Christians, historicity of Torah?

hedrick

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Feb 8, 2009
20,250
10,565
New Jersey
✟1,147,348.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
I wonder if the teachings of Jesus can stand on their own or if they require the Jewish Law and the varying Jewish traditions that Jesus was challenging? Daniel Boyarin in "The Jewish Gospels" argued that modern readers have misunderstood Jesus. When Jesus appeared to be challenging the importance of the Jewish dietary laws and other traditions, He was actually only challenging certain details. For example, Boyarin believes that Jesus disagreed only with the Oral Torah and the Pharisees who were promoting it. This makes me think that the teachings of Jesus are merely an interpretation of the Torah. If a person thinks the Torah is a mess (as I do), then that person disagrees with the teachings of Jesus.
One of the major advances in the 20th Cent was understanding the Jewish background of the NT. I would certainly never want to separate Jesus from that.

Both Jesus and Paul had problems with Jewish legalism. For Jesus it was people who put rules above the good of people. This wasn't a universal property of Jews, and probably not even of Pharisees. For Paul the issue was more specific, with Christian Jews. Paul approached it by saying that the Torah's role was temporary, as preparation for Christ. Hence in some sense (and the exact sense is debated) the Law no longer applied, at least to non-Jewish Christians.

Jesus got to the same result, but without rejecting the Torah. Rather, he interpreted it as expressing certain goals, so you should follow the intent of the Torah but not always the letter. You can see that particularly in Mat 5, but also other places, e.g. Luke 6:3. But Jesus was speaking to Jews, and Paul primarily to Gentiles.

Obviously applying this to our situation requires some analogy, since most Jews (both first century and today) don't think the Law applies to non-Jews. But it's still reasonable to see Jesus as challenging ethical approaches that focus on traditional rules (e.g. the oral law), in place of looking at the good of people and the quality of relationships. In my view this places Jesus in opposition to a lot of Christians, particularly in the area of sexual ethics.

In my opinion Jesus approach to the Torah provides a way to deal with the "mess" that you refer to. He looks at rules and asks what goal they were trying to achieve. Of course we don't know specifically how he would have dealt with other things, e.g. the genocides supposedly commanded by God. But I doubt he would affirm them. I doubt he would change his emphasis of looking at the impact on people and their relationships.
 
Upvote 0

Dirk1540

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Sep 19, 2015
8,162
13,527
Jersey
✟778,285.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Of course we don't know specifically how he would have dealt with other things, e.g. the genocides supposedly commanded by God.
Although this video is almost an hour it is very interesting concerning the 'Genocide' passages, from a prominent critical OT scholar...

Michael Heiser touches on different aspects of these genocide passages. The actual genocide always pertained to a specific bloodline (Nephilim) that was sprinkled throughout the promised land. As with all Heiser's insights he doesn't go with the technique of 'I said it therefore it's true' he definitely gets into his detailed reasoning for it (Heiser- The Unseen Realm). I'm starting to think that I could do absolutely nothing in this forum for the next 5 years except push the book The Unseen Realm on people, and that if I do I will be doing a good job lol.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2PhiloVoid
Upvote 0

Aryeh Jay

Gone and hopefully forgotten.
Supporter
Jul 19, 2012
15,312
14,321
MI - Michigan
✟498,114.00
Country
United States
Faith
Judaism
Marital Status
Married
Although this video is almost an hour it is very interesting concerning the 'Genocide' passages, from a prominent critical OT scholar...

Michael Heiser touches on different aspects of these genocide passages. The actual genocide always pertained to a specific bloodline (Nephilim) that was sprinkled throughout the promised land. As with all Heiser's insights he doesn't go with the technique of 'I said it therefore it's true' he definitely gets into his detailed reasoning for it (Heiser- The Unseen Realm). I'm starting to think that I could do absolutely nothing in this forum for the next 5 years except push the book The Unseen Realm on people, and that if I do I will be doing a good job lol.

So the Nephilim survived the flood?
 
