God Killed the Deceived but Not the Deceiver


I think it is a simple thing that the scriptures of the OT are inspired but not every act recorded within the histories was of God. When God judges we as men sometimes judge Him back, as if to wipe out a society is impossible to rectify, because life and survival are our highest morality. Looking at it from God’s perspective it might be different, considering the depravity of man, who comes up with things that never entered the mind of God, acts of wickedness that he Himself could never have conceived without our help.

It appears that Saul pursued a program of genocide against the Gibeonites, despite an existing covenant between them and Israel that had been in force for some time.

At that point in time the world was a hard place, and man was more limited in compassion, the world having not yet received the age of Messiah Jesus and the leaven of the kingdom of God.

Also i think that you should cite some authority for the whole crucified/impaled thing. I think thats an exageration and they were simply hanged, as it says. also, nothing in those verses actually says God had anything to do with this, it could simply be a record of an interaction between David and the Gibeonites- and we surely know from scripture that not all the acts of the kings of Israel and Judah- including David, were inspired.That the act was recorded in the scriptures doesnt mean the act was inspired by God.

But imo denying the veracity of the OT is a slippery slope, since Jesus and the apostles all quoted from it repeatedly without any reserve ever stated concerning its veracity- and in fact, all stating just the opposite, regarding the words of the prophets and the scriptures.

“Holy men moved by God” I think Peter says.


I don’t understand why citing an authority as to whether they were crucified, impaled or hung would be crucial to your position. As if slitting someone’s throat, drowning them, starving them or just flat out beheading them would make it any better? The fact is, the sons died died for the sins of their father. While you are correct that God doesn’t necessarily give his blessing and nowhere in the text is this implied, except for the fact that David was a ‘man of God’ and ‘was a man after God’s own heart’. Since Christians typically hold him in high regard, with the exception of his two ‘major sins’ from which he repented, they assume he was a genuinely good person.

If being righteous or a good man merely means that one follows their own conscience than many people, even people like Hitler can be ‘men of God’ since they are convinced in their own minds that they are doing the right thing.

As far as the slipping slope - In my opinion, if you believe in the active work of the spirit of God, then this isn’t really a slippery slope at all. If God wants any of us to believe an act was inspired or approved by him, then he will reveal it to us in due time. If he can’t be trusted to make known to us what we need to know, then can we trust him for anything? As for the argument that Jesus quoted from the OT - I used to share that same idea, but then I realized, quoting sections doesn’t mean you support the entire work. We see it all the time where someone reads an author’s work and says “I didn’t agree with all of it, but that was a brilliant quote” some people even drop the “I didn’t agree with all of it” while still believing such. Hence, you have quotes from George MacDonald that people love and cherish without necessarily agreeing with everything he says.

For what it is worth, I thought this was an interesting article. The SDA’s have some weird quirks, but I think their exegeses is far greater than your typical evangelical fundy. They tend to mix a bit of logic with interpretation and are typically pretty balanced about their theology. That said, it goes without saying, but I’ll say it anyway, I disagree with them on a great many of things, but I can see where they come from.


It is not critical to my position at all. You stated it- perhaps for effect to add weight to your point. It didn’t ring true to me so I asked where you got that info.

I believe in the active work of the Holy Spirit. I think His active work was in the scriptures from the beginning really, and it is easier to debunk the spiritual authority of the scriptures than to allow the Holy Spirit to sort it out for you because, at least as far as I can see, if the OT is not inspired then the whole of scripture is not inspired.

I am not a hard liner on inerrancy, but I just think there was something deeper going on than the Hebrews just recording their history in the form of propaganda and legend.

I think the NT is a vastly superior revelation so when we look back at ancient times we have to recognize an inferior paradigm was at work.

In the process of creation, as the Holy Spirit hovers over the waters of the new creation, the separations of the waters and the emergence of dry ground(civilized spiritual humanity) occur as the “let there be light” of God penetrates the chaos and the futility of tohu and bohu man. In my opinion that explains a lot of the conflicts many people have with the OT.


