1 Timothy 4:3

[Hank77]

Do you think those who re-crucify Christ daily,
either by willful sinning,
or by religious exercises that declare openly that's what they are doing,
are forgiven if they don't repent ? (stop, cease, not continue re-crucifying Christ)

Which scripture are you referring to?

 

[Kenny'sID]

Well it seems that God gave Noah permission to eat all meats. Even the Jews agree with that interpretation.

Could you please give the scripture that makes it seem so.

 

[W2L]

Could you please give the scripture that makes it seem so.

Genesis 9:3

 

[Hank77]

Could you please give the scripture that makes it seem so.

Gen. 9:1-4

 

[All4Christ]

That's a good point. Jews actually don't believe non-Jews are bound to the same laws (http://www.mechon-mamre.org/jewfaq/gentiles.htm). There are Noahide laws and laws specific to them as the chosen people. That is why the Gentiles were not required to be circumcised - and why (whether you do or do not believe the law is abolished) we Gentiles are not required to keep the dietary restrictions as dictated in the Torah. (I don't believe it is required of Christian Jews either based on the New Testament, but it is up to each person's conscience - so long as they know we are saved by grace.). Check out Acts 15 for the council's decision on whether Gentile believers were required to follow the laws of the Covenant with the Children of Israel.

 

[Hank77]

That's a good point. Jews actually don't believe non-Jews are bound to the same laws (http://www.mechon-mamre.org/jewfaq/gentiles.htm). There are Noahide laws and laws specific to them as the chosen people. That is why the Gentiles were not required to be circumcised - and why (whether you do or do not believe the law is abolished) we Gentiles are not required to keep the dietary restrictions as dictated in the Torah. (I don't believe it is required of Christian Jews either based on the New Testament, but it is up to each person's conscience - so long as they know we are saved by grace.). Check out Acts 15 for the council's decision on whether Gentile believers were required to follow the laws of the Covenant with the Children of Israel.

Rom 4:9 Is this happiness, then, upon the circumcision, or also upon the uncircumcision--for we say that the faith was reckoned to Abraham--to righteousness?
Rom 4:10 how then was it reckoned? he being in circumcision, or in uncircumcision? not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision;
Rom 4:11 and a sign he did receive of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith in the uncircumcision, for his being father of all those believing through uncircumcision, for the righteousness also being reckoned to them,
Rom 4:12 and father of circumcision to those not of circumcision only, but who also walk in the steps of the faith, that is in the uncircumcision of our father Abraham.

 

[All4Christ]

Incidentally, some people in our Tradition (Orthodox Church) do believe that we have a few dietary laws - namely the ones mentioned in Acts 15. Blood is a key area to avoid, which I believe (the reason is my own personal opinion) it is because blood as a category is sacred (the blood of Christ, etc.). I don't think we should be legalistic about it though. For example, I don't personally eat blood pudding (I don't think I could stomach raw or even cooked blood even if I didn't think it was wrong!), but the veins in fish that still have blood in them don't bother me. As a Gentile though, those are the few areas the council in Acts decided were off limits for Gentiles. Our Tradition even has canons that confirm this in later years (I believe it is the Council of Trullo).

~Anastasia~ - have you heard anything about this in our Tradition?

 

[All4Christ]

Rom 4:9 Is this happiness, then, upon the circumcision, or also upon the uncircumcision--for we say that the faith was reckoned to Abraham--to righteousness?
Rom 4:10 how then was it reckoned? he being in circumcision, or in uncircumcision? not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision;
Rom 4:11 and a sign he did receive of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith in the uncircumcision, for his being father of all those believing through uncircumcision, for the righteousness also being reckoned to them,
Rom 4:12 and father of circumcision to those not of circumcision only, but who also walk in the steps of the faith, that is in the uncircumcision of our father Abraham.

Exactly

 

[Kenny'sID]

Thanks for the scripture I asked for.

Anyone who feels we are to still follow the laws of unclean food care to comment on Genesis 9:3?

 

[Hank77]

Thanks for the scripture I asked for.

