DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
Love God Only
HTML https://lovegodonly.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Biblical Discussions
*****************************************************
#Post#: 10436--------------------------------------------------
Eye for an eye
By: George Date: February 25, 2015, 9:13 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Where do people get the idea that Jesus changed the law? Some
will say, well in the ot the law is an eye for an eye; but after
Jesus came Jesus said turn the other cheek. I have been
wondering, where in the bible does Jesus say that the old law is
no longer valid? I am aware of the following scripture
38 Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and
a tooth for a tooth:
39 But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever
shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.
40 And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy
coat, let him have thy cloak also.
41 And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him
twain.
42 Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow
of thee turn not thou away.
43 Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy
neighbour, and hate thine enemy.
44 But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse
you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which
despitefully use you, and persecute you;
45 That ye may be the children of your Father which is in
heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the
good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.
46 For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do
not even the publicans the same?
47 And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than
others? do not even the publicans so?
48 Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in
heaven is perfect.
How does this equate to a change in law? It seems to me to be
talking of completely different actions. Taking an eye is
permanent, one can never get there eye back, where as a slap in
the face is something that can be easily forgotten about. Jesus
is quoted as saying,
17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets:
I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one
jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all
be fulfilled.
19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least
commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the
least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach
them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
20 For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall
exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall
in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.
Yet there are those who will say, oh no we are no longer under
the old law... Jesus changed things when he was hung on the
cross, now we are saved through grace.
If Jesus isn't quoted saying there was a change, why would
Christians who claim to be followers of Jesus, make these
claims?
#Post#: 10441--------------------------------------------------
Re: Eye for an eye
By: HOLLAND Date: February 26, 2015, 6:54 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I don't understand you, George. Are you saying Christians are
under the Mosaic Law with all of its dietary and ceremonial
prescriptions? Or are you affirming only the moral content of
that Law as still binding and normative for Christians?
Peace be with you!
#Post#: 10442--------------------------------------------------
Re: Eye for an eye
By: Amadeus Date: February 26, 2015, 8:24 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[font=courier]I think that George is saying that Jesus is not
denying or destroying the old, but amplifying or explaining
God's meaning for people. God has never changed. The law given
to Moses does still apply if we are able to understand the
application. The "eye for an eye" could be understood better in
connection with this:
For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with
what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again." Matt
7:7
Or with this:
"So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and
said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first
cast a stone at her." John 7:8[/font]
#Post#: 10444--------------------------------------------------
Re: Eye for an eye
By: Kerry Date: February 26, 2015, 10:01 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=George M. C. Jr. link=topic=995.msg10436#msg10436
date=1424920401]
Where do people get the idea that Jesus changed the law? Some
will say, well in the ot the law is an eye for an eye; but after
Jesus came Jesus said turn the other cheek. I have been
wondering, where in the bible does Jesus say that the old law is
no longer valid? [/quote]
I think people have been taught that. They do not realize that
the laws of Moses were given to Israel only and were not binding
on everyone else.
The verse about an eye for an eye is still often misunderstood.
Some still seem to interpret it the way some people did in
Jesus' day. Jesus was correcting them. The correct way of
reading it is to see the Love in it. It's not about revenge.
It's about Love. It meant that a court could not impose a
punishment greater than the crime. It did not mean if you put
someone's eye out, he had the right to put out yours. It
applied to court cases. If someone put out an eye, the court
would award damages -- money. What good would it do to put out
someone else's eye? What would that fix?
That applied to their legal system and how judges should handle
cases. It did not mean if someone injured you personally, that
you had to prosecute them or even testify against them. If you
did take them to court, it did apply to how the judges were
supposed to rule.
It seems however in Jesus' day, some people hated the Romans and
quoted that rule as if it mean if the Romans did something bad
to them, they should do something back to the Romans. Of
course, that could start riots or even wars. The bit about
going two miles if forced to go one is clearly about the Roman
soldiers since they could stop anyone and make him carry things
for a certain distance. I'd say the whole speech was meant to
tell the Jews not to risk riots and maybe even a war by reacting
poorly to the Romans.
Another thing to remember is that individual Jews were not
supposed to interpret the laws of Moses on their own. They were
to obey the rulings of the Sanhedrin; and we find Jesus telling
Jews to obey the Sanhedrin.
No, Jesus did not come to change the Law.
#Post#: 10447--------------------------------------------------
Re: Eye for an eye
By: George Date: February 26, 2015, 11:48 am
---------------------------------------------------------
As I was about to post I seen where Amadeus replied and
explained it better than I could have. I was also going to say
some of what Kerry said about the law being given to the tribe
of Israel. I dont think we are bound by the monitary laws such
as dietary laws although I believe mankind would fair better if
we did follow them. But nothing has changed, as Kerry pointed
out the law was given to the jews for the jews. I think we as
non jews fair well to heed the verse
20 For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall
exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall
in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.
#Post#: 10457--------------------------------------------------
Re: Eye for an eye
By: HOLLAND Date: February 27, 2015, 7:13 am
---------------------------------------------------------
This is all interesting. I am struck that the idea of Messiah
does have, fundamentally a Jewish meaning, and can never be
sundered from that into any kind of Gentile ideology. Our norms
of how we relate to others must, in a certain sense, remain
Jewish, though we are not Jews.
Peace be with you!
*****************************************************