Salvation is of the Jews because that the place on earth that the Son would incarnate. It was foreordained. But being selected went to their heads. They rejected the original Gospel message and killed the messenger. So the Israelites were "un-chosen" and the light went West to people more open to Peter and Paul's version of the gospel.
Sorry to do this to you. There is a bit of self-pain in doing it (I'd never choose this). I do it now, here, for you. If it weren't for you, I'd never do this. It is a pain reading and commenting something I'd rather skip.
Jews and Gentiles
121:7.1 (1339.6) By the times of Jesus the Jews had arrived at a settled concept of their origin, history, and destiny.
"Settled concept???" This guy writes like a 13 year old.
They had built up a rigid wall of separation between themselves and the gentile world;
Er, flesh vs. spirit. Sadler is "only natural" so doesn't grasp the difference. He doesn't grasp that the man without the Spirit,
cannot understand the things of the Spirit. "Cannot" Caino, it is the blind leading the blind.
they looked upon all gentile ways with utter contempt.
Yes, because it was all flesh. Those people were exploiting one another, like we are seeing in America more and more, with God taken out of their lives.
They worshiped the letter of the law and indulged a form of self-righteousness based upon the false pride of descent.
They didn't worship the letter. Those Jews in the flesh, went through motions in the flesh, much like Urantia cultists. Those who grasped the Spirit, or rather were grasped by the Spirit, were following Him.
They had formed preconceived notions regarding the promised Messiah, and most of these expectations envisaged a Messiah who would come as a part of their national and racial history. To the Hebrews of those days Jewish theology was irrevocably settled, forever fixed.
Here, you see the disdain in Sadler's written voice. He wasn't just reporting what he'd read between Old and New Testaments. He was making a judgement, much of it anti-Semitic.
121:7.2 (1339.7) The teachings and practices of Jesus regarding tolerance and kindness ran counter to the long-standing attitude of the Jews toward other peoples whom they considered heathen.
Here, Sadler is giving his scripture commentary, but whenever we paraphrase, we also show what we apprehend incorrectly. At this point, Caino, it is nothing more than commentary. Bible commentary is not a replacement of the text. It is simply one man's ideas concerning the Bible. It is best to go to the horse's mouth and forgo the commentary, if one is going to only read one or the other.
For generations the Jews had nourished an attitude toward the outside world which made it impossible for them to accept the Master’s teachings about the spiritual brotherhood of man.
"Only natural." As I said, the only thing man has in common with all other men is flesh. Spirit is ONLY begotten by Spirit.
They were unwilling to share Yahweh on equal terms with the gentiles and were likewise unwilling to accept as the Son of God one who taught such new and strange doctrines.
No. Here Sadler's commentary goes completely wrong. All through the O.T. there are other men given by example that knew God. The Jews had an outer court for gentiles. Sadler shows a complete lack of historical knowledge at this point.
121:7.3 (1340.1) The scribes, the Pharisees, and the priesthood held the Jews in a terrible bondage of ritualism and legalism, a bondage far more real than that of the Roman political rule.
Opinion piece....
The Jews of Jesus’ time were not only held in subjugation to the law but were equally bound by the slavish demands of the traditions, which involved and invaded every domain of personal and social life.
Sadler says the 'law subjugates' which is 'only natural.' The law is no subjugation to Spirit. Those who live by the Spirit already desire not to follow any other God, lie, cheat, steal, kill, dishonor their parents, or want to live to please flesh. Sadler who is 'only natural' sees the law as bad, as subjugating.
These minute regulations of conduct pursued and dominated every loyal Jew, and it is not strange that they promptly rejected one of their number who presumed to ignore their sacred traditions, and who dared to flout their long-honored regulations of social conduct.
"Oh Dr. Sadler! How DARE they???" : plain: Good grief. It is like reading a child. At times I can barely read this stuff, Caino. I literally do it for you. I've no other desire to read such poor commentary. It is literally beneath any intelligent man. It is beneath both of us.
They could hardly regard with favor the teachings of one who did not hesitate to clash with dogmas which they regarded as having been ordained by Father Abraham himself. Moses had given them their law and they would not compromise.
Er, no. Dr. Sadler is ignorant. This is an affront to any Jew today. They'd call foul and rightly so. Moses gave the law. Abraham is rather through whom promise and favor came. Sadler didn't know much about the Bible.
121:7.4 (1340.2) By the time of the first century after Christ the spoken interpretation of the law by the recognized teachers,
This isn't even a cogent sentence.
the scribes, had become a higher authority than the written law itself. And all this made it easier for certain religious leaders of the Jews to array the people against the acceptance of a new gospel.
