I don’t know how broad you’re implying the learned and authoritative definitions reach, so maybe you could expand on what you mean.
I’ve been down this road with a Mormon before. (Apparently Joseph Smith did his own translation and came out with “poisoner” instead of witch, which was construed to mean a murderer who used potions or something.) I went to the trouble of tracking down all of the uses of the Hebrew word in question and all of them were consistent with “sorcerer” or “seer” or some variation of that theme. For example, there was a king with a court sorcerer using the same word. If you don’t like “witch”, sorcerer or magician is probably fine. Wherever there was a clear context, the word is used to describe some form of magic user (some even seemingly benign).
False. Some Christian did all these, therefore all Christians believe all these. Poor logic, as though christanity were static and uniform. Snake handling is far fringe. Turning sticks into snakes is Torah. Walking on water and raising a dead man were specific miracles attributed to Jesus only. There is no NT record that I recall that anyone else performed any miracles (I think the disciples on mission reported healings non-specifically). In general, magic and astrology is against new testament teaching. Any “supernatural” result is due to the power of God, not the power of a practitioner.
This is the accepted scholarly consensus, by the way. Matthew and Luke both make up wild and contradictory stories to explain why Jesus, famously known as the Nazarene, was actually totally from Bethlehem and was the heir to King David. There’s no historical evidence to back up the slaughter of the innocents, the census, or anything like that, so most scholars agree that the stories of the birth in Nazareth are attempts to cast Jesus as the Jewish Messiah. In contrast, Mark, the earliest Gospel, and John, the Gospel best loved by non-Jewish Gnostic Christians, both open with the baptism by John, skipping the descent-from-David argument. Mark probably hadn’t heard the born-in-Nazareth story because hadn’t been invented yet, and John was either unaware of it or deliberately chose to leave it out because it was unimportant to him or it conflicted with his view of who Jesus was.
Huh? Lots of miracles performed by disciples in Acts. Speaking in tongues and the like. Your larger point, that these are performed by God’s will and not by any magical powers inherent to the disciples, is supported by those miracles.
The nativity story is a charming piece of introductory stage setting for a Jewish audience. All we are told about the Magi is that they were astrologers, which was a court position. Their gifts were symbolic: gold for a king, myrrh for a martyr and incense for a deity (and that’s why there were 3 Magi). The gifts were supposed to be diagnostic, but Jesus accepted all 3. Matthew’s message is that Jesus’ birth is a cosmic event and to look for the three roles as the gospel unfolds. Ordinary jews of the intertestamentary period were probably as superstitious as we are and as impressed by court figures. No endorsement of magick is intended.
Btw, is magick a particular interest of yours?
The sermon on the mount summarizes Jesus teaching. His audience would not conceive of bearing arms, either as a Roman soldier or a brigand. The point is how to live your life in your community. The problem of resisting evil is thorny. Some parables have to do with thieves breaking in and imply that the householder could prevent that. If you have a tiff with a member of the community, you are supposed to resolve it through community solidarity. The idea of just war was far in the future (St. Augustine) and is not in the NT. Most of the few references to swords in the NT (especially Revelations) are a metaphor for the word of God. Jesus always took people where they were. When He had the chance, He did not tell a Roman sergeant to quit the army (it wasn’t the point of the story). I don’t support jingoistic policy, but I have no problem recommending the service as a career starter. Bottom line is to live a quiet life, which will keep you out of trouble.
I probably didn’t make my point well. I am trying to distinguish between magic and miracles. “Zap, you’re a toad” is magic (an act of will and skill on my part). Miracles manifest the power and will of God. Jesus qualifies, so walking on water is a miracle story, but it would have been magic if it had been done by anyone else. Experiencing the Holy Spirit and speaking in tongues is passive (not specifically sought out), so is not magic, but is miraculous. Magic is seen as an economic tool in the NT, like being a scribe, but is not suitable for Christians to practice. The basic attitude is that God will provide what you need, and you don’t need more than that.
IO think you need to find a Bible and read it. Snake handling and raising the dead are magical acts specifically attributed to members od the early CHristian congregation.
So, back to mny original questions:
How is all magic inconsistent with “No gods before me?”. I can see how it might preclude, for example, voodoo, but how is it inconsistent with ritual magic that makes no appeal to spirits or gods? For example, how is it inconsistent with astrology? Christians practiced astrology for millennia, justified by the assumption that Jehovah made the stars for a reason. How is that inconsistent with “no gods before me”?
How do you explain the fact that Jews and Christians have all practiced magic for millennia: walking in water, raising the dead, handling snakes, turning sticks into snakes. The list of magical acts performed by Jews and Christians is endless. Are you suggesting that none of them realised that what they were doing conflicted with the first commandment, to the point of actually writing about it n their scriptures? I find it implausible that 3, 000 years of Rabbis and Priests never spotted the inconsistency, and you did.
Because in many cases magic attempts to usurp God’s soverignty by trying to determine what is God’s will. Plus as I hope everybody agrees magic does not work so how can God tolerate something that is based on lies and involves tricking the people into false hopes and fears and perhaps even their money?
Those instances in the Bible where Christ and His Disciples performed miracles were miracles, not magic. And numerous Christians clergy and theologians have disapproved of magic and superstition throughout history-astrologers were used by monarchs for example in spite of condemnation by the Church.
