If you see your neighbor working on a Sunday you should

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jenniferolg
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
JRKH said:
You seem to enjoy moving the goalposts…Or else I am not clear on what you have been trying to say or learn…

So the question you have appears to be how can the law have been fulfilled since heaven and earth have not passed away.
And if the Law has not been fulfilled, how can there be a change to one jot or tittle…Is that correct??

Peace
James
Click to expand...
You seem to believe that the law is void. It’s not. Gentiles aren’t beholden to it in the first place. We are beholden to the Noahide Laws if we want to be in covenant with YHWH.

The law has yet to be fulfilled. The second coming will fulfill the law.
 
ChesterBeach said:
You seem to believe that the law is void. It’s not. Gentiles aren’t beholden to it in the first place. We are beholden to the Noahide Laws if we want to be in covenant with YHWH.

The law has yet to be fulfilled. The second coming will fulfill the law.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the clarification.
As to what I believe about the Law…All I can say is I believe what the Church teaches.
The distinctions you are bringing in here I am not familiar with.

Peace
James
 
There is no requirement in the bible about not working on Sunday. I think what the OP was talking about was this passage:

"On six days work may be done, but the seventh day shall be holy to you as the sabbath of complete rest to the LORD. Anyone who does work on that day shall be put to death. "
  • Is 35:2
This is talking about the Jewish Sabbath and this day is on Saturday.

The other thing is that this is part of the many Jewish laws under the old covenant.

In Christ, we are under a new covenant. And, under the new covenant the various ceremonial laws have been fulfilled in Christ. Since they were a foreshadowing of Christ. But, once Christ came they were no longer necessary. Instead, under the new covenant we have baptism instead of circumcision. Baptism brings us into the Body of Christ. When we are baptized into Christ we die to the law and are no longer under the law.

Rom 3:28 - we are justified by faith and not by works of the law.
Rom 6:4 - we were baptized into Christ’s death
Rom 7:1 - the law only has jurisdiction over someone who is alive
Rom 7:4 - we have been put to death to the law through the body of Christ

Jesus said he did not come to bring us condemnation but rather eternal life for all who believe in him. It was also a law that adulterers be stoned but when they brought the woman who had been caught in adultery to Jesus he did not stone her but had mercy on her and told her to sin no more. Jesus sets the example for Christians to follow. He commands us to forgive others so that we can be forgiven. He commands us to be merciful as he has been merciful towards us. Jesus dying on the cross is an expiation of our sins which opens a new door of grace and mercy for us not found under the old covenant restrictions.

The Old Covenant was under law. The New Covenant is under grace.

The Catholic Church teaches that we should observe a day of rest on Sunday, not working unnecessarily, if possible. In this we keep the spiritual sense of the Sabbath, that is a day of rest and worship of the Lord. Rest from labor and worship by attending Mass. Even though we are no longer bound to practice the Jewish Sabbath as the Sabbath is fulfilled in Christ since man enters God’s eternal rest through Christ, we still honor the teaching of the Church which elaborates God’s will for us to have a day of rest for leisure, family, and worship.
 
ChesterBeach said:
You seem to believe that the law is void. It’s not. Gentiles aren’t beholden to it in the first place. We are beholden to the Noahide Laws if we want to be in covenant with YHWH.

The law has yet to be fulfilled. The second coming will fulfill the law.
Click to expand...
Who is to enforce the Old Law? The Levitical Priesthood and Aronic High Priesthood? Those lines are broken. Who is to be subject under a Law where it cannot be practiced? No altar, no Temple, no atonement, thus no Law.
 
Trevor_Stamm said:
I would if I could find a practicing Jew, thing is without the Temple and Aronic Priesthood there is no religion.
Click to expand...
That’s a pretty radical stance. Who are the self-identifying Jews if not Jewish then? What goes on in Temples all over the U.S. and the world?
 
ChesterBeach said:
That’s a pretty radical stance. Who are the self-identifying Jews if not Jewish then? What goes on in Temples all over the U.S. and the world?
Click to expand...
I have not read much of the thread here. But quite simply put there was only one Temple (though it was replaced). After the destruction of the Temple around 70AD it was never rebuilt. There are no temples anywhere else. (even if the word “temple” is used here or there they will note that it is not the Temple for that is only in Jerusalem)

Though yes Jews do gather for reading the Torah and Prayer etc…there is no Temple per se with its Sacrifices. The Jewish religion continues but their the Temple is no longer standing to their great sadness. They do go to the temple area there in Jerusalem and pray at the “wailing wall” which remains.
 
