Jump to content
Kingdom of Adventistan
Gregory Matthews

Passover & Christianity

Recommended Posts

phkrause
9 hours ago, The Wanderer said:

Jesus would have no reason to tell us to "keep" all of these [alleged] 613 laws I highly doubt that you, for eg, even keep an eigth of the 613, but I would imagine that you atleast make some effort to keep the ten or the two commandments. There is a reason for that. The two "greatest commandments are indeed a summary of the two. The greatest commandment, is a call to our relationship with God, and the second being likewise, is a call to our relationship with others around us. Likewise, the first 4 call us to relationship with God; and the last 6 call us to one form or another of our relationships with others.

Exactly!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Wanderer
33 minutes ago, phkrause said:

The two "greatest commandments are indeed a summary of the two.

This is a typo from my post. It was intended to say the two is a summary of the ten :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
phkrause
9 minutes ago, The Wanderer said:

This is a typo from my post. It was intended to say the two is a summary of the ten :)

I knew that! :rollingsmile: I'm a mind reader, didn't you now that?? :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Wanderer
2 hours ago, phkrause said:

I knew that! :rollingsmile: I'm a mind reader, didn't you now that?? :)

We have more than one of those on the forum lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8thdaypriest

Looking back to the slaves just coming out of Egypt, with no writing or reading, with no experience in things of God, with generations of mindless exhausted slavery, how can we say what they would need in the way of instruction and laws.   Dr Kholberg is famous for his analysis and studies of moral development.   I used his study as a basis for an article considering the relationship between the LORD and Israel.   Things we might consider "over the top" with thunder and lightnings and leprosy, and instant death for rebellion or disrespect, those were needed to gain the attention and respect of ancient Middle Eastern peoples.  Laws that make no sense to us today - like "thou shalt not trim the edges of your beard" - actually made sense within that context.  The LORD was telling them not to look like Babylonians.  The study is on my website - prophecyviewpoint.com.  Here's the link.

http://www.prophecyviewpoint.com/htdocs/37-Kohlberg.htm

As for dietary laws, I personally do not eat bottom feeders or scavengers.  Just makes sense.  Pigs were carriers of leprosy, and they were sacrificed in the worship of pagan gods.   The ancient Egyptians sacrificed a pig to the god of the underworld - on the first full moon of the vernal equinox. 

Laws of quarantine make sense today.   Separating a new mother, and leaving her alone for awhile - makes sense.    Giving women a time of separation once a month, actually gave them a little break and time to visit with other women.  It also put the next sex with their husbands at the right time for their ovulation - helping fertility. 

The more we examine the laws given to Israel, the more sense they make.   Doesn't mean we need to keep them in exactly the same way today.  But I think we should look for the principle involved, and try to incorporate those principles in our lives today.   The law that said men were not to dress like women - that law still applies.  But HOW it is applied from culture to culture, and from century to century - may be different.   Navajo Indian men still grow long hair.  In their culture that IS manly.  

As to the Feasts - I believe the priesthood was changed, and with it the sacrifice of animals.  But we can still celebrate what Christ has done, and will do - and commemorate/celebrate those things AT THE TIMES APPOINTED.  We don't go up to Jerusalem - at present, because there is no Temple there.  But someday - in the Kingdom, I believe we will.  We will go up for the sabbaths (the Feast days WERE sabbaths - rests), just as ancient Israel was commanded to appear before the LORD at Jerusalem three times in the year for the Feasts. 


Isaiah 66:22 "For as the new heavens and the new earth which I will make shall remain before Me," says the LORD, "So shall your descendants and your name remain. 23 And it shall come to pass that from one New Moon to another, And from one Sabbath to another, All flesh shall come to worship before Me," says the LORD.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ron Amnsn
On 4/15/2018 at 7:42 AM, The Wanderer said:

Jesus would have no reason to tell us to "keep" all of these [alleged] 613 laws I highly doubt that you, for eg, even keep an eigth of the 613, but I would imagine that you atleast make some effort to keep the ten or the two commandments. There is a reason for that. The two "greatest commandments are indeed a summary of the two. The greatest commandment, is a call to our relationship with God, and the second being likewise, is a call to our relationship with others around us. Likewise, the first 4 call us to relationship with God; and the last 6 call us to one form or another of our relationships with others.

