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.
That seems to be the general thinkingI like the strong's definition
"shaatnez: mixed stuff"
that's an interesting thought. it can be answered by looking at the creation account. God said "let there be light" on day one which is a parallel/foreshadow to Christ (2 Cor 4:6 if you don't believe me). But in creation what was the earth under before the light came? it was unformed, consumed by darkness and of chaos. No law was needed for light to be spoken into this dark unformed vessel, yet light was spoken into it that started a process ending in rest. The creation account can be a salvation metaphor as before the light was spoken into our lives we were just as creation was exiting in this darkness. Law is not the quintessential ingredient of receiving light. it is darkness that light is spoken into not law. law proclaims the light, it exposes the darkness, but it doesn't invent them. our need for the gospel is not because of the law, our need for the gospel is because the only way to fix darkness is through light.There would be no point in this Gospel message being a light and being spread to the nations of the nations were not under the Mosaic Law and did not need to heed the Gospel, repent, and obey the Mosaic Law.
the law is physical because it's about the physical. physical tasks, physical food, physical objects, physical products, physical 2 tablets are called "the two tables of covenant law" etc.... but it all points to greater meaning. the physical focus may have value and may be still morally responsible. But just because some laws translate very well outside of the covenant doesn't mean we are bound by the covenant. Before law murder was wrong, murder was wrong during law and murder is wrong after law. Law did not invent this moral standard and it preexisted the law. In the creation account, Christ is foreshadowed through the word "Let there be light" so the law is also not unique in this foretelling of Christ. Everything the law proclaims preexisted the law, the law is there to echo it, not to establish it. So then the law is based on preexisting constructs and it manifests these contracts through very physical or concrete means. by the laws themselves are limited to the covenant they are established in. They innately point beyond their covenant but it is not the physical law that steps outside it's vacuum but they what they are proclaiming. Dietary laws are actually not about the food they are about people, we know this because God tells Peter it's meaning so there is no confusion. The dietary laws echo a system and plan of God's outpouring of his spirit, that may have been in ignorance during the Mosaic Covenant but it still existed. Before the Mosaic Covenant, that plan still existed, and it continues to exist. Law was a part of the plan to testify God's sovereignty since the beginning and to invite us into that plan. I call that a construct, but whatever you want to call it, it preexists law evident in the first verses of the bible, even before man is created. That's the universal part, the law however is confined to the covenant it is formed in."deeper meaning" - "spiritual meaning" - do you mean the same thing by these 2 terms?
When Paul says "spiritual" in Galatians 6:1 and we track it back, he's using it in the same way Hebrews 5:14 uses "perfect" or "mature." So, interestingly a spiritual person in Galatians 6 is one who can identify any sin and assist others in dealing with sins, and in Hebrews 5 the mature is one who is learned/skilled in the "word of righteousness" & whose faculties are well exercised in judging both good & bad. Spirituality is an educated mentality based in God's righteousness.
When Jesus taught about the "deeper" things of the Law in regard to adultery, for instance, and took it back to even looking with lust, this was not new, but the actual intent of the Law in the first place, and the circumcised heart. I don't see the commandments (that I can think of at the moment) as ever being just physical. Torah means instruction. Instruction that goes into the mind, heart, conscience - the spirit - where it is spiritual & from where actions originate.
Deeper meanings? Sure. When I first looked at the food laws decades ago in a much less learned state (still have a long way to go), it struck me how the categories seemed aligned with how a creature functions. For instance, don't eat a certain type of fish because it basically functions as a water filter.
Point being respect for God as He has designed & structured His creation, and, yes, to be separate from the ungodly who don't know Him nor know or care about such things.
Please explain what you mean.
So, we can ignore its physical constraints? Sorry, I'm not intending to be demeaning, but this statement doesn't make any sense. Once again, a spiritual person has a godly, righteous mindset, and lives a physically pure life (to whatever level the training has taken the individual). And this means the person has been conformed to God's Law to some degree in mind and thus control of the physical, does it not?
the physical focus may have value and may be still morally responsible
But just because some laws translate very well outside of the covenant doesn't mean we are bound by the covenant
Before law murder was wrong, murder was wrong during law and murder is wrong after law. Law did not invent this moral standard and it preexisted the law
by the laws themselves are limited to the covenant they are established in
Dietary laws are actually not about the food they are about people, we know this because God tells Peter it's meaning so there is no confusion
the law however is confined to the covenant it is formed in.
Hi GDL,How does anyone who cares to answer interpret this Scripture:
NKJ Romans 3:19-20 Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law (more literal = in the law - this is not the normal wording for "under law"), that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. 20 Therefore by the deeds of the law no flesh will be justified in His sight, for by the law is the knowledge of sin.
