Why God forbid the Jews to eat Pork.

So you are saying Paul eliminated a commandment of God? What authority does Paul or anyone have to eliminate God's commandments?

 

Yes, Paul eliminated an OT law. What authority? He was inspired directly by God to write it in scripture. Since he had God's authority, it's as clear a scriptural mandate as though God spoke it himself. So, actually, God eliminated the OT law of circumcision. If that were not true, He would not have inspired scripture with that message.

Unless you don't believe scripture is the inspired and infallible Word of God. Is that what you're telling us?

[ August 04, 2005, 01:17 PM: Message edited by: Johnv ]

 

No, I'm saying God eliminated the old covenant under the Law when he brought forth the new covenant in Jesus' blood. God never intended the Law with its empty rituals to be followed forever. The Law brings about the knowledge of sin and the knowledge that we must be redeemed from death by a sacrifice. The Law forecasts Jesus' sacrifice and the new covenant that is to come. Now that the new covenant has come, the old covenant has passed away.

Go read Hebrews 10 and see if you can reconcile the continued following of the empty Law with the redemption that we have in Jesus!

The passage says that the sacrifices were made over and over because they were incapable of covering our sins. If they had been capable, the sacrifices would have ceased because they would not be needed any more. Guess what--we have had our perfect sacrifice! The blood of Jesus is sufficient to cleanse forever, so no further sacrifices should be made.

We have been purified, we do not need a sacrifice. Since we have been purified, we no longer need the Law pointing out our sinfulness to lead us to Christ. Why should we saddle ourselves with ceremonial uncleanness that was simply meant to point out the sinfullness of our souls when we have been made spiritually pure in Christ? Those ceremonially unclean were required to ritually wash themselves or to make a sacrifice, symbolically washing away the uncleanness. Since we are cleansed by Jesus' blood, how could we become unclean? When we start to follow the Law that forecast Jesus, we are telling Jesus that his blood is insufficient for us--we are falling away from grace and depending on works, whether we admit it or not.

Paul himself stated that Christians do not need to be circumcised and that they should not be circumcised if they are not already. He described those that demand we follow the Law as people who try to make themselves slaves of God when he wants us to be sons.

You seem to be really intent to not change your mind. Right now the idea of the need to follow ceremonial law is embedded in you so far I don't think we could dislodge it with a jackhammer. I'm much like that--if I am debating something, I will defend my point of view to the end. It often happens that a debate ends and that my opponent and I seem to have gotten nowhere, but with time I think back on the evidence for both sides and often modify my position. Don't stop thinking about this and reading Acts, Galatians, Romans, and especially Hebrews.

I don't anticipate adding much more to this thread because we are going over ground once again that we've been over many times before. I've said what I believe God has intended for us and the Law, and I don't think I have anything else to add.

 

Thou shalt keep therefore his statutes, and his commandments, which I command thee this day, that it may go well with thee, and with thy children after thee, and that thou mayest prolong [thy] days upon the earth, which the LORD thy God giveth thee, for ever. Deut 4:40


O that there were such an heart in them, that they would fear me, and keep all my commandments always, that it might be well with them, and with their children for ever! Deut 5:29

That thou mightest fear the LORD thy God, to keep all his statutes and his commandments, which I command thee, thou, and thy son, and thy son's son, all the days of thy life; and that thy days may be prolonged. Deut 6:2

Know therefore that the LORD thy God, he [is] God, the faithful God, which keepeth covenant and mercy with them that love him and keep his commandments to a thousand generations; Deut 7:9

Beware that thou forget not the LORD thy God, in not keeping his commandments, and his judgments, and his statutes, which I command thee this day: Deut 8:11

Therefore thou shalt love the LORD thy God, and keep his charge, and his statutes, and his judgments, and his commandments, alway. Deut 11:1

A blessing, if ye obey the commandments of the LORD your God, which I command you this day: Deut 11:27

By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God, and keep his commandments. For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous. 1 John 5:2-3

Blessed [are] they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city. Rev 22:14

Need I say more??

 

You're maintaining that God lied in scripture. You've said quite enough.

