It is still NOT okay to eat pork.

[tzadik]

isn't that a vivid description peter gave? The poor fathers were under a yoke, they could not bear it..really kinda sad....


amazing...

Well seeing that God EXPLICITLY says that His Commandments are NOT burdensome...
Peter MUST be talking about something that WAS a burden wouldn't he....
hmmm...there's a thought.

Look at Matthew 23---see who are the ones burdening people.
Read Matthew 15 or Mark 7 and tell me who are the ones neglecting God's commandments for the sake of their traditions.

The burden is NOT God's Word.
To suggest that His Word is a burden is to call God a liar.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

I think the part about THE Jews not understanding it isn't accurate though.
There were also Jews who understood the allegorical import of the food symbolism.

That is good to know

 

[tzadik]

Can't there be wicked believers?
Such as the corrupt, murderous and hypocritacl Judean rulers?

Lazarus and the Rich Man - Here a little, there a little - Commentary

You're missing the point.

 

[dies-l]

So you don't believe that God's Law is His Word?

The fact that you have to keep resorting to such dishonest characterizations really ought to tell you something about the strength of your own argument. And, besides, doesn't the law that you keep pushing also say, "do not bear false witness."? Tsk tsk.

What I said is that "God's law" is not God. The law is the the Word of John 1:1. But, the law is part of the word (notice the lower case "w") of God. Your attempt to make the law=God is idolatry.

 

[Frogster]

Well seeing that God EXPLICITLY says that His Commandments are NOT burdensome...
Peter MUST be talking about something that WAS a burden wouldn't he....
hmmm...there's a thought.

Look at Matthew 23---see who are the ones burdening people.
Read Matthew 15 or Mark 7 and tell me who are the ones neglecting God's commandments for the sake of their traditions.

The burden is NOT God's Word.
To suggest that His Word is a burden is to call God a liar.

and u keep ignoring clear text. did peter say it or not? well?

besides, if you actually read 1 john 3;23, it talks anout two laws, it was not the mosaic law he was talking about.

 

[tzadik]

and u keep ignoring clear text. did peter say it or not? well?

besides, if you actually read 1 john 3;23, it talks anout two laws, it was not the mosaic law he was talking about.

Of course Peter said that the Pharisees were putting a yoke that no one could bear, for they were trying to add the requirement of circumcision and keeping of God's commandments to the "do this and you shall be saved" list. (Acts 15:1)

If the debate was simply about "Keeping of God's commandments as children of God" (saved by grace through faith), then they obviously would not of mentioned anything about a "unbearable yoke", for it's clear that all of them kept God's Law and obeyed it as Instruction.
This was about the Pharisees ADDING to the clear Word of God and going against Deuteronomy 4:2. Just as Messiah rebuked them for adding burdens to believers by their man's traditions, so too did Peter in Acts 15:10.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Originally Posted by LittleLambofJesus Can't there be wicked believers?
Such as the corrupt, murderous and hypocritacl Judean rulers?

Lazarus and the Rich Man - Here a little, there a little - Commentary

You're missing the point.

Weren't they also under the Law

 

[tzadik]

The fact that you have to keep resorting to such dishonest characterizations really ought to tell you something about the strength of your own argument. And, besides, doesn't the law that you keep pushing also say, "do not bear false witness."? Tsk tsk.

What I said is that "God's law" is not God. The law is the the Word of John 1:1. But, the law is part of the word (notice the lower case "w") of God. Your attempt to make the law=God is idolatry.

So according to your understanding God's Word = God ONLY when it's referring to the ENTIRE WORD of God....
<shrug> ok I can live with that. If you believe that I have no problem with that.

I believe that every single Word of God is a reflection of God, so His Law is a reflection of Him, part of Him. His Law contains the revelation of God to man.
That is how I can say that His Law = Himself.
If you look at Deuteronomy 30:11-14, it would be interesting to see how Paul quotes this very passage, but instead of "God's Law", He substitutes Messiah, as Messiah is the Living Word of God. (Romans 10.)
After all Messiah is the Sum, Goal and Totality [telos] of the Torah . (Romans 10:4)

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

After all Messiah is the Sum, Goal and Totality of the Torah [telos]. (Romans 10:4)

How the heck do you get "telos" from "torah"

 

[tzadik]

How the heck do you get "telos" from "torah"

After all Messiah is the Sum, Goal and Totality [telos] of the Torah . (Romans 10:4)

There I changed it just for you.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

After all Messiah is the Sum, Goal and Totality [telos] of the Torah . (Romans 10:4)

There I changed it just for you.

