others who are so far from us we can't feel much at all about them. But we still want them to have good lives, life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
Laws, on the other hand, come into play when emotions rule. It's easy to say our ethics are ruled by respect and love for all people, but when we are afraid or angry it is not so easy to stick to those ethics. So, the law draws the hard line in the sand for us and implies an added consequence, some kind of enforcement, to shape us into our ethical standards even when we can't reason our way to doing the right thing.
Love also takes self sacrifice and discipline. Sure, you can do what you want (all things are permissible), but out of consideration for others we might give up some of those liberties. Maybe give up quite a few. I know as a mother I've given up many things willingly out of love for my family.
But, evolution has ingrained in us a selfishness. We are, in a sense, incomplete. The same instincts that got us to master our environment and reach great heights in technology, sublimity in the arts, and sophisticated understandings about everything from the farthest stars to the mysterious workings of subatomic particles, those same instincts make it very hard for us to not torture our enemies when we are afraid or even be uncivil in our conversations when we feel personally insulted.
We know love is the way, we hate laws. But the laws are the fall-back position when reason fails.
three books if anyone is interested....
Amazon.com: The Ten Challenges: Spiritual Lessons from the Ten Commandments for Creating Meaning, Growth, and Richness Every Day of Your Life: Leonad Felder: Books
Amazon.com: Metamorality: Eric Butterworth: Books
Amazon.com: The Ten Commandments: Emmet Fox: Books
they all go beyond, behind the commandments...
Amazon.com: The Ten Challenges: Spiritual Lessons from the Ten Commandments for Creating Meaning, Growth, and Richness Every Day of Your Life: Leonad Felder: Books
Amazon.com: Metamorality: Eric Butterworth: Books
Amazon.com: The Ten Commandments: Emmet Fox: Books
they all go beyond, behind the commandments...
path_of_one
Embracing the Mystery
Marsh
Disagreeable By Nature
This is a little off-topic, but one thing I've considered is that the way we interpret the ten commandments may not be the way God intended them. That is to say, God did intend us to misinterpret them. Anyone confused yet?
If I as a parent was to say to my child, "You will do your homework every night," the obvious connotation would be that I'm commanding her to get her homework done, yeah? But what if the context was a little different? What if the context was that my daughter said that she loved me, but I questioned her about her love. Let's say that she asked me, "Well, what would I have to do to show you that I love you?" And I reply, "If you love me, you will do your homework every night (because in so doing you will succeed in school, stay out of trouble, and make me proud of you)."
I sometimes wonder if the "ten commandments" are not actually commandments in our understanding of what a commandment is. I wonder if they are not more along the lines of "the ten eventualities" that people display when they do love God and do care about each other. In that way, we don't really break commandments in the way that we break laws; when we transgress, it's more of a barometric reading of how well we're doing.
Of course, I don't really have much scriptural basis for this claim. It comes from what Jesus said when he told us that if we love him we will keep his commands. This could be interpeted as we show love by keeping his commands, but it could also be interpreted as we keep his commands when we truly love him.
If I as a parent was to say to my child, "You will do your homework every night," the obvious connotation would be that I'm commanding her to get her homework done, yeah? But what if the context was a little different? What if the context was that my daughter said that she loved me, but I questioned her about her love. Let's say that she asked me, "Well, what would I have to do to show you that I love you?" And I reply, "If you love me, you will do your homework every night (because in so doing you will succeed in school, stay out of trouble, and make me proud of you)."
I sometimes wonder if the "ten commandments" are not actually commandments in our understanding of what a commandment is. I wonder if they are not more along the lines of "the ten eventualities" that people display when they do love God and do care about each other. In that way, we don't really break commandments in the way that we break laws; when we transgress, it's more of a barometric reading of how well we're doing.
Of course, I don't really have much scriptural basis for this claim. It comes from what Jesus said when he told us that if we love him we will keep his commands. This could be interpeted as we show love by keeping his commands, but it could also be interpreted as we keep his commands when we truly love him.