Old Testament to Christians

[Sleeppy]

He said do as they say not as they do.

That's what the Greek says but not the Hebrew.

Anyway, what does this have to do with subject of this thread? The Pharisees were not promoting the Old Testament, they were promoting their own traditions.

Thanks for the video.. Very enlightening. Haven't learned something this exciting in a while.

So to Roger- It actually states to do everything Moses commands, because the Pharisees were assuming his authority (which better aids your position, but reaffirms mine). And therefore here is my question: who's authority did Moses assume? Therefore, my position is to do what God has spoken to me, for me to do. I don't accept commands because they are 'rote', or commonly accepted and practiced, so that they will be learned. I accept commands which prove themselves to me, in accordance with God's natural laws. Adam learned by trial and error, and while I do believe Moses and the ancient Israelites learned in similar manner (not by vocal revelation from Sinai), I do not believe the wisdom of our ancestors, of men, is ever the Most High authority. God maintains His own seat.

 

[Sleeppy]

Because of the numbers involved, I have to be brief.

In regards to the above:
Dt. 29(28): "Concerns us and our descendents forever, that we may carry out all the words of this Law."

Psalms 19(8): "The Law of the Lord is perfect… (10) the ordinances of the Lord are true; all of them are just."

Ps. 119(160): "permanence is Your words chief trait, each of Your just ordinances is everlasting."

Baruch 4(1): "the Law endures forever."





Secondly, the conditions that we lived under almost 3000 years ago changed as scripture was being written. The punishments as found in Torah reflect more of our "Sinai Experience" whereas we were in the Sinai and had no jails or prisons, thus lending to use executions quite often. Once we were settled into towns and cities whereas we built jails and prisons, the punishments in general became less harsh, and this clearly shows up in the Writings of the Prophets.

Why would it make sense to have the same exact applications when we began to live in a very different lifestyle? Imagine if American law precisely followed the law in England 3000 years ago. How would that make any sense?

But it is also true that even when Moses was alive, he was supposedly adding to the Torah. The Torah wasn't compiled in one sitting (or by Moses alone). The idea that it was perfect can't be strictly, literally true. The Oral Torah was also compiled centuries after the written Torah.

 

[metis]

But it is also true that even when Moses was alive, he was adding to the Torah. The Torah wasn't compiled in one sitting. And so the idea that it was perfect can't be literally true. The Oral Torah was also compiled centuries after the written Torah.

Just as a point of clarification, even though Moses came down with the Decalogue in written form, as found in "Exodus", if you keep reading he explains that the additional Laws were from God, so there's a gradual revealing of them as we go through Torah. Hey, cut Moses some slack-- do you think it took 40 days and nights for him to learn only 10?

The "oral law" is not considered to be on par with the written but is more clarification and application oriented. For example, in Leviticus it states that we are to follow the slaughter procedure with animals God directed us to use, but no where in either the Torah or Tanakh is that procedure explained, so it came from the "oral law", which eventually got written into the Mishnah and Talmud.

 

[4consideration]

***Mod Post***

This thread is in the Christianity DIR. No debating is allowed. If you are posting here and are not Christian, your posts should at least be within the basic tenants of Christianity -- and at the very least should not be criticizing Christians (or any other group,) or Christianity, in their own forum.​

Here's a reminder of Rule 10 that applies to DIR conversations.

10. Discuss Individual Religions Forums/Same Faith Debates/"Only Sections" The DIR subforums are for the express use for discussion by that specific group. They are not to be used for debate by anyone. People of other groups or faiths may post respectful questions to increase their understanding. Questions of a rhetorical or argumentative nature or that counter the beliefs of that DIR are not permitted. DIR areas are not to be used as cover to bash others outside the faith. The DIR forums are strictly moderated and posts are subject to editing or removal.

-For any DIR or discussion sub-forum that is colored blue, non-members of that area are limited only to respectful questions, and are not allowed to make any non-question posts.

-For any DIR or discussion sub-forum that is colored green, non-members of that area may make respectful posts that comply with the tenets and spirit of that area. This includes questions, as well as knowledgeable comments.

The Same Faith Debates subforum is specifically for debate between members of the same faith. Members that are not part of a same faith debate thread's selected faith may not post at all in those threads. The Political "Only" subforums are also used specifically for that group and may not be posted in by members that do not correspond to the political position of the subforum. These two forums are colored purple.

