• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Christians! Now which Mosaic Laws are still in force for you?

oldbadger

Skanky Old Mongrel!
That's just the thing isn't it? But according to my beliefs we are not under the Law at all. However, that doesn't mean all the Law is therefore invalid and we can disobey it. It just so happens many of those laws are still valid because they're still morally true.
So you're not under the Law, but you follow the law. Yes?
That does not make sense. If you follow laws then you are under them.
Or do some Christians who are 'not under l;aw' enforce stuff upon others?

Many of the laws however especially the ritual ones like keeping feast days etc. Are no longer necessary because they have nothing to do with morality. They were rituals just to teach people about spiritual truths.
No..... you got that wrong.
Christians do keep feast days.
And the sacrificial laws not only kept thousands of Levite Priests in Jobs but created a balance in the minds of the people that once cleansed they could clear their minds and carry on again. The psychosomatic value of declaration,
contrition, cleansing and redemption kept the majority of the people in a balanced society.
Not right for Jesus, but right 'back in the day'.

We know that Jesus stopped the sacrificial ceremonial merry-go round, but there are 507 laws left for Christians to pick up or put down.

Now...... do you quote the OT laws to others, or do you stick to NT writings about laws?
 

oldbadger

Skanky Old Mongrel!
Probably business meant as in travelling. Good point though.
But we don't want to decide that the bible really meant something else, or do we?

If you read a piece and then tell me that it probably means something other than written, we've got a problem, don't you think?
 

oldbadger

Skanky Old Mongrel!
Also traveling for business back then was dangerous. Could never return home. Same thing as war different reason.

90% of the Jewish people were within the peasant classes. How many stationary Jews do you think this law was not intended for? Couldn't the verses have simply meant what they showed?

If you do this with all the laws and verses you could change the whole basis of the legislation surely?

But do you follow any OT laws, please?
 

oldbadger

Skanky Old Mongrel!
No, you are incorrect. It depends upon what verse is quoted and why.

I could quote from the book of Job showing God is in total control of the universe, that hasn't changed.

I could quote the dietary laws given to the wandering tribe of Israel in an alien land, where concern about disease from wild animals. Certain animals were restricted as food for these health reasons.

2,000 years later, where the food supply is primarily farmed, and raised properly, Christ declared all food clean.

So, as I said, it depends upon the verses and their context.

As to the law, keep in mind that many OT laws are reiterated, or modified and incorporated in the law of Christ.

So which OT laws do you firmly stick by?

I will remind you that Christians do not abide by any Mosaic Laws unless repeated in the NT. Yes? Correct?
 

oldbadger

Skanky Old Mongrel!
Yes, I've always said that we should have a national funeral for it....or even an international day of lamentation...
It is a wonder that our highest minds, Oxbridge educated, Doctorates and Scholarships all, with over 75% of all our Prime Ministers having traveled the exact courses above, have on occasion made such stupid daft crazy bad decisions. Education never did advance pure simple common sense.


In the scripture I quoted earlier, it was really about the issue of circumcision. The Jewish Christians were wanting the Gentile Christians to conform to Jewish law. But the governing body of older men, seeing that a huge conflict was brewing took the matter to Jehovah in prayer. Once a decision had been made by the power of the holy spirit, a letter was sent then to all the congregations detailing their decision....
I rather think that any decisions were made by a bunch of priests, Deeje. To point to the Holy Spirit as if it singled out this one group of folks, but didn't bother to guide the rest of the World's leaders would be strange.

"For the holy spirit and we ourselves have favored adding no further burden to you except these necessary things: 29 to keep abstaining from things sacrificed to idols, from blood, from what is strangled, and from sexual immorality. If you carefully keep yourselves from these things, you will prosper. Good health to you!”
Alright.
No sacrifice.
No Blood.
No strangled meat.
No immoral sex.

Now........... is there ANYTHING else in Mosaic Law which JWs follow which is shown only in the Mosaic Laws? Anything else?

We'll worry about what immoral-sex is another time, OK?




The Mosaic Law contained many principles which still apply. But the law on blood is a law that was never outdated. It was repeated down through the ages from Noah, to Israel, until Jesus, and carrided on by his disciples.
What did you mean..... 'Until Jesus'?
What exactly did Jesus say or do.... exactly?

...and your sentence :-The Mosaic Law contained many principles which still apply...................

Now is there anything else apart from the decision of the priests with Holy Spirit already mentioned?
 

oldbadger

Skanky Old Mongrel!
Thread update:-

So far as I can perceive, apart from one particular group following the No Blood, No strangled animals, no immoral sex (?) laws, no Christians have quoted any Mosaic Laws which they would turn to unless these specific laws are mentioned in the NT.


