Zone1 Separation of Church and State?

[hobelim]

Can you show me the branch of government where a religious body decides on law or specific ethical issues?

Ahem, Apparently the current Supreme Court does what they were paid to do by the religious.

Now, and for God knows how long, there is only an illusion of a separation between church and state. You zombies are everywhere in government legislating corrupt laws and customs that reflect your perverted views of the world and unjustly punish unbelievers, according to the most ignorant superstitious irrational carnal and salacious interpretation of the biblical law possible.

Do you schnooks think you're invisible? Do you think that what you're doing is hidden from sight?

 

[hobelim]

Jesus did not repudiate Judaism. He repudiated Jews who had corrupted and distorted the most important aspects of Judaism. And he introduced new concepts in application of the Law as well as redemption/salvation.

The "new" concepts Jesus introduced were the exact same concepts that Moses introduced.

What Jesus called the 1000 year old "traditions of men" is what became known as the Talmud, traditions taking the words of the law literally, that started after the death of Moses who said" I know that after my death you will turn aside from THE WAY that I taught you to follow and utterly corrupt yourselves with the work of your hands...(building a temple to slaughter farm animals in.)

"You have defied the Lord while I was living, how much more will you do so after my death?"

 

[Picaro]

But Moses did not write down the words as the events were happening. There are Biblical scholars who think he may have left a line or two at various shrines but that in my opinion is just speculation. The Torah records Moses death. (Deuteronomy 34) He certainly didn't write that. The Torah is a collection of manuscripts written to describe Moses' life and mission and how the Law came to be. Who actually wrote down the words that make up the manuscripts we don't know.

I don't say this to shake anybody's faith and say it as my personal opinion that is without any authority as a Biblical expert. And those who want to believe Moses' wrote those manuscripts himself, okay. I wasn't there. I can't say they're wrong.

The one thing I am absolutely certain of is that the manuscripts are of God whether or not everything in them is absolutely true as written and I believe God communicates with us through those scriptures. I cannot see how they all survived through all the dedicated attempts to eradicate them and the whole Bible remains the best selling book in the world today if God's hand wasn't in it.

Deuteronomy 5:22 (NKJV) - “These words the LORD spoke to all | YouVersion

“These words the LORD spoke to all your assembly, in the mountain from the midst of the fire, the cloud, and the thick darkness, with a loud voice; and He added no more. And He wrote them on two table

www.bible.com

Moses' death is recorded in Deuteronomy 34:1-12.

Difference between the Torah of Moses and the 'Oral Torah'.

Oral Torah vs. Written Torah

As mentioned earlier, there are two "Torahs": the Written and the Oral. In Jewish tradition, both were given to Moses at Mt. Sinai and during the forty years i

torah.org

The 'Oral Torah' is a later fabrication, hence the distinction between the two. The written Torah was written by God.

Did Moses Write the Torah? – Israel My Glory

israelmyglory.org

Deuteronomy 31:24 says the Torah was complete as written; no 'Oral Torah' mentioned. It wasn't an oral tradition.

Verses 24-29. - After the installation of Joshua, only one thing remained for Moses to do that all things might be set in order before his departure. This was the finishing of the writing of the Book of the Law, and the committing it finally to the priests, to be by them placed by the ark of the covenant, that it might be kept for all future generations as a witness against the people, whose apostasy and rebellion were foreseen. Whether this section is to be regarded as wholly written by Moses himself, or as an appendix to his writing added by some other writer, has been made matter of question. It is quite possible, however, that Moses himself, ere he laid down the pen, may have recorded what he said when delivering the Book of the Law to the priests, and there is nothing in the manner or style of the record to render it probable that it was added by another. What follows from ver. 30 to the end of the book was probably added to the writing of Moses by some one after his death, though, of course, both the song in Deuteronomy 32, and the blessing in Deuteronomy 33, are the composition of Moses (see Introduction, § 6).

 

[Foxfyre]

The "new" concepts Jesus introduced were the exact same concepts that Moses introduced.

What Jesus called "the traditions of men" is what became known as the Talmud.

I will reserve judgment on that. It requires in depth research and intense knowledge of the culture of those times from then until present to understand even a small part of that history. For sure Judaism is a religion of traditions.

Tevya in "Fiddler on the Roof" described it:
". . .Because of our traditions, we've kept our balance for many years. Here in Anatevka we have our traditions for everything... how to eat, how to sleep, how to work, even how to wear clothes. For instance, we always keep our heads covered and we wear these little prayer shawls. This shows our constant devotion to God. You may ask, how did this tradition get started? I'll tell you—I don't know. But it's a tradition. Because of our traditions, everyone knows who he is and what God expects him to do. . ."
Who am I to dismiss those traditions as unimportant or irrelevant? Or who am I to say God does not bless those who see those traditions as important?