 

[Estro Felino]

Jesus abolished all the Judaic laws that contradict the precept "Love thy neighbor as thyself".

so God loves gay people. And He doesn't want them to become straight.
Besides, Jesus said: "whatever you did to the least of my brothers, you did to me"

so killing a human being is like killing God.
That's why we abolished the "eye for an eye thing". Death penalty is against Christianity
Killing is always wrong. God loves even the worst of the criminals.

As for food, the NT says we can eat whatever we want

 

[Sleeppy]

Just as a point of clarification, even though Moses came down with the Decalogue in written form, as found in "Exodus", if you keep reading he explains that the additional Laws were from God, so there's a gradual revealing of them as we go through Torah. Hey, cut Moses some slack-- do you think it took 40 days and nights for him to learn only 10?

The "oral law" is not considered to be on par with the written but is more clarification and application oriented. For example, in Leviticus it states that we are to follow the slaughter procedure with animals God directed us to use, but no where in either the Torah or Tanakh is that procedure explained, so it came from the "oral law", which eventually got written into the Mishnah and Talmud.

I don't think Moses received these Laws on Mount Sinai.. I think they (including the Decalogue) were compiled over time, according to the gradual growth of ancestral wisdom. I really hate that some of us are being led to believe they all came within that 40 day period, through one person. It's extremely hard for me to believe, especially considering the golden calf incident. I can't imagine being led out of slavery by God Himself, in the midst of miracles for several decades, and then deciding to worship a seemingly random golden calf, because a man didn't come down from a mountain in less than 2 months. I really don't know much about Islam, but this is also the reason I don't trust Islam's claim that Gabriel revealed the Quran to Muhammed, in a cave. Or the Mormon claim that these golden tablets were found according to the direction of an angel.

Do you honestly believe Moses received the Decalogue, and a perfect Law, from God in 40 days and nights, on Mount Sinai? Or do you align yourself more with historical findings?

 

[dantech]

I don't think Moses received these Laws on Mount Sinai.. I think they (including the Decalogue) were compiled over time, according to the gradual growth of ancestral wisdom. I really hate that some of us are being led to believe they all came within that 40 day period, through one person. It's extremely hard for me to believe, especially considering the golden calf incident. I can't imagine being led out of slavery by God Himself, in the midst of miracles for several decades, and then deciding to worship a seemingly random golden calf, because a man didn't come down from a mountain in less than 2 months. I really don't know much about Islam, but this is also the reason I don't trust Islam's claim that Gabriel revealed the Quran to Muhammed, in a cave. Or the Mormon claim that these golden tablets were found according to the direction of an angel.

Do you honestly believe Moses received the Decalogue, and a perfect Law, from God in 40 days and nights, on Mount Sinai? Or do you align yourself more with historical findings?

Your position is moot in a thread asking Christian literalists a question.

And by the way, there is more to the Golden Calf incident than them having just worshipped a seemingly random calf because a man didn't make it back in time.

 

[dantech]

***Mod Post***

This thread is in the Christianity DIR. No debating is allowed. If you are posting here and are not Christian, your posts should at least be within the basic tenants of Christianity -- and at the very least should not be criticizing Christians (or any other group,) or Christianity, in their own forum.​

Here's a reminder of Rule 10 that applies to DIR conversations.

10. Discuss Individual Religions Forums/Same Faith Debates/"Only Sections" The DIR subforums are for the express use for discussion by that specific group. They are not to be used for debate by anyone. People of other groups or faiths may post respectful questions to increase their understanding. Questions of a rhetorical or argumentative nature or that counter the beliefs of that DIR are not permitted. DIR areas are not to be used as cover to bash others outside the faith. The DIR forums are strictly moderated and posts are subject to editing or removal.

-For any DIR or discussion sub-forum that is colored blue, non-members of that area are limited only to respectful questions, and are not allowed to make any non-question posts.

-For any DIR or discussion sub-forum that is colored green, non-members of that area may make respectful posts that comply with the tenets and spirit of that area. This includes questions, as well as knowledgeable comments.