I read the article. I really dont want to argue the points of the article, it is not an unreasonable perspective… but really, the story could be read as the record of a decision David made, and imo is not presented by the scriptures as any more than"'what happened", which doesnt change my essential point. it is too easy to pick and choose the verses you want to believe, the ones you consider legend, the ones you consider unlikely or unjust.

Thats just a fundamental position we disagree upon and we are not likely to come into agreement on it either :slight_smile:

I believe the “corporate man”(Adam) is a body within which God is operating and he is limited in the “bringing out” by the light that is growing within us. we humans are incredibly violent and manipulative and without compassion, even now, in the light of the gospel. The human race has a long way to go yet and YHWH is bringing us along in the administration suitable to the fulness of times. It is a painful and bloody birth with which the entire creation groans in the pangs of childbirth.


Here are two of the laws of Moses, supposedly originating with God:

*If a man has a stubborn and rebellious son who will not obey the voice of his father or the voice of his mother, and, though they discipline him, will not listen to them, then his father and his mother shall take hold of him and bring him out to the elders of his city at the gate of the place where he lives, and they shall say to the elders of his city, ‘This our son is stubborn and rebellious; he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton and a drunkard.’Then all the men of the city shall stone him to death with stones. So you shall purge the evil from your midst, and all Israel shall hear, and fear.

If two men fight together, and the wife of one draws near to rescue her husband from the hand of the one attacking him, and puts out her hand and seizes him by the genitals, then you shall cut off her hand; your eye shall not pity her. (Deut 25:11-12)(Deut 21:18-21)*

Does it seem to you that God would give such commands?
Moses recorded also that God commanded the Israelites to make war on other nations, and even wipe them out completely.

All of this is contrary to the way our Lord Jesus described his Father. Jesus described the Most High as being kind to ungrateful people and to evil people (Luke 6:35). Do these Mosaic commands sound like kindness to evil people?

Also, according to Hebrews 1:3, Jesus is the exact imprint of the Father’s essence. Did Jesus ever command his disciples to kill disobedient children, or anyone else? Moses said that adulteress wives were to be stoned to death, but Jesus saved the woman caught in adultery, by shaming her accusers. Did Jesus ever command his disciples to make war or fight? He said that because his Kingdom was not of this world, He would NOT command his servants to fight. It seems that Jesus’ ways of dealing with people demonstrated the love of God, and were always totally different from the way Yahweh conducted Himself according to Moses.

I am not a gnostic, but I think I understand why second-century gnostics thought the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ was the Supreme God, whereas Yawweh was a lesser god who thought he was Supreme. I think the gnostics were mistaken on that point. But it seems to me that Moses had a big job trying to lead those many Israelites, some of whom were causing problems. So he came up with ideas as to how to control them, and then thought that God had planted those ideas in his mind, and thus affirmed that God had given these commands.

In 1650, the laws in Connecticut were based on these Mosaic laws. What follows is the 1650 Capital Laws of Connecticut, listing the crimes that received capital punishment, and quoting the Mosaic Scriptures to justify the Connecticut Laws. What if these laws were incorporated into state laws today? Would you find that acceptable?


If I had read this 10-12 years ago, I would have thought “Wow, what an outrageous and sacrilegious viewpoint. He is going to Hell” … Now, I totally agree with your comment. The biggest flaw in Christianity today is the refusal to use logic and incorporate it into our theology.


Logic is a funny thing. if I am right it is because I am logical. if you are wrong - it is because you are illogical and vice versa. The smugness with which people assert that their logic exceeds the testimony of the scriptures always entertains me. You dont often have to look too far to find a resolution that is logical within the testimony of the scriptures, for instance.

it is quite possible, and logical, that Saul’s sons participated in Saul’s genocidal acts against the Gibeonites and God required justice. Murder cannot go unanswered. Certain perversions cannot go unanswered either. The problem with treating our own view point as if it is the logical one, as opposed to the scriptures, is that we dont necessarily have the frame of reference from which to make that judgment call. Because of what the scriptures say about themselves, I tend to search for a logical explanation that does not require me to set my “logic”, or accept anyone elses “logic”, over them.