[QUOTE]
Turning a cheek is in the case of minor insults not in cases when you, your family, and your neighbours’ lives are in danger. And Christ did not resist because He had to be crucified in order to redeem humanity from its sin.
the nt is wishy washy about war and peace til the end, and then it’s WAR!!! right back to the vicious genocidal maniac of the ot J whose idea of victory was to kill all the men and animals, rape and enslave the girls and women, and salt the fields so no one could ever live there again. if so-called radical islamists really knew how we think here in merka they’d never ever think of poking us with a sharp stick…
Seems to me there’s really two positions you can hold regarding suffering, innocence, the murder thereof and so forth in this vale of tears.
The first position is that none of it really matters. The “real” life is out there after death, everything that happens down here is just a test of character, the meek shall inherit the Kingdom, last shall be the first, yadda yadda.
In this particular framework, defending the innocent with arms and steel and shedding the blood of the aggressor is problematic on three counts: first because you’re doing some murderin’ which, no matter how you rationalize it to yourself, still runs against one of those Commandment things which I heard were important or something for some reason ? Second, because by preventing another’s martyrdom you’re basically robbing someone of their comfy seat at the right of the big man. Third, because vengeance is his sayeth the Lord and who are you to argue ?
This position is particularly abhorrent to the materialist in me, but I understand the core of it, if not the automatic inferences I just spelled out, is shared by many if not most self-professed Christians.
The second position is that what happens down here *does *matter, that assholes preying on the weak *is *abhorrent and that by gum we *should *do something about it and not just hope some big beard in the sky is going to make it all better in the end.
But that kinda runs against much of the teachings droned on by self-professed Christians.
And yes, I do realize that many if not most Christians go through their lives teetering on a tight rope between these two contradictory notions. Because they’re humans with a heart, and the former is wholly inhumane. I’m calling these people inconsistent and in denial about their own faith.
Also, while that’s maybe the start of a massive hijack : Christ did not *have *to do anything. He was a man with a free will of his own. He also was an aspect of god with superpowers. As god almighty he could have redeemed humanity’s sin with a snap of his fingers. As just a dude he could have said screw you guys, and *especially *screw you Dad, I’m getting a frickin’ lawyer up in here.
He *chose *to let himself be killed. Presumably because he thought it would mean something to other people and incite them to maybe think about it a bit and what it meant. Judging by history, it didn’t quite play out that way ;).
Communazi is even more nonsensical a term. What a staggering bunch of idiots.
Either everything a person does attempts to usurp God’s sovereignty by trying to determine what is God’s will, or else magic is no different to any other act.
So magic doesn’t work, but God is real. I’m convinced. :dubious:
Simon Magus doesn’t come off that well in the New Testament, and there’s also a case where former sorcerers renounce their sorcery upon becoming Christian:
At another point, Paul includes witchcraft in his list of sins.:
And the writer of the Book of Revelation includes magic on his list of sins saying that magicians won’t enter the Kingdom of God.
So the New Testament seems pretty anti-magic and anti-sorcery. Also, just as a note, the Magi weren’t magicians as we’d recognize them. They were astrologers and priests of Zoroaster.
Doesn’t the biblical definition of “witchcraft” specifically involve the Devil, worshipping him and gaining power through him etc.?
So would performing magic based on your own power be acceptable? Or is it assumed that magic can only happen through the power of either God or the Devil?
It’s assumed that humans can’t have supernatural power, yes. Any power that does not come from God comes from evil.
Heck, one specific instance of magic is specifically said to be caused by an evil spirit: a fortune-telling slave has a demon removed from her, and she loses her powers. And her owners take Paul and company to the authorities for harming their livelihood (Acts 16:16-22)! The woman wasn’t saying anything harmful: she was actually telling people to listen to Paul’s message, saying he was really from God. Yet he couldn’t let even that slide.
As for the main topic: the Bible is very big about distinguishing between miracles and magic. I know modern people prefer not to. But then you can’t say you’re getting at the meaning of the original texts, which is what I assume the OP wants to know about. Magic(k) is considered a bad thing, but is completely separate from miracles, which are a good thing, a sign of God’s favor.
Again, I’m curious as to what you make of Exodus 7-8.
“And Moses and Aaron went in unto Pharaoh, and they did so as the LORD had commanded: and Aaron cast down his rod before Pharaoh, and before his servants, and it became a serpent. Then Pharaoh also called the wise men and the sorcerers: now the magicians of Egypt, they also did in like manner with their enchantments. For they cast down every man his rod, and they became serpents”
“And Moses and Aaron did so, as the LORD commanded; and he lifted up the rod, and smote the waters that were in the river, in the sight of Pharaoh, and in the sight of his servants; and all the waters that were in the river were turned to blood. And the fish that was in the river died; and the river stank, and the Egyptians could not drink of the water of the river; and there was blood throughout all the land of Egypt. And the magicians of Egypt did so with their enchantments”
“And the LORD spake unto Moses, Say unto Aaron, Stretch forth thine hand with thy rod over the streams, over the rivers, and over the ponds, and cause frogs to come up upon the land of Egypt. And Aaron stretched out his hand over the waters of Egypt; and the frogs came up, and covered the land of Egypt. And the magicians did so with their enchantments, and brought up frogs upon the land of Egypt.”
It doesn’t sound like the magic “doesn’t work” or that it “is based on lies and involves tricking the people”. It sounds as if the stuff simply works just fine, as expected.