Old Testament

[CookieMaster123]

My question about it.You guys are saying that there were times like these, and it’s nothing bad with it’s cruelties.I rather won’t be entirely sure, if for example Amalekite children or women would be happy knowing this.I’m also asking anout ridiculous laws there.Eating shrimps or dressing clothes from 2 types of fabric is forbidden?Seriously?I don’t see catholics doing exactly what is said there, though.And if you are also going to say me about “old times”, I’m giving you Luke 24:44.Please don’t delete this thread, I really want to know, what do you think about it.

 

[Della]

My question about it.You guys are saying that there were times like these, and it’s nothing bad with it’s cruelties.I rather won’t be entirely sure, if for example Amalekite children or women would be happy knowing this.

First of all, no one should read the Bible “cold”–that is without understanding the history, cultures, and theology involved. There are many “hard” things in the Bible that can be misunderstood or misapplied. You need to read reliable sources for some of these disquieting stories in order to understand what they are about. There have been several threads on the Amalekite “children” on CAF that you can search for.

I’m also asking anout ridiculous laws there.Eating shrimps or dressing clothes from 2 types of fabric is forbidden?Seriously?I don’t see catholics doing exactly what is said there, though.And if you are also going to say me about “old times”, I’m giving you Luke 24:44.Please don’t delete this thread, I really want to know, what do you think about it.

God gave these prohibitions for a few reasons: firstly, to separate the Children of Israel from the blasphemous practices of their pagan neighbors, and to keep them healthy at a time when there was no FDA to test foods or medicines. Again, we have to understand these things within their proper context of the times, the cultures and the theology involved.

Jesus was saying in the passage from Luke that he is the fulfillment of the Law of Moses–all the ceremonial laws as well as all the dietary and other laws. So, we are not bound to them since Jesus has died on the cross and risen from the dead, making them no longer necessary. His grace now suffices for all the laws of the OT.

 

[PJM]

=CookieMaster123;11414818]My question about it.You guys are saying that there were times like these, and it’s nothing bad with it’s cruelties.I rather won’t be entirely sure, if for example Amalekite children or women would be happy knowing this.I’m also asking anout ridiculous laws there.Eating shrimps or dressing clothes from 2 types of fabric is forbidden?Seriously?I don’t see catholics doing exactly what is said there, though.And if you are also going to say me about “old times”, I’m giving you Luke 24:44.Please don’t delete this thread, I really want to know, what do you think about it.

I will TRY to answer your concerns. But know please that HERE i AM sharing My own opinions.

One of the more comon errors that leads to misunderstanding within the ranks of Christianity [Protestands verses Catholics] is the lack of a critical distinction between Catholic-“Practices” WHICH ARE CHANGEABLE [emphasis; not shouting], and Sacred Tradition; defined Doctrine and Pronounced Dogma WHICH ARE NOT CHANGEABLE.

Example: married clergy is a changeable PRACTICE [that most likely will not change]; while a MALE-ONLY clergy is a Doctrine [maybe even a Dogma] and CAN"T be changed.

MANY of the 613 laws ADDED to the Commandments by the Priest where relevant to the TIMES and CONDITIONS of that Time and PLACE. They no longer have UNIVERSAL relevance. Keep in mind that to the “OT Jews” the "entire world was what they WANTED it to be; not what it actually was. Many of the laws were dietary and health directed.

Here is Lk 24:4 from the DR bible: “And he said to them: These are the words which I spoke to you, while I was yet with you, that all things must needs be fulfilled, which are written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me”

As for the "cruleities"

IF you’d care to share specific examples; I can better respond to them. BUT having addressed this issue multiple times in the past; I THINK [me] its fair to point out that in EACH and EVERY case, it is a response from God for repeated disobedience to LAES they were well aware of. GOD CAN ONLY BE “JUST” AND CAN ONLY DO WHAT GOD KNOES TO BE THE RIGHT THING TO DO.

Also: while the NT-New Covenant does NOT replace the OT covenants; it DOES nevertheless SUPERCDED them in authority and relevance for current times.

I pray this is helpful for you?

God Bless,
Patrick

 

[CookieMaster123]

Still not totally sure about it, but now I understand more.And one new question: what’s with homosexuality?This law was also because of these times, as diseases spread easier in only possible way available for homosexuals.Now we have things, that can make it less dangerous, so why are some christians still hating it?It’s like eating pork.In Jewish times, it could be full of diseases, but now isn’t.Thus everyone eats pork.

 

[Della]

No. Sex apart from marriage is never okay no matter what era we are living in. Sex is, by it’s very nature, the means by which species reproduce themselves, apart from any moral consideration. Homosexual sex does not accomplish this. Besides this, people can love each other quite deeply without engaging in sex. Marital sex joins a man and a woman together to form naturally produced families and to bond spouses. It is not merely an exercise in bodily functions, like eating. Nor is it right and proper for those for whom it was not intended, such as children, same sexes, or closely related persons. If by natural means would be impossible for a couple to produce children, as in same sex relations, no marriage has taken place.

 

[sirach2v4]

My question about it.You guys are saying that there were times like these, and it’s nothing bad with it’s cruelties.I rather won’t be entirely sure, if for example Amalekite children or women would be happy knowing this.I’m also asking anout ridiculous laws there.Eating shrimps or dressing clothes from 2 types of fabric is forbidden?Seriously?I don’t see catholics doing exactly what is said there, though.And if you are also going to say me about “old times”, I’m giving you Luke 24:44.Please don’t delete this thread, I really want to know, what do you think about it.

The prohibition of using two particular types of cloth was based on the fact that those two types of cloth WERE used to form the veil or curtain isolating the Holy of Holies in the wilderness tabernacle.

So, the PROFANE use of those cloths together was forbidden, as their combination was only allowed in the holy veil.

A lot of Catholic authors probably just don’t bother to research these things, and that’s why I have invested in a lot of Jewish scripture commentaries which DO explain them or attempt to explain them. You realize, a modern commentary may propose an interpretation of the ancient scripture, but that should only be regarded as what it really is, just the best explanation we have, so far.

It seems that the issue of the cloths has been reasonably explained.

I just got another Jewish commentary on the various commands of the Torah, and so, before you ask: The ancient rabbis and sages had to figure out what to do about the commands that could not be fulfilled after the Romans destroyed the Temple, in 70 AD. They came up with the alternative that READING the Torah commands devotionally was the same as fulfilling them, as when the Jews were in exile in Babylon, for example.

SERIOUSLY

 

[sirach2v4]

Regarding the eating of shrimp.

There may be a specific reason for this prohibition, but I don’t recall what it was. This one may be right there in the Bible, if you look for it.

But, at a higher level of the discussion, it’s not for you or me to question God or to dispute with him about his laws, right?

In a practical way, if you can’t eat shrimp, so what? Is it going to kill you?