For sure Jesus dismissed some traditions in favor of logic and common sense, but not all. But Jesus also didn't see just one way to accomplish something either. One blind man is healed by spitting and laying on of hands. Another has sight restored by putting mud on his eyes. (There's an old joke going around that this created the first 'denominations' i.e. the 'Muddites' vs the "anti-Muddites.' )

But I do I not believe there is a single way to see how things were or must be or any single correct way to worship. And some things may be very right for some while other things may be very right for others. I won't judge.

 

[hobelim]

For sure Jesus dismissed some traditions in favor of logic and common sense, but not all. But Jesus also didn't see just one way to accomplish something either. One blind man is healed by spitting and laying on of hands. Another has sight restored by putting mud on his eyes.

You need to read those stories more carefully if you want to understand what actually happened.

First Jesus wrote something on the ground. Then he made a paste of mud and spit and put that on the blind mans eyes and then put his hand over that. Then Jesus asked the blind man what he saw. First he said he saw trees, then Jesus told him to take another look and he said he saw men.

A miracle!

First of all, how could the man see anything with mud in his eyes? This alone shows that It was a healing of perception, not sight, for in many places in scripture people are compared to trees.

If the man read what Jesus wrote and asked what he saw, IN HIS MIND, then his eyes were fine.

Jesus was trying to teach the man how to understand the figurative language used in scripture.

Just like any kindergarten teacher teaches how to understand fairy tales. Its a simple as that.

 

[BreezeWood]

Prove you're not a fairy dust sniffer and lunatic.

prove yourself not a liar picaro - provide the tablets claimed etched in the heavens by the liar moses w/ their false commandments - prove what those commandments are, etched on the tablets - and the heredity idolatry of abraham.

or is it your reading comprehension of an adolescent that holds you back ....

 

[BreezeWood]

It is the competence and integrity of that oral tradition that in my opinion gives me confidence in the manuscripts that make up the Bible.

jesus taught liberation theology, self determination the very reasons for humanities initial goal for admission to the everlasting as their own free spirit.

jesus taught self determination, the choice of a&e as the means for admission to the everlasting through liberation - the desert religions use coercion, servitude and denial as false commandments to impede the original heavenly intent as free spirits to prosper willingly as time would permit.

 

[hobelim]

the choice of a&e as the means for admission to the everlasting through liberation

I don't know where you get this from. You go on and on about Moses being a liar and then cite a story he wrote. WTF! And in that story the choice A&E made excluded them from paradise, a metaphor for sanity, for life, death a metaphor for a curse, being obliviously to reality, insane

So they self determined themselves into living among the wild beasts, east of Eden, paradise, without a clue, knowing they were doing what was wrong. Falling for a con. Sounds awesome!

So have you. Thats why you want to kill the crucifiers as if that wouldn't make you a crucifier. Duh

You are lost in a jungle of wild and delusional imaginings with scary things lurking all around you.

I hope this makes you happy! Don't let the fact that your way is not the way to gain admission to the everlasting get in the way and has nothing at all to do with what Jesus taught. Be happy!

 

[Foxfyre]

You need to read those stories more carefully if you want to understand what actually happened.

First Jesus wrote something on the ground. Then he made a paste of mud and spit and put that on the blind mans eyes and then put his hand over that. Then Jesus asked the blind man what he saw. First he said he saw trees, then Jesus told him to take another look and he said he saw men.

A miracle!

First of all, how could the man see anything with mud in his eyes? This alone shows that It was a healing of perception, not sight, for in many places in scripture people are compared to trees.

If the man read what Jesus wrote and asked what he saw, IN HIS MIND, then his eyes were fine.

Jesus was trying to teach the man how to understand the figurative language used in scripture.

Just like any kindergarten teacher teaches how to understand fairy tales. Its a simple as that.

It is one way to interpret it.

You need to read those stories more carefully if you want to understand what actually happened.

First Jesus wrote something on the ground. Then he made a paste of mud and spit and put that on the blind mans eyes and then put his hand over that. Then Jesus asked the blind man what he saw. First he said he saw trees, then Jesus told him to take another look and he said he saw men.

A miracle!

First of all, how could the man see anything with mud in his eyes? This alone shows that It was a healing of perception, not sight, for in many places in scripture people are compared to trees.

If the man read what Jesus wrote and asked what he saw, IN HIS MIND, then his eyes were fine.

Jesus was trying to teach the man how to understand the figurative language used in scripture.

Just like any kindergarten teacher teaches how to understand fairy tales. Its a simple as that.

The same scripture says the man was born blind. I tend to take those kinds of facts pretty literally. But if your translation is good for you power to you.

 

[Foxfyre]

jesus taught self determination, the choice of a&e as the means for admission to the everlasting through liberation - the desert religions use coercion, servitude and denial as false commandments to impede the original heavenly intent as free spirits to prosper willingly as time would permit.

Jesus also taught us to not judge the heart and mind of another lest we be judged also.

 

[hobelim]

The same scripture says the man was born blind.

Exactly. Like ding, he never learned the lessons of the past because he never understand the figurative language of the prophets, until Jesus came and taught him how to see in his mind.

