Christian Laws

I just have one thing to explain about the mosiac law. I understand that it seems like a contradiction to say that christians are no longer required to observe the mosaic law, yet those laws are still Gods standards.
Firstly, I have explained that the Mosaic law was instituted for a specific purpose. Once that purpose was realised, it was no longer a requirement that needed to be followed.Secondly, the Mosaic law was a single package. It had requirements such as observances, festivals, sacrificial offerings, tithing, fasting, obstaining from certain foods, ceremonial cleansing etc etc.
Yes, the laws showed Gods standards, but all those 'requirements' of the law code were in addition to his standards. (remember that before the law code man could be approved by God without following the mosaic law)
Thats why he could removed the Law Code with all of the 'requirements' mentioned above, but the standards remained.Gods standards have been known since the garden of Eden. Jesus taught those same standards in his sermon on the mount and so did the apostles. But the 'requirements' of the law code were something entirely different. They were for the purpose of acknowledging sin. When someone did wrong, they would have to apply the 'requirement' of the law code to acknowledge their error. This is what was removed from christians because now Christians had an approach to God thru, not sin offerings, but thru Jesus himself. Faith in Jesus became the basis for forgiveness of sins, not those mosaic law code requirements. this is going over the same information that has been posted right throughout this thread. Christian standards of morality can be derived from studying Gods standards. Gods standards are found in the bible in both the Hebrew and Greek scriptures. Its up to each individual to study them and apply them.i dont believe any regional laws state that a person must 'love their neighbor' or must 'look after orphans and widows' or must 'feed the hungry' or 'love your enemy' or 'not eat anything strangled' or 'not use anothers blood' or not 'bow down to idols'I doubt that in the USA its illegal to practice 'fornication, adultery or homosexuality'Does your country outlaw or demand any of the above?

purpedawn,This must be what you were refering to that I quoted when you said "we should behave ourselves" My apologies. I see what you mean now.

Peg,I don't like your way of dealing with the Timothy passage. This is about God manifest in the flesh. You changed it into something about godly devotion.I have suspected that you do not believe in the manifestation of God in the flesh in Jesus Christ. I suspect that you do not believe in the incarnation of God as a man.This explains to me why some of the trouble you have gotten into with PD about Christian Laws.Would you like to continue this on the Divinity of Christ discussion or here ?This passage about God manifest in the flesh is about God living in man PERIOD. You should not reduce it to a matter of human piety or simple devotion.This is about God and man being mingled and united - a major theme of the whole Bible.

Sounds like that is your interpretation, and she has another interpretation. You can be so sure of yours that there can be no other possible interpretations? In relation to what you have said in other threads. Is she therefore doing to work of (drum roll, please)..... SATAN?

---

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

quote:

---

Firstly, I have explained that the Mosaic law was instituted for a specific purpose. Once that purpose was realised, it was no longer a requirement that needed to be followed.

---

Yes and I responded in Message 75. Yes it was presented as a legal system for a theocratic government. Every civilization needs laws and their civilization wasn't any different. Our civilization today is also no different. Laws are needed.Remember, we don't nullify the law by faith, we uphold the law. (Romans 3:31)

quote:

---

Secondly, the Mosaic law was a single package. It had requirements such as observances, festivals, sacrificial offerings, tithing, fasting, obstaining from certain foods, ceremonial cleansing etc etc.
Yes, the laws showed Gods standards, but all those 'requirements' of the law code were in addition to his standards. (remember that before the law code man could be approved by God without following the mosaic law)
Thats why he could removed the Law Code with all of the 'requirements' mentioned above, but the standards remained.

---

Back to your own mythology again. Lawless and disobedient people were not approved by God even before the Mosaic Law. If they were, please show me.

quote:

---

Gods standards have been known since the garden of Eden. Jesus taught those same standards in his sermon on the mount and so did the apostles. But the 'requirements' of the law code were something entirely different. They were for the purpose of acknowledging sin. When someone did wrong, they would have to apply the 'requirement' of the law code to acknowledge their error. This is what was removed from christians because now Christians had an approach to God thru, not sin offerings, but thru Jesus himself. Faith in Jesus became the basis for forgiveness of sins, not those mosaic law code requirements.

