home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Xref: sparky sci.skeptic:19853 alt.messianic:3470
- Path: sparky!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!saimiri.primate.wisc.edu!ames!sun-barr!male.EBay.Sun.COM!jethro.Corp.Sun.COM!exodus.Eng.Sun.COM!sun!imagen!eagle!avi
- From: avi@eagle.imagen.com
- Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,alt.messianic
- Subject: Re: What did Judas betray?
- Message-ID: <1992Nov17.000643.20381@imagen.com>
- Date: 17 Nov 92 00:06:43 GMT
- References: <1992Nov10.173344.13171@bony1.bony.com> <1992Nov11.203736.12929@imagen.com> <1992Nov14.201327.14051@netcom.com> <1992Nov16.025643.22755@hfsi.uucp>
- Sender: usenet@imagen.com
- Reply-To: avi@eagle.imagen.com
- Organization: none
- Lines: 18
-
- >>where he initially refused to heal the son of a non-Jewish woman, claiming to have
- >>come ONLY for the Jews, and only after she said that the dogs get to eat the
- >>crumbs of their masters tables, did he agree, or when he told the people NOT to
- >>stone the sinner despite the ehavy sin (i.e. tolerance and forgiveness), not
-
- >I have always interpreted that passage (Mat 15:26) to mean the exact opposite
- >i.e. Jesus was presenting the conventional argument and then proceeding to
- >abolish it.
-
- What ? But he clearly argued with the woman and she asked for him not to abolish
- it but to EXTEND it, stating very clearly that the relationship between God
- and Messiah to the Jews as opposed to the Gentiles is between a man and his
- dog, and Jesus CLEARLY did not agree (since he argued with her), but out
- of compassion, EXTENDED it - although that was NOT the initial intent.
-
- Now if he were to abolish it, he would do what he did with the Law of Sabbath
- (The man is the Lord of Sabbath and not vice versa, which by the way abolished
- his credibility as the genuine Messiah).
-