Upvote 0

Dirk1540

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Sep 19, 2015
8,162
13,527
Jersey
✟778,285.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
So the Nephilim survived the flood?
Nephilim is a big topic, and very debated, but short answer is yes. "The Nephilim were on the Earth in those days, 'and also afterwards.' " Related to Anakim, Og, etc, synonymous with the giants. And the Hebrew scholarship would side with an average height of a 6'6". I'll just cut & paste a post I made earlier;

Average height of Jewish men in David's time is said to be about 5 feet tall. Nephilim/Giants were about 6'6", which would certainly be inimidating, it would be like David Spade fighting Shaq.

The traditional (Masoretic) Hebrew text has Goliath at 6 cubits and a span (1 Samuel 17:4), roughly 9'9". The Dead Sea Scroll reading disagrees and has Goliath at 4 cubits and a span, or 6'6". The smaller size is also the reading of the Septuagint. Generally the Dead Sea Scroll readings for Samuel are regarded as superior to the Masoretic text when the two disagree, but especially when the scrolls also coincide with the Septuagint.

EDIT...'Survived the flood?' No not exactly, loaded question, more about the situation repeating itself. Personally I think that the flood was local.
 
Last edited:
  • Informative
Reactions: cloudyday2
Upvote 0

Robban

-----------
Supporter
Dec 27, 2009
11,311
3,057
✟626,034.00
Country
Sweden
Faith
Judaism
Marital Status
Divorced
Nephilim is a big topic, and very debated, but short answer is yes. "The Nephilim were on the Earth in those days, 'and also afterwards.' " Related to Anakim, Og, etc, synonymous with the giants. And the Hebrew scholarship would side with an average height of a 6'6". I'll just cut & paste a post I made earlier;

Average height of Jewish men in David's time is said to be about 5 feet tall. Nephilim/Giants were about 6'6", which would certainly be inimidating, it would be like David Spade fighting Shaq.

The traditional (Masoretic) Hebrew text has Goliath at 6 cubits and a span (1 Samuel 17:4), roughly 9'9". The Dead Sea Scroll reading disagrees and has Goliath at 4 cubits and a span, or 6'6". The smaller size is also the reading of the Septuagint. Generally the Dead Sea Scroll readings for Samuel are regarded as superior to the Masoretic text when the two disagree, but especially when the scrolls also coincide with the Septuagint.

EDIT...'Survived the flood?' No not exactly, loaded question, more about the situation repeating itself. Personally I think that the flood was local.

Weights and measurements can differ even today,
American pint=0,473 liter,
English pint=0,568 liter,

I understood a cubic as being as long as between elbow and tip of long finger.


Like a thumb=one inch,

1 Samuel 17:4 in Swedish reads,
he was six alnar and a quarter long,

Aln is an old measurement, about 45cm=1,47feet.

Would bring him to around ninefeet.

I checked out myself.
I am 6,2 and between my elbow and tip of long finger I have 48cm.

In any case, his spear was as thick as a weavers boom.
 
Upvote 0

cloudyday2

Generic Theist
Supporter
Jul 10, 2012
7,381
2,352
✟568,802.00
Country
United States
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
Somewhat on the topic of giants, Deuteronomy 3:11 mentions King Og's iron bed. Some translations say the bed was decorated with iron. Before people learned to make iron, it was very rare and expensive. Often the iron came from meteorites.

So that detail makes the story about the iron bed seem more credible as history to me.
 
Upvote 0

Quid est Veritas?

In Memoriam to CS Lewis
Feb 27, 2016
7,319
9,272
South Africa
✟316,433.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Somewhat on the topic of giants, Deuteronomy 3:11 mentions King Og's iron bed. Some translations say the bed was decorated with iron. Before people learned to make iron, it was very rare and expensive. Often the iron came from meteorites.

So that detail makes the story about the iron bed seem more credible as history to me.
It might be religious as well. The Flamen Dialis in ancient Rome, a specific priesthood of Jupiter, was not allowed to touch iron at all. Likewise, Etruscan and Roman priests were only allowed to be shaved by bronze razors - no iron.

Metals on occasion have very specific implications. Numa Pompilius, the second King of Rome, forbade the wearing of anything but iron as ornaments. The Romans repeated such sumptuary laws later under Cato the Elder. It might be something similar, that Iron is associated with strength and martial qualities, while gold and silver are more associated with luxury and indolence.