Paidon, you’re comments about Moses are hilarious, even if they do make a total mockery of the scriptures. I mean, how can anyone read the tone of the scriptures and the attitude with which the things said within them are presented, and come up with a reality such as the one you present, and then later on quote scripture as if it has any authority at all. it is a snake chasing its tale. Your argument about Moses defeats any other argument you make citing scripture as authority. :laughing:


Actually Paidon, understanding free will as you do, I think you might understand that Moses DID come up with some of the law himself, as a steward over the flock of Israel, not because he was inventing control mechanisms, but because the Holy Spirit was working with him in dealing with the unique issues of the time and the conditions of the world at that time. “For the hardness of your hearts Moses gave you divorce but from the beginning it was not so”.

i think the poison of the “total predestination of all things” has ruined the true understanding of how God is leading mankind by shepherds and preists from within their own midst out of the primordial stew- and it aint easy LOL. There is no antiseptic path through the mess of blood and death that follows the fall of Adam to0 now that can be explained in any other way- but that is just my logic, which I am sure someone will find illogical, and I mean no offense. We all see our own arguments as the most logical or we wouldnt make them :slight_smile:

Today we have armies of young men and women killing one another in the streets and parents cannot control them because they are prohibited by laws that “protect” them until they are professional criminals preying upon innocent bystanders, defenseless defenseless victims of robbery and homicide, etc

Pedophiles and abusers of all kinds prey upon innocent children and women because we dont have the nerve, the courage, or the enlightment to execute the judgment they deserve. The statistics are staggering and you often have to dig to find them- But criminals and perverts rack up huge numbers of victims before they are incarcerated and after. while they are on trial and when they are paroled. Its a joke really, the number of innocent lives destroyed by our enlightened ways.

No, the logical path that has been espoused as “mercy” and “enlightenment” has led us into the ultimate quagmire. it is destroying our world. Perhaps this Father you think Jesus describes must at times be harsh in His wisdom to maintain, protect and preserve family and community. The societies that were destroyed by the Israelites at the command of YHWH were cancers in the body of the world, committing atrocities against there own children and treating everyone weaker than themselves as prey.

yea, I think maybe there is a Supreme God who reigns over the lesser God YHWH. He is the product of man’s imagination and he stands by spouting platitudes as evil predators get away with murder. :laughing:


Unfortunately, people say that some assertion is “logical” as if “logical” were a synonym for “reasonable.” In what you have stated above, replace “logical” with “reasonable”, and “illogical” with “unreasonable” and I will agree with your second sentence. What makes you think that the people who assert that logic overrides the testimony of the Scriptures are smug? I think I am detecting a bit of anger here on your part.

In any case, I will give you examples of logic. 2+2=4 is a logical statement. No amount of argument can convince a rational person that the sum is 5.
What follows is a logical argument:

  1. If it is raining outside, John will stay inside until it stops.
  2. It is raining outside.

Therefore, John will stay inside until it stops.

The conclusion logically follows from the premises. IF the premises are true, then the conclusion MUST be true.
If the conclusion is false, then at least one of the premises MUST be false. No amount of argument can convince a rational person that this is not the case.

What is hilarious about my comments? Are they hilarious to you just because you disagree with them?
There is nothing inconsistent in my quoting the Bible. I don’t quote it as having intrinsic authority, as being without error. Jesus is my authority, and I quote his words as recorded in the Memoirs of Christ (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John) as authoritative—not because they are in an infallible Bible, but because they are in a historical record. I may also quote historical records to establish that after Columbus discovered the western hemisphere, he first landed in San Salvador. That doesn’t imply that I think those historical records are flawless or infallibly inspired.


The scriptures have testimony in them about the nature of the scriptures. As I said before, I am not a hardliner about inerrancy, but saying that Moses was making it up as he went along governing those rowdy hebrews is just too much for me. I find it to be really funny. Its not like you are talking about a peripheral point in the Bible.

My point is that when you look at a shoot coming up out of the ground(OT) you see something different than when you look at a mature fruit bearing tree(NT).

In my view Christians who are debunking the OT because there are things that happened therein with which they are not comfortable are like people looking at the shoot and saying, “Why is there no fruit on you yet”.

God is building the new man in stages.

I am anything but angry about it. I just think it is smug- which is like a small form of arrogance.


