01/05/2024
"If you cannot afford a lamb, one will be appointed to you."
___
JOKE-OGRAPHY:
1. Joseph continues reading about Jewish law from his brochure (continued from last week's cartoon). In Jewish tradition, the sacrifice for a newborn boy was typically one yearling lamb (for the sin offering) and one turtledove (for the burnt offering). As Mary and Joseph discuss this, the Holy Spirit (a dove, but not for sacrifice) shows up to give a knowing glance at Baby Jesus. You see, Jesus is called the "Lamb of God," and His mission is to be sacrificed for our sins, so it's ironic that His parents are required to sacrifice a lamb for HIM under Jewish law.
2. A few commenters last week were concerned about Mary and Joseph sleeping too close together in their blanket fort, as it challenges the perpetual virginity of Mary (a core Catholic belief). I argue that Mary and Joseph are a poor married couple sleeping in a barn that's open to the cold and creatures of nature, so the chaste and honorable Joseph would probably stay near his Holy Family for their protection, instead of sleeping apart and leaving them vulnerable. No scandal here!
3. A few commenters last week argued about the perpetual virginity of Mary (the belief that she remained a virgin after Jesus's birth; a belief held by the early Church even before the Bible was canonized). I just wanted to say that I'm thrilled and honored that my comics appeal to people of all religions, including other Christian denominations. It moves me every time I get a comment from someone who isn't Catholic but loves my work. That said, I AM Catholic, so please understand that my comics follow the canon of Catholicism when I can help it. No hard feelings. Of course, you're all welcome to continue giving me suggestions and debating in the comments (good-naturedly, of course). I've learned so much by listening and looking into your apologetics.
279 notes
·
View notes
Israelology Versus Replacement Theology: Is the Bible about Israel or Jesus❓
Eli Kittim
If Jesus is the Messianic fulfillment of the Hebrew Bible, then the Old Testament is essentially Christocentric (not Jewishcentric) and the New Testament is not talking about two peoples (the Jews & the church) but rather one: the elect (cf. Eph. 2:19-20), which is to say that the overarching theme of the Old Testament is not about a race but about a person: the Messiah!
If in fact there are 2 peoples with 2 different sets of standards (law & grace) by which they’re saved, then that would invalidate Christ’s atonement, as would the rebuilding of the third Jewish temple, which would necessitate the reinstituting of animal sacrifices. However, the Bible is not about ethnicity, racism, or nationalism. In Romans 2:28-29 (NASB), Paul redefines what the term Jew means in scripture:
For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly,
nor is circumcision that which is outward in
the flesh. But he is a Jew who is one
inwardly; and circumcision is of the heart.
In the Bible, there are not two people of God, but only one: those who are in Christ. At the end of the age, Christ will separate “the sheep from the goats” (Mt. 25.32). In other words, there are only two categories: you are either in Christ or out of Christ! The Bible is Christocentric. It is not ethnocentric. It’s not about a race.
Instead of admitting that they view the Bible as being about their race and not about Christ, the Hebrew Roots Movement dresses it up euphemistically as though the controversy was about the Jews versus the church. But that’s a misnomer. The real controversy is this: they don’t believe that the Bible is about Christ. But they hide that from you! Messianic Jews are often far more Judaic than they let on.
Read the letter to the Hebrews, chapter 9. It’s all about how Christ is greater than the temple sacrifices or the Law of Moses. This is a New Covenant. So why are the Jews holding on to the old one? Hebrews 8:13 declares:
When He [God] said, ‘A new covenant,’ He
has made the first obsolete.
Both Galatians and Romans are authentic Pauline letters. In those letters, Paul says categorically & unequivocally that we are saved by Grace, not by the Law. Paul says in Galatians 2:16:
a person is not justified by works
of the Law but through faith in Christ.
In Galatians 2:21, Paul says:
if righteousness comes through the Law, then
Christ died needlessly.
In Galatians 3:11, Paul repeats the justification of faith teaching:
that no one is justified by the Law before
God is evident; for, ‘the righteous one will
live by faith.’
It’s also found in many other places, including Romans 3:20:
by the works of the Law none of mankind
will be justified in His sight.
It doesn’t get any clearer than that. We are not to observe the law. We are saved by faith in Jesus Christ. According to Acts 4:12:
there is salvation in no one else [except
Jesus Christ]; for there is no other name
under heaven that has been given among
mankind by which we must be saved.
