Is the Law God gave through Moses still in effect today???

[follower of Christ]

Sparrowhawke wrote:Those who advocate the "tossing out" of the Torah are saying that Genesis and Exodus must be "thrown out" right along with Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy. The word Torah actually means "teaching," "doctrine," or "instruction" --- the common English word "law" gives us wrong impression.

youre being a bit ridiculous, friend.
NO ONE HERE is saying to toss out ANY part of our bibles.
We ARE saying, however, that we AGREE with Jesus and Paul BOTH on the matter of food and drink.

 

[whirlwind]

God told Adam what was "good for food." Because the written word wasn't until the time of Moses doesn't mean the spoken word wasn't carried forward. :yes

This argument does not work. If, as you suggest, the "word about what was good was carried forward, then why the need to tell the Jews not to eat pork?]

Why?....because it was time to write everything down for future generations. Because something was carried forward doesn't mean it shouldn't be written. And, they were not Jews...they were Hebrews than Israelites. Only the tribes of Judah and Benjamin are Jews.

[God did separate Israel from others. They/we are His "peculiar people." However, Israel doesn't become the Gentile but rather...the Gentile becomes Israel. The Torah isn't erased...it is fulfilled. The blood ordinances are fulfilled in Christ. And, He is our Sabbath, He is our Passover, circumcision is now of the heart. Fulfilled...not done away with.

I would be interested to know if you really think we should be stoning adulterers and making sacrifices in the temple, etc. That is where you go if you say the Torah is still in force. And since you say that we Gentiles are subsumed into Israel, you seem to be saying that all Christians should be obeying the dictates of the Torah - stoning adulterers, sacrificing goats in the temple, staying away from lepers, etc. Do you really believe this?"

Jesus fulfilled all blood ordinances. No, we shouldn't stone adulterers for He died for our sins and we can repent.

I trust you realize that it is perfectly coherent to say that the Torah was fulfilled in a manner such that it is no longer in force. If I get on a plane from Montreal to London, I stop travelling when the plane reaches its destination. The purpose of the plane trip has been fulfilled. Does this mean that I insist on staying on the plane, and not "abolishing" or "putting an end to" my travel? Of course not.

Torah is used by God to achieve a certain goal. And that goal was achieved at Calvary. Torah has done its job and can it be retired.

I agree Drew...a great deal was achieved but certainly not all. There is a difference in ordinances, statutes and laws.

 

[Sparkey]

More "Torah" --- more on the 613 Mitzvots

It is a rich and powerful study - but as you know there are 613 commandments that were enforce during the time of the Apostles. There are three categories, Affirmative commandments, Negative commandments and Commandments that apply only in Israel.

Many of the 613 are not observable today --- they are primarily focused on Temple worship and its sacrifices -- some unobservable commands are focused on criminal procedures and can not be followed because the "TheoCratic" state of Israel does not exist.

For each mitzvah I've provided a citation to the Old Testament:
To know that God exists! (Ex. 20:2; Deut. 5:6)
To fear Him reverently (Deut. 6:13; 10:20)
To imitate His good and upright ways (Deut. 28:9)
To cleave to those who know Him (Deut. 10:20)
Not to add to the commandments of the Torah (Deut. 13:1)
Not to take away from the commandments of the Torah (Deut. 13:1)
To love all human beings who are of the covenant (Lev. 19:18)

The Halakhah includes commandments instituted by Rabbis and "binding customs".

Oh, one more (I like this one):
To honor the old and the wise (Lev. 19:32)

~Sparrow

PS -- stop the personal attack. I am not being "ridiculous" but in fact am responding to statements made here by another brother and I will quickly run to the "REPORT" button if the tone of this thread especially "personal attacks" does not abruptly change. All authority is given by God for a purpose and I have asked a moderator into this thread to speak to this issue.

 

[whirlwind]

it says 'abominable'...ie 'unclean'...

abominable
H6292
פּגּל פּגּוּל
piggûl piggûl
pig-gool', pig-gool'
From an unused root meaning to stink; properly fetid, that is, (figuratively) unclean (ceremonially): - abominable (-tion, thing).


H6292
פּגּל / פּגּוּל
piggûl
BDB Definition:
1) foul thing, refuse
1a) unclean sacrificial flesh (only use)

Do you have any REAL evidence ?



.