I agree that the "[alleged] 613 laws" probably are not correctly enumerated.  I should probably say 600+ rather than perpetuate the idea that the 613 number is correct.

I also agree that Jesus wouldn't need to tell people to "keep" the 600+ instructions of God in the Law of Moses.  But my reason is different than yours.  The 600+ instructions of God in the Law of Moses are part of God's Word (the Scriptures that existed at the time of Jesus) and since God never told people to ignore or set aside His Word or the Scriptures, there was no need for Jesus to tell people to pay attention to what his followers were already paying attention to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Wanderer
7 hours ago, 8thdaypriest said:

Looking back to the slaves just coming out of Egypt, with no writing or reading, with no experience in things of God, with generations of mindless exhausted slavery, how can we say what they would need in the way of instruction and laws.   Dr Kholberg is famous for his analysis and studies of moral development.   I used his study as a basis for an article considering the relationship between the LORD and Israel.   Things we might consider "over the top" with thunder and lightnings and leprosy, and instant death for rebellion or disrespect, those were needed to gain the attention and respect of ancient Middle Eastern peoples.  Laws that make no sense to us today - like "thou shalt not trim the edges of your beard" - actually made sense within that context.  The LORD was telling them not to look like Babylonians.  The study is on my website - prophecyviewpoint.com.  Here's the link.

A few years back I did some study on what I’ll coin as The Kholberg Effect on Biblical interpretation. The article which 8thdaypriest has referred us to, and this post, in my opinion, is not a valid form of Biblical interpretation.  I would assert that it amounts to what is called “form criticism.” (  ) While form criticism of this nature, (the post quoted here and the article it links to) holds forth some interesting and possibly some applicable facts, but it cannot be used as a valid way to interpret scripture.

Gerhard F Hasel summed it up nicely when he wrote:

Quote

“The basic assumption of form critcism holds that OT texts must be interpreted with the aid of external sociological phenomena, built upon contemporary linguistics, anthropology, and sociology. This assumption implies that the same laws that work in linguistics, anthropology, and sociology are also at work in the shaping of the Biblical material.” (Biblical Interpretation Today, pg 37)

In my opinion, relating Kholberg’s model of moral development to interpretation of Biblical text doesn’t give us a true picture of whats going on in a given text. While such form criticism sounds impressive, scholarly, and interesting, there are major flaws. Again, Gerhard F Hasel brings my point closer to home on the next page of his book Biblical Interpretation Today, (pg 37-39), and it reads like this:

Quote

“Scholars who acknowledge the indivisible divine-human nature of inspired scripture find the proper and primary interpretational context in scripture itself; that is, scripture interprets scripture. From THAT point of view, the naturalistic and/or evolutionary premises of form criticism – with it’s own sociocultural context reconsrutcted on the basis of the theories of modern folklore studies, linguistics, anthropology, and sociology are hardly compatible with the self-testimony of scripture.”

Hasel was mostly discussing interpretations in Genesis and Isaiah in the book, but what he says applies to the entire Bible. Personally, I have abandoned any kinds of jigsaw puzzling of scripture with the theories of Kholberg and his peers. Its not that such sources do not give us any useful information, but that this information does not allow us to correctly explain any given Bible text; especially the relationship of God to Israel.

For example, in consideration of the OP, regarding The Passover and Christianity, there would be a number of concerns in trying to explain God’s relationship to Israel, by using Kholbergs theory of moral development. And it is all a theory, not really empiracally proven, but definitely subjectively, and anecdotally “explained.” The form-critical approach to study of the scriptures which have some comment about “The Passover And Christians;” for example is confronted left, right, and center simply by what the testimony of what the Bible text itself says, not just on a given text in question, but also in the whole rest of the Bible.