---

why do you think Israel functioned differently than any other civilization when it came to handling civil disobedience and disturbances?I assume you get speeding tickets in your country. Whenever you exceed the speed limit do you report yourself to the police? If you like most people, you wait until you get caught.The same thing with Israel. The sacrifice was a fine just like the fine for a speeding ticket.

quote:

---

this is going over the same information that has been posted right throughout this thread. Christian standards of morality can be derived from studying Gods standards. Gods standards are found in the bible in both the Hebrew and Greek scriptures. Its up to each individual to study them and apply them.

---

Good to know. Each interprets them as they see fit, which is what Christianity does.

quote:

---

i dont believe any regional laws state that a person must 'love their neighbor' or must 'look after orphans and widows' or must 'feed the hungry' or 'love your enemy' or 'not eat anything strangled' or 'not use anothers blood' or not 'bow down to idols'

​

I doubt that in the USA its illegal to practice 'fornication, adultery or homosexuality'

---

Love you neighbor is a summary of the Torah. Those are all the Torah/Jewish Law. So what you are saying is that we are to follow the 613 Commandments that the Jews follow today. They don't follow the sacrificial ones either or the ones that only apply to the land of Israel. As I said, Jesus brought a more humane and universal notion of Torah interpretation. The spirit of the law as opposed to the letter of the law. If one gets the spirit right, the details will take care of themselves.We look at what the authors are trying to tell their audience and bring that spirit forward when obeying the laws of our own individual nations all the way down to our communities and families.It isn't about following an ancient civilizations legal system. It is about obeying our respective legal systems and applying mercy when administering a system of rules. Not getting caught up in the letter and forgetting the spirit of the law.Before you have heart failure, I'm not saying any of this is a means of salvation, justification, etc. It has everything to do with how people need to behave to live together peacefully; whether a family, a tribe, a congregation, a team, a club, a town, a city, a state, or a country.Christianity picks and chooses the standards of God they wish to amplify, but I feel the clergy are truly afraid to say we have to behave a certain way because the support for it is in Judaiam. They'll stick to catch phrases and metaphors and hope it keeps people in line.Edited by purpledawn, : Msg #

---

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

Thanks for the exchange Peg ...
Hope things are well with you.Thank you, as well, for the distinctions you provided towards the trinity of sects attached to the Levitical regulations associated with 2^nd Temple Yuhdaism, etc.. Very much appreciated ... I'm a lil' surprised to hear that your unaware of the prophetic tradition. It does not seem appropriate to reference such faith & belief as a sect though. Anyway, there are quite a few mentions of their various traditions in the latter, and more popular, Roman scripture text collection (church testaments) ...Within the 'Gospels' selected by the RCC, Yeshua refers to three parts of the TaNaKh by name - the Torah (Law), the Nevi'im (Prophets) and the Tehellim (Psalms). If I may, I'd encourage you to explore 'the Law and the Prophets', as well as the Psalms. Beyond this, my friend, it would seem as one is departing from, or reaching outside of what Yeshua found necessasry. Now, please understand that I am, in no way, suggesting that one should ignore the other scripture texts. I am simply trying to narrow in on the texts that Yeshua specifically mentions that one may do well to admonish.

quote:

---

Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets; I have come not to abolish but to fulfill.

​

For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth pass away, not one letter, not one stroke of a letter, will pass from the law until all is accomplished.

---

​

quote:

---

In everything do to others as you would have them do to you; for this is the law and the prophets.

---

​

quote:

---

Teacher, which commandment in the law is the greatest?

​

He said to him ...

​

You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind.

​

This is the greatest and first commandment.

​

And a second is like it: 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself.'

​

On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

---

​

quote:

---

The law and the prophets were in effect until Yochan came; since then the good news of the kingdom of God is proclaimed, and everyone tries to enter it by force.

​

But it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away, than for one stroke of a letter in the law to be dropped.

---

​

quote:

---

Then he said to them ...

​

These are my words that I spoke to you while I was still with you - that everything written about me in the law of Moses', the prophets, and the psalms must be fulfilled.