I see no need to as you provided it. Unclean is unclean is abominable. As I said, if that sounds wholesome to you...

 

[whirlwind]

More "Torah" --- more on the 613 Mitzvots


Oh, one more (I like this one):
To honor the old and the wise (Lev. 19:32)

~Sparrow

 

[Vic C.]

FoC, play nice, please. :naughty Allow other their opinions. Correct when you feel it is need, but try hard NOT to ridicule and taunt the other members.

Thanks.

 

[follower of Christ]

it says 'abominable'...ie 'unclean'...

abominable
H6292
פּגּל פּגּוּל
piggûl piggûl
pig-gool', pig-gool'
From an unused root meaning to stink; properly fetid, that is, (figuratively) unclean (ceremonially): - abominable (-tion, thing).


H6292
פּגּל / פּגּוּל
piggûl
BDB Definition:
1) foul thing, refuse
1a) unclean sacrificial flesh (only use)

Do you have any REAL evidence ?



.

I see no need to as you provided it. Unclean is unclean is abominable. As I said, if that sounds wholesome to you...

What I provided shows an issue of being 'unclean'....which we KNOW NOW is NOT an issue anymore
Do I need to post that evidence again ?

Again...WHERE does it say 'pork is BAD for you' ?
Until I see that said with my own eyes Im sorry, Im not buying it.
.

 

[follower of Christ]

Why?....because it was time to write everything down for future generations. Because something was carried forward doesn't mean it shouldn't be written. And, they were not Jews...they were Hebrews than Israelites. Only the tribes of Judah and Benjamin are Jews.

Sorry but that just doesnt work where meats are concerned.
*IF* Pork was BAD for us God could have told NOAH not to eat certain meats at the end of the flood....but He didnt.
What He DID do,however, is give Noah the SAME restrictions against eating blood that we see in Acts 15 and 21 for this NEW covenant...

Every moving thing that lives shall be food for you. I have given you all things, even as the green herb. But you shall not eat of flesh with the life in it, or the blood of it.
(Genesis 9:3-4 MKJV)

All I see is that God returned things to their former state after the 'schoolmaster' and its purpose had been fulfilled in Christ



.

 

[whirlwind]

Food, even unclean foods, do not defile someone.

!?!?!?!?...Ye have caused me to rend my garment......

Here, in the very establishment of the food laws, the fact that certain foods defiled the Jew - made him unclean - is clearly asserted:

Speak to the sons of Israel, saying, '(A)These are the creatures which you may eat from all the animals that are on the earth. 3'Whatever divides a hoof, thus making split hoofs, and chews the cud, among the animals, that you may eat. 4'Nevertheless, (B)you are not to eat of these, among those which chew the cud, or among those which divide the hoof: the camel, for though it chews cud, it does not divide the hoof, it is unclean to you. 5'Likewise, the shaphan, for though it chews cud, it does not divide the hoof, it is unclean to you; 6the rabbit also, for though it chews cud, it does not divide the hoof, it is unclean to you;

I'll bet you are going to say that to "be unclean" is not the same as "to be defiled".....

No...I thought about it though.

It is unclean to us. Among the definitions given in unclean we are given...foul, filthiness, unclean. To be defiled is more an unholy, spiritual thing. The animals mentioned are scavengers so I see unclean as being unhealthy...they are unclean to our flesh bodies.

 

[follower of Christ]

PS -- stop the personal attack. I am not being "ridiculous" but in fact am responding to statements made here by another brother and I will quickly run to the "REPORT" button if the tone of this thread especially "personal attacks" does not abruptly change.

Inevitably.
Little hint...'ridiculous' isnt a personal attack.
I submit that if you are THAT sensitive then forum discussion may not be your thing
Sorry, I'll just ignore your posts from this point forward to avoid any more conflict if its going to be like this with you

Your EXAGGERATION was 'ridiculous'...and I stand by that fact.
NO ONE here that *I* have seen is saying that we should rip out the law of Moses just because we agree with Christ and Paul.


You have a nice afternoon

 

[follower of Christ]

It is unclean to us. Among the definitions given in unclean we are given...foul, filthiness, unclean. To be defiled is more an unholy, spiritual thing. The animals mentioned are scavengers so I see unclean as being unhealthy...they are unclean to our flesh bodies. [/b]

Again, not according to PAUL...the one who is actually qualified to teach in the matter.

