Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 76 (8908 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 05-21-2019 7:37 AM
24 online now:
PaulK (1 member, 23 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: WeloTemo
Post Volume:
Total: 851,669 Year: 6,706/19,786 Month: 1,247/1,581 Week: 69/393 Day: 2/50 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
1
2Next
Author Topic:   Did the coming of Jesus render the Law of the old testament null and void
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 1594 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 5 of 80 (665721)
06-16-2012 10:41 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by LexM1985
06-16-2012 7:48 AM


Christianity Went to Gentiles
The Mosaic Laws were the basis for the Jewish legal system when they were an independent nation. Jesus did not do away with the Jewish legal system. The Jewish followers of Jesus still followed the Mosaic Laws as allowed by the Romans.

To their neighbors these early followers of Jesus, for they did not yet bear the distinctive designation of Christian, must have appeared another sect of Judaism, predominantly Galilean in membership, distinguished from other Jews by their belief that Jesus was the Messiah and by their expectation of the early return of their Lord. Their leader, James, appears to have been especially conservative in his loyalty to Jewish customs. They continued to use the temple as a place of worship and observed the Jewish law, including its ceremonies, circumcision, and the dietary regulations. Even some of the pharisees joined them. So far as we know, their numbers were recruited entirely from Jews and proselytes to Judaism. --From the book "a History of Christianity" by Kenneth Scott Latourette, 1953.

The Mosaic laws as presented in the OT were the laws of a functioning government. Notice many of the laws also pertained to those living within the land but not of Jewish descent. It was the foundation of a legal system.

The community is to have the same rules for you and for the alien living among you; this is a lasting ordinance for the generations to come. You and the alien shall be the same before the Lord: The same laws and regulations will apply both to you and to the alien living among you. (Numbers 15:13-16)

At some point Christianity was no longer part of Judaism and since the Jews were no in power, the Gentiles weren't required to follow the Jewish laws.

A History of Christianity by Kenneth Scott Latourette, 1953.

Christianity quickly moved out of the Jewish community and became prevailingly non-Jewish. As early as the time that Paul wrote his letter to it, a generation or less after the resurrection, the church in Rome was predominantly Gentile. This in itself was highly significant: Christianity had cease to be a Jewish sect and, while having roots in Judaism, was clearly new and different from that faith. In becoming non-Jewish in its following, Christianity was entering into the Hellenistic world. In becoming non-Jewish in its following, Christianity was entering into the Hellenistic world. (Page 75)

As the separation between Judaism and Christianity became more obvious and as the majority of Christian converts began to be drawn from the Gentiles, while antagonism between Jews and Christians did not decline, persecution of Christians by Jews was less frequent. (Page 81)

Few of the second and third century apologists devoted much attention to the Jews and Judaism. By the time that they wrote, the separation of the Christian community from Judaism was almost complete and Christians were being drawn primarily from paganism. (Page 83)

In Acts, we see that the Gentiles were given some basics to adhere to that would make fellowship between the Gentiles and Jews easier.

"Therefore it is my judgment that we do not trouble those who are turning to God from among the Gentiles, but that we write to them that they abstain from things contaminated by idols and from fornication and from what is strangled and from blood. For Moses from ancient generations has in every city those who preach him, since he (i.e. The Torah) is read in the synagogues every Sabbath." (Acts 15:1921)

The implication is that those basic rules would work as they learned the ropes of Judaism. Unfortunately Jewish Christianity became extinct.

How Christianity Rose To Dominate Europe

During the Council of Jerusalem in 50 AD, it was determined that Gentiles would be accepted by all Jews into the Christianity movement, and that certain Jewish practices were not necessary for their inclusion, especially circumcision.

This brand of Jewish Christianity largely died out as a result of this, as the new idea of a religion independent of Judaism eclipsed the original Jewish-centric creed. The fate of Jewish-Christianity was sealed with the slaughters and deportations of Jews in Jerusalem, between 70-130 AD, in response to the Jewish revolts against the Roman Empire. Jewish Christians were largely located in and around Jerusalem. Therefore, the majority were killed or deported, essentially uprooting Christianity from among the Jewish settlements in the Palestinian region.