---

No, not really, except perhaps by their own individual names - lolAlthough, the continuum of the prophetic tradition may be best understood by identifying each prophet's interpretation, within their specific tradition, regarding HaToRaH. For example, the radical school of Yuhdaic Prophetic traditions does not usually contend HaToRaH that had become canonized in the bible was written by the hand of Moses. It is obvious that Yeshua HaMashiach, as portrayed in the gospel of Mark, did not think so either, and uncle Paul, also, does not seem to have thought that Moses was the author of what had come to be popularly accepted as the first five books of 'The Bible'; in actuality, neither did many of the earliest churches believe that Moses was the author of the Levitical laws found in the Pentateuch.Bear with me through this, if you can, as the evidence for this vein of reason is all around us. Additionally, much is obvious, and some is a rehash.Rather frequently, within the Books of the Prophets, these Levite regulations are referenced as as human commandments, and, at times, things are taken as far as to call some of the laws found in books like Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy 'the doctrines of demons'. I will provide for you certain verses if you want, but they are easy to find on your own, as they are sprinkled like salt, from front to back, all the way through the Roman scripture texts. Although, by identifying the various examples on your own, you may come to appreciate them more thoroughly. The Books of the Prophets effectively lend us assistance towards discerning the forms of contradiction that have come down to us in The Bible, as they present variant records of both historical events, and doctrines, which, on examination, prove to be mutually exclusive.This is most obvious when considering 'history' as it is presented in the bible. If one record of events proposes that I went out to buy milk on a specific Friday, and another record of events declares that on that same Friday I did not leave the house, the two records are mutually exclusive in that if one proves to be accurate, it excludes the other. Both cannot be true. The Testimony of the Prophets is the testimony that Yeshua is depicted as promoting to those who would look to Him for guidance. In the end though, what the bible actually presents is a range of positions on almost every issue.What then passes for 'Bible based teaching' most often consists of a process of selection and selective nullification, with the process of nullification submerged under the weight of polemical argument. Verses which contradict a certain dogma can be said to be 'misunderstood' or 'to be taken as 'metaphor' rather than literally, while the favored verse is then, most always, to be taken literally. In this way, the process of creating these 'theologies' can be seen as one way of attacking, destroying and offending certain Bible verses, and, indeed, whole swaths of scripture text. Matter of factly, most all theologians nullify the Bible, and the process of exegesis seems to be one of upholding certain verses while destroying the authority of others.Personally, while it does seem to me that most all theologians destroy bible verses one way or another, there is the sense that some are up front and direct in their attacks, while others attempt the slippery task of destroying Bible verses by way of subterfuge. One perfect example would be any ardent belief in the 'infallibility of scripture' and, in particular, a concrete belief that 'Moses wrote the Torah', and that any deviation from this belief should then be held to clearly demonstrate a turning away from the authority of 'God's word', as we are told that 'scripture states' that 'Moses brought the ToRaH of God'.After all, could 'scripture be any clearer on the matter'? It is at this point, most often, that 'the evidence' of apostasy will be clearly presented in the form of 'crystal clear bible verses' and 'the meaning of such passages is unmistakably clear'. That is not to say that you, personally, resort to this. However, as we have all seen, all too often, it turns out that much is submerged, nullified and rejected in order to maintain obviously erroneous positions. Keeping the 'Holy Moses ToRaH' means nullifying Prophets, Yeshua, uncle Paul and perhaps, the actual HaToRaH of the Father, as Yeshua repeatedly pointed out. As I said earlier, there are also early traditions, which are also found plainly in the Bible itself, rejecting authorship of the law books by Moses.In the book of the prophet Yirmiyahu we read that not only was Moses not the author of the ToRaH, but that the sacrificial system was a form of rebellion against the Father, and that the 'ToRaH of God', represented as certain documents attributed to and 'coming from' Moses, were, in actuality, forged by the priesthood. This is plainly written within the pages of every bible in print, regardless how often Yirmiyahu's Testimony and Tradition is ignored and nullified. I have pointed this out to you numerous times within multiple threads and it is plainly recorded in your bible, so I have faith you will discover this fact eventually. It just does not fit in with the more modern doctrines that have evolved into our time, and so, is may seem outrageous. This is, perhaps, where 'living by faith' serves us in a practical sense. Yet, we have, in our possesion, the Prophetic Traditions in a tangible, canonized print for our discernment.In the end Peg, the belief that Moses was not the author of the written ToRaH we are in possesion of, and that 'The Bible' was never 'infallible' is, most thankfully - although, also, seemingly ironically, one of the predominant traditions that compose the Bible itself. It weaves its way through the Bible, in The Books of the Prophets, in the Gospels, and in the Letters that compose the church testament. It is not a novelty, nor is it a 'heresy', but as the record indicates, believing that the Bible was not infallible was one of the, although perhaps hotly contested, core doctrines of the very earliest church. To silence these voices is to support a position that cannot be supported and a losing battle, as it is easy to demonstrate that the Bible is both fallible and errant.To suggest otherwise, perhaps, seems to embody the spirit of rebellion most effectively. While such zealotry might carry a superficial gloss of piety, as the earlier writers noticed, such quarrelling over words often ruins people's faith, and in our case, as admirers of the Anointing - and more, it would seem that the best way to honor the Bible, and to treat it with reverence, is to acknowledge the ideological conflicts in its pages. After all, this is something that is never done by either those who claim to be defending the Bible, attempting to 'prove' it is 'inerrant', or by those who attack the Bible; those who never treat the diverse voices on its pages with any sort of respect, but, then again, this is not their goal, and so, why should they.To restate uncle Paul's argument on this matter, the righteous will live by faith, and it may seem ironic that within the context in which he says this, what he is really saying is that the righteous will live by faith in Yeshua HaMashiach, as well as The Books of the Prophets, as they did before us, by believing that The Bible is not infallible, it is certainly not inerrant, and that, most obviously, the ToRaH which has come to be within the pages of the bible, no longer accurately reflects the Father, much less HaToRaH that Moses delivered. Most importantly, perhaps, the traditions of the Prophets are certainly in stark contrast to the sects which became associated to the Levitical regulations attached to multiple ancient forms of Yuhdaism, etc., such as the Pharisees, the Sadducees, the Essenes, and we have the witness of the Law and the Prophets at our disposal to establish this fact.It's hard not to appreciate the Law and the Prophets ...However, they seem easy to overlook.One LoveEdited by Bailey, : sp.Edited by Bailey, : sp.