Anyone who feels we are to still follow the laws of unclean food care to comment on Genesis 9:3?

Surely you don't think God told Noah, Seth, ....Abraham and Issac to eat unclean food???? Sheesh..

 

[giftofGod2]

Concerning two things that have been mentioned in this thread, wherein the person was misleading about what the scripture really says (I wil simply give the scripture on it that they were ignoring and leave you to make your own decision):

First, in Acts 15 the controversy was not only about circumcision but about keeping the law:

But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed, saying, That it was necessary to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses. Acts 15:5

Secondly, eating or not eating in Romans 14 does not refer to fasting:

For one believeth that he may eat all things: another, who is weak, eateth herbs. Romans 14:2

It is clear from this second scripture that it was referring to having liberty as to what I may eat (i.e. whether it be all things or only herbs; it has nothing to do with fasting.

 

[giftofGod2]

A third thing I want to mention:

Practice concerning the eating of things sacrificed to idols is indeed addressed in the New Testament.

Read 1 Corinthians 10:25-33 for the scoop.

Basically it is the other person's conscience that matters; so they were to eat anything sold in the shambles, and if no one said to you, "This was offered in sacrifice to idols" you were allowed to eat it. If it was sacrificed and you remained unaware of this, you could eat it, because "The earth is the LORD's, and the fulness thereof." My liberty is not judged by another man's conscience: I am not to be evil spoken of for that for which I give thanks. I only choose not to eat for the sake of the other person; but if not for him, I have the freedom to eat.

 

[Kenny'sID]

Surely you don't think God told Noah, Seth, ....Abraham and Issac to eat unclean food???? Sheesh..

Hank, can you think of anywhere in the Bible after the account in the verse you mentioned, that God might have pronounced some foods unclean?

 

[Hank77]

Hank, can you think of anywhere in the Bible after the account in the verse you mentioned, that God might have pronounced some foods unclean?

Mights don't mean anything. So if you have a scripture that says He did please post it.

 

[Kenny'sID]

Mights don't mean anything. So if you have a scripture that says He did please post it.

You know, I think you know perfectly well what I'm taking about, and If you are that deep into denial where you've managed to completely forget about what is splattered all over the bible on this subject, all the quoting in the world won't do the least bit of good.

 

[giftofGod2]

You know Kenny, I don't know what you're talking about, so if you have a scripture please post it, if not for Hank77 then for the rest of us.

 

[Rhamiel]

I thought this verse was about gnostics?

they did not let people marry because the physical world is evil and they did not want to make more babies

and they also had weird views on fasting, some people starving themselves to death

 

[Hank77]

You know, I think you know perfectly well what I'm taking about, and If you are that deep into denial where you've managed to completely forget about what is splattered all over the bible on this subject, all the quoting in the world won't do the least bit of good.

If you are talking about the Law of Moses, that just doesn't make any sense at all. If an animal is clean to eat how did that animal change to be unclean to eat? Man ate them for well over 500 yrs. and then what?

 

[Kenny'sID]

If you are talking about the Law of Moses, that just doesn't make any sense at all. If an animal is clean to eat how did that animal change to be unclean to eat? Man ate them for well over 500 yrs. and then what?

So are you saying the Bible is wrong or that you don't care what it says because it doesn't make sense to you?

Just as one example, having several wives wasn't against the rules at one time, and though it may not make sense to me it is now, I still obey it.

Several things were allowed before the 10 commandments went into affect, but that doesn't mean they weren't harmful.

 

[Hank77]

So are you saying the Bible is wrong or that you don't care what it says because it doesn't make sense to you?

Just as one example, having several wives wasn't against the rules at one time, and though it may not make sense to me it is now, I still obey it.

Several things were allowed before the 10 commandments went into affect, but that doesn't mean they weren't harmful.

I fail to see your point. The Law of Moses was given to keep the Israelites from continuing in idolatry, spiritual adultery. It was given because of transgression.

So God told Noah, who had never eaten meat, that he and his posterity could eat meat that was harmful to them,....Abraham and Issac?

Which of the Ten Commandments was allowed, before they were given, but was not allowed later?