Yes, I pointed that out in the scriptural examples which I quoted. But in no scripture does “hoti” EVER mean “that” in the sense of “in order that.”
However, in the passage in question, Knoch’s translation of “hoti” as “that” suggests, contextually, that it IS used in that sense.
I always appreciated Isaiah’s hope in Isaiah 30:26
I also appreciate David’s patient confidence that God himself had the key to escape in Psalm 142:7
[size=125]For the LAW[/size] was given through MOSES, but grace and TRUTH came through JESUS Christ. John 1:17.
"Unless your righteousness exceeds the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven": Considering the incredible devotion to the law shown by the scribes and Pharisees, how could any of us ever hope to exceed their righteousness?
But we later read, “If righteousness comes through the law, then Christ died in vain.” Galatians 2:21. The law sends us to Jesus to be justified, because it shows us our inability to serve God in ourselves. Thankfully, our righteousness is a gift. Rom. 5:17.
*“You have heard that it was said….But I say….” * (Mt. 5:21-44) For example, “You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’ [Exodus 21:24; Lev. 24:20; Deut. 19:21] “But I tell you….”
*“If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also. And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well.” * Mt. 5:39-40. But wait! Isn’t illegal behavior supposed to be punished, according to Moses?
Yet Jesus says,* 'Love your enemies. Bless them. Pray for them. In doing so you show yourselves to be children of our Father in heaven’* (Mt. 5:44-45). (Note: Jesus does not say, “Put those bad guys to death, in obedience to the added-on embellishments [Greek: dogma] of Moses.”)
These clarifications from Jesus about the Law came BEFORE he went to the cross. Jesus was not mistaken. Moses was mistaken.
When the woman with the issue of blood approached Jesus through the crowd (“His disciples said to him, “Look at this crowd pressing around you. How can you ask, ‘Who touched me?’”), that woman was breaking the Law of Moses! She was commanded to keep herself apart from people (Lev. 15):
"If a woman has a discharge, and the discharge from her body is blood, SHE SHALL BE SET APART seven days; and whoever touches her shall be unclean until evening….If a woman has a discharge of blood for many days, other than at the time of her customary impurity, or if it runs beyond her usual time of impurity, all the days of her unclean discharge shall be as the days of her customary impurity. She shall be unclean.”
DID Jesus rebuke her for breaking the Law of Moses? No, he honored her: “Jesus turned around, and when He saw her He said, ‘Daughter, be of good cheer; your faith has made you well. Go in peace.’”
To repeat: Moses embellished. However, to paraphrase Jesus: *The Law was made for man, NOT man for the Law. * (Mk. 2:27)
Satan is the killer, not God. God’s nature has never changed: God is only about abundant life. Satan is about death:
“He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own resources, for he is a liar and the father of it.” Jn 8:44b.
“The thief does not come except to steal, and to kill, and to destroy. I have come that they may have life, and that they may have it more abundantly.” John 10:10.
*
“Seeing, then, the children have partaken of flesh and blood, he himself also in like manner did take part of the same, that through death he might destroy him having the power of death – that is, the devil.”* Hebrews 2:14 (YLT).
I take every opportunity to recommend the most liberating essay I ever read, Richard Murray’s “SATAN: Old Testament Servant Angel or New Testament Cosmic Rebel?”
Blessings.
This does seem to be the rule, but like all rules there will inevitably be the exception, here’s one…
“In order that” or “to the end that” can also be simplified down to “so that”.
It is my understanding that the Ten Commandments given to Moses and the Israelites still stand today. These are the Laws of God/ Spirit as Jesus proclaimed them to be. Breaking them leads to spiritual death which is also true today. However, in order to fulfill them, we must come to obey them through the love and truth of God in our own hearts and minds. In other words, they cannot be fulfilled simply by making laws and forcing people into obedience through coercion. This does not bring about righteousness. I believe Moses may have attempted to do this at some point, but I would say that many who followed afterwards took it a bit further.
It is my understanding that the Ten Commandments given to Moses and the Israelites still stand today. These are the Laws of God/ Spirit as Jesus proclaimed them to be. Breaking them leads to spiritual death which is also true today. However, in order to fulfill them, we must come to obey them through the love and truth of God in our own hearts and minds. In other words, they cannot be fulfilled simply by making laws and forcing people into obedience through coercion. This does not bring about righteousness. I believe Moses may have attempted to do this at some point, but I would say that many who followed afterwards took it a bit further.
My understanding is that the Mosaic Law of which the 10 Commandments were a part of have both moral and ritual laws. The moral laws are from God’s character so they are eternal but the ritual laws have passed away.