---

I'm not here to mock or condemn what you believe, tho my intentions are no less than to tickle your thinker.
If those in first century CE had known what these words mean ... 'I want and desire mercy, not sacrifice'
They surely would not have condemned the innocent; why trust what I say when you can learn for yourself?
Think for yourself.Mercy Trumps Judgement,
Love Weary

I have showed you.
Tell me, was Noah under the mosaic law?
was Able under the mosaic law?
was Abraham or Jacob or Isaac under the mosaic law?How about Moses. He was chosen by God to lead the nation of Isreal. Was Moses a follower of the mosaic law when God chose him?You know they were not, so how is it they were declared righteous by God? If it wasnt the law the made them righteous, what was it? because their laws were from God. They were a theocracy, not a democracy. You do realise that when a woman had a baby she had to make an offering after the birth. Does that mean it was illegal to have a baby?You also realise that if a person contracted a communicable disease, they had to make an offering once the disease had passed. Does this mean it was illegal to get sick.You also know that menstruation required an offering. Was menstruation illegal too? everything should be questioned. There is plenty of false information floating around christendom. Its your responsibility to search out what is accurate and what is not. You have a bible, you have a reasoning mind and you have an ability to judge things for yourself. Do it. In the end it will be between you and God, so the ball rests in your court. I agree with you totally. The bible tells us to be obedient to the secular authorities. But it also tells us to 'Pay back Gods things to God'
Secular authorities do not deal out mercy. if you are caught speeding, you get a fine. The do not look at the circumstances of why you were speeding. If you get a parking ticket because you stayed too long in your parking spot, you get a fine and the authority doesnt care if you were there too long because your baby was lost in the shopping center and you couldnt leave until you found him.when you place a higher price on secular legal laws, you are doing yourself a disservice. Again your right. Christianity today leaves a lot to be desired. Most churchs' are run, not by men of faith, but by employees. Pay someone enough and they will say what you want them to say.The clergy left God and the bible a long long time ago and no salvation will be found in them. They have become like the pharasees of Jesus day. They fail to teach the truth about God, they fail to apply Christianity in their own lives and they fail to show their followers how to live a christian life.

