- May 22, 2015
- 7,379
- 2,640
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Agnostic
- Marital Status
- Married
You know you quoted me talking about what's in the Talmud and then said I ignore the oral tradition right?
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
You know you quoted me talking about what's in the Talmud and then said I ignore the oral tradition right?You don't seem to catch on with the concept of justice or fair play and that Jesus revised the law because it was given to hard hearted people. You deliberately ignore things like the oral traditions, the Spirit of prophecy, good examples for record like Ruth, the apostles the gifts and the Spirit of truth.
If someone else points out something in the OT, and I comment on it, that means I'm fixating on the OT? Come one man...Which part of the Talmud are you referring to, the Mishnah or the Gemara? And why this fixation with OT? As Christians we have a new covenant with God and it is spelled out in the Gospels and the rest of the NT.
I did not mention the Talmud.You know you quoted me talking about what's in the Talmud and then said I ignore the oral tradition right?
I've read the Bible, but I've not read much of any extra-biblical sources. Can you link me to something specific?TDNT says in the period between the OT and NT it widened to include all sex outside marriage. They cite a number of examples, but without tracking down the originals it's hard for me to assess whether they're right. Most commentators seem to agree, though, so I assume they're right.
One commentary notes that in Roman society men often had wives to bear their legitimate children and mistresses for sexual satisfaction. Christianity rejected this, maintaining that sex should only be within marriage.
You mentioned the oral traditions. The Talmud is the oral tradition of the OT Jews. I mentioned the Talmud and you said I ignore the oral tradition. See the problem?I did not mention the Talmud.
Yes, by oral tradition I mean the practice of Moses' law by the inner circle with Moses and their inheritors. Like the anointed ones, Ruth the prophet school, and to some extent the Talmud the rabbis. I just checked it in wikipedia. The Talmud, 6200 pages long. Jesus did not agree with all of it.You mentioned the oral traditions. The Talmud is the oral tradition of the OT Jews. I mentioned the Talmud and you said I ignore the oral tradition. See the problem?
Sigh... Guess what? There is no word for "fornicate" in ancient Greek or Hebrew.Fornicate meant sex outside of marriage; guess what?.....it still means that today.
Israel depended on Moses for righteousness and the favour of God... but Moses depended on Israel for obedience and service, food and protection unless one considers the part of that time when God wanted to start again, just with Moses.
God did not endorse slavery as we have said and I say again, God wanted Israel to remember how Egypt treated them and not to repeat.
Jesus is God and at the more opportune time, after Ruth and being also descended from Jesse of Boaz, explained that Moses made concession because Israel was hard of heart, they may have rejected God or Moses if he was exact.
As for ND post 66 and fornication, I was explaining that Moses taught and we practice, by interpretation, to marry if there has been a fornication. Also that Peter extracted from the laws, with authority over Moses, that fornication was sin and not to be practiced by Jewish and gentile Christians. According to the spiritual and soft hearted theme.
Fornicate means sex outside of marriage including adultery.Sigh... Guess what? There is no word for "fornicate" in ancient Greek or Hebrew.
The Talmud wasn't written down until much later after it came into use. That's why it is "the oral tradition". And I know Jesus and most Christians don't agree with all of it. That's why I told you in the other thread that we shouldn't be looking at anything other than the Bible because that's the only thing everyone agrees isn't heretical. But since you still bring it up, I talked about it with you. Then you tell me I'm ignoring it.Yes, by oral tradition I mean the practice of Moses' law by the inner circle with Moses and their inheritors. Like the anointed ones, Ruth the prophet school, and to some extent the Talmud the rabbis. I just checked it in wikipedia. The Talmud, 6200 pages long. Jesus did not agree with all of it.
Pertinent verses please. I've been the one looking up all of your claims so far, it's time for you to do the legwork.Fornicate means sex outside of marriage including adultery.
The OT defines it through lengthy passages. Moses law with Ruth, with Wisdom, and then the NT and Peter and the oral tradition, the apostles and successors traditions...
I don't agree with only quoting the Bible. Although bringing out old and new with the early church in view is much better.The Talmud wasn't written down until much later after it came into use. That's why it is "the oral tradition". And I know Jesus and most Christians don't agree with all of it. That's why I told you in the other thread that we shouldn't be looking at anything other than the Bible because that's the only thing everyone agrees isn't heretical. But since you still bring it up, I talked about it with you. Then you tell me I'm ignoring it.
Can you address the actual things I said though? Your verse makes it illegal for a man to have sex with a virgin. That does not equal "no sex outside of marriage". Divorcees hooking up is one example of many that is acceptable.
You didn't ask me about OT Law.Well, you don't seem to understand the purpose of the OT Law and why it was given to the Jews as compared to what is written in Genesis.
And if I belonged to a cult and tried to put forth that logic to you about why you see contradictions in my cult's holy doctrines, what would you say of that logic?The short answer is yes. I explained the passage to you but you are unable to see it as anything other than a contradiction because the explanation satisfies the 'natural man' in you. 1 Corinthians 2:14 says that to the 'natural man' (those without the Holy Spirit) all scripture is foolishness.
KJV
14 But G1161 the natural G5591 man G444 receiveth G1209 not G3756 the things G3588 of the Spirit G4151 of God G2316: for G1063 they are G2076 foolishness G3472 unto him G846: neither G2532 G3756 can G1410 he know G1097 them, because G3754 they are spiritually G4153 discerned G350.
ISV
14 A person who isn’t spiritual doesn’t accept the things of God’s Spirit, for they are nonsense to him. He can’t understand them because they are spiritually evaluated.
So, until you are a believer much of scripture, especially the spiritual meanings, will remain a mystery to you regardless of how someone tries to explain. This is the very reason so many non-believers come up with so many strange ideas about Christianity.
Only if their 'scripture' were of God which it is not.......
I think he likes you more than me. He replied to your reply to me, but not my reply to him... Weird...Guilty. Take it from here mate, I simply can't deal with that guy any more.
I think he likes you more than me. He replied to your reply to me, but not my reply to him... Weird...
That they are not of God......therefore they have no basis to make that claim except on the word of the cult leader......which is where such a statement would have originated.....You didn't ask me about OT Law.
And if I belonged to a cult and tried to put forth that logic to you about why you see contradictions in my cult's holy doctrines, what would you say of that logic?
Right. So we do understand each other.they have no basis to make that claim except on the word of the cult leader......which is where such a statement would have originated.....
First, it’s clear that the definition includes adultery and prostitution.I've read the Bible, but I've not read much of any extra-biblical sources. Can you link me to something specific?
Even in Judaism, as far as I can tell, premarital sex isn't forbidden, it's just that marital sex is the ideal. So it would be Christians after the events of the Bible who decided that premarital sex is forbidden, and not necessarily the people quoted in the Bible. Perhaps. Like I said, I don't have your reference to look at, but that's what it seems like at first glance.
Are you implying that Christianity is a cult?Right. So we do understand each other.
Nope. That's why I snipped the part about God from your quote so I wouldn't seem to be doing that. From what I quoted of you there, everything you said about how you would view such a claim, is how I view your claim, just like it should be. That is what the natural response to such a claim should be.Are you implying that Christianity is a cult?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?