Results 1 - 4 of 4
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Unclean food for the Christian? | Lev 1:1 | Kwigger | 105870 | ||
Ed, Cicumcision was given in Genesis to Abraham and his seed as an everlasting covenant. If "everlasting" is somehow over in your view, please explain. Paul, in his letter to the Galatians, underscores the fact that if we are Christ's we are Abraham's seed. Again, if you hold that Paul cannot be taken at his word, please explain. The circumcision covenant was given prior to the birth of Levi's GRANDFATHER, so it is assuredly not a Levitical law. It is still to be done. And please don't beat up on poor Titus. The Scripture never says he was not circumcised; it says he was not compelled to be circumcised. This is the same basic controversy we see in Acts 15. "And certain menwhich came down from Judaea taught the bretheren, and sai, Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, YE CANNOT BE SAVED." (Emphasis added) As for the other matters you list, I am not sure why Christians want to use me as a standard when Messiah is a perfect one, but if it makes you feel better, I wear a full beard and fringes. I also try to avoid plant/animal blends in the fabrics we wear. But don't worry, I still have plenty of hypocrisy to root out of my life. In a previous post you asked what my point was in pointing out that 3/4 of the decrees made by the Jerusalem council were dietary. Well the point is the inconsistency of the standard Christian argument against Kosher eating. If Acts 15 is your behavioral standard, then how is YOUR meat bled? How do you know that the porkchops you enjoy are not from a strangled hog or first offered to idols. "Do we make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea we establish the law." (Romans 3:30) Let me assure you. Ed that I have been right where you are. Please allow me to make a comparison to which I think you will be able to relate. Have you seen these creationist guys who give presentations all over the country? There's Kent Hovind, Ken Hamm, John Morris and probably many more whose names I don't know. They have a two-fold mission. They fortify the resolve of those who agree with them and challenge those who do not to take a critical look at the very popular false doctrine (macroevolution) they embrace. It is hard for the evolutionists to turn a critical eye on their own religion. There is a great deal of sentimental attachment and they have learned to be quite confortable in their beliefs. You or I look at these people and think, "But they claim science is their standard! Don't they see that what they believe is utterly perpendicular to REAL SCIENCE!" In their defence, evolution is widely believed, pervasively taught and seldom questioned in their circles. We both know that doesn't make it right. "Disobedience Doctrine" is exactly the same way! In fact, anti-Semetic and anti-Torah sentiments were a mainstay of Churchianity centuries before Darwinism, but that still doesn't mean it's right. Christians carry preconceived notions just like evolutionists and they cling to them just as tenaciously. My prayer is that Christians will turn a critical eye on themselves and return to their professed standard (Scripture) just as they would have the evolutionists self-examine and return to their standard (science). Where is Asken during all this? Are you getting any of this? Grace and peace my friends, Kwigger |
||||||
2 | Unclean food for the Christian? | Lev 1:1 | Morant61 | 105945 | ||
Greetings Kwigger! Concerning circumcision, you wrote: "The circumcision covenant was given prior to the birth of Levi's GRANDFATHER, so it is assuredly not a Levitical law. It is still to be done." Yet, Paul said: Gal. 5:1 - "It is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm, then, and do not let yourselves be burdened again by a yoke of slavery. 2 Mark my words! I, Paul, tell you that if you let yourselves be circumcised, Christ will be of no value to you at all. 3 Again I declare to every man who lets himself be circumcised that he is obligated to obey the whole law. 4 You who are trying to be justified by law have been alienated from Christ; you have fallen away from grace." Then, in v. 11, Paul adamently denies that he is still preaching circumcision. These would be pretty harsh words for something which you say should still be done! :-) Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
3 | Unclean food for the Christian? | Lev 1:1 | Kwigger | 105956 | ||
Tim, You have not addressed the "everlasting" aspect of circumcision in Gen. 17 along with the "Seed of Abraham" matter in Gal. 3. All you have done is put Paul at odds with the God of Abraham. Also: Gal. 5:4 says "You who are TRYING TO BE JUSTIFIED BY THE LAW have been alienated from Christ; you have fallen away from grace." Look. 1. God makes everlasting covenant (circumcision) with Abraham and his seed in all their generations. (Gen 17) 2. Paul assures us that we are indeed Abraham's seed if we are Christ's. 3. Ergo the everlasting covenant is with Christians as well. How do you reconcile this? It appears to me that thinking on this matter is tainted with an anti-Torah preconception. Have you ever carefully and prayerfully considered this possibility? Grace and peace, Kwigger |
||||||
4 | Unclean food for the Christian? | Lev 1:1 | Morant61 | 105974 | ||
Greetings Kwigger! Thanks for the response my friend! Allow me to make two observations about the 'everlasting' part of your post. 1) First of all, Gen. 17:8 also says, "The whole land of Canaan, where you are now an alien, I will give as an everlasting possession to you and your descendants after you; and I will be their God." Yet, the entire land of Canaan has not always been the possession of Israel. Even today, the entire land is not a possession of Israel. 2) Secondly, we are under a new covenant. The old has been nulified. (See Hebrews) So, while you make a logical connection between Gen. 17 and Gal. 3, there is no specific command in the New Testament which states that we must or even should be circumcised. Yet, there are plenty of very plain Scriptures which stress that one should not be circumcised: 1 Cor. 7:18 - "Was a man already circumcised when he was called? He should not become uncircumcised. Was a man uncircumcised when he was called? He should not be circumcised." Gal. 5:2 - "Mark my words! I, Paul, tell you that if you let yourselves be circumcised, Christ will be of no value to you at all. 3 Again I declare to every man who lets himself be circumcised that he is obligated to obey the whole law." Gal. 5:11 - "Brothers, if I am still preaching circumcision, why am I still being persecuted? In that case the offense of the cross has been abolished. 12 As for those agitators, I wish they would go the whole way and emasculate themselves! " Titus 1:10 - "For there are many rebellious people, mere talkers and deceivers, especially those of the circumcision group. 11 They must be silenced, because they are ruining whole households by teaching things they ought not to teach—and that for the sake of dishonest gain." Acts 15:5 - "Then some of the believers who belonged to the party of the Pharisees stood up and said, 'The Gentiles must be circumcised and required to obey the law of Moses.'" ... Acts 15:10 - "Now then, why do you try to test God by putting on the necks of the disciples a yoke that neither we nor our fathers have been able to bear?" Now, I responded to your questions, please address mine. If circumcision is still required, why does Paul say in 1 Cor. 7:18 say that an uncircumcised man should stay uncircumcised? Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||