I know and am convinced in the Lord Jesus that nothing is unclean of itself; except to him considering anything to be unclean, to him it is unclean.
But if your brother is grieved on account of your food, you are no longer walking according to love. Do not destroy with your food the one on behalf of whom Christ died. Therefore do not let your good be slandered. For the kingdom of God is not eating and drinking, but righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit.
(Romans 14:14-17 EMTV)


And you, being dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He made you alive together with Him, having forgiven us all our trespasses, having blotted out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and He has taken it out of the midst, nailing it to the cross. And having disarmed principalities and powers, He mocked them in public, triumphing over them in it.
Therefore do not let anyone judge you in food or in drink, or regarding a festival or of a new moon or of sabbaths, which are a shadow of things to come, but the body is of Christ.
(Colossians 2:13-17 EMTV)

Because of YOUR views, tho, for YOU some foods ARE unclean....



.

 

[whirlwind]

God told Adam what was "good for food." Because the written word wasn't until the time of Moses doesn't mean the spoken word wasn't carried forward. :yes

Sorry but God COULD have just as easily told NOAH what NOT to eat.....but He DIDNT.
I submit that you go learn what the law was FOR and maybe that will help you find out why foods are no longer an issue

What makes you think He didn't tell Noah?

Listen Sweet Pea, I submit to you to that you should stop being so rude.

 

[follower of Christ]

God told Adam what was "good for food." Because the written word wasn't until the time of Moses doesn't mean the spoken word wasn't carried forward. :yes

Sorry but God COULD have just as easily told NOAH what NOT to eat.....but He DIDNT.
I submit that you go learn what the law was FOR and maybe that will help you find out why foods are no longer an issue

What makes you think He didn't tell Noah?

Well, lets see...God said "EVERY MOVING THING" shall be food ...

Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things. But flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat.
(Genesis 9:3-4 KJV)

If youre going to claim extra biblical revelation, you have fun with that, but *I* will be sticking to what IS actually shown in the texts and the context and harmony therein..

.

 

[Sparkey]

Please read my last post. ;)

~Sparrow

I have. I see nothing in that post relevant to my point that the food laws are not eternal laws that are connected significantly to matters of "good health" (although there may be an element of that). The food laws were given at Sinai - thousands of years after Adam.

I would assert that Able offered "clean meats" unto God. Within that assertion comes the concept of the Unfolding Revelation of God to His people. Consider that man (even and maybe especially the Children of Israel (Jacob)) were called by God "stubborn and hard of heart". The Logos of God has plead with man (all of us) to unstop our ears and to those with an ear to hear, let them hear! Magnify the law!

~Sparrowhawke

Hear, ye deaf; and look, ye blind, that ye may see.
Who is blind, but my servant? or deaf, as my messenger that I sent? who is blind as he that is perfect, and blind as the LORD'S servant? Seeing many things, but thou observest not; opening the ears, but he heareth not. The LORD is well pleased for his righteousness' sake; he will magnify the law, and make it honourable. (Isa 42:18-21)

 

[Vic C.]

Listen Sweet Pea, I submit to you to that you should stop being so rude.

So, lets see, I ask FoC to tone it down a bit and now you are calling him sweet pea? I don't know for sure, but that could come across as a bit condescending, don'cha think?

Compromise is a two way street, people. :yes

 

[Drew]

Greetings Sparrow and WW:

I think I will bow out of this thread. I may get lured back in, but maybe not. We seem to be going round in circles and / or do not share the shame fundamental concept of what constitutes a sound argument.

May I commend you both on your polite demeanour.

FoC - I hand the floor over to you to continue to defend the "Torah is abolished" position.

 

[Sparkey]

Okay, let me tell a parable and pray listen. It is offered by way of conciliation.

There was a man, a father who read that he should train his children in the Lord. Now, having a good heart and wanting to do as he was commanded he called his children (his sons) to him and told them they were going to play a game.

It was called, "The Game of Obedience"

The man would tell his kids - "Just do what I command - nothing more". Of course the older son heard better than the younger - the weaker heard the first part, but not the latter.

The man said, "Stand". It was a command given in a firm tone (but not angry).
The second (younger) so looked to his older brother for the example and copied him.
Both children stood.

