Leviticus

[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]

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.

http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3054&page=3

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-

 

[jewscout]

Leviticus is part of the five books that G-d gave to Moses on Mt. Sinai. Leviticus is essentially additional laws and commandments that G-d meant for the Jewish people. Non-jews only have 7 laws, the Noahide Laws. Yes one of them is do not commit sexual immorality, but that is relative and G-d is lax when it comes to judging the non-jew (i mean technicaly non-jews aren't to worship engraven images which would include the symbol of the crucifix which is in most churches, however most jewish scholars would argue that sense they are non-jews the standards aren't quite the same).
But go through the 613 mitzvot http://www.jewfaq.org/613.htm there is nothing in there about lesbianism so, technically, lesibianism isn't seen as being something "sexually immoral". It's just 2 guys can't get together.
I'm not saying this is wrong or right that's just what the rules are for jews.
I have my own thoughts on that but i'll save that for a later post.

Later:jiggy:

 

[logos]

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

I think he means this type of bashing. He never singled one particular religion, but you guys seem to single out Christianity as its cause. On the positive side, at least it bothers you because it is better to be noticed negatively than to not be noticed at all

 

[Pah]

I think he means this type of bashing. He never singled one particular religion, but you guys seem to single out Christianity as its cause. On the positive side, at least it bothers you because it is better to be noticed negatively than to not be noticed at all

I don't see Jews trying to take over this country.

-pah-

 

[chuck010342]

leviticus is not abolished

leviticus is used for study but not applical to today

leviticus is for the Jews they have the yoke of the law

Leviticus is under the old testiment the old way and the old covenent

today we live for jesus who is the new testiment the new way and the new covenent

 

[Pah]

leviticus is not abolished

leviticus is used for study but not applical to today

leviticus is for the Jews they have the yoke of the law

Leviticus is under the old testiment the old way and the old covenent

today we live for jesus who is the new testiment the new way and the new covenent

I find it simply amazing that rationalization of this sort would relieve the Christian of the words of Christ in Mark 7

If parts of the Old Testament is only for Jewish following, why is any of it included in the canons - why are maniacal Christians fighting the Constitution to include the Ten Commandments - why are the prophecies spewed throughout the New Testament. More Christians at the cafeteria is all I can think of and it's sad, really sad to be so arrogant about what you do choose to follow.

-pah-

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Dogma is the perfect vending machine:

Drop in a quarter.
Wind it up.
And out comes the drivel ...​

... all without requiring an ounce of knowledge or understanding of early Christianity.

 

[logos]

I don't see Jews trying to take over this country.

-pah-

Take over? How are Christians trying to take over, if anything they are being asked to stop being Christians and asserting their beliefs. In other words, be a Christian in name but foregoing one's Christian identity.

 

[linwood]

I intentionally dropped this thread months ago after Scott wrote this statement.

Scott
..typical as of late to have a open exchange of ideas somehow turn into Christian bashing.

He wrote it in reply to this...

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

Now it`s back up again with people implying I`m bashing Christians because they .."believe it is right to force others to go against their own moral code.

I resent it.

Two days ago 11 states voted to install discrimination within their constitutions.
Discrimination based on nothing more than the word of the Bible and some Christians interpretation of it.
People who believe these interpretations are nothing more than myth are now being forced to go agaist their own moral code.

Christianity has yet again forced it`s intolerance upon us all.

Don`t speak to me of "bashing".

 

[robtex]

logos try to see this from a non christian prespective. You go to a hotel you get a bible in the room. In some cities in the deep south there are more churches than bars or pubs. The current president spews Christian justifications on a regular basis. Down here in south at least, and when I lived in northern Cali, Christians knock on your door every month. At work I think all of us non-christians have been asked to convert at least once. I have been asked to convert on average once every two months for the last two years. There is fights to get the 10 commandments put into the court AA is a Christian organization. Christanity comes up in interviews (at least in mine), the church has an aggressive recruitment campaign. When you are a Christian I am sure you don't take a 2nd notice to this but if you are a non-christian or worse an athiests you feel constant pressure, even if friendly to convert. Conversion is the act of taking over.

 

[logos]

When you are a Christian I am sure you don't take a 2nd notice to this but if you are a non-christian or worse an athiests you feel constant pressure, even if friendly to convert. Conversion is the act of taking over.

No one can pressure you to do something you do not want to do. If you feel pressure that is your conscience trying to work out whatever it is you feel is right in that situation.

 

[chuck010342]

I find it simply amazing that rationalization of this sort would relieve the Christian of the words of Christ in Mark 7

If parts of the Old Testament is only for Jewish following, why is any of it included in the canons - why are maniacal Christians fighting the Constitution to include the Ten Commandments - why are the prophecies spewed throughout the New Testament. More Christians at the cafeteria is all I can think of and it's sad, really sad to be so arrogant about what you do choose to follow.

-pah-

Wow your right I can't believe that jesus told us not to follow the teachings of God oh no my faith is wrong I have been wrong all this time.....

in case you can' t tell I'm being sarcastic

you violated one rule of law when dealing with the bible

you took the passage out of context. but it into context and Mark 7 makes sense

 

[linwood]

No one can pressure you to do something you do not want to do. If you feel pressure that is your conscience trying to work out whatever it is you feel is right in that situation.

Walk a mile in the persons shoes you are analysing before you attempt to analyze.