That's a tad better..thanks

 

[tzadik]

That's a tad better..thanks

Do you believe that to be true, or do you also believe that Messiah is the END of the Law?

 

[Frogster]

Of course Peter said that the Pharisees were putting a yoke that no one could bear, for they were trying to add the requirement of circumcision and keeping of God's commandments to the "do this and you shall be saved" list. (Acts 15:1)

If the debate was simply about "Keeping of God's commandments as children of God" (saved by grace through faith), then they obviously would not of mentioned anything about a "unbearable yoke", for it's clear that all of them kept God's Law and obeyed it as Instruction.
This was about the Pharisees ADDING to the clear Word of God and going against Deuteronomy 4:2. Just as Messiah rebuked them for adding burdens to believers by their man's traditions, so too did Peter in Acts 15:10.

nice try, but wht did he say it was a yoke, alllll the way back to the fathers? Alll the way back before the council meeting, all the way back....

heck, if u knew better, u would know that the pharisees were not around centuries before...

so why was it antedated way back when? a yoke...why?

 

[JoeyArnold]

I will provide bible verses, but I would first like to see people's reaction to this and their biblical knowledge of the matter.

Seek what is best through applying eternal principles to each specific situation. For example, The Bible even commanded Israel to wash their hands back when they didn't know what germs were. We should be obedient, we should apply truth to each scenario, because God knows better than we do.

 

[Frogster]

Do you believe that to be true, or do you also believe that Messiah is the END of the Law?

back to the simple unanswered question..

if tomorrow, someone came up to u and asked, "is it sin for someone in the mj doctrine churh, to eat shrimp scampi?", what would u say?


teach us...



luv ya....

 

[JoeyArnold]

It is sin to be unhealthy.

 

[dies-l]

So according to your understanding God's Word = God ONLY when it's referring to the ENTIRE WORD of God....
<shrug> ok I can live with that. If you believe that I have no problem with that.

I believe that every single Word of God is a reflection of God, so His Law is a reflection of Him, part of Him. His Law contains the revelation of God to man.
That is how I can say that His Law = Himself.
If you look at Deuteronomy 30:11-14, it would be interesting to see how Paul quotes this very passage, but instead of "God's Law", He substitutes Messiah, as Messiah is the Living Word of God. (Romans 10.)
After all Messiah is the Sum, Goal and Totality [telos] of the Torah . (Romans 10:4)

Neither the Bible nor any part of it is the Word of John 1:1. That refers to Christ, not the written communications of God. The Bible is not God. The Torah is not God. To elevate them to that status is idolatry, which is ironically a violation of the very law that you are pushing on us.

 

[Fireinfolding]

It is sin to be unhealthy.

John 9:2 And his disciples asked him, saying, Master, who did sin, this man, or his parents, that he was born blind?

Would blind be considered healthy?

 

[bbbbbbb]

It is sin to be unhealthy.

So, who sinned - the man born blind or his parents - in John 9? And while you are at it, will you please tell us sufferers of fibromyalgia what sin we committed so that we were stricken with it?

 

[JoeyArnold]

John 9:2 And his disciples asked him, saying, Master, who did sin, this man, or his parents, that he was born blind? Would blind be considered healthy?

We all sin, Romans 3:23. We all contribute to that curse that started with the first people on earth, Romans 5:12. The curse brought death, deformity, blindness, sickness, disease.

So, who sinned - the man born blind or his parents - in John 9? And while you are at it, will you please tell us sufferers of fibromyalgia what sin we committed so that we were stricken with it?

Everybody sins & contributes to this mess of a world that we live in. It is not always a question of who caused what. It is too tough to say which sin cause what consequences to what or who or where. It is the domino effect. Everything is interconnected with each other. But it's not as simple as we think it is. Sometimes people say "Oh, you must have sinned & God must be punishing you by cursing you with sickness or disease or something," but that is never the case, really. We just need to cling to Christ no matter what.