The Same Faith Debates subforum is specifically for debate between members of the same faith. Members that are not part of a same faith debate thread's selected faith may not post at all in those threads. The Political "Only" subforums are also used specifically for that group and may not be posted in by members that do not correspond to the political position of the subforum. These two forums are colored purple.

Can this thread be moved to the debate forums as this is turning into that?

 

[Sleeppy]

Your position is moot in a thread asking Christian literalists a question.

And by the way, there is more to the Golden Calf incident than them having just worshipped a seemingly random calf because a man didn't make it back in time.

It's a completely relevant point. The thread isn't only aimed at Christian literalists, but Christians in general. But my point is even more relevant to Christian literalists, and Jews, because it questions the authenticity of the Torah's origin, and its unquestionable, but assumed perfection.

There may be more to that incident, but I'm betting whatever that additional information is, is actually what's moot here.

 

[dantech]

It's a completely relevant point. The thread isn't only aimed at Christian literalists, but Christians in general. But my point is even more relevant to Christian literalists, and Jews, because it questions the authenticity of the Torah's origin, and its unquestionable, but assumed perfection.

What I mean is that this thread is not asking a question to those who question its authenticity. Otherwise, whatever the scriptural question, one could just brush it aside and blame it on corruption.

My OP is clearly aimed towards those who believe in its authenticity, otherwise, why would any law from it still be binding?

My question was basically to those Christians who believe the Torah's laws are no longer binding on Christians, yet they still condemn homosexuality. My question is why?

 

[Pegg]

Ok, I see the problem now. Did Jesus make the Law obsolete? It depends on who you ask. According to the Gospel of Matthew, the answer would be no.

“1Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples: 2“The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat. 3So you must be careful to do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach.”” (Matthew 23:1-3)​

On the other hand the Apostle Paul wrote the opposite.

“Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us, for it is written: "Cursed is everyone who is hung on a pole."” (Galatians 3:13)​

Paul did not mean that people did not have to obey Gods laws....
Gods laws were built into the conscience of mankind and that is why, even before the mosiac law was put down in writing, people knew Gods standards and people lived by them.

But the mosaic law was a religious requirement and a means of worshiping God based on a set of pre-defined regulations in accord with a priesthood who administered divine justice which included the death penalty. That is what Paul was talking about when he said we have been redeemed from the 'curse of the law'.... the curse of the law is the death penalty.

So Paul is not contradicting Jesus. Jesus spoke those words when the mosaic law was still in effect and sinners were to be put to death under the mosaic law. But Jesus sacrifice redeemed mankind from the 'curse of the law' as Jesus himself stated:
Matt 20:28 Just as the Son of man came, not to be ministered to, but to minister and to give his life*as a ransom in exchange for many.”
And why did Jesus offer this 'ransom'??? Because as it says in John 3:16 “For God loved the world so much that he gave his only-begotten Son, so that everyone exercising faith in him might not be destroyed but have everlasting life"

So God wants to give everlasting life to those who exercise faith in Jesus. Do you think that's possible under the mosaic law code with its prescribed death penalty?

 

[Sleeppy]

What I mean is that this thread is not asking a question to those who question its authenticity. Otherwise, whatever the scriptural question, one could just brush it aside and blame it on corruption.

My OP is clearly aimed towards those who believe in its authenticity, otherwise, why would any law from it still be binding?

My question was basically to those Christians who believe the Torah's laws are no longer binding on Christians, yet they still condemn homosexuality. My question is why?

Ok. But I'm not questioning the authenticity of the whole. It's just not possible to dismiss the whole, as a Christian. I only question certain portions, and only the authenticity of the whole's origins.

I know certain laws are perpetually binding, because they are constantly being proven- some of them daily, or even in fundamental social interaction.

Christians are more inclined to need observable, or logical reasoning behind their adherence. Without going into too much detail, I think the common argument among Christians, concerning homosexuality, involves preservation of the 'original' (Adam and Eve) family unit. We like to think women are for men, and vice versa.. And that children should have male and female parental guidance.

 

[dantech]

Ok. But I'm not questioning the authenticity of the whole. It's just not possible to dismiss the whole, as a Christian. I only question certain portions, and only the authenticity of the whole's origins.

so you decide whether a part is the Torah is authentic, or isn't. On what basis do you make these decisions?