How to use his imagination in a rational way.

 

[BreezeWood]

I don't know where you get this from. You go on and on about Moses being a liar and then cite a story he wrote.

paradisians do not site the story written by moses the liar - provide their tablets they claim etched in the heavens w/ 10 commandments or remove them from all heavenly inspired publications - all three desert religion bibles.

 

[Picaro]

or is it your reading comprehension of an adolescent that holds you back ....

So you're a fairy dust sniffer and lunatic. Okay.

 

[hobelim]

Jesus also taught us to not judge the heart and mind of another lest we be judged also.

You left out an important part, " be just in your judgments"

 

[hobelim]

It is one way to interpret it.

Right, it is one way, but its the only way to interpret the story that conforms to and is confirmed by reality daily by teachers who open the eyes of many students who were born blind, incapable of understanding figurative language, like Picaro who claims there is nothing hidden in the Bible

Even though the entire Bible including Jesus says that there is hidden knowledge, hidden teaching, the fruit of the tree of life, just out of reach, just above the grasp, of the irrational...

"So he drove the man out and to the east of Eden he placed the Cherubim with a flaming and flashing sword, which turns in every direction, to guard the way to the tree of life"

 

[Foxfyre]

You left out an important part, " be just in your judgments"

Well it is pretty clearly laid out in the New Testament which is all we know of Jesus' teachings.

 

[Foxfyre]

Right, it is one way, but its the only way to interpret the story that conforms to and is confirmed by reality daily by teachers who open the eyes of many students who were born blind, incapable of understanding figurative language, like Picaro who claims there is nothing hidden in the Bible

Even though the entire Bible including Jesus says that there is hidden knowledge, hidden teaching, the fruit of the tree of life, just out of reach, just above the grasp, of the irrational...

"So he drove the man out and to the east of Eden he placed the Cherubim with a flaming and flashing sword, which turns in every direction, to guard the way to the tree of life"

Again you are interpreting the story in a particular way which if that makes you happy okay--no harm, no foul--but I don't see it that way. In my heart I believe the man was blind, i.e. without physical sight, and Jesus healed him. Yes Jesus could be symbolic and somewhat mysterious in the teachings we have, but I don't think that was one of those times.

 

[hobelim]

In my heart I believe the man was blind, i.e. without physical sight, and Jesus healed him. Yes Jesus could be symbolic and somewhat mysterious in the teachings we have, but I don't think that was one of those times.

If thats what you choose to believe in spite of the evidence provided by the reality that you have been living in for your entire life its no skin off my nose. But maybe you should ask your self how the man born blind could see anything with a paste of spit and mud in and a hand over his eyes.

Jesus asking the man what he saw, with mud in his eyes, proves that it was a healing of perception not sight. He was asking him what he saw in his mind after Jesus wrote on the ground

If you still want to believe that it was about restoring physical sight, thats your prerogative.

Maybe you should put a paste of mud and spit in the eyes of people born blind without physical sight and see if it works. Jesus did say believers would do what he was doing, so go on and do it.

Believer.

I never heard that anyone ever repeated that "miracle" so has there never been even one true believer since Jesus gave sight to the blind? Or do you just have the whole damn story all wrong?

Would that be just too hard, too kooky, too unbelievable for a believer in the ridiculous to believe?

I just put mud and spit in your eyes. Take another harder look and tell me what you "see" now.

 

[ding]

If thats what you choose to believe in spite of the evidence provided by the reality that you have been living in for your entire life its no skin off my nose. But maybe you should ask your self how the man born blind could see anything with a paste of spit and mud in and a hand over his eyes.

Jesus asking the man what he saw, with mud in his eyes, proves that it was a healing of perception not sight. He was asking him what he saw in his mind after Jesus wrote on the ground

If you still want to believe that it was about restoring physical sight, thats your prerogative.

Maybe you should put a paste of mud and spit in the eyes of people born blind without physical sight and see if it works. Jesus did say believers would do what he was doing, so go on and do it.

Believer.

I never heard that anyone ever repeated that "miracle" so has there never been even one true believer since Jesus gave sight to the blind? Or do you just have the whole damn story all wrong?

Would that be just too hard, too kooky, too unbelievable for a believer in the ridiculous to believe?

I just put mud and spit in your eyes. Take another harder look and tell me what you "see" now.

Because with God all things are possible. God provides reality to all things, everywhere and at all times.

 

[ding]

Again you are interpreting the story in a particular way which if that makes you happy okay--no harm, no foul--but I don't see it that way. In my heart I believe the man was blind, i.e. without physical sight, and Jesus healed him. Yes Jesus could be symbolic and somewhat mysterious in the teachings we have, but I don't think that was one of those times.

There are 24,000 written manuscripts which details the 40 miracles of Christ. And is confirmed by the behaviors of the early Christians and Apostles who acted like Christ performed 40 miracles.

So unless there was a massive conspiracy of epic proportion, Christ did heal the sick, raise the dead and control nature.