In the OP, Gregory referred us to an article in a popular, well-known Christian Magazine called Christianity Today about “Why Christians Can Celebrate The Passover.” Personally, I like the idea of The Seder, or Passover Dinner, as I think it’s a great way to fellowship and bond with others who have similar interests. The author of this article coined a catch phrase under the title “a response to Jesus didn’t eat a Seder meal,”

Now this article from CT references the line of thought where we as Christians should do a Seder “to help them better understand the Jewish roots of the Christian faith” and in theory I can agree somewhat with this, but to me, it would teach people more about Jesus. I think that’s what it would boil down to. The article calls Jesus, near the beginning, “a first-century Jewish teacher,” and I think that’s the beginning of where the topic gets undone and starts to come out in a way that the Bible does not intend, when it comes to Christians and Passovers.  Troubling things can happen if we just relegate Jesus to being a Teacher but then the article starts to tie in with the thought that The “Last Supper,” was perhaps, a primitive form of The more ancient Seder. But we cannot use Jesus’ nationality to say “these traditions could have been practiced during the Last Supper.” As soon as we start in with the “could haves” and the “might haves” then we part from the statement scripture intends.

Luke 22:17-18, 20 as the article points out “completely recasts the meal as a vehicle for describing His coming death as a substitutionary sacrifice.” And this is the most important point to be keeping in mind. And, yes, Kholberg and other popular phylosophy makers are keen to take us away from that to make us think that “God must have done things that way because those guys were only Stage One in their moral development. That kind of thing just doesn’t make sense to me, and it can be noted here now that the word morality is not even in the Bible. There is a reason for that.

As the CT article so aptly puts it:

Quote

“In the Lucan version, the bread is his body and the wine pictures his blood shed for his disciples. Whether Jesus spoke of “the many” as in Mark 14:24 or of the sacrifice being “for you” as in Luke 22:19–20, the point is crystal clear, as Jesus is about to die as an offering made on behalf of others. The allusion to establishing a covenant (Mark 14:24) or a new covenant (Luke 22:20) also assumes a sacrifice and the shedding of blood (Heb. 9:15–22) to inaugurate a covenant.”

This is the kind of thing that makes more sense to me. It is completely based upon scripture, and we don’t have to dally in the phylosophical realms of modern form criticism techniques which we would need years of study to even  begin to comprehend what scripture is saying to people today about the Passover. Kholberg type theories really don’t have much to do with it.

This CT article appears to have been written in an effort to bring Christians and Jews closer together, and to try and close some of the distance between the two groups by finding in common things they could be united on through The Seder. I see this CT article as a good start, but is that really the intention of the Scripture passages regarding The Passover? What do the scripture texts themselves tell us? What do they say, specifically about how we can/should be relating to God today?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Wanderer
3 minutes ago, Ron Amnsn said:

God never told people to ignore or set aside His Word or the Scriptures, there was no need for Jesus to tell people to pay attention to what his followers were already paying attention to.

Your entire post sounded really good until you said this. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ron Amnsn
On 4/15/2018 at 7:42 AM, The Wanderer said:

I highly doubt that you, for eg, even keep an eighth of the 613,

I haven't looked through Maimonides' list of 613 commandments in quite a while.  However, I suspect that most Christians live according to at least 77 of God's instructions in found in the Books of Moses. 

Most Christians I know don't generally have any trouble with "Be fruitful and multiply." They don't murder or move the boundary markers of their neighbors' property.  They have railings where there would be a danger of people falling. They don't make blind men stumble. They don't sacrifice animals away from the Temple, and they don't eat the portions of the offerings that are reserved for priests. They don't accept bribes to pervert justice. Some tithe their increase.  They don't usually kill thieves inside their homes during the daytime.  They return strayed animals to their rightful owners.  They usually honor their fathers and mothers.  They don't testify falsely in court.  They don't use dishonest scales for commerce.  They don't eat the food left in a jar where a mouse died.  They don't cross-dress. They avoid immoral sexual behavior with humans and animals.

So, does it really matter to this discussion whether I personally keep an eighth of the 600+ instructions found in God's Law of Moses, or was that just a distraction?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ron Amnsn
On 4/12/2018 at 11:29 PM, The Wanderer said:

So are you saying the law of Moses is the same thing as "the Law of the Lord?"

The Hebrew doesn't usually use the word "Law" when referring to God's instructions.  The word usually used is "torah", which means instructions.  Yes, God's Law of Moses contains the instructions of the Lord.