Meteoric iron remained highly praised even into times of iron-smelting. Often it was used for cultic statues. It reminds me of the 'star-metal' of Conan the Barbarian's sword. If something falls from the sky, it remains special regardless.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

hedrick

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Feb 8, 2009
20,250
10,565
New Jersey
✟1,147,348.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
Although this video is almost an hour it is very interesting concerning the 'Genocide' passages, from a prominent critical OT scholar...
Hess looks like he's a fine scholar, but he's at an institution that requires its faculty to affirm inerrancy. I wouldn't use the term "critical" to describe anyone who has made that commitment.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: TheOldWays
Upvote 0

2PhiloVoid

Yes, you're right! I'm not Gandalf!
Supporter
Oct 28, 2006
21,125
9,946
The Void!
✟1,126,163.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Nephilim is a big topic, and very debated, but short answer is yes. "The Nephilim were on the Earth in those days, 'and also afterwards.' " Related to Anakim, Og, etc, synonymous with the giants. And the Hebrew scholarship would side with an average height of a 6'6". I'll just cut & paste a post I made earlier;

Average height of Jewish men in David's time is said to be about 5 feet tall. Nephilim/Giants were about 6'6", which would certainly be inimidating, it would be like David Spade fighting Shaq.

The traditional (Masoretic) Hebrew text has Goliath at 6 cubits and a span (1 Samuel 17:4), roughly 9'9". The Dead Sea Scroll reading disagrees and has Goliath at 4 cubits and a span, or 6'6". The smaller size is also the reading of the Septuagint. Generally the Dead Sea Scroll readings for Samuel are regarded as superior to the Masoretic text when the two disagree, but especially when the scrolls also coincide with the Septuagint.

EDIT...'Survived the flood?' No not exactly, loaded question, more about the situation repeating itself. Personally I think that the flood was local.

Maybe the Nephilim were good swimmers? :ahah:
 
Upvote 0

cloudyday2

Generic Theist
Supporter
Jul 10, 2012
7,381
2,352
✟568,802.00
Country
United States
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
Hess looks like he's a fine scholar, but he's at an institution that requires its faculty to affirm inerrancy. I wouldn't use the term "critical" to describe anyone who has made that commitment.
Maybe scholars should be more like trial lawyers? Much as it is desirable for a defendant who is probably guilty to be able to hire an expert trial lawyer, and that trial lawyer is not required to believe the defendant is innocent, a faction with an opinion on history should be able to hire an expert historian to make the best case possible, and that historian should not be required to believe in the faction's opinion. Then the field of all historians can reach a verdict much like a jury. This would ensure that minority opinions on academic topics can get their day in court. There should be no expectation of integrity from the academics advocating the opinion - only from the academics rendering the verdict. (Essentially this is what universities are doing when they ask their researchers to agree to advocate inerrancy of scripture or be terminated. Maybe we should have Stephen Hawking writing papers advocating young earth creationism even though that isn't his personal view. LOL)
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

2PhiloVoid

Yes, you're right! I'm not Gandalf!
Supporter
Oct 28, 2006
21,125
9,946
The Void!
✟1,126,163.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I wonder if the teachings of Jesus can stand on their own or if they require the Jewish Law and the varying Jewish traditions that Jesus was challenging? Daniel Boyarin in "The Jewish Gospels" argued that modern readers have misunderstood Jesus. When Jesus appeared to be challenging the importance of the Jewish dietary laws and other traditions, He was actually only challenging certain details. For example, Boyarin believes that Jesus disagreed only with the Oral Torah and the Pharisees who were promoting it. This makes me think that the teachings of Jesus are merely an interpretation of the Torah. If a person thinks the Torah is a mess (as I do), then that person disagrees with the teachings of Jesus.

