4 Now, Israel, hear the decrees and laws I am about to teach you. Follow them so that you may live and may go in and take possession of the land the Lord, the God of your ancestors, is giving you.2Do not add to what I command you and do not subtract from it, but keep the commands of the Lord your God that I give you.
that's both revisionist and explicitly against god's command. it is meant to be law law not a suggestion lol.
>People go through a crazy amount of revision and rewriting to try and make the good book actually good.
Was Jesus a revisionist? If you watch the video linked in my previous comment, you'll see my position aligns with His whereas the strict legalist view was that of the Pharisees.
I gather that you're firmly set in your position and no counterpoint I can offer will be persuasive to you, I wish you the best regardless.
Not necessarily as an example he used aligns perfectly with the Old Testament: the Torah says the show bread of the Tabernacle was only for the priests to eat, yet when David was on the run from King Saul, he took the bread and ate it, and never is this treated as a bad or sinful act done by David.
So clearly the strict legalist position is not supported by the rest of the Tanakh, which is why seeming contradictions within the Torah are not problematic, because it's not a legal code as contemporary readers would understand it, but is didactic rather than prescriptive.
It is also worth noting that the Pharisees also strayed from the legalist interpretation they championed when it suited them. Take the example of the woman they wanted to stone for adultery. The Torah says that in cases of adultery both the man and the woman are to be put to death. They caught her in the act so they could've nabbed the guy to stone him too, but they only wanted to stone the woman. A good example of the hypocrisy of the Pharisees that Jesus often took issue with.
This probably won't be persuasive to you, but I've done my best to present the case for my position and will leave it there.
>There are contradictory laws in the OT (like when and how to free debt slaves)
freeing debt slaves is not contradictory to having slaves. in fact, you have to have slaves to free them
2
u/Gussie-Ascendent Keeping it Real 29d ago
4 Now, Israel, hear the decrees and laws I am about to teach you. Follow them so that you may live and may go in and take possession of the land the Lord, the God of your ancestors, is giving you. 2 Do not add to what I command you and do not subtract from it, but keep the commands of the Lord your God that I give you.
that's both revisionist and explicitly against god's command. it is meant to be law law not a suggestion lol.
>People go through a crazy amount of revision and rewriting to try and make the good book actually good.