So far..............
 

exchemist

Veteran Member
Hello again.
But my quote was from a command, a law, and not gentle guidance.
I notice that many wealthy Christians have written that they resent paying out for subsistence, education and health for the poor, you see. So guidance is not enough, it seems.
Well we don't live in a theocracy nowadays. In modern society a church can't really make laws and enforce them.

The point about giving to the poor is interesting. Now that we have had a welfare state for so long, I suspect a lot of us think we already do a fair bit through what we pay in tax. This is one reason why I disapprove of people going to inordinate lengths to minimise their tax bills. I imagine the people you have in mind have put taxpaying in one compartment of their minds, lazily seeing it as robbery by a profligate government, while putting charity in another - and failing to see the connection. (As a matter of fact HMRC sends me every year a pie chart showing the proportion of my tax spent on health, education etc. From memory, health is the largest.)

But my experience is that people at my church are in fact pretty generous to the various charities that send people along to give us a talk and ask for our money, which happens regularly.
 

exchemist

Veteran Member
OK, are you saying that the OT is relevant to Christianity but that it does not and cannot drive Christian rules, laws or morals?

Some Christians quote the OT all the time at me, especially the more extreme ones. And where Christians on this thread have told me that Love and Understanding are the two main tenets of Christianity others (on extremist Christian web sites) put this idea down as naivety.

So I still need to pusjh on with this thread, really.
Yes, that's it, I think. Christians, being followers of Christ are enjoined to follow the teaching of Christ in the NewTestament. However since that teaching emerged in Jewish culture, suffused with the Old Testament, the teaching refers to the OT constantly. One needs, therefore to refer back to the OT in order to read the NT in context and interpret it properly.

The OT (Judaism in effect) gives Christianity its fundamental principles of:
- one God as creator,
- who is a personal God,
- that loves His creation and
- has a two-way relationship with Mankind,
- and with individual people.

Most of it is stories, many of them mythological, about the history of the Jewish people (with a number of digressions into assertions about the ownership of land which make uncomfortable reading today;)), illustrating the operation of this relationship and its ups and downs. Many of these stories are rich in symbolism and have come to be used in Christianity for the lessons they hold. But the individual details are less important to Christians than to Jews.

A further twist is that at the Reformation, there was, among the Protestants, a desire to do away with all the encrustations of church teaching and practice that had grown up over the centuries and to base their newly simplified faith on reading the bible for themselves, as it had by then become available to everyone in the vernacular, thanks to the printing press. This placed more emphasis on the OT than the medieval church had done. Right up to the mid c.20th, when I was a boy, Protestants were a lot better informed about the OT than Catholics. In fact one change made after the 2nd Vatican Council was to insert an extra bible reading into the mass, specifically from the Old Testament, to remedy the deficiency. But I think it remains true that the more extreme Protestants rely far more heavily on the OT than the mainstream denominations do.
 

Deeje

Avid Bible Student
Premium Member
Hello again. I had to quote just this one paragraph so that it is on view.

This 'spirit of the law' never going away.

If the World was populated by so many JWs that the Watchtower governed the World, would certain crimes be punished by whipping or flogging as in Deut. 25:2?

If you know a little about Jewish history, then you will understand what spiritual state the Jews were in when Jesus walked the earth. (Matthew 23 gives us an idea) Did Jesus ever advocate corporal punishment among his followers? Many of them suffered at the hands of the Jews, but it wasn't to be met with retaliation. (They were taught to turn the other cheek) When Peter drew his sword to protect Jesus on the night of his arrest, Jesus rebuked him.

In Israel, "The judges were to be treated with respect, inasmuch as they stood in a position representing Jehovah. (Ex 22:28; Ac 23:3-5) When a decision was handed down by the priests, by the Levites at the sanctuary, or by the judge who was acting in those days (for example, Moses or Samuel), it was binding, and anyone who refused to abide by the decision was put to death.—De 17:8-13.

If a man was sentenced to receive a beating with rods, he was to be laid prostrate before the judge and beaten in his presence. (De 25:2) Justice was administered speedily. The only instances where a person was held for a time was when a matter was difficult and the judgment had to be received from Jehovah. Then the accused was held in custody until the decision was received. (Le 24:12; Nu 15:34) The Law did not provide for imprisonment. Only later on, as the nation deteriorated, and also during the time of Gentile domination, was imprisonment practiced. . . .

In the time of Jesus’ earthly ministry the Roman government allowed the Sanhedrin [the Jewish High Court] a great measure of independence, granting it civil and administrative authority. It had officers at its disposal as well as the power of arrest and imprisonment. (Mt 26:47; Ac 4:1-3; 9:1, 2) Its religious authority was recognized even among the Jews of the Dispersion. (See Ac 9:1, 2.) However, under the Roman rule the Sanhedrin in time evidently lost the legal authority to execute the death penalty, unless they got the permission of the Roman governor (procurator). (John 18:31) After the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 C.E., the Sanhedrin was abolished."

