The Bible does not condemn self defense

[Tez3]

Thanks Tez3. As always, even when I may not agree, I am always interested in your explanations. I feel they give me much insight. I may make some comments later to explain my thoughts on some of what you have said. Again, thanks.

No worries . I'm spending the day overdosing on sport on the television, it's the European Games ( including Israel), lots and lots of different sports. Boxing at the moment, there's been TKD, karate, Sambo, wrestling and with Judo to come not to mention all the normal sports you get in the Olympics. Bliss, so good to be retired lol.

 

[oftheherd1]

One problem for me is that while there may have been scholars of Hebrew working on the KJV they weren't Jewish scholars who understood not just the text but how to prise the context out of the text. (There were no Jews in the UK from 1275 to 1655) Speaking the language is not the same as being a 'native speaker. Look at the difficulties and misunderstandings we have here between American and British English speakers.

Yes, I am aware of that. As I am sure you know, we try to suffer through with you, but I wish you guys across the pond would give up those archaic ways and join us in correct English.

As to Jewish scholars versus who aren't Jews, I understand your point, and can agree up to a point. However, I believe they were equivalent in speaking ability, had the original Hebrew/Aramaic available, and anyway, were inspired by God. I can also understand you will find that idea distasteful.

I suppose the problem , as I've said before, is that the OT was never meant for dissemination among anyone other than the Jewish people, written by Jews for Jews it's hard to see how it really has relevance for non Jews who have only taken it upon themselves because the person they follow was Jewish though that is forgotten for much of the time I feel. I find it puzzling that people decide the OT is not relevant as far as the Law is concerned yet they follow someone to whom the Law as well as Jewish customs and traditions would have been very important as a Jew. The person they follow would have also been able to argue the points as we still do, would have known that the Law is able to be used so that it was humane and just rather than dictatorial. For example where it says a witch should be killed, the Law actually works so that no one is killed, there isn't actually a death penalty there just a warning. There's many examples like this yet this is missing when the Law goes out of Jewish hands and is used to justify much that shouldn't be. In Jewish Law the death penalty is to remind people of the seriousness of the crime not something that should actually carried out. It's this connection with the Law and the way it works that is very sadly lacking when people take the Bible to be literal and follow it to the letter. they leave out all human understanding and compassion which was given to us by G-d.

I believe the Old Testament has value to a Christian. It has many examples of how the Jewish people did not follow God's laws, and the punishment they suffered because of that; to teach us that we should not disoby God. It has laws, some of which were excused by God in the New Testament teachings. There are stories of faith, obediance and lack of it with consequences, reasons things don't always go as we wish, and yet we should perservere, beautiful and inspiring songs, and many other lessons. So I personally do not think the Old Testament is not relevant, nor do I think any Bible believing Christian should think otherwise.

I don't doubt that Jesus knew the law, nor that he obeyed it. But I think the disconnect between us is that we believe Jesus is completely man, and completely God. So yes He knew the law, but did not always agree with the later interpretations of the law, which were given the same force as law. He pointed out some of those that He was against. Again, I am sure you will not agree, and look at that as completely against the core of your beliefs.

I do think you are right that many people don't always make the connection that Jesus was Jewish. Partly perhaps, because of His diety that we believe in, and partly because of the actions of those who pushed for the crusades and the inquisition. It is my belief that a Bible believing Christian should not have supported those things.

There are some good points above. I certainly agree that the death penalty is very final. It is my main reservation about it, although I agree it is sanctioned or required in the Law. I wonder if the rabbis seem to have sought to change the God-given law, and finding no reason under the Law, began to debate to find reasons to do so. I don't mean that as harshly as it might sound. There are plenty of social reformers in our present times (and all times) who do the same to justify their beliefs agains something they don't like. Sometimes they make sense, and sometimes at least in my opinion, they don't. But those are the reasons we all are free to have our own opinions. One of the problems though is that too often, people can't articulate any viable reaons other than they want to believe, and act a certain way. That no matter how it might effect others, nor how much it may be controlled by law.