As Jewish Christianity dwindled into extinction by the 2nd century, it was the Gentiles that took the mantle of Christianity, continuing the struggle against Roman persecution in order to survive as a religion. First, Christians were seen as a sect of the Jewish religion, which was disdained in the Roman Empire, as it conflicted with the worship of the Greco-Roman Gods. Christians and Jews were also known for their zealous revolts. Furthermore, many in the Roman Empire believed that Christianity offended the Greco-Roman Gods, which is why Paul and Peter were blamed for the Great Fire of Rome in 64 AD, leading to their martyrdom.

None of this made the Mosaic Laws or Jewish Laws null and void for Jewish believers and Gentiles never were required to follow the Mosaic laws aside from when they were part of a functioning legal system or if one joined Judaism.

Jesus didn't have the authority to do away with a legal system.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by LexM1985, posted 06-16-2012 7:48 AM LexM1985 has not yet responded

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 1594 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 11 of 80 (665976)
06-20-2012 12:35 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by Jon
06-20-2012 4:31 AM


Re: Who to Blame
quote:
So, if we want to figure out who to blame for the Christian disregard for the Jewish Law as originally practiced by the earliest band of Jesus' followers, we can look to the most zealous anti-Law early Christian we have on record: Paul. As much as our records tell us, Paul created a Christianity marketable to Gentiles that stressed the belief that the Law was no longer applicable.

Paul's the one we should blame. Let's blame Paul.


I don't feel that Paul did nullify the Mosaic Laws. He didn't have that authority. Paul was Torah obedient. His issues were more about Gentile Christians being compelled to do rituals they didn't need to do to be part of the Jewish community.

Galatians 2:11 is not about abolishing the Mosaic Laws for the Jews. Politics of the time.

Galatians 2 Commentary
It seems that during the late forties and fifties, Jewish Christians in Judea were facing bitter antagonism from Zealot-minded Jews for socializing with Gentiles. The fierce Jewish nationalism rampant in Palestine at that time led to harsh treatment of any Jew who associated with Gentiles. It is likely that the delegation from James simply reported to Peter that his open and unrestricted association with Gentiles in Antioch would cause (or had already caused) the church in Jerusalem to suffer greatly at the hands of the circumcision group, Jewish nationalists.

It was more about hypocrisy.

Don't confuse justification with expected behavior of a group and don't confuse Paul's arguments concerning justification and behavior. His argument is that Gentile Christians weren't adopted into God's family because of stellar behavior, but through belief just like Abraham. (Romans 4) He didn't nullify any laws that pertained to the Christian Jews or Gentiles. Right behavior was still expected.

Even in the Mosaic Laws, not everything pertains to both Jews and Gentiles.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by Jon, posted 06-20-2012 4:31 AM Jon has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by Jon, posted 06-20-2012 3:11 PM purpledawn has responded

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 1594 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 13 of 80 (666004)
06-20-2012 4:59 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by Jon
06-20-2012 3:11 PM


Re: Who to Blame
quote:
My point was that there were folk making declarations that becoming Christian didn't necessarily mean keeping all of the Torah and that one of those people was definitely Paul. Paul said that following Jesus didn't necessarily mean following the Law.

quote:
It's about a lot of things. But I wasn't trying to interpret Paul's message, I was simply reading his words as insight into the nature of the early Christian movement, and Galatians 2:11 does indicate that at least some early Christians were working from the viewpoint that following Jesus meant keeping the Jewish Law. I mean, why else would Cephas refuse to eat with the Gentiles? And what else would the 'circumcision party' be other than a group of Jesus followers who believed following Jesus meant following the Law?
The Laws in the OT are the basis for the Jewish Laws. By the first century there was more to the Jewish Laws than just what was written in the OT. This thread is about whether the Law of the OT was rendered null and void. Not Jewish Law in general.

The circumcision group has been identified as Jewish nationalists, not necessarily Jewish Christians.

Galatians
Paul says, "because he was afraid of those who belonged to the circumcision group." We have defined this latter group as a group of ardent Jewish nationalists, based in Jerusalem, who urged all groups in Jerusalem and Judaism to live faithfully according to the law.

