Demons and such

What do you think fulfillment means. Do away with!? What was it Jesus said? - "I have not come to destroy the law ... I have come to do away with it." ??? Does that mean that mildew does not continue or is no longer a problem? Do you know that inhaling spores of household mildew can be fatal to small children? Do you know what the Bible prescribes for ridding your house of mildew? There's more to the law than mildew you know.Are you saying that just because the New Testament doesn't mention something means it's not important anymore? The ten commandments are not reiterated in the NT. Does that mean they no longer apply. Jesus did, after all, summarize "all the law and the prophets" by saying, "Love God with all your heart, and your neighbor as yourself."Where exactly did Jesus say, "Okay boys. Screw Moses. The Law is Done Away. Everybody's under grace now. You can eat pork, shellfish and mice. You can make slaves of your brothers and wear blended fabrics. You can ..." oops, Excuuuuse meeee. Did the apostle's ever agree on those things? It was,after all, the apostles, you know, NOT JESUS, who started Christianity.db------------------
Doesn't anyone graduate Sunday School?

For someone who doesn't believe, you certainly have the argument down pat. But it is fallacious and dishonest to God. "Be ye therefore perfect, even as your father in heaven is perfect." Sound familiar?The religious scholars of his day would say that Jesus did not obey the law. So you are a believer? Everybody's entitled to one mistake. The mildew statutes were a matter of public health. It is a perfect example of what's wrong with the Christian penchant for selective belief. Perhaps you will argue that those public health laws are antiquated, and that may be so. If you are willing to grant that public health laws have evolved along with the science of public health, then why not concede that attitudes toward homosexuality should also evolve along with the science of sexuality? Or that Christianity itself should evolve (and indeed has evolved) along with a current knowledge of the truth. Blood sacrifice is still required for the remission of sin. The blood of the Iraqi people for the sins of Sadam. The blood of our people for the sins of George. The blood of traffic victims for the sin of bad driving. You get the picture. Blood sacrifice to cover whatever may come in the future is a Pagan concept. Christianity is just a new style of Paganism. Once again - Because it isn't found in the NT, Christians don't think it applies, even though it is one of the ten commandments. Do you think we should believe nothing but what is found in the NT? Do you think we should lose any of the ten commandments if we can't find them in the NT? A lot less than respectful I imagine. Nothing personal. I simply don't respect Christian doctrine, much less Jewish or Islamic. I am one of those former Christians who understands why some people are willing to burn Christians on sight. You wave that flag. You carry that target. You risk that fate.What is, was, and is to come.
World without end. Amen.db------------------
Doesn't anyone graduate Sunday School?

In other words, Jesus didn't mean what he said ..." or "We can't do what he asked us to do"? Incredible! No more need to be healthy? Because it is not discussed in the NT, there is no need to be concerned about mildew? Do you doubt that exposure to mildew can be fatal? Do you doubt that we should follow certain rituals to protect ourselves from mildew? Or does Jesus death mean that we don't have to concern ourselves with midew anymore? How was the mildew law "fulfilled" by Jesus death? So, I guess you are not one of those who thinks they should be posted in every school and public building in America. ? According to Jesus, Salvation itself was meant for the Jews. He sent his disciples only to the "lost sheep of the house of Israel." the Gospel to the Gentiles thing was Paul's idea. You can't get away from it. The OT is how you attempt to prove that Jesus was The messiah. The OT is what you use to claim that the Jesus "fulfilled" the Law. Absolutes that changed? What dictionary do you use? As I see it, there are two kinds of Christians, those who don't ask and can't tell; and those who, as you say, seek truth. The former will always be Christians. The latter will, eventually, come to a knowledge of the truth. It is that you go forth into battle. Such Christians are the only ones at risk. The others do not write here, and most of them would not understand our conflict anyway. Hey! Without guys like you, I'd have no one with whom to spar.Cheers.