Gospel means "Good news." There were no gentiles. Only Jews accepted and spread the 'good news.' Some of them were Pharisees and Sadducees.
121:7.5 (1340.3) These circumstances rendered it impossible for the Jews to fulfill their divine destiny as messengers of the new gospel of religious freedom and spiritual liberty.
A meaningless platitude that simply means "what I, Dr. Sadler think is spiritual, as an 'only natural' man. No person in the spirt says 'only natural' when conveying spiritual truth.
They could not break the fetters of tradition.
Er, Jesus breaks fetters, Dr. Sadler. Wrong. Sorry. You are wrong.
Jeremiah had told of the “law to be written in men’s hearts,” Ezekiel had spoken of a “new spirit to live in man’s soul,” and the Psalmist had prayed that God would “create a clean heart within and renew a right spirit.” But when the Jewish religion of good works and slavery to law fell victim to the stagnation of traditionalistic inertia, the motion of religious evolution passed westward to the European peoples.
This is just dumb commentary on Sadler's sloppy take on history. European people don't enter the picture until much much later.
121:7.6 (1340.4) And so a different people were called upon to carry an advancing theology to the world, a system of teaching embodying the philosophy of the Greeks, the law of the Romans, the morality of the Hebrews, and the gospel of personality sanctity and spiritual liberty formulated by Paul and based on the teachings of Jesus.
The 'only natural' great melting pot. Sadler just literally gave you an 'unspiritual, only natural' take on his own religion and morality. It isn't Spiritual, it is 'only natural' amalgamation of men collectively.
121:7.7 (1340.5) Paul’s sect of Christianity exhibited its morality as a Jewish birthmark. The Jews viewed history as the providence of God—Yahweh at work. The Greeks brought to the new teaching clearer concepts of the eternal life.
Caino. Caino. Do YOU actually buy this? Do you? I can't even begin to tell you how poor this is. The Greeks were "only natural" and had their own gods. Sadler admires them because they are 'only natural' and his only concept of spirituality, which isn't God, it is "only natural" observation of a man still very much in his flesh.
Paul’s doctrines were influenced in theology and philosophy not only by Jesus’ teachings but also by Plato and Philo. In ethics he was inspired not only by Christ but also by the Stoics.
"Inspired?" Hmmm. Likely not. Paul was trained as a Pharisee under Gamaliel.
121:7.8 (1340.6) The gospel of Jesus, as it was embodied in Paul’s cult of Antioch Christianity, became blended with the following teachings:
121:7.9 (1340.7) 1. The philosophic reasoning of the Greek proselytes to Judaism, including some of their concepts of the eternal life.
No evidence of this, just Sadler making an educated guess. There is no definitive statement like this, he could make that'd be acceptable.
121:7.10 (1340.8) 2. The appealing teachings
Again, poor sentence structure :Z
of the prevailing mystery cults,
Uggghhh. His writing is atrocious. I do this only for you, Caino. His writing is appalling.
especially the Mithraic doctrines of redemption, atonement, and salvation by the sacrifice made by some god.
A complete platitude of his imaginings. Paul spoke against Greek gods and here Sadler is accusing him of the very thing he spoke against. Sadler is full in his rejection of Jews, Paul and even Jesus at this point. His training is complete, he went to the dark side.
121:7.11 (1340.9) 3. The sturdy morality of the established Jewish religion.
Not a sentence.
121:7.12 (1341.1) The Mediterranean Roman Empire, the Parthian kingdom, and the adjacent peoples of Jesus’ time all held crude and primitive ideas regarding the geography of the world, astronomy, health, and disease; and naturally they were amazed by the new and startling pronouncements of the carpenter of Nazareth.
Which has WHAT to do with 'adjacent people, geography, astronomy, health and disease???
Oh then "NATURALLY" again, they were 'amazed!' Good grief, Caino!
The ideas of spirit possession, good and bad, applied not merely to human beings, but every rock and tree was viewed by many as being spirit possessed.
Oh brother. Now my rocks are indwelled spiritually! CAINO! WAKE UP!!!!!!
This was an enchanted age, and everybody believed in miracles as commonplace occurrences." UB 1955
But not Sadler. He is "ONLY" natural. Do you get what he told you in his book, Caino? That he was ONLY natural? DId you get that? He told you he was. He told you here. Do you get that?
It is like cult leaders are making fun of their own congregation for believing this stuff. Do you EVER stop and think about stuff like this, Joe?