I don't see it written in the OT that Jews were forbidden to eat with Gentiles (613 Mitzvot). I think it was more a part of the "fence around the Torah".

Gezeirah: A Fence around the Torah
A gezeirah is a law instituted by the rabbis to prevent people from accidentally violating a Torah mitzvah. For example, the Torah commands us not to work on the Sabbath, but a gezeirah commands us not to move a object only used to perform prohibited work (such as a pencil, money, a hammer), because someone handling the implement might forget that it was the Sabbath and perform prohibited work.

It is important to note that from the point of view of the practicing Jew, there is no difference between a gezeirah and a Torah mitzvah. Both are equally binding. The difference is just in the severity of punishment: a Torah violation of the Sabbath is punishable by death, while a rabbinical violation of a gezeirah is punishable by whipping.

Another difference between a gezeirah and a mitzvah is that the rabbis can, in rare appropriate circumstances, modify, or abrogate a gezeirah. Rabbis cannot change the Torah law that was commanded by God.

I agree that Paul fought the idea that Gentile Christians should be compelled to take on the full weight of Judaism, but they could still do so by choice. Jewish Christians were still required to follow the 613 Commandments from the OT, but the Gentiles were only required to follow the rules mentioned in Acts 15.

I also agree that Paul made it clear that taking on the full weight of Judaism was not necessary to become a Gentile Christian, just as one did not have to give up full Judaism to become a Jewish Christian either.

Paul was tearing down a "fence", not the laws of the OT.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by Jon, posted 06-20-2012 3:11 PM Jon has not yet responded

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 1594 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 16 of 80 (666076)
06-21-2012 7:32 PM
Reply to: Message 15 by Jon
06-21-2012 4:59 PM


Not Dropped - Picked
quote:
Are we going to talk about the parts of the Law that were dropped as Christianity developed?
Christianity didn't drop any laws. The OT laws were a part of a nation's legal system. Christianity didn't and still doesn't have a legal system.

The Jewish Christians were still bound by the OT laws and the Jewish laws. The Non-Jewish Christians were never bound by the OT laws or the Jewish laws, so there was nothing to drop.

Jewish Christians died out and the Non-Jewish Christians were left to continue Christianity. If these Non-Jewish Christians decided to follow any "laws" from the OT, then they chose the "laws" they wanted to follow, they didn't drop anything.

Christians just have rules for behavior.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by Jon, posted 06-21-2012 4:59 PM Jon has not yet responded

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 1594 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 19 of 80 (666172)
06-23-2012 6:16 AM
Reply to: Message 18 by Jon
06-22-2012 7:31 PM


Dropped Laws
Since you feel that OT laws were dropped by Christians, please present your argument. List the OT laws you feel were dropped by Christians, when they were dropped and why, and provide support for your position.

The idea of the word drop as you're using it means to give up, abandon, or discontinue. After the failure of the Jewish Revolt that destroyed the temple, surviving Jewish Christians may have abandoned actions that might divulge their Jewish heritage, but their actions didn't affect the OT Laws on the books for the Jews.

Before 175 BCE intellectual Jewish reformists wanted to improve Judaism.
Excerpt from History of the Jews by Paul Johnson 1987:

They embarked on the first Biblical criticism: the Law, as now written, was not very old and certainly did not go back to Moses. They argued that the original laws were far more universalistic. ...The reformers did not want to abolish the Law completely but to purge it of those elements which forbade participation in Greek culturefor instance, the ban on nudity, which kept pious Jews out of the gymnasium and stadiumand reduce it to its ethical core, so universalizing it.

Jewish reformists were working on adjusting the Jewish laws for Jews before Jesus was even born. IMO, adjusting laws as a civilization changes is pretty standard.

The only OT rules the Non-Jewish Christians were supposedly bound by were the rules given in Acts 15.