I don’t understand the logic of “If one part is false, then the whole thing must be false”. Word’s don’t make truth, they merely reflect it. If a book said 2+2=5 then the book would be wrong for that specific equation. If another page in the book said 3+3=6 then the book would be right for that specific equation. To condemn the whole math book merely because there are some typos or incorrect mathematical equations would be like throwing out the baby with the bathwater. Sure, if you find a typo or an incorrect calculation, you should be on watch, lest you find another one. I see why this is no different with the Bible. The Holy Spirit is said to guide us into all truth. But many Christian’s have added a restriction to it by adding " by bringing us the Bible only". So the Holy Spirit guides us into truth by bringing us the Bible only. I don’t think think that is a proper restriction. There is truth in many ancient documents. There is truth is modern books. Truth is when you do something true and upright to your neighbor. Truth isn’t truth because it is in the Bible. It is truth because it is true!

Additionally, Scripture and the Bible are not the same thing. The Bible contains scripture. Think of scripture like math equations. Some can be true, some can be false and if the Holy Spirit is present in our lives, we will find truth not only in the Bible but in other books and life’s experiences. The key difference between you and me I suppose is that I am trusting in a living and active God, as opposed to one who dropped a manual that only some people were blessed enough to see. Not only do many people in the world not have access to it, but if they were born blind, they also was ‘shut-out’ from this divine manual. I wonder how Moses was able to know truth without the Bible, I mean it isn’t like God could have told him… Oh wait… That is exactly what I am suggesting. Maybe we are all a bit like Moses where we can hear and talk to God directly.

Also, since you said you are not a hardliner on innerancy, I don’t see why you would be upset with Paidion’s or my viewpoints on certain things. I mean, you must have hated many of the Christian’s in the past for what they did. Martin Luther namely, who rejected the authority of many scriptures. I mean, someone who would do that could hardly be trusted, right? Isn’t that your manner of thinking?

That said, I don’t want to turn this into a heated debate. So far I have not been upset or unglued over anything that has been said. I’d love to keep it that way and since I don’t want to assault your beliefs or make you or others upset, I will close with this: I may very well be incorrect in my beliefs. May God correct me if he finds me in error. I trust God does his best for every man and woman.


Well, to start with … I am not upset with Paidons view and I respect Paidon and have read some great stuff by him. I just disagree with this particular idea pretty strongly. when I say i am not a hardliner on inerrancy, it means I am not like some raving lunatics who have to find an explanation for every little inconsistency or who disegard the faith and opinions of those whose view on the integrity of scripture are not as strict as mine.

But I see the scriptures as a cloth with a few tattered edges and a couple of small holes in it due to the ravages of time. In order to rationalize the law and YHWH’s participation in it, or to disregard the miracles and supernatural events of the OT, I think you just have to tear a big ol hole in it.

How one goes from the burning bush to a guy just making it up as he goes along really strongly contradicts the tone and testimony of the scriptures concerning themselves, and the law concerning itself- and imo lowers Moses almost to the level of a charlatan despot.

I am presenting an alternative view to that which I believe is as logical as any- even if it turns out to be incorrect(since we are dealing with theories explaining acts from ancient times). My view hinges on three hypothesises.

1)God has set limits for Himself while He grows man through stewardship.

The law was a tutor and a shadow. The entire revelation under Moses was inferior, there was a reason for that, beyond God just singing “Doh De Doh” through the ages. His hands are in the clay upon the wheel of time, his winnowing fork upon the threshing floor separating the wheat from the chaff. we cannot see all the way into how the one “who causes all things to work according to the counsel of His will” has done what he has done, but to me it is clearly progressive, and in the OT you see the law given to govern a civilized nation in the midst of a primitive uncivilized word. A nation formed as a lampstand to the corporate consciousness of man. And even that is in stages as Israel progresses through trial and error through the Judges and the Kings while the prophets continually interpret the heart of the law back to erring Israel as they point to the coming reality of Messiah. For someone who had never seen a summer fruit tree, the dry tree would look very inferior until the leaves began to come out, then the blossoms, then the mature fruit.

2)Man presents logic in refutation of the scriptures that is as inconsistent and limited as the inconsistency man thinks he defies.