To repeat: Moses embellished. However, to paraphrase Jesus: The Law was made for man, NOT man for the Law. (Mk. 2:27)
Hermano,
Jesus said The Sabbath was made for man in Mk 2.27. As you know Jesus said he did not come to destroy the law but to fulfill it.
OK you said Moses embellished , so that seems vague to me. What did he embellish? Are you saying the commands from God about putting someone to death in “the Law” are not from God but from Satan or Moses imagination?
Please just state your position clearly, i’m not interested in attacking it. I already said Jesus said “not one jot or tittle from the law shall be changed until” Matt 5.18.
So i think the two strongest statements Jesus made about the law are these two which were “not one jot or tittle” and “I did not come to destroy the law but to fulfill it.” If that doesn’t convince you that Jesus validated the Mosaic Law we will agree to disagree.
I’m just looking for you to clearly state in your own words a summary of what Moses embellished in the Mosaic Law! Thanks
Steve7150, I agree with what you are saying here. All that was in the Law that was not of God, such as the rituals etc. , “died” or passed away. If I remember correctly, at some point God said He would destroy Israel and raise up a new nation, but Moses pleaded with God not to do so. My guess would be that this is where Moses may have gone wrong. As Hermano mentioned, he also struck the rock which was another mistake, and according to Jesus, he allowed divorce. I would say that the divorce being spoken of had a spiritual meaning to it.
Steve7150, I agree with what you are saying here. All that was in the Law that was not of God, such as the rituals etc. , “died” or passed away. If I remember correctly, at some point God said He would destroy Israel and raise up a new nation, but Moses pleaded with God not to do so. My guess would be that this is where Moses may have gone wrong. As Hermano mentioned, he also struck the rock which was another mistake, and according to Jesus, he allowed divorce. I would say that the divorce being spoken of had a spiritual meaning to it.
Hi LLC,
I didn’t mean the ritual laws were not of God, only that they were symbolic of something greater so when the greater came the rituals passed away.
I do not believe Jesus validated all of Mosaic Law. In fact, I believe he outright contradicted parts of Mosaic Law. (I have given the example of the woman with the 12 year issue of blood.)
I believe Moses sometimes confused God with Satan. I believe God is nonviolent, and would never order violence carried out in His name. ANYTIME we see a commandment to put someone to death as the will of God (by Moses or anyone else), the Scripture writer in that instance was being directed by his own culture, his own anger issues, or Satan himself.
Let me concatenate snippets of some of my earlier comments, with their relevant embedded reference links:
Steve7150, I think many of the rituals and doctrines came about through misinterpretation and twisting of the words to make them fit one’s own understanding and agenda.
As Jesus says in Mark 7:7-13 “And in vain they worship Me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men-the washing of pitchers and cups, and many other such things you do. All t0 well you reject the commandment of God, that you may keep your tradition. For Moses said, ‘Honor you father and mother’ ; and ‘He who curses father or mother , let him be put to death’. But you say 'If a man says to his father or mother, “Whatever profit you might have received from me is Corban.” And you no longer let him do anything for his father or mother, making the word of God of no effect through your tradition which you have handed down. And many such things you do.”
Steve7150, I think many of the rituals and doctrines came about through misinterpretation and twisting of the words to make them fit one’s own understanding and agenda.
As Jesus says in Mark 7:7-13 “And in vain they worship Me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men-the washing of pitchers and cups, and many other such things you do. All t0 well you reject the commandment of God, that you may keep your tradition. For Moses said, ‘Honor you father and mother’ ; and ‘He who curses father or mother , let him be put to death’. But you say 'If a man says to his father or mother, “Whatever profit you might have received from me is Corban.” And you no longer let him do anything for his father or mother, making the word of God of no effect through your tradition which you have handed down. And many such things you do.”
LLC
Posts: 541
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2015 9:45 am
Top
Print view this post
Well OK but here Jesus is talking to the Pharisees about their hypocrisy. As i see this Jesus is not critiquing the ritual laws inside the Mosaic Law here.
I do not believe Jesus validated all of Mosaic Law. In fact, I believe he outright contradicted parts of Mosaic Law. (I have given the example of the woman with the 12 year issue of blood.)
I believe Moses sometimes confused God with Satan. I believe God is nonviolent, and would never order violence carried out in His name. ANYTIME we see a commandment to put someone to death as the will of God (by Moses or anyone else), the Scripture writer in that instance was being directed by his own culture, his own anger issues, or Satan himself.
As you know Jesus initiated the New Covenant and apparently during his ministry he was phasing it in so i don’t think he was invalidating the Mosaic Law but rather introducing his teachings.
God didn’t allow Moses to enter Israel because he disobeyed on one occasion. Wouldn’t it stand to reason that if Moses misrepresented God so often for so long that God would have punished him a lot more for this continuing misrepresentation?