"Be ye therefore perfect, as your father in heaven is perfect." That isn't worded as a request. It wasn't encouragement to "strive" for an "unattainable goal." It is a command; given in the imperitive. You will recall that Jesus said, "If you love me, keep my commandments." This is clearly one of his commandments. You might argue in favor of deleting one of the ten oldies because it's not in the NT, but I'm sure that the commandments of Jesus are not so easily dismissed. "Love one another." He said. Not, "Strive to love one another even though you'll never be able to do it." I don't know about what God demanded, but Jesus (working within the myth you understand) clearly demanded it. It's not, unless by negligence, by disregarding the public health law, you become responsible for someone's death. Then it becomes moral indeed. I agree, but that is, of course, debatable. The mildew statutes were not about ceremonial or moral cleanliness. They were about cleanliness period. Only after they were outdated (they sound pretty weird now) did their dogged observance constitute a moralistic addiction to tradition. I cannot cite specifics, but I believe Roman public health science was more advanced than that of Judea. More advanced than most civilizations of the time. That in itself would be incentive to discard antiquated provincial ordinances and go with the new and improved statutes of Roman public health law. I am sure that Jesus and the Apostles were, for their time, progressive thinkers. They were, at least, revolutionary thinkers who were willing to die for their politico-religious ideals.... Geez, I think I must be beginning to sound like a Christian apologist!At any rate, these men must have seen how the once beneficial advancements in science and faith had become meaningless religious rituals. How many Christians today are willing to be so bold? To examine their own "science" and "faith" to determine whether it holds True to Life? For me, it did not, does not, and shall not in my lifetime. It could take a million years to catch up to my personal evolution, if ever it could, or would. But then if I hadn't been steeped in the stuff for twenty five years, I wouldn't be the well tanned heretic I am today, would I. Humor in the midst of thrust and parry. Damn!! I'm beginning to like you. Few champions of your ilk conduct battle in such a gentlemanly manner. The subject, and the day is tiring me. Perhaps I'll join in the fray later on.db------------------
Doesn't anyone graduate Sunday School?

Hello again Jake,This sparked something in me. A stance which reminds me of where I was once upon a time. To make a long story short, literal interpretation of Genesis is not as simple as it sounds. In fact, analysis of biblical cosmology has consumed thousands of hours of my free time over that past decade. Not terribly efficient research by university standards I suppose, but I have no idea where to go in order to get spoonfed what I have learned. Thus, I feel compelled to share with others what I have garnered, so that they may get it quickly and devote their own lives to something more practical. Anyway, to state the high point of all this, the cosmological views of biblical authors appear to parallel those of the established science of their respective times. Thus, biblical cosmology cannot be stated in simple terms, but evolves over the timeline. Genesis reveals at least two traditions, one older that the other, and a possible third which was apparently pretty much up to date. The author(s) did a pretty good job of weaving it all together in such a way that it might read in an entertaining and informative way (to ancient Hebrew readers, NOT modern English readers!!). Where it was impossible to blend the old oral traditions, the compiler simply placed them side by side (or one after the other) in much the same way as the traditions of Noah's flood and the promise to Abram were laid end to end.I keep writing outside the Nutshell, don't I?OK. Here it is. It seems to have kept pace (some distance to the rear) with "modern" science regarding details of how the universe is put together. The one consistent factor has been, "God did it." Otherwise, the cosmos imagined by the authors of Genesis is entirely different from the one we imagine today. That becomes a problem for the literalist. Few are true literalists. Almost immediately upon reading Genesis for themselves they cannot accept it as written. Then they look to the Hebrew language (which doesn't help the literalist case). They end up changing the definition of words, reordering the sequence of events, and reversing the relative motion of things, in order to squeeze Genesis into a modern cosmological mold. As if this were not insult enough they go on to claim that the "original" manuscripts of Genesis were completely inerrant. Conveniently, for that argument, the original manuscripts are long lost.But it's a fascinating study and the Hebrew brings it to life in a way that English never could. I'm sure you will enjoy the journey.db------------------
Doesn't anyone graduate Sunday School?