" In discussing the relationship between the Old and the New Testaments, the Synod also considered those passages in the Bible which, due to the violence and immorality they occasionally contain, prove obscure and difficult. Here it must be remembered first and foremost that biblical revelation is deeply rooted in history. God’s plan is manifested progressively and it is accomplished slowly, in successive stages and despite human resistance. God chose a people and patiently worked to guide and educate them. Revelation is suited to the cultural and moral level of distant times and thus describes facts and customs, such as cheating and trickery, and acts of violence and massacre, without explicitly denouncing the immorality of such things. This can be explained by the historical context, yet it can cause the modern reader to be taken aback, especially if he or she fails to take account of the many “dark” deeds carried out down the centuries, and also in our own day. In the Old Testament, the preaching of the prophets vigorously challenged every kind of injustice and violence, whether collective or individual, and thus became God’s way of training his people in preparation for the Gospel. So it would be a mistake to neglect those passages of Scripture that strike us as problematic. Rather, we should be aware that the correct interpretation of these passages requires a degree of expertise, acquired through a training that interprets the texts in their historical-literary context and within the Christian perspective which has as its ultimate hermeneutical key “the Gospel and the new commandment of Jesus Christ brought about in the paschal mystery”.[140] I encourage scholars and pastors to help all the faithful to approach these passages through an interpretation which enables their meaning to emerge in the light of the mystery of Christ."

–Pope Benedict XVI

vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/apost_exhortations/documents/hf_ben-xvi_exh_20100930_verbum-domini_en.html
 
Some general things in approaching various things in the Old Testament.

Some passages are difficult for us to understand being in the period after the coming of Christ and the fullness of Revelation. In some passages one can note that God too was using as Jimmy Akin says - a “blunt instrument” so to speak – in a culture and time that was not like our own etc. Progressively leading them forward. Or some things are not meant perhaps in a literal way (like in the NT Jesus tells us to cut off ones hand if it causes you to sin)…or some things are other forms of writing that where readily understood by their first audience in a culture very distant from our own…but difficult for us etc etc etc

Expertise has to be brought into play in understanding the context of various passages historically, culturally and as to the genre of the writings etc. (Not something that can necessarily be accomplished in an internet Forum.)

Here are a couple of quotes which can contain aspects that can be of help in approaching various passages in the Old Testament:

Catechism:

110 In order to discover the sacred authors’ intention, the reader must take into account the conditions of their time and culture, the literary genres in use at that time, and the modes of feeling, speaking and narrating then current. "For the fact is that truth is differently presented and expressed in the various types of historical writing, in prophetical and poetical texts, and in other forms of literary expression."76
“42. In discussing the relationship between the Old and the New Testaments, the Synod also considered those passages in the Bible which, due to the violence and immorality they occasionally contain, prove obscure and difficult. Here it must be remembered first and foremost that biblical revelation is deeply rooted in history. God’s plan is manifested progressively and it is accomplished slowly, in successive stages and despite human resistance. God chose a people and patiently worked to guide and educate them. Revelation is suited to the cultural and moral level of distant times and thus describes facts and customs, such as cheating and trickery, and acts of violence and massacre, without explicitly denouncing the immorality of such things. This can be explained by the historical context, yet it can cause the modern reader to be taken aback, especially if he or she fails to take account of the many “dark” deeds carried out down the centuries, and also in our own day. In the Old Testament, the preaching of the prophets vigorously challenged every kind of injustice and violence, whether collective or individual, and thus became God’s way of training his people in preparation for the Gospel. So it would be a mistake to neglect those passages of Scripture that strike us as problematic. Rather, we should be aware that the correct interpretation of these passages requires a degree of expertise, acquired through a training that interprets the texts in their historical-literary context and within the Christian perspective which has as its ultimate hermeneutical key “the Gospel and the new commandment of Jesus Christ brought about in the paschal mystery”.[140] I encourage scholars and pastors to help all the faithful to approach these passages through an interpretation which enables their meaning to emerge in the light of the mystery of Christ.”