The Scriptures and the Jews don't separate the "ten commandments" of the Covenant document from the rest of God's instructions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Wanderer
2 hours ago, Ron Amnsn said:

So, does it really matter to this discussion whether I personally keep an eighth of the 600+ instructions found in God's Law of Moses, or was that just a distraction?

No, it actually does not matter a bit; I used that as a figure of speech to outline the idea that people in general would never in a million years have to or want to keep all [allegedly] 613 commandments. God would never expect such a thing. But there are definitely some things God expects regarding the ten commandments or the two greatest commandments. No twisting of semantics regarding the word "commandment" can change that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ron Amnsn
22 hours ago, The Wanderer said:

No, it actually does not matter a bit; I used that as a figure of speech to outline the idea that people in general would never in a million years have to or want to keep all [allegedly] 613 commandments.

It sounds like you view as a negative thing God's Law (or God's Instructions) as given to Israel through Moses and lived by Jesus.  What passages of Scripture support that negative view of God's Law or God's Instructions?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ron Amnsn
On 4/17/2018 at 10:56 AM, The Wanderer said:

But there are definitely some things God expects regarding the ten commandments or the two greatest commandments. No twisting of semantics regarding the word "commandment" can change that.

The word "commandment" is an English word.  The translators of our English Bibles have used "commandment" to translate various Greek and Hebrew words that have various meanings.

It seems you are wanting to use the word English word "commandment" to designate a special group of God's instructions that you feel God expects us to pay attention to, and to exclude other instructions given by God that you feel God doesn't expect us to pay attention to.  However, there is plenty of evidence in our English translations that such a designation was not the intent of the Bible authors.  There is even more evidence of that when you pay attention to the Greek and Hebrew words rather than relying on the work of translators who did not value God's instructions as much as the Bible authors did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Wanderer
1 hour ago, Ron Amnsn said:

a special group of God's instructions that you feel God expects us to pay attention to, and to exclude other instructions given by God that you feel God doesn't expect us to pay attention to.

As we discussed above, it would appear that you also "exclude" many of what you alledge to be 613 "laws" yet you defended yourself by stating that what you personally believe and practice regarding the ten commandments is not the subject of this thread and yet, you are saying here that it is the subject of this thread what I believe and practice regarding the ten commandments. This goes both ways. You know full-well that you yourself do not and cannot and need not keep all 613 laws, and there is a reason for that. Would you care to tell us what it is, and give us scripture evidence for your reasoning? ( Also,  i do seriously question the number 613).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8thdaypriest
On 4/16/2018 at 7:56 PM, The Wanderer said:

For example, in consideration of the OP, regarding The Passover and Christianity, there would be a number of concerns in trying to explain God’s relationship to Israel, by using Kholbergs theory of moral development. And it is all a theory, not really empiracally proven, but definitely subjectively, and anecdotally “explained.” The form-critical approach to study of the scriptures which have some comment about “The Passover And Christians;” for example is confronted left, right, and center simply by what the testimony of what the Bible text itself says, not just on a given text in question, but also in the whole rest of the Bible.

OK - so you don't like Kholberg.   I do.   We can all think of adults (physically) who are still thinking and acting at Stage Two level (many prison inmates for instance).   Doesn't mean that ALL inmates think at those levels.   Doesn't mean that ALL Isralites just coming out of slavery, functioned at Moral level 2 - "eye for eye, and tooth for tooth".  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Wanderer
5 hours ago, 8thdaypriest said:

OK - so you don't like Kholberg.   I do.   We can all think of adults (physically) who are still thinking and acting at Stage Two level (many prison inmates for instance).   Doesn't mean that ALL inmates think at those levels.   Doesn't mean that ALL Isralites just coming out of slavery, functioned at Moral level 2 - "eye for eye, and tooth for tooth".  

Well; if one were to look at my posts here they would see that I did not say I didn't like Kholberg. What I did say was that modern-day sociology cannot be used to get a correct interpretation of scripture. Also, I think that running around with our little Kholberg lists and boxing others into whatever of his "levels" we think they belong in, then we are way off base, among other things. Thats not how he intended for his writings to be used.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×