Before I address this point I would like to say a word about "doing the work of Satan".It is possible for anyone of us (and I DID say "us" so as to include jaywill), to be used by the enemy of God. Please notice this passage from Matthew: What Peter proposed was in human terms, very noble. Why shouldn't a Person like Jesus Christ be preserved so as not to be tortured and die ? Peter urged Jesus to have pity on Himself and preserve Himself. God's will was Christ's death and resurrection.But nothing escapes the discernment of the Son of God. Jesus detected that hiding out in Peter's opinion was the enemy of God, Satan. The verse says that "He turned and said TO PETER, Get behind Me Satan ...". Even the leading disciple, Peter, could be utlized by Satan just by expressing his noble and good opinion - "Jesus should certainly not die in Jerusalem".Speaking to Peter (who had just in the same chapter had such a revelation so as to declare Jesus the Christ and Son of God (v.16), Jesus said "Get behind Me Satan ...". That was quite a rebuke of the apparent leader among the twelve disciples. Peter took it rather well. He did not take offense.The point here is that Peter set his mind on man's things, man's interests, man's priorities according to the fallen Adamic world. He failed to set his mind on the will of God, mainly the redemptive death and resurrection of Jesus."You are a stumbling block to Me, for you are not setting your mind on the things of God, but on the things of men."I, jaywill, and you or anyone can easily be utlized by Satan, even in expressing our man centered opinion. When we are too much impressed with "the things of men" so as to oppose the will of God, we too can get the rebuke.Peter is a good representative of the true seeker for the truth. Peter did not take offense. He probably thought that he should be careful in rebuking Jesus, for the Son of God knows the things of God and is not to be distracted from accomplishing it.As to your question about interpretation of 1 Timothy 3:16, I see your point insofar that the translation of a few words there is important. Some translations use "piety" where my favorite translations has "godliness". So I can see how Peg could understand "devotion" in that instance.If I came down too harshly on Peg, I apologize Peg. However, I'll be back after I look into some translation issues about 1 Timothy 3:16. I also want to re-read Peg's post.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Hi bailey,
I do know what you mean now, however, i wouldnt go so far as to say that there was a particular 'sect' that followed the prophets. - which is what i thought you were saying.the writings of the prophets was accepted by ALL Jewish worshipers and sects. It formed a part of the 'inspired writings' as a whole.Jesus referred a lot to the books of the prophets because many prophecies were about the Messiah. Therefore there was a lot of application of prophecies attributed to Jesus in the NT.ie
Isaiah 7:14 foretold the manner of the birth of the one to be the Messiah. Micah 2:4-6 had foretold that Bethlehem would be the place of the birth. Daniel 9:25 fortold the time of arrival of the messiah.
Hosea 11:1 and Jeremiah 31:15 describes events surrounding the early life of the messiah...these, and other, prophecies were attributed to Jesus in the NT. Im not sure i can agree with that. Jesus made reference to the 'Law of Moses' on quite a few occasions. Im sure he would not have called it the 'law of moses' if he did not believe it was written by Moses.Im sorry, but all the rest of you post has gone over my head...i have no idea what you are trying to say in it.

i appreciate that you believe that Jesus is Almighty God. I know its a very common teaching among christendom. Its not something i've been taught though and i've been studying for over 10 years.I guess Jesus can only be one or the other. He can only be God or he can only be Christ. I dont believe he can be both. I dont believe the scriptures present him as being both, i dont believe the apostles presented him as being both.I do believe he was a god who dwelt with the Almighty before he came to earth to live as a man, but the scriptures do say that jesus is the 'only begotten son' of God.So my understanding is that the Almighty God Jehovah, created a being in his likeness who was the only being that God personally created which is why Jesus is called 'the only begotten son'In a way it is correct to call jesus 'A' god, because he really is a spiritual being like his father. But, he is a separate being to the Almighty Jehovah.