For instance, I think it is entirely possible that Saul’s sons participated in genocide and God would not let them go unpunished. He is a covenant God. The drought, as God is known to do, brings hidden things to light, and the cause of His disfavor had to be removed- similarly to when Achan hid things from the ban under his tent and Israel sufferred loss until the violation had to be revealed and purged. This is just as logical and likely a possibility and casts the “victims of the imaginary man-made unjust scriptural view of God”" in an entirely different light. Despite whatever their mother’s pain- in such a case they had to be judged. I cannot strictly see what (objective independent) logic would lead to one view over the other, but faith in the wisdom of God and a greater respect for the scriptures causes me personally to regard that as the logical view.

3)God understands war, but hates murder, and these can be two different things.

God is working with mankind, and “all the families in heaven and earth” are like waters flowing this way and that. he is the Master of the Seas and he is trying the hearts of men(individually and corporately) within the circumstance of time and chaos(futility- the crucible).

The God who made the world and all things in it, since He is Lord of heaven and earth, does not dwell in temples made with hands; 25 nor is He served by human hands, as though He needed anything, since He Himself gives to all people life and breath and all things; 26 and** He made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined their appointed times and the boundaries of their habitation, 27 that they would seek God, if perhaps they might grope for Him and find Him, though He is not far from each one of us; 28 for in Him we live and move and exist, as even some of your own poets have said, ‘For we also are His children.**

The only way out of time and chaos is to seek God and commune with Him and His Spirit is moving over the face of the waters. “No man comes to me but the father draws Him”. But the scriptures testify of themselves that they are the integral thing within which the Spirit is able to reveal this relationship between God and man. If they are not largely dependable they are a joke, and shouldnt be treated as anything holy, because of what they say about themselves. IMO this would be a falseness to great to ignore/overlook, while at the same time using them to justify arguments and positions that suit my individual persoective.

Sometimes harsh circumstances, brought on by the actions of humanity, become the hammer and the anvil as God shapes His purpose through the “corporate clay of man”. The clay when fully shaped, must still go into the kiln.

God has never been “abhorrent” to violence. I think a lot of our moralizing about how God uses death is just our survival instinct enthroned and worshipped intellectually. Violence and death and injustice and pain are tools He is using in some fashion to bring us into an awareness that we are all connected and that “I am my brother’s keeper”. Like a drunk breaking up on the rocks and finally coming to the end of his wantoness and seeking help, the earth, because of mankind staggers- and God is working in every little bit of it, and the scriptures are the map he has given to go along with the compass of the Spirit.

Men say they abhor violence, then they lay on their couch as the predators of the world consume their prey in the most obvious ways, and yawn, go to sleep, and pretend to wisdom. “For if people do these things when the tree is green, what will happen when it is dry?”- Jesus of Nazareth


Going back to the OP, i think what is revealed in the story of the prophet and the man of God is not so much whether or not the prophet was “true” or “false”.

The man of God followed the Spirit and saw the glory of God. The prophet was used to test the man of God, whether by his own falseness or because God led Him to it- doesn’t matter, the man of God was tested after his victory.

We all find ourselves in the crucible at times, as God deals with us as sons. To him unto whom much is given, much is required.


I read the Bible mostly as literature. The Jewish people were great story tellers, and Jesus Himself often spoke in parables. Moral stories, poetry, proverbs and such reveal truths of life much better than just plain facts in a history book. Who remembers anything from history class? Yet we all remember great stories passed down through the ages. Not everything in the story has to be literally true for it to be considered true. If you have ever watched the movie Cars, of course cars don’t talk but the movie revealed a truth of life. So, in the story that Paidion presented, I figured that there must be something of a hidden truth. However, I can’t really put my finger on it.


I think this is what is called the strawman fallacy—attacking a statement that was never made.
Never have I said that Moses was “making up his laws as he went along.” If you care to check my post with an open mind, I think you will find that I said that Moses believed that his thoughts for governing Israel were planted there by God, and thus wrote that God said it.

This is quite different from “making it up” knowingly, and trying to dupe the Hebrews into believing that God said these words to him.