From a human point of view, I'm sure it would appear that Jesus has interpreted, or reinterpreted, the Torah along with various parts of the Prophets, etc. But I don't think we'd be surprised by this if we take the Epistemic Indices into account--the Old Testament contains statements that are apparently articulated by the Prophets (or God) in purposefully enigmatic ways that weren't clear in the first place but still indicated something to be aware of in the future. So, when Jesus showed up, and if He was the true Messiah, it probably wouldn't be too surprising for Him to fill His disciples in on the "secret meanings" from the Jewish Scriptures. Right? ;)
 
  • Informative
Reactions: cloudyday2
Upvote 0

cloudyday2

Generic Theist
Supporter
Jul 10, 2012
7,381
2,352
✟568,802.00
Country
United States
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
So, when Jesus showed up, and if He was the true Messiah, it probably wouldn't be too surprising for Him to fill His disciples in on the "secret meanings" from the Jewish Scriptures. Right? ;)
I've often wondered if Gnostic Christianity was the authentic form. The gospels have Jesus speaking in riddles and telling secrets to a select few. The Essenes were known for seeking hidden meanings in scripture and they believed that only the Essenes were actually "the elect" genuine Jews - the "remnant" waiting to return from exile, etc. In some ways Jesus was recruiting a religious equivalent of Delta Force to help usher-in the Kingdom of Heaven, and it was Paul that made Christianity a big tent. (IMO)
 
Upvote 0

2PhiloVoid

Yes, you're right! I'm not Gandalf!
Supporter
Oct 28, 2006
21,125
9,946
The Void!
✟1,126,163.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I've often wondered if Gnostic Christianity was the authentic form. The gospels have Jesus speaking in riddles and telling secrets to a select few. The Essenes were known for seeking hidden meanings in scripture and they believed that only the Essenes were actually "the elect" genuine Jews - the "remnant" waiting to return from exile, etc. In some ways Jesus was recruiting a religious equivalent of Delta Force to help usher-in the Kingdom of Heaven, and it was Paul that made Christianity a big tent. (IMO)

I doubt that Gnostic Christianity was the authentic form. From what Carl B. Smith II states in the conclusion of one of his books, it appears that he thinks, in line with Edwin Yamauchi, that it developed as a response to three streams of diverse thought "...in the late first and early second centuries" (p. 250). Those three streams which 'merged' to form the Gnosticism you're talking about were 1) Anti-Judaism, 2) Christianity, and 3) and Platonism, all coming together to form a Hellenized alternative to earlier Orthodox Christian beliefs.

Reference
No Longer Jews: The Search for Gnostic Origins - Carl B. Smith II
 
Upvote 0

dlamberth

Senior Contributor
Supporter
Oct 12, 2003
19,212
2,813
Oregon
✟723,684.00
Faith
Other Religion
Politics
US-Others
I doubt that Gnostic Christianity was the authentic form.
Personally, I have no idea whether or not Gnostic Christianity was the authentic form. What I do appreciate about Gnostic Christianity though is the mystical aspect with in that trajectory. I feel that's a critical aspect of knowing God that has been all but lost in modern day Christianity.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: cloudyday2
Upvote 0

2PhiloVoid

Yes, you're right! I'm not Gandalf!
Supporter
Oct 28, 2006
21,125
9,946
The Void!
✟1,126,163.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Personally, I have no idea whether or not Gnostic Christianity was the authentic form. What I do appreciate about Gnostic Christianity though is the mystical aspect with in that trajectory. I feel that's a critical aspect of knowing God that has been all but lost in modern day Christianity.

While I'm not opposed to forms of Mysticism being practised within the corporate body of Christian believers, we might want to surmise that what you think of as a Gnostic quality to belief might not be the same as what Ascetic Gnostics or Anti-nomian Gnostics of the 1st and 2nd centuries affirmed.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

dlamberth

Senior Contributor
Supporter
Oct 12, 2003
19,212
2,813
Oregon
✟723,684.00
Faith
Other Religion
Politics
US-Others
While I'm not opposed to forms of Mysticism being practised within the corporate body of Christian believers, we might want to surmise that what you think of as a Gnostic quality to belief might not be the same as what Ascetic Gnostics or Anti-nomian Gnostics of the 1st and 2nd centuries affirmed.
What I'm meaning by the mystical aspect is the experiential experience of Divinity that is spontaneous, playful, erotic, full of life and surprises.
 
Upvote 0

2PhiloVoid

Yes, you're right! I'm not Gandalf!
Supporter
Oct 28, 2006
21,125
9,946
The Void!
✟1,126,163.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
What I'm meaning by the mystical aspect is the experiential experience of Divinity that is spontaneous, playful, erotic, full of life and surprises.