First Timothy 3:16 has many varied English translations. Some say piety or even religion where the Recovery Version and other English versions read "great is the mystery of godliness"Here are my reasons for saying that it refers to God living in man:Christ is the Head of the Body of Christ (Col. 1:18). And the fullness of the Godhead dwells bodily in Christ (Col.2:9;1:19). God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself (2 Cor. 5:19). Christ was the Word Who was God (John 1:1) and Who became flesh (John 1:14).Paul says in Colossians 1:19 - "all the fullness of the was pleased to dwell in Christ". That is not one third of the fullness but "all" the fullness. That is not 33.33333% of the fullness but "ALL the fullness was pleased to dwell" in Jesus Christ. So God certainly was manifested in the flesh in Jesus.Christ came in the likeness, in fashion, of man (Rom. 8:3; Phil. 2:7-8).And confessedly, great is the mystery of godliness: He who was manifested in the flesh ...". The Word Who was with God and Who was God became flesh. So God was manifested in the flesh in Jesus. He appeared to people in the form of a man (2 Cor. 5:16).John writes "No one has ever seen God; the only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, He has declared [Him]" (John 1:18). Christ declared God, manifested God, defined God, expressed God. And to see the Son was to see the Father (John 14:9) First Timothy 3:16 covers the vindiation of Christ -"justified (or vindicated) in the Spirit". Jesus was vindiated as the Son of God by the Spirit (Matt. 3:16-17; Rom. 1:3-4). He also was justified, proved righteous, approved as righteous by the Spirit (Matt. 3:15-16; 4:1). As the Son who declared God (John 1:1) He appeared in the flesh, but He lived in the Spirit (Luke 4:1,14; Matt. 12:48). He offered Himself to God (the Word was with God and was God) through the eternal Spirit (Heb.9:14). His transfiguration (Matt. 17:2) and His resurrection are both justifications in the Spirit.In resurrection, the crucified and risin Man became a life giving Spirit (1 Cor. 15:45; 2 Cor. 3:17). This fact that Jesus Christ is made available to all people in all times since all around the globe is a vindication of Jesus in the Spirit.As a life giving Spirit He can dwell in man (Romans 8:9-10) . And as such the manifestation of God in the flesh can continue in His mystical Body the church.To have Christ is to have God (1 John 4:12). Paul uses the Spirit of Christ as interchangeable with the Spirit of God (Romans 8:9-11). And Paul uses the Spirit of Christ interchangeable with Christ (Rom. 8:9-11). He further uses this title of the indwelling Spirit of Christ (Christ) interchangeably with "the Spirit of the One who raised Jesus from the dead" (Rom. 8:9-11)The mystery of godliness in 1 Timothy 3:16 firstly covers God manifest in the flesh in the Son of God, Jesus. It extends to be Christ manifest in the members of the household of God, the church which is His body. This is why 1 Timothy 3:16 begins with an exhortation that the Chrisians should know how to behave themselves in the house of God. God began to manifest Himself in Christ through incarnation. He further manifests Himself in the believers by way of salvation, especially transformation and building up into oneness. This is probably the reason why in the list of praises Paul puts "Believed on in the world before "Taken up in glory."If Paul meant Christ only is God manifest in the flesh, the sequence should be that Christ was first taken up in glory as He ascended and then preached in the world.The unexpected reversal of the sequence strongly suggests that the rapture of the overcoming saints of Christ at the end of the church age after Christ has been preached to all the nations, is a continuation of God being manifest in the flesh. This would confirm why Paul uses the same word "godliness" for the proper living in the church as well as for the life of Jesus.God desires to dispense His life in Christ into the members of Christ's body, the house of God, the church of the living God. The phrase "living God" should stress that it is a matter not merely of doctrine but of living. He is the living God and not simply the God of theological dogma. We have to live God in the house of God.In the house of God the church, man must behave by living out from them this living God in Christ, who has now been dispensed into them as "a life giving Spirit" (1 Cor. 15:45).Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

hey Jaywill,like i said, i appreciate that we differ on this regard.Its interesting that the early church split over this very issue. Is Jesus God, or is Jesus Gods son? It was determined, by what is now the Catholic church, that God is a trinity. Any who taught against this 3rd/4th century teaching were considered heretics.that makes me a heretic, its just fortunate i dont live in the dark ages because i'd probably be burned at the stake for disbelieving the trinity.I would just like you to answer me this. I've seen you use the name of Almighty God, Jehovah, a number of times. Who is this one?