Court, Judicial — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

When Christianity spread, Christ's followers were under the authority of the laws of their various nations, so anyone breaking the law, would have been punished according to the law of the land, not according to Jewish law. The Christian congregation would respond with discipline, but not physical punishment. We have no legal right to do that.

If the world was populated with JW's there would be very little crime anyway. For those who break God's law, there is no need to administer corporal punishment....Loving counsel may be all they need to lead them to repentance....but if they were unrepentant, they would just be shown the door. We'll leave the physical punishment to God.

Would Widows be able to receive loans pledge-free as in Deut. 24:17

Deuteronomy 24:17 (Tanakh)
"You shall not pervert the judgment of a stranger or an orphan, and you shall not take a widow's garment as security [for a loan] ."

Sometimes all a poor person had to secure a loan was their garment. But a widow was especially disadvantaged because she had no husband to provide for her. No one was to take advantage of the disadvantaged....not the widow, the stranger or the orphan.

In our ranks, we are encouraged to help others, but also to help ourselves rather than always being the one that needs help. We do not want to foster a "victim" mentality, but to see ourselves as member of the human family and to help anyone who needs assistance. The Christians always took care of their own first. (Galatians 6:10) We do that too.

These were selected at random, OK?

Is there something you are trying to crystallize here OB?
 

Deeje

Avid Bible Student
Premium Member
I rather think that any decisions were made by a bunch of priests, Deeje. To point to the Holy Spirit as if it singled out this one group of folks, but didn't bother to guide the rest of the World's leaders would be strange.

Christianity had no earthly priesthood OB. Their priesthood was to be served in heaven. The apostles and older men in Jerusalem made up a governing body who were called upon at times to adjudicate on issues as they arose, like the one on circumcision. The holy spirit guided these men as Christ promised that the "helper" would. These in turn passed on their direction to the whole brotherhood.
Why would God guide the world leaders when Jesus had identified satan as the ruler of this world? Satan himself declared it. (Luke 4:5-8; 1 John 5:19) God has always used 'groups of men' to guide his worshippers.

Alright.
No sacrifice.
No Blood.
No strangled meat.
No immoral sex.

Now........... is there ANYTHING else in Mosaic Law which JWs follow which is shown only in the Mosaic Laws? Anything else?

Those things mentioned were the only things specified, apart from Jesus' specific reference to marriage and divorce. (that come to mind) What have you heard?

We'll worry about what immoral-sex is another time, OK?

If you need to....:D
 

PureX

Veteran Member
I think I got your first post right then.
Since Jesus did not speak very much to non-Jews, can I take it that you don't take much notice of what he said?

I am a Deist but I do take interest in the Mosaic Laws and the Gospels.
Why?
 

Samantha Rinne

Resident Genderfluid Writer/Artist
It's time that I found out about this. One Christian might mention a law and quote from the Mosaic books, another could dismiss the same law but feel strong about other ones. Some of the more extreme Christians seem to want a Theistic Monarchy leading a Police State (oh yes!) whilst others focus upon love and understanding as the main message of Jesus. The range of tenets that fall under the title of Christianity are legion, I think.

And I cannot tie any of it down! Like willow-the-wisps some Christians will pick up and drop Mosaic Laws at whim (it seems) whilst totally disregarding the ones that others have greatest respect for.
So...... please...... Can you help with this?

To start off, let's pick any one Mosaic law ...... this was chosen by my wife by opening early pages of the bible and placing her finger down until eventually there was a law underneath, and so fate decided this one:-

Deut {24:5} When a man hath taken a new wife, he shall not go out to war, neither shall he be charged with any business:[but] he shall be free at home one year, and shall cheer up his wife which he hath taken.

OK..... So..... how many Christian business folks have a one-year paid leave (or leave of absence) scheme for their employee brides and/or grooms? If not, why not?

I don't need to think about this. The Bible already gives the answer. All of them! And none of them (though the Golden Rule and Ten Commandments still hold value, not because they are greater than other laws but because civil society would break down if everyone betrayed those laws, such as everyone stealing or killing)!

It tells us that we are being convicted by the Law. If I, as I tend to do, wear women's clothes, I suffer any jeering or embarrassment that follows. Now some of these laws are no longer even much of a thing, because few ppl still fret about eating certain meats. This sense of separation is what sin is.

However, the Law is being fulfilled by the blood of Christ. This means that I will find people who love me, regardless of how I am.

