https://www.bethinking.org/bible/q- how-did-jesus-view-the-o

>>3033973
it might not being 100% accurated because New Testament basically goes against most stuff in the Old Testament. Starting with the muh choosen people

>>3033982
so does that basically mean he agreed with everything in the old testament that didn't go against what he said?

>>3033993
maybe it was something like and update, like that were the rules for the past and now they were prepared for a higher revelation

but we are discusing the reality and historicy of religions, having them probably influenced by external powers, especially christianism with the Roman Empire

>>3033973

Well there is some cognitive dissonance around the old testament.

If stoning gays is supposed to be a thing, so is not wearing mixed threads and eating pork and shellfish. Also usury and various other things that modern Christians do that is not Kosher.

I don't know. Maybe they should have been clear on that rather than let former pagans decide.

>>3033973
Yes, Jesus was a Jew. Everything he said and did was in the context of the Judaism of his day.

>>3033993
Well, he was a Jew. He was circumcised, he worshiped at Temple, he debated the meaning of the Torah and other scripture with the Rabbis, observed all Jewish holidays and customs...people seem to forget this.

File: 1488599443683.jpg (32KB, 300x293px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 300x293px

>>3034142

So did the pagan converts fuck Christianity up or were they divinely inspired when they dropped the Jewish rules?

>>3034154
Dunno. Jesus himself (suspending my disbelief in honor of academic discussion)does appear to claim that his presence signaled a new covenant, therefore voiding the old one. This seems to be asserted a lot, particularly by evangelicals in my country, but it's hard to say really.

>>3034142
>observed all Jewish holidays and customs
Not all of them. If we assume that the Gospels are actual accurate renditions of what Jesus said and did (which is not an assumption I would support on my own), then we see him clearly flouting Jewish law with things like the last supper; you're not supposed to just show up at someone's house and mooch off of their sacrifice.

>>3034206
Well, he seemed to follow *most* of the ones that were customary at the time. Not sure which books contain what (Torah vs. Talmud), but we have to remember the Talmud is considered a post-Jesus text, too.

Pretty sure Jews weren't supposed to go around with vagabonds claiming to be the son of God, either, so he definitely wasn't super strict, but seemed to observe enough to be what was considered pious at that time.

>>3033982
>Starting with the muh choosen people

Yeah stupid kikes think they are chosen still. Little do they know that anyone who follows Jesus is chosen. Therefore Jews aren't chosen at all because they hate Jesus (they are actually cursed) but we are because we follow Jesus.

>>3034277
>"They Hate Jesus"
You probably think Muslims hate Jesus too, right?

>>3034224
>Not sure which books contain what (Torah vs. Talmud), but we have to remember the Talmud is considered a post-Jesus text, too.
True, although don't forget, the Talmud was not all composed at once and is supposedly a bunch of oral teachings written down which predate the composition of the text itself (Although how accurately is tough to gauge).

>Pretty sure Jews weren't supposed to go around with vagabonds claiming to be the son of God,
Interestingly enough, he only directly claims that in John, which is the furthest removed from Jesus's own time. The title he's using in the others, "Son of Man" IS used elsewhere in the Hebrew scriptures, especially in Ezekiel. It also isn't really a claim to divinity, more that a claim on being on a divinely ordained mission.

> but seemed to observe enough to be what was considered pious at that time.
True enough.

>>3034291
Muslims didn't kill Jesus, Shlomo. You kill God, you get cursed.

>>3034368
Jesus isn't God you idol worshiping faggot

>>3034368
>"father forgive them because they don't know what they are doing"
>expliciting saying that getting murdered was part of his plan

Stoning gays and kosher eating is part of the law of Moses, which scripture says only applies to Israelites. Jesus was a Jew so he followed it but gentile christians aren't Jews so they don't

>>3034601

So we don't need to follow the rules that Jesus abidded by? I mean what would Jesus do?

>>3034601
>Jesus was a Jew so he followed it
then explain to me the “Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her” episode

>>3034650
Not him, but if you're referring to John 8, there is no indication of a court presence, witnesses, the throwing the victim off a building, or any of the other accoutrements of actual Jewish judicial execution. It reads much more as a lynch mob than the law of the time being carried out.

File: childgods.png (479KB, 1062x692px) Image search: [Google]

479KB, 1062x692px

>>3033973
>He said, ‘The Scripture cannot be broken’ (John 10:35)

He's criticizing the Jews' idea here - specifically the claim they are all "sons of God."

> Matthew 15:3) and as the ‘Word of God’

The verse is:

"For God commanded, ‘Honor your father and your mother,’ and, ‘Whoever reviles father or mother must surely die.’ 5 But you say, ‘If anyone tells his father or his mother, “What you would have gained from me is given to God,”[a] 6 he need not honor his father.’"

I think Jesus is making fun of the Jews here (one of the many instances the gospels mock them):

The Greek word for "given" in this is an "offering." Jesus is talking about the human sacrifice inherent in actively putting someone to death "at the command" of a god. If someone kills the child for dishonoring the parents then the child is free of the obligation to honor the parents and the parents can gain nothing from the child.

Furthermore this follows the notion of Jesus eating with unclean hands - the Jews' hands are soaked in innocent blood.

> He also indicated that it was indestructible: ‘Until Heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass away from the law, until all is accomplished’

I wouldn't lean to heavily on that verse - the gospels are somewhat of a troll. See passage to left to see the cutting sarcasm in them.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zXDL2hQ76tU

File: richmanlaz3.png (1MB, 1626x858px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1626x858px

>>3033973
>He also indicated that it was indestructible: ‘Until Heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass away from the law, until all is accomplished’

Also, that's probably sarcasm as that's clearly nonsense. The Jews and their accomplices have a policy of destroying all sacred things of all cultures but their own "sacred' book. It's clearly not true that it's easier to destroy heaven and earth than it is to destroy the Pentateuch.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MuKFX1NuoaI

If you pay close attention, there's a LOT of sardonic humor in the gospels - I think it's pretty safe to say that the vast majority of the Hebrew Text isn't compatible with Jesus' theology.

Those things were merely to separate the Israelites from the other tribes. God was pretty autistic about that in the OT. There's another one about wearing shirts of mixed fabrics.

File: moses5.png (1MB, 1280x773px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1280x773px

>>3034977
>God was pretty autistic about that in the OT

Maybe God had nothing to do with such a disgusting piece of fiction...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZLCTzLzf6to

>>3034438
didn't he say that about the romans though?
terrific race, the romans. terrific