quote:

---

I have showed you.
Tell me, was Noah under the mosaic law?
was Able under the mosaic law?
was Abraham or Jacob or Isaac under the mosaic law?

​

How about Moses. He was chosen by God to lead the nation of Isreal. Was Moses a follower of the mosaic law when God chose him?

​

You know they were not, so how is it they were declared righteous by God? If it wasnt the law the made them righteous, what was it?

---

Were they lawless and disobedient to the legal system that did govern them?As I said in Message 180: Now both of you are hung up on the "being deemed righteous issue". Not once have I asked for the list of laws that will make one righteous before God. You are the one who says we must follow God's laws. Even Jaywill's quote says we still aren't allowed to be lawless and disobedient.Keep up please.

quote:

---

because their laws were from God. They were a theocracy, not a democracy.

---

That's a difference in where the laws came from, not in how the civilization administered the laws.

quote:

---

You do realise that when a woman had a baby she had to make an offering after the birth. Does that mean it was illegal to have a baby?

​

You also realise that if a person contracted a communicable disease, they had to make an offering once the disease had passed. Does this mean it was illegal to get sick.

​

You also know that menstruation required an offering. Was menstruation illegal too?

---

We are discussing right and wrong behavior, not analyzing the Hebrew Legal System.The items you mention concern purification, not wrong behavior. Of course, by mentioning these issues you also show that the Mosaic Laws weren't just for the purpose of acknowledging sin as you stated in Message 181.

quote:

---

everything should be questioned. There is plenty of false information floating around christendom. Its your responsibility to search out what is accurate and what is not. You have a bible, you have a reasoning mind and you have an ability to judge things for yourself. Do it. In the end it will be between you and God, so the ball rests in your court.

---

That's what I do best.

quote:

---

I agree with you totally. The bible tells us to be obedient to the secular authorities. But it also tells us to 'Pay back Gods things to God'
Secular authorities do not deal out mercy. if you are caught speeding, you get a fine. The do not look at the circumstances of why you were speeding. If you get a parking ticket because you stayed too long in your parking spot, you get a fine and the authority doesnt care if you were there too long because your baby was lost in the shopping center and you couldnt leave until you found him.

​

when you place a higher price on secular legal laws, you are doing yourself a disservice.

---

Authorities that carry out secular law may or may not belong to a religion. We don't know that authorities never show mercy. Parking tickets are a difficult one to show mercy on in a large society because so many people lie (even Christians). One can make their case to the right person for leniency though if they choose to. The clerk can't make the decision.Being a Christian isn't about expecting mercy, but practicing mercy when possible. Christians who work within the legal system should show mercy when possible.Applying mercy when administering a set of rules also applies to Christian congregations and the rules governing church practices and the rules that churches glean from the Bible. Since each group judges for themselves what is God's will, there are no consistent set of rules for Christians.So there are no Christian laws and you haven't really shown God's laws either. You say that the Mosaic Laws are still God's standards, but in reality, those ancient laws are not all brought forward as standards. Laws adjust to fit the needs of the civilization.Christians should be law abiding citizens who are benevolent and forgiving.Edited by purpledawn, : Msg #

---

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

what legal system did they live under?

not quite.childbirth made a woman 'unclean' because the original purpose of it was to pass on perfect human life. However, because of the inherited effects of sin, imperfect and sinful life was passed on to the offspring. This is why the offering was required...it was still an acknowledgment of the hereditary sin passed onto the child and reminded them of the need to be released from the sinful condition. but there is a consistent set of rules...its called the bible. I think what you have come to understand is that the church's of christendom do not apply the bible and do not teach the bibles standards.The bible has been the same since the day it was written.