The man said, "Sit". Same tone and both chidren obeyed. Their father reinforced the instructions by repetition, "Just do what I command - nothing more."

As they continued to play -- the game of standing and sitting for no other reason than to simply obey became a contest. Each child started standing as fast as they could and sitting as fast as they could. This wasn't what the father intended, he merely wanted the joy of seeing his children in obedience.

Eventually the jostling and tosseling became a little more as the father spoke the commands.
Stand, sit, stand." Now the commands were not being given faster and faster like we may assume when we read it. In point of fact the father was slowing his commands in an effort to refocus his children to the original intent. A lesson of obedience.

When the younger purposefully sat onto the older one (and all could see the gleam in the red-heads eye) the older objected (as well he might). "YOU CAN"T DO THAT" he said.

Question: Did the older disobey his father's instruction? He knew the "law" - "Just do what I command - nothing more". What did the father do?

Moral - we do not know the whole mind of God. Can we say his laws of clean and unclean meats are healthy? In retrospect, perhaps. Could He have been training His hard-hearted children about obedience [*EDIT and holiness - being separate, or being what we call the Ekklesia? ] there are any number of "spiritual" lessons here and could the Holy Spirit have written the law itself into our hearts? Is it possible that God had no great objection to eating pork? Maybe the law given was more about obedience than anything else? I can not know the whole mind of God. No man can. But can we not HEAR HIM even now?

~Sparrow

May I commend you both on your polite demeanour.

FoC - I hand the floor over to you to continue to defend the "Torah is abolished" position.

I have always known and have always hoped for this. Answered prayer - not that you leave - but that you listen to your heart. Here then, and example. The Torah (or whatever technocratish term we call it) is written into your heart. The "torah isn't abolished" ---- it isn't being substantially misinterpreted by you!

I'm a "jot and tittle" kind - it takes an effort to not go back and edit my typo's. Pray pardon me as I don't want my heart to be misunderstood (or abolished) either.

 

[Sparkey]

I've said it before - We Christians are a funny (peculiar) people. We are commanded to seek the truth - to prove it and to hold it fast. Unto us are given great weapons (one of which is the Word himself!) but also added are other things - The Truth (given into our hearts) is figuratively said to be "Wrapped around our loins". That's an area that we are all wanting by nature to protect, yes?

One of our our most formidable defenses is our Righteousness - the "Breastplate" --- the part that defends and protects our HEART. Nobody here is saying that our hearts are not circumcised. None are violating the admonition of Paul that we limit ourselves and don't push beyond fornication and blood and strangled and offered to idols (for conscience sake) --- we (all here - not just the ones who share each others beliefs about meats) are fully aware that no law is being violated.

I would venture to say that all here have their feet prepared to share the good news of Christ's law. They run to the chance to speak the Word of Truth. I've seen it. But perhaps some here have failed to take what we are instructed to take with us - the Shield of Faith.

Nobody here is throwing "fiery darts" -- but that doesn't mean that fiery darts have not found their way into the hearts of our brothers (and into me also). Let us affirm our love for one another even here, even now, yes? Do so in prayer --- we understand that this "battle" is not against flesh and blood - is not about meats and drink - all such will go into the pit - but it is truly about standing together (even in our difference) and fighting the good fight.

Time to pray, rise up those in Jerusalem. Shout out and let the trumpet sound! A brother may have been struck in battle! Send our salvation from Zion, Lord! We cry out to You!

A father commands! Yea, a worm commands in faith (in the Name) :amen
~Sparrowhawke

 

[whirlwind]

Listen Sweet Pea, I submit to you to that you should stop being so rude.

So, lets see, I ask FoC to tone it down a bit and now you are calling him sweet pea? I don't know for sure, but that could come across as a bit condescending, don'cha think?

Compromise is a two way street, people. :yes

Yes...it was very condescending.

My apologies FOC...I'm sorry I lost my temper.

 

[whirlwind]

Greetings Sparrow and WW:

I think I will bow out of this thread. I may get lured back in, but maybe not. We seem to be going round in circles and / or do not share the shame fundamental concept of what constitutes a sound argument.

May I commend you both on your polite demeanour.

FoC - I hand the floor over to you to continue to defend the "Torah is abolished" position.

I too am bowing out Drew. You're right...we're going in circles. :crazy

It was good to discuss this with you.