Abstain from:
(1) Eating food sacrificed to idols;
(2) Sexual immorality;
(3) Eating the meat of strangled animals; and
(4) Eating blood.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by Jon, posted 06-22-2012 7:31 PM Jon has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by Jon, posted 06-23-2012 6:58 AM purpledawn has responded

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 1594 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 22 of 80 (666178)
06-23-2012 9:43 AM
Reply to: Message 20 by Jon
06-23-2012 6:58 AM


Re: Dropped Laws
quote:
Again; you're just nitpicking. If I use the phrase 'made unnecessary', will you stop pretending you don't understand what I'm saying?
Unnecessary for what? Present your argument.

Christians weren't required to follow the law to become Christians, therefore the laws weren't necessary for that purpose to begin with.

Jewish Christians were Christians because they believed Jesus was the Messiah and followed his teachings, not because they followed Jewish law. They were still bound by Jewish law because they were Jewish, but that wasn't part of being Christian. Non-Jewish Christians weren't bound by Jewish law because they weren't Jewish, but they were still Christians because of their belief. They had no OT laws to drop.

The rules they asked the Non-Jewish Christians to follow in Acts 15 were a means to make it easier for fellowship between the groups since the Jewish Christians still had to follow Jewish Law.

According to the OT stories, God did not become the God of Abraham because Abraham followed laws. The laws were given because they believed in God. They were a nation that needed laws to govern them.

I've already made it clear I'm not talking about justification for becoming a Christian or for being accepted by God. That was Paul's point. Don't use the laws as justification, OT or otherwise. He didn't do away with anything, just put them in their proper place.

quote:
Sure; and part of that 'adjustment' as the Jewish Jesus Movement developed into Gentile Christianity was the decision that all but the most basic and expected Laws were unnecessary.
Unnecessary for what? Also some support would be nice.

quote:
And how many Christian sects still feel themselves bound by those last two?
If a group of Non-Jewish Christians entertained a group of Jewish Christians who still ate kosher, would they serve kosher or expect the Jews to deal with it? My guess is they would serve kosher if they understood anything that Paul taught.

Once the Jewish Christians died away, there would be no conflict to avoid. The Non-Jewish Christians were no longer part of a Jewish community. That had nothing to do with Jesus or Paul.

So IMO, the last two rules would not be "necessary" as long as Non-Jewish Christians aren't fellowshipping around the food table with Jewish Christians. No blood pudding next to the veggie platter.

If all you're arguing is that the OT laws aren't necessary to be a Christian, I agree. But, then they never were. That's why I say there wasn't really anything to drop or "make" unnecessary. That doesn't make the OT laws null and void, it just makes them not applicable.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by Jon, posted 06-23-2012 6:58 AM Jon has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by Buzsaw, posted 06-23-2012 2:41 PM purpledawn has responded
 Message 24 by Jon, posted 06-23-2012 4:35 PM purpledawn has responded

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 1594 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 28 of 80 (666195)
06-23-2012 9:05 PM
Reply to: Message 23 by Buzsaw
06-23-2012 2:41 PM


Re: Dropped Laws
quote:
Not so, PD. The Jewish temple holy place was done away with as I said and the temple was destroyed shortly later, never to be rebuilt in this dispensation of Christianity. Not so, PD. The Jewish temple holy place was done away with as I said and the temple was destroyed shortly later, never to be rebuilt in this dispensation of Christianity.
I agree, the Jews supposedly couldn't do the sacrificial rituals after the destruction of the temple. That had nothing to do with Jesus though. The destruction of the temple in 70 AD stopped the sacrifices for lack of a place, not Jesus.

quote:
Don't forget, Jesus and his apostles were all Jews. It was all of them, including Jesus, who never kept the letter of the law. Thus Jesus told the man healed of palsy from birth to pick up his bed and walk. Jewish Levitical law forbad that. It was Jesus and his apostles who did not wash their hands after plucking corn from the field, as required by Jewish Levitical law of the letterl
Shammai and Hillel debated over the letter of the law and the spirit of the law long before Jesus came around. Also note some laws were part of the Oral Law or the "fence around the Torah". Show me the Scripture that supports these things you mention were part of the OT law. Hillel tended to win out. Supposedly Paul was also from the school of Hillel.

