https://christianforums.net/threads/psalm-70-1-save-me-o-god-lord-help-me-now.108509/
Read through the following study by Tenchi for more on this topic
https://christianforums.net/threads/without-the-holy-spirit-we-can-do-nothing.109419/
Strengthening families through biblical principles.
Focus on the Family addresses the use of biblical principles in parenting and marriage to strengthen the family.
Read daily articles from Focus on the Family in the Marriage and Parenting Resources forum.
Join Sola Scriptura for a discussion on the subject
https://christianforums.net/threads/anointed-preaching-teaching.109331/#post-1912042
I was studying over some passages relevant to this discussion last night.
One thing that stood out to me is the fact that the word for "clean" as applied to the animals that Noah took more of on the ark, the word "tahowr" is used specifically for that which was used in worship of God up until Leviticus 10.
This word "tahowr" is used to describe the animals that Noah took on the ark that were sacrificed, for the gold used in the making of the tabernacle and used on the priests robes (the little bells), the holy anointing oil and the incense, and the place where things were to be sacrificed. As far as I could see, from my admittedly limited understanding of Hebrew, this word was used only in relation of things for worship and for sacrifice.
In Leviticus 10, we see the word used along with the word for "unclean" for the first time, and it is when Aaron's sons offered "strange fire" before the Lord and were killed because of it, and Jehovah instructed Aaron to differentiate between the holy and unholy and the clean and unclean.
The word for "unclean", the Hebrew word "tame'" does not show up in the Scriptures until Leviticus 5, the context of Leviticus 5 being what shall be considered sin and needing a guilt offering. This word is not in the account of Noah at all. I checked this out, because we have a tendency to think of the animals that went on the ark as "clean" and "unclean" but that is not how the Bible says it...rather, the animals that went on the ark were clean, "tahowr" and not clean. I think this is significant...again because up until Leviticus 11, "tahowr" and "tame'" are not used in conjunction of things to eat, but rather things sanctified to God and things unholy and unclean before God.
Just thought I'd throw this in.
And yet Jesus was called a 'gutton and drunkard.' Paul makes it quite clear that we either keep the whole of the law or we live under grace.
Yeah, I figured that the 'badger skin' bad translation that 'i' posted up would give some ammunition for more stuff! Like the wine & the fermented devils brew! If it be a Yes or No, or whatever? one has got to take the chance it seems.
So what does the arm of flesh of Jer. 17:5 come up with for Isa. 65:4's broth of 'abominable things + swine's flesh' or chapter 66 & verse 17's 'mouse + eating swine flesh' & CONSUMED TOGETHER!
Surely a person could locate a commentary to their likeing with one of the many seen from the Rev. 17:1-5 ones??
--Elijah
No one is eating rats or drinking antifreeze here...we are discussing whether or not the old covenants and old laws are in effect, or by the death of Christ, were thus fulfilled and ended.So we eat rats & drink antifreez? Because it does not 'spiritually' defile us? [But what comes out of the heart does] So what is Christ saying??? He would not even drink vinegar (fermented wine) on His death/bed! (cross) As Peter did not understand his 3 time vision from God, perhaps we best watch how we explain the Word of God to others? Eccl. 3:14 & Heb. 13:8 & 9.
And Christ did what in Mark 7:14-19????
And Mark 7:17's Parable? 'verse 20 'That which commeth out of man, (his heart in other words!) that defileth the man.' (mankind including housewives;))
--Elijah
PS: I wonder how many Christians set an bad example that indeed does shorten the lives of their husband & children that they love?
I don't know how it can be any clearer than this, that we are not under the old covenant or the old law because Christ died. And, as Paul said, we are made to die to the law in the body of Christ, so that we can be joined to another, yes Paul did say "another", that is the resurrected Christ.
To not eat certain meats, or to observe certain days, or to not eat any leavened bread during communion...these are all things that, are good if we are doing them as unto the Lord...but there is no law covering these things.
In regards to the title of the thread, however, I believe it's a very pointed truth. The idea that we 'bless' our food in the first place is a laugh at best and a mockery at worst. The case Paul was putting forth is that God is able to do anything He so chooses, and if He gives us something we should accept it with thankfulness, and not with self imposed righteous judgement.
This does not give way to a person thinking they can say a prayer and make something poisonous good. The only action on the part of the receiver is thankfulness. Which imparts the idea that he/she understands who they are receiving their food from, which then imparts understanding that God is active in their life - even down to the basics of what they take in as nourishment.
Presumption of ability within oneself to do anything but receive from God is a grave error.
In regards to the title of the thread, however, I believe it's a very pointed truth. The idea that we 'bless' our food in the first place is a laugh at best and a mockery at worst. The case Paul was putting forth is that God is able to do anything He so chooses, and if He gives us something we should accept it with thankfulness, and not with self imposed righteous judgement.
This does not give way to a person thinking they can say a prayer and make something poisonous good. The only action on the part of the receiver is thankfulness. Which imparts the idea that he/she understands who they are receiving their food from, which then imparts understanding that God is active in their life - even down to the basics of what they take in as nourishment.
Presumption of ability within oneself to do anything but receive from God is a grave error.
How come? I always ask the Lord to cleanse my food from all impurities because I don't won't food poisoning! It's worked. It's been a safeguard to me. I didn't know I was doing something wrong... :ohwell
How come? I always ask the Lord to cleanse my food from all impurities because I don't won't food poisoning! It's worked. It's been a safeguard to me. I didn't know I was doing something wrong... :ohwell
Elijah beat me too it.;). I believe it is good to ask a blessing. But if your going to do that, would you not agree it needs to be done in faith? I bet growing up my mother did this a lot, and as you say "it worked". Personally, it's just a matter of words, but I would like to say He worked.
It's just all to often that we do something, or say something, "in faith" based upon our own interpretation of it. And this is 'ok' up to the point of actually knowing what is right and wrong. That is why Paul says what he does about faith and food and sin.
To me it's just like my children. When they ask for something I let them know an answer to their request. But if they presumptuously keep asking, regardless of what I have told them before, then it brings me to a point of needing to discipline them.
So the idea is that as we grow in Christ, which is through our training of discernment between right and wrong(Heb 5:14), then we cannot 'presumptuously' ask for something when we know full well that He does not want us to have it. Many times we stop with the obvious 'sins', and never go beyond that into full maturity.
But this may be the case for many. There are some 'adults' that just have not come to a point of maturity in their physical life. And I am sure the same holds true for the spiritual life of some. But the bottom line of it all is obedience, and that is the WHOLE message of the Gospel for ALL; even Christ.
Side note: no 'personal' stuff taken friend.;)