Question about the different covenants

[angell1]

why does circumcision not apply anymore? it’s part of the abraamic covenant and not the mosaic. and was supposed to last forever

same thing with the consumption of blood. it was given to Noah because the life of the animal is contained in the blood and this hasn’t changed

i was asked this by someone and i answered thatt hose were disciplines given by god, which the apostles, with Jesus’ authority, later released. they then countered with acts which says not to consume blood and sexual immorality. their argument is that how come sexual immorality wasn’t a pastoral discipline also

any help is appreciated. thanks

 

[irenaeuslyons]

why does circumcision not apply anymore? it’s part of the abraamic covenant and not the mosaic. and was supposed to last forever

same thing with the consumption of blood. it was given to Noah because the life of the animal is contained in the blood and this hasn’t changed

i was asked this by someone and i answered thatt hose were disciplines given by god, which the apostles, with Jesus’ authority, later released. they then countered with acts which says not to consume blood and sexual immorality. their argument is that how come sexual immorality wasn’t a pastoral discipline also

any help is appreciated. thanks

St. Paul tells us that baptism is the new circumcision. We are no longer a people of God by our blood, but by the gift of grace from God.

 

[judynurse]

I suspect that if you go back and look at the Covenant with Noah, which you are correct, pre-dated Mosaic Law, the animal flesh was permitted to Noah and his descendants, which indicates they were strictly vegetarian previously. However, the BLOOD of the animal, “which contains life” was not given to men to drink or consume. The blood of animals was used as a sacrifice to God, along with a lot of the internal organs. Later, in the time of Abraham, the entire animal was sacrificed on some occasions, just as was done by the children of Adam and Eve (see Cain and Abel). Blood is still considered to be forbidden to both Jews and Muslims. A lot of Christians will not consume anything made with blood (like blood pudding, for instance). Now we recognize that blood can carry microorganisms and diseases, whereas cooking meat makes the flesh much safer. The blood however, was considered unclean for many millennia by the Jews, whether sacrificed or killed for food. That’s where the Kosher Laws were codified by Moses and after Moses.

 

[angell1]

I suspect that if you go back and look at the Covenant with Noah, which you are correct, pre-dated Mosaic Law, the animal flesh was permitted to Noah and his descendants, which indicates they were strictly vegetarian previously. However, the BLOOD of the animal, “which contains life” was not given to men to drink or consume. The blood of animals was used as a sacrifice to God, along with a lot of the internal organs. Later, in the time of Abraham, the entire animal was sacrificed on some occasions, just as was done by the children of Adam and Eve (see Cain and Abel). Blood is still considered to be forbidden to both Jews and Muslims. A lot of Christians will not consume anything made with blood (like blood pudding, for instance). Now we recognize that blood can carry microorganisms and diseases, whereas cooking meat makes the flesh much safer. The blood however, was considered unclean for many millennia by the Jews, whether sacrificed or killed for food. That’s where the Kosher Laws were codified by Moses and after Moses.

yes i get that.

my question is that i know cahotlic teaching does not forbid the consumption of blood. there are countries with a large populations of caohtlics woh do eat things such as blood sausage or blood pudding.

i’m wondering why it’s ok now. the life of the animal is sitll blood isn’t it?

i have someone argue that sexuality immorality could be seen as pastoral discipline by peter’s remarks in acts if we use our logic.

so why can the church undo certain things and not others?

 

[judynurse]

Actually, although ancient people believed life was in the blood, it truly isn’t. Animals have a soul, just not a soul with the touch of God enabling the Divine Life of God to enter and dwell. True, if you bleed enough, you will die, but not, actually, from the loss of blood, but from shock and heart failure and lack of oxygen to the heart and brain. Oxygen is carried in the bloodstream, but it’s the lack of oxygen and systemic shock which kills you.

The Apostles didn’t teach the eating of blood or foods containing blood. Remember, they were mainly Jews, and still did not eat the blood of animals. It changed centuries later. I don’t even know if the Church ever made a Decree regarding the consumption of blood.

As for sexual immorality, that has been a teaching since the time of the most ancient people in the Bible — those who followed God. Remember, Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed due to their “immorality” in the time of Abraham. The Flood occurred for the same reason: immorality among mankind. Moses also taught against immorality, that’s what the 10 Commandments are about,: killing (murder, which is what Cain was guilty of), lying, adultery, fornication,(sex outside of marriage), stealing, false witness etc… are all immoral. So the Apostles didn’t change the definition of immorality, nor did the Popes. We still have the 10 Commandments, and Jesus taught them too.

 

[angell1]

Actually, although ancient people believed life was in the blood, it truly isn’t. Animals have a soul, just not a soul with the touch of God enabling the Divine Life of God to enter and dwell. True, if you bleed enough, you will die, but not, actually, from the loss of blood, but from shock and heart failure and lack of oxygen to the heart and brain. Oxygen is carried in the bloodstream, but it’s the lack of oxygen and systemic shock which kills you.

The Apostles didn’t teach the eating of blood or foods containing blood. Remember, they were mainly Jews, and still did not eat the blood of animals. It changed centuries later. I don’t even know if the Church ever made a Decree regarding the consumption of blood.

As for sexual immorality, that has been a teaching since the time of the most ancient people in the Bible — those who followed God. Remember, Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed due to their “immorality” in the time of Abraham. The Flood occurred for the same reason: immorality among mankind. Moses also taught against immorality, that’s what the 10 Commandments are about,: killing (murder, which is what Cain was guilty of), lying, adultery, fornication,(sex outside of marriage), stealing, false witness etc… are all immoral. So the Apostles didn’t change the definition of immorality, nor did the Popes. We still have the 10 Commandments, and Jesus taught them too.

so we are sitll not allowed to consume blood then? not that i particularly want to, was just wondering

 

[judynurse]

I don’t think the Church has a Doctrine or Decree on such things as “blood sausage” and such. I don’t think they would approve of just drinking blood by itself, as it was a pagan ritual (and still may be, for all I know!) If you want to eat blood sausage or blood pudding, ask your Priest. He may like it or not, personally, but he could sure tell you if the Church has a problem with it. I tried the sausage version once, didn’t like it, and have no desire to try the “blood pudding” anyway. Don’t like the name or the taste, personally. But that’s my preference. Ask your Priest or an Apologist on here. They can give you a definitive answer. I’ve never heard anything about it from the Church either way, so can’t tell you.

You do ask interesting questions, Angel!!!

 

[TimothyH]

God made all the Old Testament covenants- with Noah, with Abraham, with Moses/Israel, with David. Covenants end when one member of the covenant dies.

Marriage for example, is a covenant. Marriage ends when one member of the marriage dies.

God in the person of Jesus Christ died. God died on the cross and so all Old Testament covenants are ended.

-Tim-