"The Talmud ruled out the admissibility of circumstantial evidence in cases which involved a capital crime. Two witnesses were required to testify that they saw the action with their own eyes. A man could not be found guilty of a capital crime through his own confession or through the testimony of immediate members of his family. The rabbis demanded a condition of cool premeditation in the act of crime before they would sanction the death penalty; the specific test on which they insisted was that the criminal be warned prior to the crime, and that the criminal indicate by responding to the warning, that he is fully aware of his deed, but that he is determined to go through with it. In effect this did away with the application of the death penalty. The rabbis were aware of this, and they declared openly that they found capital punishment repugnant to them… There is another reason which argues for the abolition of capital punishment. It is the fact of human fallibility. Too often we learn of people who were convicted of crimes and only later are new facts uncovered by which their innocence is established. The doors of the jail can be opened, in such cases we can partially undo the injustice. But the dead cannot be brought back to life again. We regard all forms of capital punishment as barbaric and obsolete".

—Rabbi Ben Zion Bokser, Statement on capital punishment, 1960. Proceedings of the Committee on Jewish Law and Standards 1927-1970, Volume III, pp. 1537-1538

As an example, from the paragraph above, I think clearly God intended that some people should be killed so as not to be able to taint the Jewish people, or uplift Satan. But it seems, to get around that, an additional requirement is added that the person must be warned just before the commission of a capitol crime, that it is wrong, and the person must acknowledge that, but insist on doing the crime any way. That clearly isn't possible at all times, in fact hardly ever. But regardless, the killer, if convicted, cannot be sentenced to death (what was done to them?).

There may be an example of that in the New Testament. The New Testament tells us the Jewish leaders wanted Jesus dead, but took that to Pilate. They said Jesus deserved to die under their law, but they could not kill Jesus, but the Romans could, and accused Jesus of being against Ceasar (against paying taxes) so Pilate would agree. They also accused Jesus of saying he was the King of the Jews So would you think they were following some of what you have pointed out? Also, I do wonder how Jews view the fact that God gave the Jews laws, and if I understand your several statements over time, all Jews know the law from an early age. Why then would they have to be warned just before the commission of the crime (all crimes?) when that doesn't seem to be in the Old Testament?

As always thanks for your willingness to continue to provide insights into your beliefs, and to discuss them. I don't know how many others find it interesting or enlightening, but I certainly do.

EDIT: Oh, I meant to add I envy you your retirement. I expect to do so in about two years or maybe less. But do you ever get bored, or feel you aren't contributing? I worry about that.

 

[Tez3]

As to Jewish scholars versus who aren't Jews, I understand your point, and can agree up to a point. However, I believe they were equivalent in speaking ability, had the original Hebrew/Aramaic available

The problem as we see it is that while being able to speak Hebrew and Aramaic they didn't have the Jewish education to understand HOW to read more than the words.

So yes He knew the law, but did not always agree with the later interpretations of the law, which were given the same force as law. He pointed out some of those that He was against.

But that's what we do, we disagree, argue and work it out among ourselves, everyone has bits they disagree with, in this he was no different from any other Rebbe.

it is sanctioned or required in the Law. I wonder if the rabbis seem to have sought to change the God-given law, and finding no reason under the Law, began to debate to find reasons to do so

I think this is where the difference in our relationship with G-d shows, our relationship is one of having a Covenant with G-d and of having free will. We have no fixed, mandated, official belief outside that of there being one G-d and we are His Chosen (that means we are the vanguard of the human race, that we should show by our behaviour how people can live peacefully and with treating each other well, an extremely difficult thing to live up to as we know to our cost). We are concerned with relationships, that with each other, with Israel and with G-d. Each person's relationship with G-d if they choose to have one is personal and individual. We have to be as kind as we can to each other, the idea of loving your neighbour is a very old one predating the NT, it's actually a fundamental thing in Judaism.
"There is a story in the Talmud that is often told when someone is asked to summarize the essence of Judaism. During the first century B.C.E. a great rabbi named Hillel was asked to sum up Judaism while standing on one foot. He replied: "Certainly! What is hateful to you, do not do to your neighbour. That is the Torah. The rest is commentary, now go and study." (Talmud Shabbat 31A.) Hence, at its core Judaism is concerned with the well-being of humanity."
So all the Laws have been given to us but it is up to us to ensure they do as little harm as possible, we are given brains and the ability to question everything, we are expected to do so. The Rebbes aren't trying to dodge anything, we have to interpret the spirit of the law not just follow it blindly. This is the thing that's difficult to do with the non Hebrew writings because you don't get the nuances that tell you what is meant. That's why you think the laws are written in black and white because they seem so in English, instead of how they are actually written where you have to work for the meaning and have to make the most humane choice you can. We are, if you like, expected to be adults rather than children. The idea is that we started as children but must learn to rule ourselves not to remain as obedient children because that way we learn nothing. The Rebbes are teachers not priests, they don't speak for us, they don't make laws ( there are Rabbinical laws too which usually become laws by custom) without the will of the people wishing it so.