I know certain laws are perpetually binding, because they are constantly being proven- some of them daily, or even in fundamental social interaction.

Example for one would be...?

Christians are more inclined to need observable, or logical reasoning behind their adherence. Without going into too much detail, I think the common argument among Christians, concerning homosexuality, involves preservation of the 'original' (Adam and Eve) family unit. We like to think women are for men, and vice versa.. And that children should have male and female parental guidance.

logic varies according to each person. Why is not preserving the 'original' family unit condemning one to Hell, is there a law that explains this in the NT? Otherwise, you can hardly argue that this is a logical position.Or maybe that's just my perspective...

 

[Brickjectivity]

I've read quite a few times over the years on these forums, from Christians, that the laws of the Old Testament are obsolete because Jesus fulfilled them. Is this the case for all Christians? and if so, why is homosexuality prohibited? What's the difference between that, and say, the dietary laws?

For most members of churches today and for the last fifty years that is the case, yes. As a result Christians (including me) tend to be very superstitious. You would be too. Look at this dude's web site: The Churches where he shows how superstitious he is. If a church has a steeple it automatically means they are connected to pagan idolatry. Notice his comment about the Anglican church that they have 'Gay bishops running rampant', like it were full of raging elephants! Yes, running across the floor. That is what Anglican bishops do. They run back and forth all day long. Think this man's opinion is off the wall and unusual? Wrong. He's typical of the young, fervent and dedicated man who tries to make sense of the NT with an obsolete OT.

And how many churches believe that Christmas trees are a way for Satan to sneek Asherah poles into Christian homes? A lot of them. 'Oh but that isn't a superstition' they will tell me. No, it makes total sense that those terrible, awful Christmas trees are Satanic. Goodness knows what cheap tricks Satan will try next! (I hope toilet paper isn't Satanic.)

Now drop into Africa and visit the churches there and what will you see? They will have combined superstitions about voodoo and various sticks and stones with their Christian faith, and none of it will make any sense. Ooh, Satan is here, and Satan is there! Africa is a scary place to live! In North America here in USA good ol' hymns are giving way to the 'New move' of the Spirit which suddenly doesn't like hymns anymore -- (because they're too stodgy?). Yes, the Holy Spirit has officially repudiated hymns! But that isn't superstition! South America is a turf war between the 'Protestants' (who desperately need synthesizers & microphones for their 'Worship' services) and the 'Catholics' (who are into exorcism and bleeding statues). Honestly I'm not surprised that our Brazillian forum member is so opposed to theism, considering the choices he has over there.

So why is homosexuality prohibited? Like anything that is prohibited, somebody has called it 'Satanic'. Did you know I had a cousin who told me Star Trek was Satanic? Yes. Star Trek is Satanic, and if Star Trek is Satanic then I'll be damned if I'm going to let homosexuals not be Satanic. First give me my Star Trek back, and then we'll talk.

 

[Sleeppy]

so you decide whether a part is the Torah is authentic, or isn't. On what basis do you make these decisions?

Experience, and historical evidence. I don't actually believe the Adam and Eve narrative is literally historical, but I acknowledge that like Adam, I am required to acquire knowledge according to trial and error- I have to test both good and bad, to know which is which. Just one example.

Example for one would be...?

Honoring father and mother. With science, we've come into some pretty amazing knowledge about the way God created us. We inherit 23 chromosomes from our mother and 23 complementary chromosomes from our father. Our DNA determines who we are, and what we will be inclined to do. So, this commandment is literally, physically and spiritually true. I cannot honor my father and mother any more than they have honored me- unless what they have honored me with is profitable. I think that's something worth thinking about.

Logic varies according to each person. Why is not preserving the 'original' family unit condemning one to Hell, is there a law that explains this in the NT? Otherwise, you can hardly argue that this is a logical position.Or maybe that's just my perspective...

I think it's more intricate than I can explain with any decency. I don't think hell is some place where fire literally burns, waiting for homosexuals. I think hell involves our experience right here on Earth. If scientific studies suggest that homosexual couples raise equally healthy children as heterosexuals do (which isn't saying much), I'm not the one to ignore that. But, I think mental health is something we really haven't quite figured out completely. We really don't know all the effects of having two parents of only one sex. I like to think nature/God created males and females specifically for one another, and that the complimentary sex organs which enable childbirth are a proof. -- So for me, hell results from negative actions producing negative reactions. If there are no negative reactions, I don't claim there were negative actions. I trust God to judge things moreso as they occur, and don't rely on the idea that hell is waiting after we've all died. Judgement day is everyday.