I accept your correction of how I portrayed your comments Paidon, but the effect of them leads to the same result. I was being ironic in expressing the result of what you propose- as I see it. Moses thought he heard from God so he said “God said” is a lot different from “holy men moved of God spoke by the Holy Spirit.”

I wasnt saying that Moses was “purposely duping” the Israelites, but if your proposition were true, he nevertheless duped them, representing his own words as God’s, or at least representing them as sanctioned by God, when they were’nt. He would still be a charlatan in my opinion, self deceived at least.

Also the comparison, which you kind of disavow, but nevertheless use to communicate, at least in some measure, your estimation of Moses and the law(little YHWH contradicting Supreme Father, the gnostic position) is also a huge diminution of the OT scriptures and the Pentateuch in particular, again- I am only speaking from my point of view.

I see it as straw argument to posit that what you actually said leads to any different logical destination than the one I indicated.

Jesus never represents Moses or the law in any such lesser light. Actually, to the contrary, the law and the prophets and the histories of the OT are represented by Jesus and the apostles in exactly the way i am explaining(imo of course:))- a stage in the reclamation of the creation, perfectly effectual in its time according to its purpose- as a shadow of what was to come and a tutor leading to Christ and the Kingdom of God- teaching the insufficiency of man to fulfill it without Messiah and the Spirit. While the light Moses brought was a fading one, and there is a veil over it still for anyone who reads it outside of Christ without the illumination of the Spirit, the man who stood on holy ground before the burning bush and received the tablets was the epitome of what God was doing in that stage of the “administration suitable to the fulness of times.”

I think it is the limits of those primordial times, and the nature of YHWH’s bringing man up out of the soup of chaos through stages, that is confusing, not the work God was doing through Moses.


Have you ever noticed that Jesus never represents the Father as having killed anyone or commanded his people to fight or destroy other nations?
Rather He describes Him as kind both to ungrateful and to evil people, and states that if his hearers do the same they will show themselves to be sons of the Most High (Luke 6:35)

Jesus was Another divine Individual EXACTLY like his Father. He was the exact imprint of the Father’s essence (Heb 1:3). He said, “If you’ve seen me, you’ve seen the Father.” Yet Jesus never ordered his disciples to kill anyone or to participate in war against an enemy, to punish rebellious children by stoning them to death, or to cut of women’s hands for particular offenses, as Moses claimed God did. Why not if He is exactly like the Father?

According to Moses, God presumably told the Israelites to stone to death adulterous people. An adulterous woman was brought to Jesus by the Pharisees who then asked Him, “Moses commanded that such a one be stoned, what do you say?” If Jesus had followed the laws of Moses, He would have said, “The law is clear. She must be stoned,” and probably would have cast the first stone Himself. But instead He shamed the Pharisees into going away without another word. Then He told the woman that He didn’t condemn her. He simply told her to go on her way and to stop sinning.


In Deuteronomy 5:1-22, the laws that Moses was originally given were the ten commandments. Verse 22 goes on to say that “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.” Again, in Deuteronomy 10:12-22,the essence of the law is stated. These are the same as what Jesus spoke of. I would say that over time, man began adding to this. Some of the things added may not have even been from Moses, or they could have been misinterpretations of things that Moses had said. Who knows? For example, Leviticus 11:13 says " And these you shall regard as an abomination among the birds; they shall not be eaten, they are an abomination: the eagle,the vulture, the buzzard." I think this has a spiritual meaning to it. However, many foods were banned from being eaten. This may have come from the fact that eating such things was not healthy, but I don’t doubt that some food laws came about through misinterpretation. Another example might be circumcision. Did God really require this? As Paidion pointed out about the laws of Connecticut, we see how things can be twisted into something other than what was originally intended. The Constitution and the laws of this country are also a prime example of how all of this occurs. It starts out simple and ends up to be so complex one cannot even move without breaking some law or another and often unknowingly. I don’t think anyone can possibly fulfill all of the thousands upon thousands of laws we have on the books today. I believe this is one of the reasons Jesus came to earth, to separate God’s laws from man’s laws and bring them back to what they originally were in the beginning.