But regardless, the killer, if convicted, cannot be sentenced to death (what was done to them?).

Often if they had killed someone they'd have to pay compensation or look after the family if they had killed the father/husband. Executing them would not leave the bereaved any better off, making the person who caused the death work for the family or pay compensation works much better, that sentence could last for decades. Exile was a possibility, being forced to leave your community would be a harsh punishment in many places.



Retirement is fun, I am busy with Guiding, I take Rainbows and Brownies, often Guides and Rangers too. We have trips, camps and expeditions so I seem to actually have less time than when I was working. I'm also working for two award schemes, one is for older people everywhere and the other a Girl Guide one for adults. There's also free university courses to do online from universities all around the world. I know it's a cliché to say you don't know how you found time to work but it's true!

 

[oftheherd1]

As always your posts are informative and thought provoking. Thanks so much.

 

[Tez3]

As always your posts are informative and thought provoking. Thanks so much.

I try my best, it's always useful when you have to explain yourself, it makes you think about things and how to put them so that something you have always known but not often put into words comes out making sense!
Bear in mind thought that saying about asking ten Jews an opinion and getting twelve back! You will find many different answers though they won't actually differ in the basics. We each forge our own relationship with G-d or not if that's what you wish so everyone's experience will be different. That's why, too, other religions are considered as relevant to people as ours is to us and we feel no need, quite the opposite, to try to convert anyone.

 

[Tez3]

This came through just today, more food for thought. Why does Torah law allow polygamy - Marriage

 

[geezer]

During the first century B.C.E. a great rabbi named Hillel was asked to sum up Judaism while standing on one foot. He replied: "Certainly! What is hateful to you, do not do to your neighbour. That is the Torah. The rest is commentary, now go and study."

That is one of my favorite stories! And it goes to show that the "Golden Rule" was part and parcel of Jewish culture i.e. Jesus didn't invent this stuff.

I also find the expression, "while standing on one foot" instructive. I remember a college professor of mine, Rabbi Nobel explaining that this was a common expression of the time meaning to give a quick summary (since one can't normally stand on one foot for a long time, TKD practitioners excepted). Can you imagine a fundamentalist interpreting such an expression, imagining an old rabbi trying to answer questions while teetering on one foot! This kind of idiomatic speech would be an example of why King James should have found some good rabbis for his "company" of scholars.

Oh and regarding that whole "chosen people" thing. It's hard to find a tribe of people anywhere that don't feel that they are the chosen ones (like the American "tea-party" tribe and their belief in "American exceptionalism". Then again as the scriptural stories of Jonah, Job, Jesus, and Brian remind us, being chosen is not always such a great thing!

 

[Tez3]

It's hard to find a tribe of people anywhere that don't feel that they are the chosen

Most people may feel they are chosen but in a superior way, we were chosen for strife and hardship so we could eventually be worthy of seeing the face of G-d.

It may upset many Xtians but nothing that Jesus said or did was new or contrary to Jewish thinking. we have always had forgiveness and we've always to be told to 'love our neighbour.' Even the words said on the cross are from Psalms.

 

[oftheherd1]

TEZ3 SAID: ↑
During the first century B.C.E. a great rabbi named Hillel was asked to sum up Judaism while standing on one foot. He replied: "Certainly! What is hateful to you, do not do to your neighbour. That is the Torah. The rest is commentary, now go and study."

That is one of my favorite stories! And it goes to show that the "Golden Rule" was part and parcel of Jewish culture i.e. Jesus didn't invent this stuff.

I also find the expression, "while standing on one foot" instructive. I remember a college professor of mine, Rabbi Nobel explaining that this was a common expression of the time meaning to give a quick summary (since one can't normally stand on one foot for a long time, TKD practitioners excepted). Can you imagine a fundamentalist interpreting such an expression, imagining an old rabbi trying to answer questions while teetering on one foot! This kind of idiomatic speech would be an example of why King James should have found some good rabbis for his "company" of scholars.