The Debate Over Jewish Law

Show me what laws you're talking about specifically. Going by the spirit of the law as opposed to the letter of the law doesn't void or nullify the law.

quote:
It was at Penticost when the Holy Spirit decended, entering the believer's body and being/heart/soul, awaiting that event, as Jesus had instructed. The intent of the law came into their being via the baptism of the Holy Ghost, i.e. being born from above/again.
quote:
Paul said somewhere, If any man be in Christ Jesus, he becomes a new creature/creation; old things have passed away; behold all things have become new. In other words, the sinful life passes away and one begins (I say begins) to be a better person as one grows from a babe in Christ to become a mature practicing believer, growing as one applies one's life to the Biblical principles.
That still doesn't nullify or void the OT laws. If the intent came into their being then they should have no problem following the OT laws.

Changing one's behavior also doesn't nullify or void the OT laws. The person changed, not the OT laws.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by Buzsaw, posted 06-23-2012 2:41 PM Buzsaw has not yet responded

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 1594 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 29 of 80 (666197)
06-23-2012 9:18 PM
Reply to: Message 24 by Jon
06-23-2012 4:35 PM


Re: Dropped Laws
quote:
Christianity began as a cult movement within Judaism. Jesus was a Jew. His direct followers were Jews. The whole concept of what Jesus was was entirely entrenched in a Jewish world view. He was the Messiah who was resurrected after being executed during the Passover; he offered spiritual reinterpretations of the Law; and so the list goes on.

The Jesus Movement was a Jewish movement for Jews. The new movement didn't become Christianity until it started to become populated with non-Jews. The abandonment of the necessity for keeping certain parts of the Law was part of the general movement away from the Jewish Jesus Movement to a more universal Christianity.

Did this not happen?


Show some support. I've shown you the Jewish half of Christianity died out. The Jewish half followed the laws. The Non-Jewish half couldn't abandon what they didn't have.

I already said Christianity went to the Gentiles. Message 5


This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by Jon, posted 06-23-2012 4:35 PM Jon has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 30 by jar, posted 06-23-2012 9:27 PM purpledawn has responded
 Message 31 by Jon, posted 06-24-2012 12:47 PM purpledawn has not yet responded

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 1594 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 32 of 80 (666220)
06-24-2012 6:33 PM
Reply to: Message 30 by jar
06-23-2012 9:27 PM


Re: Dropped Laws
quote:
But the Jewish Christian cult did abandon much of the Law.

Peter and Paul are two great examples.


Show us that Paul or Peter followed the OT Laws any less than other Jews or Jewish Christians of the time.

Romans 3:31
...Do we, then, nullify the law by this faith? Not at all! Rather, we uphold the law.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by jar, posted 06-23-2012 9:27 PM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 33 by jar, posted 06-24-2012 6:48 PM purpledawn has responded

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 1594 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 34 of 80 (666222)
06-24-2012 6:56 PM
Reply to: Message 33 by jar
06-24-2012 6:48 PM


Re: Dropped Laws
quote:
They ate with non Jews, ate unclean foods.
Scripture please!
This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by jar, posted 06-24-2012 6:48 PM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 35 by jar, posted 06-24-2012 7:10 PM purpledawn has responded

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 1594 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 36 of 80 (666224)
06-24-2012 7:22 PM
Reply to: Message 35 by jar
06-24-2012 7:10 PM


Associating with Gentiles
Associating with Non-Jews is not part of the OT Laws. Message 13

What you never knew about the Pharisees
This attitude caused Pharisees from the school of Shammai to hate all Gentiles, and left them with little regard even for Jews who didnt follow them. (In one case, nearly attacking the sage Hillel for bringing a sacrifice to the Temple on a day they disapproved of.) In the days of Shammai, so passionate was their hatred of Gentiles that around 10 AD, Shammai passed 18 edicts specifically meant to force separation between Jews and Gentiles. The specifics of all these edicts have been lost, but among them was a prohibition of entering the house of a Gentile lest a Jew thereby become defiled, and even eating with or purchasing food from a Gentile was forbidden.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by jar, posted 06-24-2012 7:10 PM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 37 by jar, posted 06-24-2012 7:45 PM purpledawn has responded

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 1594 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 38 of 80 (666227)
06-24-2012 8:36 PM
Reply to: Message 37 by jar
06-24-2012 7:45 PM


Re: Associating with Gentiles
Support please!