On another note, I see what Eaglesway is saying. I think there do come times when our sins “pile up to heaven”. These are judgment times when this law of God must be fulfilled: Deuteronomy 30:17-18 “But if your heart turns away so that you do not hear, and are drawn away, and worship other gods and serve them, I announce to you today that you shall surely perish.” We do have a right to protect ourselves against evilness and to bring to justice those who commit evil acts.Jesus says in Luke 22:36 “But now, he who has a money bag, let him take it, and likewise a sack; and he who has no sword, let him sell his garment and buy one.”


That statement you quote taken out of the context of all I wrote certainly does seem ignorant doesnt it? :slight_smile: The lesser light I was speaking of was in comparison to your “gnostic position”- diminishing the OT. The Old Covenant is certainly a lesser light than the New.

I clearly see the difference between the law and grace, and between Jesus and Moses. I simply see the nature, origins and validity of the law and the histories differently than you do. As I posted, since the advent of Christ a greater law(the perfect law of liberty,love through the indwelling Christ) has come to the forefront in the power of the Holy Spirit.

The difference between our positions, as I see it, is that you see Moses and the law as “not good”, in error. Yet Paul says it was good and of God in its time but now it is dissolved in the body of Jesus Christ. Only by the breaking of that body could the ability to walk in the new creation succeed and the Holy Spirit be poured out into the world. Before that it was a different world. You see an opposition between Christ and Moses. I see Jesus transcending and fulfilling Moses. I see Jesus speaking with Moses and Elijah on the mount of transfiguration- the law the prophets merged into Messiah’s gospel.

Of course Jesus opposed the stoning of the adulterous woman…He came to abolish the law and conquer death. Paul calls it the former covenant. he clearly defines it as inferior, but he does not at any point invalidate it as to its purpose for its time in the administration of the fulness of times. Paul says that the old testament saints saw that they were serving us, and that they could not be completed without us, and that they would have loved to have been able to see plainly what we see plainly. They were incomplete, even as we are also, but we are much further along because of the advent.

Where I do agree with you in some small measure is that Moses struck the rock, so he could not enter in. that is the nature of the law. it strikes the rock, instead of just speaking to it. Jesus is the promised land. Moses could see it from afar- but he could not enter, just as the law YHWH gave through him was only a shadow and a schoolmaster preparing for a much greater revelation to come.

i dont think we have any disagreement as to the greater glory of the revelation of God in Christ. We have a serious disagreement about the law and Moses and to what extent he was anointed and equipped by God to deliver the revelation for His time.

Think about it. A two million person camp. Moving through the wilderness through the midst of pagan tribes, hated by every kingdom, without a home, without a central location, following the pillar of fire and smoke. Moses was saved from death, prepared in Pharaoh’s house, was the hand of God to release the israelites by signs and wonders. parted the red sea by God’s outstretched hand, met YHWH face to face at the burning bush, received the tablets written in fire, and was the meekest man on the face of the earth, yet everyday he met God face to face in the tent of meeting.
The earth opened up and swallowed those who sought to usurp his mantle when he opened the question before God and the great congregation as to whether he was God’s chosen deliverer. Miriam was struck with leprosy for getting catty behind his back.Aaron’s sons were struck down for offering a careless offering before the Lord.

But then I know a lot of people think that’s all hyperbole. I think the I AM is not who some people want Him to be and they are offended at Him, but He Is Who He Is- not some lesser god.

At any rate- we aren’t likely to agree on this one. Peace out :slight_smile:


I do think it is possible there are interpolations and mistranslations in the law. I forget the number of traditions and statutes the Pharisees added to it in their practices but it was a large number. As i said before tho, i see the scriptures as perhaps tattered a little around the edges and bearing a few holes due to the ravages of time and the imperfections of men.

i am sure, for instance, that “hell” and “eternal damnation” and “forever” and the many little twists that english “interpreters” added in the guise of translating the New testament are accompanied in like manner in the Old Testament. The Septuagint was translated by Greek Hebrews and who knows where they nudged the translations in order to interpret their pharasaical ideas.

But i definitely dont think the integrity of the cloth is as shredded as Paidon does, and I think the histories are largely true, not legends or cultural mind-speak. But then, I think the Red Sea actually parted, and the first-born of Israel actually died, and frogs fell in a plague upon the land of Egypt- all by the hand of YHWH.