Even if not there is the whole Old Testament and there is plenty of right wing in there, I believe. Christianity ain’t just the New Testament.
Yes, but the New Testament supersedes the old. And even at that, there’s plenty of left wing in the Old Testament, too: For instance, the Torah calls for a means-tested health care system.
I would be curious what you’re referring to, more specifically?
In general though, (as a non-theist) I would generally see the OT as simply formalizing the existing rules of Israel circa 500BC as God’s will. Reading them as eternal truths that would be meant to apply to modern systems or ways of thinking is probably not reasonable.
But even if we take the view that the OT was written under God’s guidance, and that we should assume that he was able to foresee mankind’s future and to dictate his rules in ways that would apply even as the world changes, I would still want to have a more specific quote from the Torah to discuss before accepting that your description matches the text, is a fair reading, and jibes with the rest of the thing.
I’d actually say the opposite. As the New Testament is primarily about your personal relationship with god in a society that does not follow gods laws in the slightest, you can make the argument that all that stuff about helping the poor is a personal instruction to individual Christians not something you can apply to how to govern (the counter argument being: then why should the parts about personal sexuality be relevant to anyone except the individual Christian and their relationship with god)
But the Old Testament has more about helping the poor and the immigrant, and criticizing oppressive rulers who don’t’ look after the poor and disadvantaged. Because it, unlike the New Testament, was absolutely concerned with how to run a society. If you are going to take that and apply it to how a “Christian nation” (whatever that means) should be run, then progressive ideals are going to be part of that.
It does? I thought it was all the word of God? What would I know, I guess
What I said was the Old Testament had plenty of right wing. I didn’t say it didn’t have any (or even a majority of) left wing. I thought it was a gigantic mess of conflicting stuff, and you could find anything in there, if you wanted. Again, what would I know, never read it, never will.
…what??
It’s a popular misconception that the Bible is the Word of God. The Bible says that the Word of God is Jesus.
John 1:1-5
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was fully God. The Word was with God in the beginning. All things were created by him, and apart from him not one thing was created that has been created. In him was life, and the life was the light of mankind. And the light shines on in the darkness, but the darkness has not mastered it.
The OT laws are also the direct word of God, according to the text.
Of course, the fact that the law is listed more than once and don’t quite match does make that a bit suspicious.
I didn’t see the word “Jesus” in that quote.
Can you point me to chapter and verse?
Sorry, I forget not everyone knows the full context. See a few verses later.
John 1:14-18
Now the Word became flesh and took up residence among us. We saw his glory—the glory of the one and only, full of grace and truth, who came from the Father. John testified about him and shouted out, “This one was the one about whom I said, ‘He who comes after me is greater than I am, because he existed before me.’” For we have all received from his fullness one gracious gift after another. For the law was given through Moses, but grace and truth came about through Jesus Christ. No one has ever seen God. The only one, himself God, who is in closest fellowship with the Father, has made God known.
I believe the first rendition begins at roughly Exodus 19, with an introductory text describing how Moses and the people of Israel came to receive the words from God, with the actual law starting at Exodus 20 and continuing through Exodus 31.
The second rendition has the introduction in Deuteronomy 4, starts Deut 5, and continues to Deut 8.
The third version is Leviticus 1-8.
All three present the law as the direct words of God.
We further have Jesus quoting (i.e. affirming) the law at Matthew 15:4 and confirming that it is the words of God and correctly passed down to us:
Which, actually, we should note also affirms Jesus’ support for capital punishment - which would fall under the Republican side of things - including for things that we would generally find unobjectionable. If, for example, a woman was molested by her father and grows up to revile him, she should be killed.
Your passage from Mark also shows Jesus affirming God’s law on Levirate marriage. He takes it as a given that it’s a law and devises (or describes) a system that does not conflict with it.
I would assume that we could find a few more examples.
Obligatory hijack: GOD AND OTHER FAMOUS LIBERALS by Forrest Church.
ISBN:
9780671761202
9780802774835
Ah, I see our disconnect. There are words of God (quotations) and there is the Word of God (Logos).
I bet he’s looking at Leviticus 14 (“Cleansing from defiling skin diseases”)
At least some of these offerings are “dinner for the priest in question”
Ah, yes. Greek philosophy probably started to influence Judaism around the 2nd century BC.
I believe that there are some pre-Jesus works that were developed during this period that are part of the Bible (certainly of the Ethiopian Bible) but I’m not sure if they include any Greek influences or include any reference to Logos. I’ll check.
If you rip a historical figure from their time, to experience our world for a few years, their views would likely change. So, if Jesus lived in a society where their were lots of atheists, he might be more tolerant of atheists. Or maybe he would be hit so hard by culture shock as to regard almost every one of us as sinners to be, nonviolently, but firmly, told to sin no more.
We do know — assuming Jesus wasn’t being misquoted — that he was against divorce in the only remarks of his on the subject that we have. Given that Judaism is pretty tolerant of divorce, this POV was probably distinctive enough to be remembered, and reflective of real views at the time.
As for evangelicals and divorce, I don’t think most of them agree with Christ on that. Same with liberal Christians.
I know about that.
I do know that the Old Testament is a compilation of religious writings by multiple authors. From our modern perspective, some would appear to have much more of a progressive temperament than others.
Ah, yes, thank you; I hadn’t been following this thread, and forgot to look up the references. That is indeed what I was referring to.
Isn’t it remarriage after divorce that’s supposed to be more of a problem? As in the first marriage is still in effect as far as God is concerned.