Plates could be washed other than clay. Leviticus 11


This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by jar, posted 06-24-2012 7:45 PM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 39 by jar, posted 06-24-2012 8:59 PM purpledawn has responded

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 1594 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 40 of 80 (666251)
06-25-2012 7:15 AM
Reply to: Message 39 by jar
06-24-2012 8:59 PM


Difficult But Not Forbidden
quote:
Some plates could be washed. But unless done by someone who understands the requirements it is not Kosher. And of course, any clay pot where an unclean critter has touched and anything that touches or is in such an unclean pot is unclean. That also applies to how food was prepared and stored, cooked, handled, what ingredients are included.
It may have been difficult to eat with Gentiles or to visit one, but it wasn't forbidden and since Shammai felt it necessary to make several decrees to keep Jews and Gentiles separated, the people must have overcome the difficulty. Message 36

quote:
The support is common sense. The Laws were detailed, often arbitrary, sometimes contradictory and whether the source was Biblical, or Rabbinical or simply custom, complex and obscure.

When you entered a non-Jewish hose there was simply no way to know the history of the food offered.


The support for your argument is not common sense because the Laws were detailed, often arbitrary, sometimes contradictory, complex and obscure. There were several sects with their interpretations of the OT Laws and at least two schools of thought.

You stated in Message 30, that

jar writes:

But the Jewish Christian cult did abandon much of the Law.

Peter and Paul are two great examples.

But you haven't shown us that Paul or Peter followed the OT Laws any less than other Jews or Jewish Christians of their time.

There were Hellenistic Jews before Jesus came. These Jews had largely abandoned much of the Torah in order to be "more accepted" in the Greek/Roman culture where they lived.

The Dispora
The vast majority of the Jews living in the Dispersion, however, were not Hebraists, but Hellenists. These were Jews who had conformed themselves to the Greek/Roman culture, and who had basically ceased being "Jewish" except in certain matters of faith. The Sadducees, for example, tended to be Hellenists, whereas the Pharisees were generally Hebraists.

Paul claimed to be a Pharisee. Acts 23:6

My position is that at the time of Jesus, Paul, and Peter; the OT Laws had no legal or binding force on Gentiles, Christian or otherwise. They had nothing to abandon. I don't see that Jewish Christians abandoned any OT Laws because of Jesus or Paul.

I don't see that Paul or Peter followed the OT Laws any less than the various Diaspora Jews of their time.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by jar, posted 06-24-2012 8:59 PM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 41 by jar, posted 06-25-2012 9:34 AM purpledawn has responded

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 1594 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 42 of 80 (666259)
06-25-2012 10:35 AM
Reply to: Message 41 by jar
06-25-2012 9:34 AM


Re: Difficult But Not Forbidden
quote:
However both Peter and Paul were of sects that definitely considered keeping Kosher as required and yet they both changed their position. They dropped keeping Kosher as a requirement.

You may not see it but it really is that simple.


Requirement for what?

You haven't shown that Paul and Peter didn't follow the Jewish dietary laws.

Acts 25:8
Then Paul made his defense: "I have done nothing wrong against the law of the Jews or against the temple or against Caesar."

Excerpt from: How People Lived In The Bible 2002

Most ancient people ate meat sparingly. Beans and fresh veggies comprised most everyday meals, but when company was coming or there was something to really celebrate, it was time to kill the fatted calf!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 41 by jar, posted 06-25-2012 9:34 AM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 43 by jar, posted 06-25-2012 10:53 AM purpledawn has not yet responded

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 1594 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 45 of 80 (666278)
06-25-2012 1:16 PM
Reply to: Message 44 by New Cat's Eye
06-25-2012 12:01 PM


Extreme Fence
IMO, it became more complicated when the leading Jews figured perfect adherence to the laws would get them their nation and temple back. They developed the fence, which was extreme in some cases.

Before that I don't feel they were any more complicated than any other nation's laws.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by New Cat's Eye, posted 06-25-2012 12:01 PM New Cat's Eye has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 46 by New Cat's Eye, posted 06-25-2012 2:29 PM purpledawn has responded

  
1
2Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019