He exists all the time, ahead of time. I am sure He would not be micromanaging each individual creation like Jeff Bezos micromanages his piss breaks. Regardless, as per my other reply, the quote doesn’t count as all standards have been overruled by the new testament. Before you ask why there are new/old testaments despite “existing all the time”, I say He just fast forwarded then saw what happened and pushed the Jesus update to fix it.
It says “fullfill”. “I came here not to abolish” quite literally means that the old testament were to still be considered part of the Christian bible and kept for reference. It’s a bit difficult for me to define “fullfill”, although the “New Living Translation” is in my opinion more clear on it with “accomplish their purpose”. “Purpose” refers to the one described in Jeremiah 31:31-34.
18 For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth pass away, not one letter,[a] not one stroke of a letter, will pass from the law until all is accomplished. 19 Therefore, whoever breaks[b] one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
Jesus is explicitly speaking on the law and prophets, meaning the Torah and Nevi’im, basically the entire old testament. He said not a single stroke of a letter will pass from the law until heaven and earth pass away, meaning FOREVER or until end times when a new heaven is created on earth, depending on your interpretation.
Seeing as earth is still here, all has not been accomplished.
Oh come on, we could be debating here all day, that’s why there are multiple branches of Christianity in the first place.
Also, correct, not a single stroke of a letter “passed”. We were just looking at translations of these strokes of letters. Doesn’t mean all of them are still in effect.
Another way to think of it. There are two time conditions specified, “until heaven and earth pass away” and “until all is accomplished”. One could assume the first was just filler and second refers to when Jesus finishes teaching everyone.
That’s a good point. It’s weird that the divine word of God is so nebulous as to spawn 40,000 denominations that all think the others have it wrong.
assume the first was just filler
The Bible is really easy to interpret when you just ignore the stuff you don’t like. Like the original verse condoning rape. But even if we accept that the old law doesn’t apply anymore, it did at one point, meaning God (and therefore Jesus) condoned rape. If you believe God is unchanging, you have to believe he still thinks rape is permissible as long as you marry the victim.
40,000 denominations that all think the others have it wrong
Truly I tell you, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.
Matthew 18:18. New living translation to the rescue again:
I tell you the truth, whatever you forbid on earth will be forbidden in heaven, and whatever you permit on earth will be permitted in heaven.
assume the first was just filler
The Bible is really easy to interpret when you just ignore the stuff you don’t like.
Okay, if you interpret the first as something else (like until you don’t see heaven and earth so you died, or something else entirely), the other point still stands. I just claimed “another way to think of it”, meaning alternative.
If you believe God is unchanging (…) God (and therefore Jesus) condoned rape
Again, multiple ways to go here. I actually personally agree with both here.
Simple one, lots of lines from the book initially quoted follow the structure of “sin - punishment”, which implies marrying the victim was meant to be punishment which was then weaponized by the evil.
Now on the extent of God’s immutability: He can’t age, and is always omni[potent/present/scient], sure, but He made humans in His own image, and humans change all the time. Everything not specified otherwise is commonly assumed to be equal between humans and God. He is usually depicted having arms and legs since humans have those and it was not specified that He doesn’t. And I, as one of the creations in His image, would consider myself quite “changed” compared to last year or even 3 or so months ago. Don’t see how God couldn’t change His opinion on the matter, even despite the modern social construct for “person” often including opinions.
The “and they are discovered” is extra icing on this shit cake.
“God sees everything.”
“Nah, doesn’t count.”
He exists all the time, ahead of time. I am sure He would not be micromanaging each individual creation like Jeff Bezos micromanages his piss breaks. Regardless, as per my other reply, the quote doesn’t count as all standards have been overruled by the new testament. Before you ask why there are new/old testaments despite “existing all the time”, I say He just fast forwarded then saw what happened and pushed the Jesus update to fix it.
How do you interpret Matthew 5:17 - 5:18 regarding the Jesus update? Isn’t this Jesus saying that the old testament still stands?
It says “fullfill”. “I came here not to abolish” quite literally means that the old testament were to still be considered part of the Christian bible and kept for reference. It’s a bit difficult for me to define “fullfill”, although the “New Living Translation” is in my opinion more clear on it with “accomplish their purpose”. “Purpose” refers to the one described in Jeremiah 31:31-34.
See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supersessionism
You forgot the rest.
Jesus is explicitly speaking on the law and prophets, meaning the Torah and Nevi’im, basically the entire old testament. He said not a single stroke of a letter will pass from the law until heaven and earth pass away, meaning FOREVER or until end times when a new heaven is created on earth, depending on your interpretation.
Seeing as earth is still here, all has not been accomplished.
Oh come on, we could be debating here all day, that’s why there are multiple branches of Christianity in the first place.
Also, correct, not a single stroke of a letter “passed”. We were just looking at translations of these strokes of letters. Doesn’t mean all of them are still in effect.
Another way to think of it. There are two time conditions specified, “until heaven and earth pass away” and “until all is accomplished”. One could assume the first was just filler and second refers to when Jesus finishes teaching everyone.
That’s a good point. It’s weird that the divine word of God is so nebulous as to spawn 40,000 denominations that all think the others have it wrong.
The Bible is really easy to interpret when you just ignore the stuff you don’t like. Like the original verse condoning rape. But even if we accept that the old law doesn’t apply anymore, it did at one point, meaning God (and therefore Jesus) condoned rape. If you believe God is unchanging, you have to believe he still thinks rape is permissible as long as you marry the victim.
Matthew 18:18. New living translation to the rescue again:
Okay, if you interpret the first as something else (like until you don’t see heaven and earth so you died, or something else entirely), the other point still stands. I just claimed “another way to think of it”, meaning alternative.
Again, multiple ways to go here. I actually personally agree with both here.
Simple one, lots of lines from the book initially quoted follow the structure of “sin - punishment”, which implies marrying the victim was meant to be punishment which was then weaponized by the evil.
Now on the extent of God’s immutability: He can’t age, and is always omni[potent/present/scient], sure, but He made humans in His own image, and humans change all the time. Everything not specified otherwise is commonly assumed to be equal between humans and God. He is usually depicted having arms and legs since humans have those and it was not specified that He doesn’t. And I, as one of the creations in His image, would consider myself quite “changed” compared to last year or even 3 or so months ago. Don’t see how God couldn’t change His opinion on the matter, even despite the modern social construct for “person” often including opinions.
Have you considered deprogramming? There are people who can help.
I beg your pardon, did I say something negative or was there another reason for such an offer? Like the belief in Jeff Bezos? I wouldn’t judge.