Obey the entire Bible or pick and choose

It appears you missed the biblical teaching that the Law was for OT Israel and we are now no longer under the Law. The Law was a schoolmaster to guard until Christ (Gal 3); Christ is the end of the Law. So your poll really has no bearing on whether or not we obey the whole Bible. It rather shows a misunderstanding of basic Bible teaching with regard to the Law.

 

David, Larry and I have disagreed about a number of things, but I totally agree with him here, and your question after that shows you have not understood something God told Moses in the Old Testament. After the Ten Commandments were given, God specifically said that the following laws were for the Israelites.

Now, a couple of other corrections -- horses, donkeys, and mules are all the same kind of animal biologically. All the same 'baramin' or 'kind.'

Homosexuality injunctions are not confined simply to the Israelites because they are repeated a number of times throughout the Bible, including the New Testament, so that we know they are for all people.

Please note, as well, that the Ten Commandments can be followed personally, but the rest of the law, for the Israelites, required a full political set-up to follow them and enforce them.

Also, the idea of simply cursing one's parents being deserving of the death penalty is a bad misunderstanding of what the Hebrew is saying. The word used means to cause to fall into disrepute -- in other words, it is an adult son or daughter saying things that cause the name of his or her parents to fall into disrepute. In other words, attempts to destroy the reputation and name of your parents was deserving the death penalty; not simply swearing at them!

That much has already been covered in the Bible studies below...

 

The NT believer is not under the OT Law (the Mosaic Law) ... none of it. The Law existed as a whole. To be under part of it is to be under all of it. Paul condemns those who would place people under part of it. That is what the whole book of Galatians is about. Some aspects of the Law are based outside the Law. They have continuing relevance as is evidenced by their expression or grounding outside the Law. For instance, murder is condemned outside the Law and capital punishment for murder is substantiated outside the Law (Gen 9). Therefore, murder is a continuing provision for the Law. Homosexuality is condemned outside the Law (Rom 1; 1 Cor 6; Gal 5). Therefore, homosexuality is still a sin against God.

The principles are found by realizing the distinction between the Law and law, by recognizing those things which have bases or expressions outside the Law, and by seeing what the NT says about role of the Law in the NT era. These principles will prevent the abuse or misapplication of the Law.

 

We're still friends aren't we?????

 

The Law (which is a bad translation actually should be translated Instructions) is for Israel you are right. But have you ever wonder how many gentiles (pagans) came in to the promise land? NONE. I mean you know tons of them came out of egypt and were going to learn about the one true G-d. And eventually became one people.

How many gates is there in the Messianic Temple? 12, one for every tribe of Israel, but none for gentiles? why? Because they are included into Israel just like then, is now. There is nothing new under the heavens!

1 Peter 2:9-10 says quoting from the the OT as you call it: But you are a chosen people (That is Israel not the church), a royal priesthood, a holy nation (ISRAEL), a people belonging to God, that you may declare the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light. Once you were not a people, but now you are the people of God; once you had not received mercy, but now you have received mercy.

So you who are grafted in, and I who I do belong naturally to the true vine are one in Messian Yeshua (Jesus). G-d has one bride, that is Israel, not two "church and Israel".

What thinketh thee?

Karl
www.cmy.on.ca

[ November 27, 2002, 12:48 PM: Message edited by: Mevaser ]

 

Saying "the Law doesn't apply anymore" is still somewhat disingenuous considering the fundamentalist perspective of the nature of God relative to sin. Fundamentalists generally say "God does not change - and what was unacceptable to God is always unacceptable to God."

Yet apparently God thought it was OK at one time for some people to kill disreputable children. But no more.

I genuinely believe that fundamentalists put a filter on when they read the Hebrew Bible. It's something to the effect of "God must really believe and think like a 20th Century fundamentalist Christian, so I'm going to interpret everything I read in that context."

Joshua

 

lev.19: what about vs.15-18; & 20:22 ?

 

The notion that OT law no longer applies because of Christ is a gross misunderstanding of Christ's statement that he came to fulfill the law. That would mean the NT has greater weight than the OT, and that's contrary to everything that we say about scripture being divinely inspired.

However, failing to see the cultural weight of the OT laws is also a misunderstanding of those same laws. We need to ask ourselves why some of the OT laws were enacted.

Lastly, we need to stop ridiculing those in the Christian community who choose to continue to follow some of the OT laws. I've seen on this very board, Christians slandering other Christians for simply choosing to follow kosher dietary laws.

 

The questions as presented are disingenuous. All of the rules listed are part of God's law - merely turning to the given references is enough to prove that

However, the pollster fails to take the distinction between moral law (questions of moral right and wrong), civil law (pertaining to the government of the nation of Israel), and ceremonial law (pertaining to the temple worship system) into consideration. The first is binding upon all men because it reflects God's moral character (and would include such laws as the prohibition of homosexuality). The second applies only to citizens of the nation of Israel, which most people are not (and would include such things as the penalties for specific transgressions, e.g. the death penalty for adultery). The third pertains only to participation in the Temple sacrifices, and they were abolished by Christ's death.

 

really good summary, Ransom. Thank you.

 

Clearly, this thread is another attempt by apostates who call themselves Christians to downgrade the Bible. They should be ashamed of themselves. Their judgement will follow unless they repent.

 

Excuse me, sir, but who are you calling apostate?

 

Ransom, that is a specious distinction, and one that only has bearing for people who want to simultaneously proclaim that God's moral pronouncements are eternal and also proclaim that some of them don't apply any more.

All ethical systems grow out of civic morality. There is no need for a moral system if people are not living in communities with each other. The writers of the Levitical code give no indication that the standards they set - which they view as God's standards for anyone who wishes to follow God - fit into separate categories.

Joshua

 

I'm sorry Joshua, but you are wrong.

Either that or you preach at "an altar of earth" or an altar of undressed stones with no steps going up.

 

Gal. 3"24&25.
"The Law was given as a tutor to lead us to Christ. Now that Christ has come, we are no longer under the supervision of the Law."

Are we still under the Law of animal sacrifice or may we pick and choose in this case?

MR

 

Rev. Joshua said:

All ethical systems grow out of civic morality.

Speaking of specious claims: warmed-over Rousseauism cloaked in Christian garb.

 

The way those answers were worded I couldn't answer this poll.