 

[roger1440]

Paul did not mean that people did not have to obey Gods laws....
Gods laws were built into the conscience of mankind and that is why, even before the mosiac law was put down in writing, people knew Gods standards and people lived by them.

But the mosaic law was a religious requirement and a means of worshiping God based on a set of pre-defined regulations in accord with a priesthood who administered divine justice which included the death penalty. That is what Paul was talking about when he said we have been redeemed from the 'curse of the law'.... the curse of the law is the death penalty.

So Paul is not contradicting Jesus. Jesus spoke those words when the mosaic law was still in effect and sinners were to be put to death under the mosaic law. But Jesus sacrifice redeemed mankind from the 'curse of the law' as Jesus himself stated:
Matt 20:28 Just as the Son of man came, not to be ministered to, but to minister and to give his life*as a ransom in exchange for many.”
And why did Jesus offer this 'ransom'??? Because as it says in John 3:16 “For God loved the world so much that he gave his only-begotten Son, so that everyone exercising faith in him might not be destroyed but have everlasting life"

So God wants to give everlasting life to those who exercise faith in Jesus. Do you think that's possible under the mosaic law code with its prescribed death penalty?

By “God’s law” I assume you mean the Noahide Laws. All of mankind are obligated to obey those laws, regardless if they Jewish or not. The Mosaic Law demands it to be kept. There is no provision within the Mosaic Law to make it obsolete. It defines Judaism.

 

[roger1440]

Thanks for the video.. Very enlightening. Haven't learned something this exciting in a while.

So to Roger- It actually states to do everything Moses commands, because the Pharisees were assuming his authority (which better aids your position, but reaffirms mine). And therefore here is my question: who's authority did Moses assume? Therefore, my position is to do what God has spoken to me, for me to do. I don't accept commands because they are 'rote', or commonly accepted and practiced, so that they will be learned. I accept commands which prove themselves to me, in accordance with God's natural laws. Adam learned by trial and error, and while I do believe Moses and the ancient Israelites learned in similar manner (not by vocal revelation from Sinai), I do not believe the wisdom of our ancestors, of men, is ever the Most High authority. God maintains His own seat.

Moses assumed no one’s authority. God was the authority, or to put it more appropriate, God was the author . Moses was simply a spokesman. He was God’s mouth piece.

 

[Sleeppy]

Moses assumed no one’s authority. God was the authority, or to put it more appropriate, God was the author . Moses was simply a spokesman. He was God’s mouth piece.

Which is the same thing the Pharisees said/say.. But, fair enough. That's the standard belief on prophets. -- I have to take into account historical accuracy, when I consider these things.

 

[roger1440]

Which is the same thing the Pharisees said/say.. But, fair enough. That's the standard belief on prophets. -- I have to take into account historical accuracy, when I consider these things.

That"s what prophets do. If they didn't they wouldn't be a prophet. The Bible isn't a history book, although it may contain history. It's primary purpose is to lead people to God. It may use events from the past to convey its message but at all times its the message not the event that is more important.

 

[Sleeppy]

That"s what prophets do. If they didn't they wouldn't be a prophet. The Bible isn't a history book, although it may contain history. It's primary purpose is to lead people to God. It may use events from the past to convey its message but at all times its the message not the event that is more important.

That's not a valid argument. God doesn't need to misrepresent history to make Himself known. We can accept accurate historical realities, because they actually produce accurate revelations about our realities. We shouldn't be misrepresenting the "Truth, the Way, and the Life."

Anybody can claim to be a prophet. And many false prophecies are still lingering around, waiting to be fulfilled. We need to get back to efficiency; we shouldn't be accepting ideas wholesale because they came from someone believed to be a prophet. This is the problem with the Pharisees, Moses, and everyone else we like to call prophets- they're not always right. There is only One who is good. If God can reveal the truth to one person, He can reveal it to all His creation. And while Jeremiah partly prophecies correctly, concerning the knowledge of the least through to the greatest, he also made many false prophecies based solely in cultural bias.