Leviticus (Jesus, moral, exodus, salvation, homosexuality)

[Scott1]

linwood,

Well, I think we are pretty close here..... one last try:

As for Scotts definition someone still needs to supply a standard by which each of Gods law are deemed "Moral" or "Ceremonial" for them to have any concrete meaning.

There is a big difference in a ceremonial requirement under the old law, and fundamental human morality. Some of your examples:

For instance: not eating shellfish or a certain food. That has nothing to do with morality.
Becoming a Wiccan is an offense to God... a moral wrong to deny the truth of God, and a violation of a Commandment.
Kissing your wife while on her period was a cultural ignorance and superstition that has nothing to do with morality.
Cutting your hair or trimming your beard should be an obvious adhereance to the ceremonial law.
Buying slaves are a violation of the human dignity of a person... a moral wrong.

Pretty easy stuff, I am sure you will come to see that when one of us explains it well enough! Hope this was the one!

Scott

[linwood]

Well since I`ve been getting no where with all this Leviticus stuff and have waaay too much time on my hands I figured I`d go rooting around in the gospels to see what Jesus had to say about all this Law choosing.

I`m relieved to find that either the authors of the gospels or Jesus himself were just as confused as I seem to be.


This is the text where Jesus dismisses the old "ceremonial" laws and distinguishes them from "moral" laws.
He says the food laws no longer apply but other laws do (he doesn`t specify which still do other than honor thy father and mother)

Mark 7:5-19

Then the Pharisees and scribes asked him, Why walk not thy disciples according to the tradition of the elders, but eat bread with unwashen hands?
He answered and said unto them, Well hath Esaias prophesied of you hypocrites, as it is written, This people honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me.
Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.
For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do.
And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.
For Moses said, Honour thy father and thy mother; and, Whoso curseth father or mother, let him die the death:
But ye say, If a man shall say to his father or mother, It is Corban, that is to say, a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; he shall be free.
And ye suffer him no more to do ought for his father or his mother;
Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.
And when he had called all the people unto him, he said unto them, Hearken unto me every one of you, and understand:
There is nothing from without a man, that entering into him can defile him: but the things which come out of him, those are they that defile the man.
If any man have ears to hear, let him hear.
And when he was entered into the house from the people, his disciples asked him concerning the parable.
And he saith unto them, Are ye so without understanding also? Do ye not perceive, that whatsoever thing from without entereth into the man, it cannot defile him;
Because it entereth not into his heart, but into the belly, and goeth out into the draught, purging all meats?

Pay attention to ..

Mark 7:10-13

For Moses said, Honour thy father and thy mother; and, Whoso curseth father or mother, let him die the death:
But ye say, If a man shall say to his father or mother, It is Corban, that is to say, a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; he shall be free.
And ye suffer him no more to do ought for his father or his mother;
Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.

In the above passages Jesus shows the Pharisees failure to uphold Gods law by telling them they are hypocrites for paying attention to the ceremonial law but ignoring the moral law.
In this case he uses Duet 21:18-19 and Exod 21:15 as an example.
"Honor thy Father & Mother or else."

The thing is that Jesus doesn`t seperate the punishment from the moral as Mr Emu has interpreted Jesus calls them hypocrites precisely because they don`t carry out the punishment God has ordered (Stoning the child)

Mr Emu...how does this harmonize with your interpretation?

The really good part is that earlier in Mathew Jesus says...

Mathew 5:17-21

Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.
Ye have heard that it was said of them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment:

In the above passages he contradicts his later statement in Mark ..refer above to his seperation of "moral" and "ceremonial" law and the end passages in Mark..

Mark 7:18-19
And he saith unto them, Are ye so without understanding also? Do ye not perceive, that whatsoever thing from without entereth into the man, it cannot defile him;
Because it entereth not into his heart, but into the belly, and goeth out into the draught, purging all meats?

The above contradicts his earlier statements in Matthew 5:17-21 while at the same time giving the added bonus of revealing Christs ignorance of the digestive and cardio-vascular systems.

He also says"one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law," Not to..break one of these least commandments,
In other words not a single part of the Law is to be disregarded not "One jot or Tittle.
Some translations read it as ..
"I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished."

This is pretty clear that Jesus did not seperate any of the laws none are to be disregarded because as jesus says.."you are "still in danger of the judgement"

At the very least this and the above reference to punishment for dishonoring your parents shows that Mr Emus interpretation is weak if not altogether wrong.

So which is it?

Jesus says all laws stand as written.
Jesus says some laws are no longer applied.

And..if it is the later what is the standard of applicability?



PS..Whoever reads this entire dissertation also has too much time on their hands.

[Mister Emu]

one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

It was fullfilled when Jesus died. Right before he died on the cross he said, "It is finished"

In the above passages Jesus shows the Pharisees failure to uphold Gods law by telling them they are hypocrites for paying attention to the ceremonial law but ignoring the moral law.

Actually he calls them hypocrites for accepting corban(gifts) to stop the punishment without any apology or restitution for the parents.

PS..Whoever reads this entire dissertation also has too much time on their hands.