Yahweh is never once mentioned in the New Testament. Moreover, Galatians 3:7 says that we are the sons of Abraham by faith (not by race):
recognize that it is those who are of faith
who are sons of Abraham.
Ephesians 2:12-13 says that through “the blood of Christ” the elect are now part of God’s family. There’s only one plan, one family, one salvation, and one Lord, not 2 different salvation plans, or 2 peoples. It’s not that we have replaced Israel but that we have been brought into one family through Jesus’ atonement (the new covenant) which was prophesied in Jeremiah 31.31.
Incidentally, the history of replacement theology doesn’t go back to the dispensationalism of the 1800s, but rather to the early church. In Jer. 3:8, God gave Israel an official certificate of divorce. In Mt. 21:43, Jesus promised that the kingdom of God will be taken away from the Jews and given to another nation. Justin Martyr (100-165 AD) concurred that God’s covenant with Israel was annulled and that the Jews had been replaced by the Gentiles. Origen’s (185-253 AD) view was along the same lines. Irenaeus (ca. 130-202 AD) also proclaimed that God disinherited the Jews from his grace. Tertullian (ca. 155-220 AD) also held that the Jews had been rejected by God. Similarly, Eusebius (ca. 265-339 AD) held that the promises of Scripture were given to the Gentiles because only the Church was the “true Israel.” So, this view didn’t start in the 19th century. It was there from the beginning.
The covenant of the seed (in Genesis 12) is a reference to Christ (see Gal. 3:16). Notice that Abraham is the “father of many nations” (Gen. 17:5), not just one. So the covenant with Abraham and his descendants (Gen. 17:8) is with multiple nations, not just one! And all these are part of the covenant through Abraham’s seed, who is Christ! That’s why Isaiah 61:9 explicitly refers to God’s posterity as the people of the Gentiles:
their offspring will be known among the
nations [Gentiles], And their descendants in
the midst of the peoples. All who see them
will recognize them because they are the
offspring whom the Lord has blessed.
“It is not the children of the flesh … but the children of the promise [who] are regarded as descendants [of Israel]” (Rom 9:6-8). Here’s further proof that the language which was once used for Israel is now used to address the church (cf. Gal. 6:16). In contradistinction to those who don’t believe in Christ, 1 Peter 2:9 is addressing the church who does believe in Christ, saying:
But you are a chosen people, a royal
priesthood, a holy nation, a people for
God’s own possession.
In Colossians 1:26, “the mystery which had been hidden from the past ages and generations, but now has been revealed to His saints” is that the Gentiles are co-inheritors with Israel (cf. Gal 3:28). Ephesians 3:6 says:
This mystery is that through the gospel the
Gentiles are heirs together with Israel,
members together of one body, and sharers
together in the promise in Christ Jesus.
The real controversy about replacement theology is this: is the Bible about Judaism or Jesus? Jews argue that the Bible is not about Christ. Their Dual-covenant theology holds that the Old Covenant remains valid for Jews whereas the New Covenant is only applicable to gentiles.
Bottom line, the Bible is not about a nation or a race. It’s about a person: the God-incarnate Messiah. Those who believe in Christ think that the Bible is about Christ. Those who don’t really believe in Christ think that the Bible is about the nation of Israel. It’s that simple.
What is the argument about? It’s really about whether we pledge allegiance to Moses or to Jesus.
Has Christ been divided?
(1 Corinthians 1:13).
4 notes
·
View notes
01/12/2024
"Can that tiny pamphlet really contain all of Mosaic law?"
Bro. Sure.
___
JOKE-OGRAPHY:
1. Following from the last two comics, Mary has to make a sacrifice as a new mother, according to Mosaic law (Leviticus 12:1-8). As a poor family, she and Joseph can't afford the prescribed sacrifice of one yearling lamb and one turtledove, so they address their "Mosaic Law and You" brochure and see if there are substitute sacrifices they can use. It turns out there are! According to Leviticus 12, if they can't afford a lamb, they can sacrifice TWO turtledoves (or pigeons) instead of one. "Two turtledoves" is one of the lyrics in the song, "The Twelve Days of Christmas," so in this cartoon, I add a list of other possible substitute sacrifices as if the song is an extension of the Leviticus law. It is not. I am a lying liar, who has lied.
2. "What's a french?" reflects the fact that Mary has no idea what "french" means. Back in ye olde Bible dayes, France did not exist in its current form, as St. Joan of Arc hadn't yet slain the titan, Grumblebuff, whose head became England and whose body formed the rest of Europe.
374 notes
·
View notes