So yes, all the Law is still there, but Jesus is there.
 

shmogie

Well-Known Member
So which OT laws do you firmly stick by?

I will remind you that Christians do not abide by any Mosaic Laws unless repeated in the NT. Yes? Correct?
9 of the 10 commandments are repeatedly applied to Christians in the NT.
There are other rules and laws that are promulgated for Christians in the NT as well.
 

oldbadger

Skanky Old Mongrel!
Well we don't live in a theocracy nowadays. In modern society a church can't really make laws and enforce them.

The point about giving to the poor is interesting. Now that we have had a welfare state for so long, I suspect a lot of us think we already do a fair bit through what we pay in tax. This is one reason why I disapprove of people going to inordinate lengths to minimise their tax bills. I imagine the people you have in mind have put taxpaying in one compartment of their minds, lazily seeing it as robbery by a profligate government, while putting charity in another - and failing to see the connection. (As a matter of fact HMRC sends me every year a pie chart showing the proportion of my tax spent on health, education etc. From memory, health is the largest.)

But my experience is that people at my church are in fact pretty generous to the various charities that send people along to give us a talk and ask for our money, which happens regularly.

Oh yes. I have no doubt that many Churches and church-goers are strong supporters of charities.

Of course, under Mosaic Law they could offer charity to other kinds of needs because the Law would have provided for the poor.
 

shmogie

Well-Known Member
Theological training?
Excellent!
If the focus of your theology was Christianity, how much emphasis if any was focused upon laws from the OT, and if so, which ones, please?
I am familiar with The worship laws, the health laws, what one might call the criminal law, and the laws of mercy, e.g the cities of refuge.

Remember, the earliest Christians were Jews, and they were considered a Jewish sect. Much consideration was given to Jewish law and how it related to what would become Christianity.

The first council of the Christian Church was over this very issue, and how it relates to Gentiles.

Judaism itself, since 70 AD, has not kept it's own law, given by God, related to sacrifice, atonement, and the temple, critical laws of the OT.

These laws rightfully receive emphasis in the Church, because they illustrate the very foundation of Judaism and Christianity, mercy, justice, atonement, forgiveness , the love of God.
 

oldbadger

Skanky Old Mongrel!
Is there something you are trying to crystallize here OB?

Thankyou for your answers, if veiled, to some extent, by a theological lesson. :)

Crystallize? Hmmm...... I'm trying to obtain a crystal clear view of what Christians really do believe about life and love.
You may already have seen how one respondent has initially written that there is no Mosaic Law in their particular Creed, and then later telling me that Mosaic Law is there. I wish to learn more about such ideas.
 

oldbadger

Skanky Old Mongrel!
Christianity had no earthly priesthood OB. Their priesthood was to be served in heaven. The apostles and older men in Jerusalem made up a governing body who were called upon at times to adjudicate on issues as they arose, like the one on circumcision.
My use of the word 'Priesthood' is for the leaders of Churches.
The Elders were leaders.

The holy spirit guided these men as Christ promised that the "helper" would. These in turn passed on their direction to the whole brotherhood.
Oh no!
Look at your next Paragraph......
Why would God guide the world leaders when Jesus had identified satan as the ruler of this world? Satan himself declared it. (Luke 4:5-8; 1 John 5:19) God has always used 'groups of men' to guide his worshippers.
Ah! You mention God giving guidance.

My beliefs don't count here, but you know that most Christians believe in a Trinity, and some don't.

The Elders either prayed to God and received their guidance from God, or not. As soon as Holy Spirits are guiding the World then everybody is over half way to a Trinity already. But that's not really the point of this thread, I'm just mentioning that point.


Those things mentioned were the only things specified, apart from Jesus' specific reference to marriage and divorce. (that come to mind) What have you heard?
I have heard the most dreadful things, read them, actually.
Example? Hmmmmm.... go in to google ........ no..... change of heart.... I won't mention names here. Alright, try an entry like 'Denver Pastor' and see if anything comes up. I'll try just that in a minute.
 

oldbadger

Skanky Old Mongrel!
Alright, try an entry like 'Denver Pastor' and see if anything comes up. I'll try just that in a minute.

@Deeje ! Are you there? That didn't work. The name I expected to appear was completely submerged under accounts of other Pastors from Denver who have beaten up wives, abused kids and messed up funerals.

But (by chance) that obviously can show just how much variation is there is within the term 'Christian'.

I will just wait and see if anything my turn up on this thread.
 

oldbadger

Skanky Old Mongrel!
Oh...... You didn't want to answer my question.
I'm interested in the history of Jesus, model boats, our dogs and living with my wife. I just am.

Now, since Jesus was only talking to Jews, do you take any notice of what he said?
If you don't, then why are you a Christian?
 
Top