–Pope Benedict XVI

vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/apost_exhortations/documents/hf_ben-xvi_exh_20100930_verbum-domini_en.html
 
Bookcat said:
Though yes Jews do gather for reading the Torah and Prayer etc…there is no Temple per se with its Sacrifices.
Click to expand...
Synagogue - But colloquially Jewish people say “I’m going to Temple” like Christians say " I’m going to Church"
 
For the death penalty to be enforced against Jew who desecrated the Sabbath, the Jew would need to have received an official warning in advance from the Sanhedrin, and then two witnesses would need to testify the Jew. Thus even when the Sanhedrin existed, it was extremely rare for it to execute the death penalty.

The Sanhedrin has been dissolved since 358. Most mainstream Jews believe it will not be restored until the third temple is built (which in turn, would require God to provide a completely red heffer.) A few fringe groups believe that it is possible to restore a Sanhedrin earlier, but no national government (including the State of Israel) will recognize the authority of such a Sanhedrin. (Exception: Napoleon formed something called the “Grand Sanhedrin,” but it was universally recognized as merely being a political contrivance.)
 
if you would sincerely like to defend your faith to anyone like bill maher or myself i would suggest watching his entire movie, think about his questions and bring them to a priest or even a different religous leader. if you can think of or are given a satisfactory answer to most if not all of these questions i would very much like to hear them as like bill maher i have looked into alot of different religions and keep finding more questions than answers. however with regards to the original text that could very well be down to a mistranslation or even a misunderstanding of the message. my biggest stumbling block with the bible is if GOD is infallable deos not make mistakes then why is the message in the new testament (turn the other cheek) so profoundly different from the message in the old testament (the plagues of egypt).
 
gusgus32 said:
if you would sincerely like to defend your faith to anyone like bill maher or myself i would suggest watching his entire movie, think about his questions and bring them to a priest or even a different religous leader. if you can think of or are given a satisfactory answer to most if not all of these questions i would very much like to hear them as like bill maher i have looked into alot of different religions and keep finding more questions than answers. however with regards to the original text that could very well be down to a mistranslation or even a misunderstanding of the message. my biggest stumbling block with the bible is if GOD is infallable deos not make mistakes then why is the message in the new testament (turn the other cheek) so profoundly different from the message in the old testament (the plagues of egypt).
Click to expand...
In large part the historical context of the Israelites living among other cultural groups that threatened their very existence and identity meant that keeping “Israel out of Egypt” was critical in God’s plan for Israel. This also entailed dealing harshly with the pressures towards integration with surrounding cultural groups that is a recurring theme in the Old Testament. Thus you have seemingly odd rules of conduct and law, that, if studied carefully, show that these laws directly oppose the equally odd but common practices of the pagan groups that surrounded the Jewish people. The laws were intended to preserve the Israelites identity as distinct and “set apart” for God.

For example, each of the plagues brought on Egypt actually targeted their gods or cultural mores in order to demonstrate to Israel that Yahweh was more than capable of defending it from powerful incentives to reintegrate.

This site proposes a correlation of Egyptian religious practices and deities to the plagues intended to show the reticent Israelites how powerless the gods of Egypt were.
pastorjamesandrews.wordpress.com/2010/08/25/ten-egyptian-plagues/

You have to realize that Christ through his sacrifice on the cross brought distinctive power in the form of the Holy Spirit that was not available to the Old Testament Jewish community.

Adherence to God among the people of Israel in the Old Testament was an external matter enforced by law and ritual practice. Cultural purity and religious identity had to be strictly maintained because the pressures to conform to pagan practices was so strong.

Following Christ, the power of the Holy Spirit, made available internally to believers - Christ living in his people - means that external rituals are less a factor in maintaining God’s will.
This does not mean that moral principles have changed - they haven’t - but it does mean that the ritual, legal and cultures practices of the Old Testament do not have the efficacy nor the necessity they once did.

I would argue that in the Old Testament God in many ways was constrained to speak externally to His people, but because of the sacrifice of Christ, God’s message is more efficacious as, though not strictly, an internal one, directly to the heart of each of us. This may account for the apparent differences you perceive between the God of the Old and New Testaments.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top