Hermano, I think in many instances, “death” means that they were to be cast out, no longer being a part of Israel, as in the people of God. Only those that follow God willingly from the heart are considered to be the “nation of Israel”. Men cannot compromise or change the Laws of God to suit themselves. Those who refuse to follow God, should be left to their own demise.
Steve, I would say that washing dishes would be good as far as hygiene goes, but as far as making it a requirement to be with God, or it being a Law of God, no. Jesus refers to them as “commandments of men.”
Thank God for Moses. God always works through any available means, no matter how imperfect. He will get love and help to people any way available. (And unfortunately, demonic powers will always try to get death to people any way available.)
Do you really think Moses disobeyed God on only one occasion? We have Joshua’s view on how and why Moses died, but now we know death is an enemy of God (1 Corinthians 15:26), not an instrument of God. God is about LIFE (Deu 30:19, 2 Ki 18:32, John 10:10). Satan has the power of death, *not God *(Hebrews 2:14). Our legalistic, violent enemy is always looking to provoke, and then come through, holes in our divine hedge of protection.
Moses ‘saw through a glass darkly.’ Through ignorance, he sometimes failed to correctly distinguish God from Satan—like many today.
Blessings.
Steve, I would say that washing dishes would be good as far as hygiene goes, but as far as making it a requirement to be with God, or it being a Law of God, no. Jesus refers to them as “commandments of men.”
LLC
Posts: 543
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2015 9:45 am
Yes LLC that’s the point, that the Pharisees used the traditions of men (washing pitchers) as if it were the Law of Moses but it wasn’t. Actually the Pharisees claimed they were “Oral Commands” passed down from Moses and these eventually found their way into the Talmud.
Do you really think Moses disobeyed God on only one occasion? We have Joshua’s view on how and why Moses died, but now we know death is an enemy of God (1 Corinthians 15:26), not an instrument of God. God is about LIFE (Deu 30:19, 2 Ki 18:32, John 10:10). Satan has the power of death, not God (Hebrews 2:14). Our legalistic, violent enemy is always looking to provoke, and then come through, holes in our divine hedge of protection.
Moses ‘saw through a glass darkly.’ Through ignorance, he sometimes failed to correctly distinguish God from Satan—like many today.
Moses wasn’t perfect so probably he disobeyed God before but we are told why God didn’t let him enter Egypt. So my point was that if he continually misrepresented God over an extended time period over a serious matter, God didn’t mind? Also this verse “saw through a glass darkly” was written by Paul after Jesus came and died and was resurrected and ascended to the Father, so if you apply it extensively to the OT it would be even more applicable to the NT and before long there isn’t much left.
There are many interesting ideas about Satan in that he is quickly presented as an adversary worthy of testing Jesus in the NT and apparently had the authority to offer to Jesus the kingdoms of this world. But he is rarely mentioned in the OT which really does seem strange if he obtained dominion of the world from Adam. So it is definitely food for thought!
Steve, I would take it as a great personal favor if you would read “SATAN: Old Testament Servant Angel or New Testament Cosmic Rebel?” by Richard Murray. (The most important article I have ever read.)
Murray does a masterful job. I couldn’t possibly present the case as clearly as he does.
Let’s examine the passage in its context. Jesus said:
Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly, I tell you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished. Therefore whoever relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. You have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not murder; and whoever murders will be liable to judgment.’ But I tell you that everyone who is angry with his brother will be liable to judgment; whoever insults his brother will be liable to the council; and whoever says, ‘You fool!’ will be liable to the hell of fire. (Matthew 5:17-22)
Jesus once said that Moses spoke of Him. I suggest that both the section of the Hebrew writings called “The Law” as well as the prophets predicted what Jesus would do and accomplish here on earth. Isaiah particularly did so. Jesus was saying that these predictions would all be accomplished. But He was referring to the commandments of the law, too. However, notice that He didn’t say that God gave them, but that “you have heard it was said to those of old.” And then He gave an even stricter commandment. However, sometimes His commandment was just the opposite.
Verses 33, 34:
Again you have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not swear falsely, but shall perform to the Lord what you have sworn.’ But I say to you, Do not take an oath at all…
Verses 38, 39:
You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.’ But I say to you, Do not resist the one who is evil.
So, Steve, if Jesus validated the Mosaic law, it seems strange that His law for His disciples was the opposite.
Also, according to the apostle John, Jesus Himself broke the Sabbath law:
Therefore the Jews sought all the more to kill Him, because He not only broke the Sabbath, but also said that God was His Father, making Himself equal with God. (John 5:18)
Again, it doesn’t make sense that anyone validating the Mosaic law, would himself break the Sabbath.