Oh and regarding that whole "chosen people" thing. It's hard to find a tribe of people anywhere that don't feel that they are the chosen ones (like the American "tea-party" tribe and their belief in "American exceptionalism". Then again as the scriptural stories of Jonah, Job, Jesus, and Brian remind us, being chosen is not always such a great thing!

It might interest you to know that about 500 years before Christ, Confucius said something quite similar.But I have read from somewhere I now forget, but agree, that there is a subtle difference between what Confucius and Hillel said, and what Christ said. Jesus said in Luke 6:31 "And as ye would that men should do to you, do ye also to them likewise." and in Matthew 5:31 "And as ye would that men should do to you, do ye also to them likewise."

I don't know if you see that Confucius and Hillel were speaking in the negative, while Jesus spoke in the positive. "Don't do something" as opposed to "Do something." As I said, a subtle difference, but I think there is significance there. You may agree or disagree.

 

[oftheherd1]

Most people may feel they are chosen but in a superior way, we were chosen for strife and hardship so we could eventually be worthy of seeing the face of G-d.

It may upset many Xtians but nothing that Jesus said or did was new or contrary to Jewish thinking. we have always had forgiveness and we've always to be told to 'love our neighbour.' Even the words said on the cross are from Psalms.

As were the actions of the soldiers with Jesus' clothing, and the very fact that Jesus was not accepted by the Jews and was nailed to the cross. You may not have been aware of that, and probably don't accept it regardless.

EDIT: I should have pointed out they were messianic predictions that Christians believe were fulfilled at Christ's crucifixion, but not necessarily only from Psalms; Psalms yes, but other places in the Old Testament as well.

 

[Tez3]

As were the actions of the soldiers with Jesus' clothing, and the very fact that Jesus was not accepted by the Jews and was nailed to the cross. You may not have been aware of that, and probably don't accept it regardless.

EDIT: I should have pointed out they were messianic predictions that Christians believe were fulfilled at Christ's crucifixion, but not necessarily only from Psalms; Psalms yes, but other places in the Old Testament as well.

You do know that at that time there were hundreds of people calling themselves the messiah, partly because it doesn't mean what it does to Xtians and partly because it was a common thing to do. When you say 'the Jews' didn't accept them you are lumping all Jews into the same basket when it's fairly obvious that a good many did think that this chap was the messiah otherwise you wouldn't have your religion today. There's also a great many then and even some now who believe that John the Baptist was the messiah.
I'm sorry to sound like Monty Python but messiahs were ten a penny then, most not accepted by people who wanted a quiet life under the conquering forces and also those who wanted to revolt and found the messiahs disappointing.

 

[oftheherd1]

Most people may feel they are chosen but in a superior way, we were chosen for strife and hardship so we could eventually be worthy of seeing the face of G-d.

It may upset many Xtians but nothing that Jesus said or did was new or contrary to Jewish thinking. we have always had forgiveness and we've always to be told to 'love our neighbour.' Even the words said on the cross are from Psalms.

Those things in the Old Testament that he said or did would not upset me in any way.

But I wonder if you are aware that Jesus went against the strict interpretation of the then Jewish leaders of what work on the Sabbath was? He healed a man with a withered hand while in a synagogue, and a man who was blind also on the Sabbath. He lectured the Pharisees for allowing a man to deny support to his mother and father if he declared his possession as Corban. Mark 7:9-13 --

9 And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.

10 For Moses said, Honour thy father and thy mother; and, Whoso curseth father or mother, let him die the death:

11 But ye say, If a man shall say to his father or mother, It is Corban, that is to say, a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; he shall be free.

12 And ye suffer him no more to do ought for his father or his mother;

13 Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.

I don't point that out to lecture or be disagreeable, but only to point out how I think a Christian should think and react. As always, you may think and believe as you wish, as may others who read what you and I say in this thread. And again, thanks for your links. I was fascinated by the link on polygamy. My personal thought on that was that I don't think God sanctioned polygamy, nor slavery, but did give instruction on how to treat more than one wife, or a slave. Among many things we can agree on, just one more thing on which we have differences. BTW, while I might not agree with the morality of the rabbi who married 300 women, I applaud his compassion and ingenuity. That put a smile on my face.