Well, if that is all you mean by "gnostic," you're not quite doing what the people of the 1st and 2nd centuries were doing in practicing what they knew of as Gnosticism. Whatever it is you're doing is more of a vanilla form of Modern Hedonism, of sorts. ^_^
 
Upvote 0

Dirk1540

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Sep 19, 2015
8,162
13,527
Jersey
✟778,285.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Hess looks like he's a fine scholar, but he's at an institution that requires its faculty to affirm inerrancy. I wouldn't use the term "critical" to describe anyone who has made that commitment.
Hess often discusses problems with the Biblical text. I once a long time ago encountered a smart Christian bashing Hebrew scholar online who was just mopping the floor with Christians. His replies were very technical and he was basically calling Christian after Christian out on hack job argumentation.

Knowing that I don't know Hebrew I tried my best to follow along, and with the things I did understand it seemed like he was the one making all the good points. It was so long ago that all I remember is being intrigued by his detail, and I basically complimented his knowledge, and politely asked if he knew of any Christian scholars who's research he respected even though he disagreed with them (this was back when a Lee Stroebel & Josh McDowell book were my most technical resources, and I was starting to doubt if professionals with the original language & context can defend the Bible).

I actually had doubts that he would respect anyone because he seemed pretty militant against Christians. He actually dropped 2 names on me and Richard Hess was one, and he said he did study under him before. That intrigued me enough to get a book from him, if this guy respected Hess' research I wanted to read him! Hmm, maybe he thinks the Bible was GIVEN to us inerrant, but has transmission errors? Or did I just contradict myself there lol? Not sure. But he definitely doesn't strike me as the rigid Christians I think of when I hear the word inerrancy.

Also I don't mind if a person has an axe to grind, I just wanna see if their arguments for grinding their axe is good or not.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 2PhiloVoid
Upvote 0

dlamberth

Senior Contributor
Supporter
Oct 12, 2003
19,212
2,813
Oregon
✟723,684.00
Faith
Other Religion
Politics
US-Others
Well, if that is all you mean by "gnostic," you're not quite doing what the people of the 1st and 2nd centuries were doing in practicing what they knew of as Gnosticism. Whatever it is you're doing is more of a vanilla form of Modern Hedonism, of sorts. ^_^
My admittedly very limited knowledge of those early Christian Gnostic's is that the core of their spirituality was in their finding the Divine Light with in. As Christian Mystics have been saying since day one, in that trajectory of finding the Divine Light within there is a mystical aspect in knowing God, the fruit of which does bubble up in those things that I mentioned and more. Though not the aim for pleasure and happiness, which would be Hedonism, the mystical aspect of knowing God directly does have a way of bringing forth those qualities in a person.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: cloudyday2
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Dirk1540

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Sep 19, 2015
8,162
13,527
Jersey
✟778,285.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Personally, I have no idea whether or not Gnostic Christianity was the authentic form. What I do appreciate about Gnostic Christianity though is the mystical aspect with in that trajectory. I feel that's a critical aspect of knowing God that has been all but lost in modern day Christianity.
The 4 canonical gospels are totally situated in their 1st century Judaism/Palestinian context. They are totally dripping with references to people and local leaders of that time & place, festivals, detailed customs, events, geographical descriptions, dietary laws, etc. The Gnostic gospels are nearly completely void of these things.

It's also very telling that the canonical gospels have traditions of authorship, yet are technically anonymous, whereas Gnostic gospels that are proven to be mid 2nd century and later are always trying to 'Prove their worth' by claiming to be written by the 1st generation apostles/Christians who were dead for a long time. It's the biggest indirect compliment that Gnostic gospels give to authentic Christianity. But then in the Gnostics you also get into complete theological disharmonies with the (then) 1,500 year old religion of Judaism that it's context is supposed to be glued to.

It's also a very small radical fringe of non-Christian scholars who argue this, and by far the gospel of Thomas is the most argued gospel for 1st century authorship. And Thomas is mostly just a bunch of Jesus sayings, there is no narrative.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0