Far too much

[linwood]

Originally Posted by SOGFPP

linwood,

Well, I think we are pretty close here..... one last try:

I do appreciate it Scott and just so you know I didn`t ignore your post I was still writing my dissertation on the gospels when you posted this.
I hadn`t seen it until I hit the "submit" button.

There is a big difference in a ceremonial requirement under the old law, and fundamental human morality. Some of your examples:

For instance: not eating shellfish or a certain food. That has nothing to do with morality.
Becoming a Wiccan is an offense to God... a moral wrong to deny the truth of God, and a violation of a Commandment.
Kissing your wife while on her period was a cultural ignorance and superstition that has nothing to do with morality.
Cutting your hair or trimming your beard should be an obvious adhereance to the ceremonial law.
Buying slaves are a violation of the human dignity of a person... a moral wrong.

Pretty easy stuff, I am sure you will come to see that when one of us explains it well enough! Hope this was the one!

Yes, this is the one.

However I do have to disagree that this is "Pretty easy stuff".

Becoming a Wiccan is an offense to God... a moral wrong to deny the truth of God, and a violation of a Commandment.

It`s an offense to whose god?
A moral wrong for whom?

It`s certainly not an offense to any Wiccans god, it`s not an offense to my god for I have none.
I and many others are morally wrong with every breath we take as we deny the truth of your god.
Why should the Christian Gods commandments mean anything to a Wiccan, Budhist, Atheist, Native American, or any of the billions of others who don`t follow Christianity?

Under many peoples moral code denying anyone equal rights because of who they share their bed with is...

"a moral wrong"
"a violation of commandment"
"cultural ignorance"
and
"a violation of the human dignity of a person"

Did you ever read my answer to you in the Da Vinci Code thread about my definition of morals?
It`s at the bottom.

The DaVinci Code

The point is while I can respect that you and your church hold these morals and wouldn`t suggest that they are wrong for you not all people have their morals dictated by the Christian God.
Many have devised or been given their own and live good honest prosperous lives.
In fact even though I am an atheist my morals can be summed up in the Wiccan creed..
"In it harm none, do what thou wilt."
Thats it...there is my moral compass...just one single commandment.
Ya gotta love simplicity.


The point I`m getting at is why do Christians believe it is right to force others to go against their own moral code?
To follow a moral law that they find repugnant.

Is it because Christians believe any and all moral codes that go against their Gods are invalid?

I think it is.

[Scott1]

PS..Whoever reads this entire dissertation also has too much time on their hands.

Guilty as charged!

Jesus says all laws stand as written.
Jesus says some laws are no longer applied.

And..if it is the later what is the standard of applicability?

The part you are missing is that Jesus was trying to educate the Jewish people (and the world) that no one could be saved by the law of moses.

By pointing out the hypocrites in the bunch and proclaiming that by one transgression of the law you are guilty of breaking them ALL....... Jesus was trying to show that there must be and end....... the law of moses must end and be replaced by the law of grace--- brought to the world by the blood of Christ.

Maybe the Catechism will help:

1964 The Old Law is a preparation for the Gospel. "The Law is a pedagogy and a prophecy of things to come."17 It prophesies and presages the work of liberation from sin which will be fulfilled in Christ: it provides the New Testament with images, "types," and symbols for expressing the life according to the Spirit. Finally, the Law is completed by the teaching of the sapiential books and the prophets which set its course toward the New Covenant and the Kingdom of heaven.
1968 The Law of the Gospel fulfills the commandments of the Law. The Lord's Sermon on the Mount, far from abolishing or devaluing the moral prescriptions of the Old Law, releases their hidden potential and has new demands arise from them: it reveals their entire divine and human truth. It does not add new external precepts, but proceeds to reform the heart, the root of human acts, where man chooses between the pure and the impure,22 where faith, hope, and charity are formed and with them the other virtues. The Gospel thus brings the Law to its fullness through imitation of the perfection of the heavenly Father, through forgiveness of enemies and prayer for persecutors, in emulation of the divine generosity.23

Scott

[Scott1]

linwood,

You are forgetting one important part about this thread.... I didn't start it, and I don't judge anyone here. Never have, never will.

I contribute here to educate people about what I believe in..... I should not have to preface every statement by "This is what I believe. I in no way imply or suggest that you or anyone should believe as I do..... please respect what I believe in and I will you..... send all complaints to linwood" LOL
Come on........

The point I`m getting at is why do Christians believe it is right to force others to go against their own moral code?

I'm gonna end this here before I get upset........ typical as of late to have a open exchange of ideas somehow turn into Christian bashing.

Bye.
Scott

[Ardhanariswar]

"The point I`m getting at is why do Christians believe it is right to force others to go against their own moral code?"

all religions do it. more recently the christain religion. its fact. not bashing.

[Pah]

Lev 15:9 has to do with men with running sores, and it is telling you how to deal with that, no morals involved.

The why are there two offering required one for a burnt offering and the other for sin? Isn't sin a trangression of morality?

So many of those purification procedures require those offerings, I'm tempted to say all of them do. Being unpure is obviously a sin.

-pah-