 

I never said God lied, you have by saying He eliminated His commandments

 

Scripture says He eliminated His commandments, plainly and clearly. If God wantes to eliminate one of His laws, He's allowed to. If you have a problem with it, take it up wiht Him.

You indeed said God lied when He inspired Peter and Paul to write in scripture that circumcision is no longer necessary.

 

For I [am] the LORD, I change not Mal 3:6...

I guess He didnt mean it??

God said His Laws were forever, if He eliminates them then he has changed so He cannot be God. He is either the same or He has changed.

 

You're again twisting scripture to propogate a false claim. God changing and the need for certain laws changing are two completely separate issues.

Then you are calling Peter and Paul liars, and scripture is not the infallible and inspired Word of God. There's no way for you to back out of that.

 

Once again you are ignoring the factthe Paul and Peter were battling a false teaching. Not the practice itself. For example, there are people who believe that people are redeemed by water baptism. That is obvivously wrong but do we eliminate the practice of baptism? Of course not, the same logic applies.

 

Scripture doesn't say that. It discusses false teachings, but the issue of circumcision not being required is separately discussed.

 

Except that Paul did eliminate circumcision. . . Hmm. . . That would indicate that circumcision is no longer required.

 

If you refuse to see that Paul was battling a false teaching then I can do nothing. I can only ask that God open your eyes.

 

I don't see how you can reconcile this position with the fact that Paul told Christians not to be circumcised.

 

How can quoting the inspired text - be error or calling God "a liar"??

Isn't that going a bit too far?

In Christ,

Bob

 

IF we take Gal 5 to "an extreme" then it easily becomes apparent that Paul is "causing Timothy to Fall from Grace" in Acts 16:1-2.

#1. Circumcision was never required of Gentiles even in the OT. Paul argued against the "rabbinical tradition" that would ADD that as a requirement for Gentiles in the NT.

#2. Paul is never quoted as telling Jews that they can not be circumcised. In fact as TK pointed out in Acts 21:23 we see Paul going before non-Christian Priests and taking a "vow" just to SHOW conformity withIN the Jewish culture for the requirements for Jews.

BTW - what does this have to do with the title of the thread?

In Christ,

Bob

 

He isn't talking about that post, he was referring to our ongoing discussion where TorahKeeper upholds circumcision even though I Corinthians says that Christians should not be circumcised.

 

I think it's possible that Paul changed his mind later after Timothy was circumcised because of the growth of the pro-circumcision works group.

I don't think that Paul went to the Temple because it was required of him or anyone else, I think he went simply to avoid alienating the Jews so that he would have a chance to witness to them.

Paul said:

I Corinthians 7:18-19

We're talking about circumcision because we originally started talking about unclean meat and the Law and why meat is unclean no longer. TorahKeeper objected, so we decided to start from one simple detail that is clearly no longer required under the new covenant.

Genesis 17 demands that Gentile slaves be circumcised as well. Exodus 12:48 requires foreigners to be circumcised if they partake of the Passover.

TorahKeeper is arguing that now Christian Jews and Christian Gentiles should all obey the Law, including circumcision.

 

I am simply stating that we are to obey God's own words. No one, including Paul has the authority to eliminate any of God's Laws. If God eliminates any of His laws then He has changed and is no longer God. People can twist words if they choose, I am simply stating that we are to be obedient to God.

 

So Paul was not inspired?

why would God put the new wine of Christianity into the old wineskin of Judaism?

Just as Col 2:16 exempts Christians of the Jewish sabbath, and dietary laws, 1Cor 7:18-19 exempts us from circumcision.

remember Judaizers have major problems with their injecting the torah in christianity. History, there are no sources that say these jewish laws were practiced by the early church, and if Polycarp kept no jewish laws, then that is an excellent precedent for us. if the Apostles taught the jewish law, why is there not one single source saying so. no letters about keeping the law, no romans who knew of christians keeping the jewish laws.

sadly torah you try to impose laws handed down for the Jews (do i have to list the scriptures again) ONLY.

and Yes God does away with laws:

Deu 17:5 Then shalt thou bring forth that man or that woman, which have committed that wicked thing, unto thy gates, even that man or that woman, and shalt stone them with stones, till they die.


did this law change?

thankyou and God Bless