Kosher Boat

  • Thread starter Thread starter GFresa9
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Randy_Carson said:
Horus Reads the Internet
Why Christians are no longer bound by Jewish Ceremonial Laws
youtube.com/watch?v=4r2m_cffRjI&feature=youtu.be

Partial Transcript:

Something that is made clear throughout the scriptures is the distinction between the Moral Law and the Ceremonial Law. The Moral Law is the stuff found in the 10 Commandments: things like, “You shall have no other gods”, “Don’t murder”, and “Don’t commit adultery.”

The Ceremonial Law on the other hand is the stuff found primarily in the book of Leviticus that the Israelite people were required to observe: things like, “Don’t eat pork or shellfish” and “Those who engage in homosexual acts must be put to death.”

The Bible also teaches the Moral Law and the Ceremonial Law have two very different purposes. According to Romans 5, for example, the purpose of the Moral Law is to show us our sins so that we can see our need for Christ and his forgiveness. And because all of us are sinners who need to have our sins set before us in order to see our need for Christ, the Moral Law still applies to us today.

According to Exodus 19, the Ceremonial Law is quite different. The purpose of the Ceremonial Law was to mark the Israelites as the people from whom the Messiah was going to come. In other words, the Ceremonial Law formed the way the Israelites worshipped, dressed, ate, worked and practiced justice, this was God’s way of reminding the Israelites that the savior of the world would come from them. And so, when that savior finally came in the person of Jesus, the purpose of the Ceremonial Law had been fulfilled. So, in the same way that you don’t need to hang up flyers for a concert once the concert is over, after Jesus died and rose again, it was no longer necessary to follow the Ceremonial Law.

This is why in the Book of Acts, Chapter 10, God tells Peter that all of the animals are now considered clean and that the Gentiles who didn’t follow the Ceremonial Law were welcomed into the Christian faith. So, the reason that Christians can eat pork and shellfish isn’t because we don’t take our faith seriously, it’s because we take our faith so seriously that we’ve actually read the Bible, and the Bible tells us that we are now free to eat these things.
Click to expand...
Thanks that’s extremely clear. And as Jesus never mentioned homosexuality what are we meant to believe about it and why? I am honestly puzzled
 
JimmyG88 said:
Thanks that’s extremely clear. And as Jesus never mentioned homosexuality what are we meant to believe about it and why? I am honestly puzzled
Click to expand...
If you watch the full video (about five minutes), you will see that while the stoning of homosexuals as prescribed under the Ceremonial Law is no longer applicable to us, the prohibition against homosexual acts remains as part of the Moral Law of God which still applies

Paul reaffirms this when he wrote;

1 Corinthians 6:9-10
9 Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men[a] 10 nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.
 
Randy_Carson said:
If you watch the full video (about five minutes), you will see that while the stoning of homosexuals as prescribed under the Ceremonial Law is no longer applicable to us, the prohibition against homosexual acts remains as part of the Moral Law of God which still applies

Paul reaffirms this when he wrote;

1 Corinthians 6:9-10
9 Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men[a] 10 nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.
Click to expand...
Thanks. I’m interested to note that homosexuals are not singled out for opprobrium any more than the greedy.
 
Jesus defined marriage as one man and one woman, when talking about divorce. 'when God made them, He created them man and woman, and the two shall come together as one flesh. and no man shall separate them. this was a pretty clear statement about same sex relations as well.
 
bisco1 said:
Jesus defined marriage as one man and one woman, when talking about divorce. 'when God made them, He created them man and woman, and the two shall come together as one flesh. and no man shall separate them. this was a pretty clear statement about same sex relations as well.
Click to expand...
What did Jesus say about same sex relations. I know what he said about divorce
 
bisco1 said:
Jesus defined marriage as one man and one woman, when talking about divorce. 'when God made them, He created them man and woman, and the two shall come together as one flesh. and no man shall separate them. this was a pretty clear statement about same sex relations as well.
Click to expand...
This also puzzles me because we don’t regard divorce as a sin and yet Jesus seems pretty unequivocal here
 
that’s because it’s civil. in the eyes of the church, you’re still married until death.
 