 

[oftheherd1]

You do know that at that time there were hundreds of people calling themselves the messiah, partly because it doesn't mean what it does to Xtians and partly because it was a common thing to do. When you say 'the Jews' didn't accept them you are lumping all Jews into the same basket when it's fairly obvious that a good many did think that this chap was the messiah otherwise you wouldn't have your religion today. There's also a great many then and even some now who believe that John the Baptist was the messiah.
I'm sorry to sound like Monty Python but messiahs were ten a penny then, most not accepted by people who wanted a quiet life under the conquering forces and also those who wanted to revolt and found the messiahs disappointing.

Let me see, who was it who said Christians sometimes lose the connection between the fact that Christ was a jew? So, yeah, I think you got me there. Sorry to have made too broad a connection.

 

[Dirty Dog]

You do know that at that time there were hundreds of people calling themselves the messiah, partly because it doesn't mean what it does to Xtians and partly because it was a common thing to do. When you say 'the Jews' didn't accept them you are lumping all Jews into the same basket when it's fairly obvious that a good many did think that this chap was the messiah otherwise you wouldn't have your religion today. There's also a great many then and even some now who believe that John the Baptist was the messiah.
I'm sorry to sound like Monty Python but messiahs were ten a penny then, most not accepted by people who wanted a quiet life under the conquering forces and also those who wanted to revolt and found the messiahs disappointing.

There are still hundreds of people calling themselves the messiah. In the last few months, I've met Jesus twice and the King of Mars once.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

"He's not the Messiah! He's a very naughty boy!"

 

[Tez3]

But I wonder if you are aware that Jesus went against the strict interpretation of the then Jewish leaders of what work on the Sabbath was? He healed a man with a withered hand while in a synagogue, and a man who was blind also on the Sabbath. He lectured the Pharisees for allowing a man to deny support to his mother and father if he declared his possession as Corban. Mark 7:9-13 --

I imagine he only went against some of their interpretations because as I said we are all free to interpret how we see fit, all the leaders wouldn't have agreed on everything, it's why we question and debate it's part of the process. Anyone can put their interpretation up against others, perhaps only non Jews find this of importance? Anyone could lecture anyone if they wanted, depending on how you felt about it yourself as to whether they were right or wrong. I do feel that too much is made of Jesus arguing with people, it's normal, well for us anyway

When I was working one place on our beat was the military psychiatric hospital before it closed down, always good for a cuppa and a chat during the night. One psychiatrist said he was always very careful about people who claimed to be G-d or a messiah because you never know, they could be telling the truth lol.

 

[Cirdan]

Why anyone would want to the be the dress wearing hippie is beyond me.

The Son of Odin is way more useful anyway.

 

[Oldbear343]

It is not sensible to take any one message from any religious text in isolation. Jesus himself acted in the spirit of the whole scriptures (probably for him, at that time, simply what we know as The Old Testament, but possibly also including the apocryphal writings, such as Macclesfield, etc.). A central theme in the life and teaching of Jesus was acting in accordance with principles rather than strict legalistic dogma. For example, while he upheld the principle of non-violence when arrested, flogged and crucified, he did not condemn the Roman Centurion (a man of violence), but said he had not found such faith in the whole of Israel....

I do not, however, understand why you feel the need to defend self-defence from a theological perspective when you are a member of a martial arts forum! But to each his own....☺

 

[Tez3]

I do not, however, understand why you feel the need to defend self-defence from a theological perspective when you are a member of a martial arts forum! But to each his own....☺

The OPs threads are often very mysterious to us as you can see though we've been having a good time without him, it's a nice non argumentative informative thread which isn't what was intended in the OP but that's the way we roll

Off back to the European Games on television....blind Judo now, absolutely brilliant, same as ordinary Judo but the Judoka start with holding each others Gis. Amazing, hope no one ever sees these blind people in the street and thinks they can mug them easily!

 

[oftheherd1]

There are still hundreds of people calling themselves the messiah. In the last few months, I've met Jesus twice and the King of Mars once.

Did the King of Mar seem like a nice guy? Do you suppose he might gift any of us a round trip ticket to Mars? I've always wanted to visit there before the commercial interests ruin it.