JimmyG88 said:
What did Jesus say about same sex relations. I know what he said about divorce
Click to expand...
well, he didn’t say ‘God created them one man and one man, and the two shall come together as one flesh.’ but if your heart is hard, ask God for a new one.
 
bisco1 said:
well, he didn’t say ‘God created them one man and one man, and the two shall come together as one flesh.’ but if your heart is hard, ask God for a new one.
Click to expand...
Sorry I really didn’t mean to offend you. I don’t have a hard heart (as you so tactlessly put it) I merely observed that Jesus was discussing marriage not same sex relations
 
no offense taken. if you need exact wording from Jesus for every church teaching, you’re going to be searching for a long time.
 
bisco1 said:
no offense taken. if you need exact wording from Jesus for every church teaching, you’re going to be searching for a long time.
Click to expand...
I just wanted to know what Jesus said. And consider why he didn’t say other things. As God is omniscient I do not doubt that he foresaw this debate and yet Jesus remained silent on that matter. I think it’s important
 
He said many things. if all of them were written down, it would be more than the whole world could hold, i suppose.:cool:
 
JimmyG88 said:
I just wanted to know what Jesus said. And consider why he didn’t say other things. As God is omniscient I do not doubt that he foresaw this debate and yet Jesus remained silent on that matter. I think it’s important
Click to expand...
Jesus COULD HAVE specifically taught that homosexual sins themselves were no longer prohibited. But he didn’t.

Therefore, God’s judgment upon those who commit all sorts of immoral sins, homosexual acts included, is unchanged.
 
Randy_Carson said:
Jesus COULD HAVE specifically taught that homosexual sins themselves were no longer prohibited. But he didn’t, did He?

Therefore, God’s judgment upon those who commit all sorts of immoral sins, homosexual acts included, is unchanged.
Click to expand...
He was silent on the matter. And I do not seek to know the mind of the Lord, or extrapolate what is not there from absence of teaching. I will leave the judgement of Almighty God to God rather than seek to dispense summary justice on his behalf
 
JimmyG88 said:
He was silent on the matter. And I do not seek to know the mind of the Lord, or extrapolate what is not there from absence of teaching. I will leave the judgement of Almighty God to God rather than seek to dispense summary justice on his behalf
Click to expand...
Jesus was silent about:
  • Slavery
  • Abortion
  • The death penalty
  • Corporal punishment
  • Racism
  • Rape
Does that mean that we should argue that Jesus was implicitly endorsing each of these? :nope:
 
Randy_Carson said:
Jesus was silent about:
  • Slavery
  • Abortion
  • The death penalty
  • Corporal punishment
  • Racism
  • Rape
Does that mean that we should argue that Jesus was implicitly endorsing each of these? :nope:
Click to expand...
Abortion is taking a life I’m pretty sure Jesus was anti that. Without the death penalty Jesus would not have been crucified. The good Samaritan was. Probably chosen as a rebuke against racism or ethnocentricy. As for the rest I don’t know what I do know is that rape slavery and homosexuality are not analogous
 
i’m questioning your faith in the catholic church. am i wrong to take from your comments that you don’t buy into all the teachings?
 
bisco1 said:
i’m questioning your faith in the catholic church. am i wrong to take from your comments that you don’t buy into all the teachings?
Click to expand...
You are wrong to imagine that you are in a position to question my faith. No I don’t believe some Catholic traditions such as some Marion apparitions but then I am free to choose not to believe in Our Lady of Knock if I choose. Some other teachings I question as indeed do many people, all of them very learned unlike me. Theological debate has been somewhat stifled, but I believe the Curia are more open to discourse currently. The Church is not an unmovable monolith.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top