It seems clear that all humanity is "in the Law," which could be elaborated as being within the sphere or jurisdiction of Law, whether or not everyone has the Law, which is why Paul speaks of those who don't have the Law nevertheless doing the Law naturally, it being written on their hearts.
Then we discuss what "under the Law" means.
Did you know that many of the commandments given were to provide a clear way for Messiah to come?the law is physical because it's about the physical. physical tasks, physical food, physical objects, physical products, physical 2 tablets are called "the two tables of covenant law" etc.... but it all points to greater meaning. the physical focus may have value and may be still morally responsible. But just because some laws translate very well outside of the covenant doesn't mean we are bound by the covenant.
Please define your understanding of 'wrong'. Murder (recorded) goes back to Cain and Abel. The LORD said sin was crouching at the door. If there were no law then how could it be a sin?Before law murder was wrong, murder was wrong during law and murder is wrong after law.
The law echos the law?Everything the law proclaims preexisted the law, the law is there to echo it, not to establish it.
Sorry, but they are about what you put into your body.Dietary laws are actually not about the food they are about people, we know this because God tells Peter it's meaning so there is no confusion.
How does anyone who cares to answer interpret this Scripture:
NKJ Romans 3:19-20 Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law (more literal = in the law - this is not the normal wording for "under law"), that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. 20 Therefore by the deeds of the law no flesh will be justified in His sight, for by the law is the knowledge of sin.
It seems clear that all humanity is "in the Law," which could be elaborated as being within the sphere or jurisdiction of Law, whether or not everyone has the Law, which is why Paul speaks of those who don't have the Law nevertheless doing the Law naturally, it being written on their hearts.
Then we discuss what "under the Law" means.
That seems to be the general thinking
Strong's Hebrew: 8162. שַׁעַטְנֵז (shaatnez) -- mixed stuff
imo the big question is whether a law in one place can be used to interpret a law in another place. If so, it would open up whole worlds of interpretation, again imo.
that's an interesting thought. it can be answered by looking at the creation account. God said "let there be light" on day one which is a parallel/foreshadow to Christ (2 Cor 4:6 if you don't believe me). But in creation what was the earth under before the light came? it was unformed, consumed by darkness and of chaos. No law was needed for light to be spoken into this dark unformed vessel, yet light was spoken into it that started a process ending in rest. The creation account can be a salvation metaphor as before the light was spoken into our lives we were just as creation was exiting in this darkness. Law is not the quintessential ingredient of receiving light. it is darkness that light is spoken into not law. law proclaims the light, it exposes the darkness, but it doesn't invent them. our need for the gospel is not because of the law, our need for the gospel is because the only way to fix darkness is through light.
Being under the law refers to it having jurisdiction over us and to us being obligated to obey it. If someone were not under God's law and had no obligation to obey it, then their mouth would not be stopped and they would not become guilty before God, so the only way for every mouth to be stopped and all the world to become guilty before God is if all of the world is under God's law and obligated to obey it. It other words, if someone had no obligation to refrain from sin, then God would have no grounds by which to judge them as guilty for committing sin. Having the law refers to having physical possession of a Torah scroll.
the grounds are from the context that light is spoken into. "the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters." what is innate about before day 1 is a state of disorder, hence why day 1-3 are about ordering. what is innate is emptiness hence why days 4-6 are about filling, what is innate is it is unrest hence why day 7 is about rest. everything creation is about, before the light is spoken is the opposite.The case can certainly be made that the light in the creation account was the light of Messiah. Messiah is the light, he is God's word made flesh, God's word is the light, God's law is God's word and God's word made flesh is the living embodiment of Gods' law. For as long as God's nature has been eternal there has been a way to act in accordance with his nature and Messiah is the embodiment of God's nature expressed through sinless obedience to those instructions, you don't have any grounds for claiming that no law was needed for light to be spoken into this dark unformed vessel, but rather the law is the light.
Psalms 119:105 Your word is a lamp to my feet and a light to my path.
Did you know that many of the commandments given were to provide a clear way for Messiah to come?
Please define your understanding of 'wrong'. Murder (recorded) goes back to Cain and Abel. The LORD said sin was crouching at the door. If there were no law then how could it be a sin?
The law echos the law?I'm not understanding that.
Sorry, but they are about what you put into your body.
The dream was to show Peter that the Gentiles were acceptable for those he called clean.
The animals in the sheet were representative of the nations, just like animals are used in the book of Daniel.
Peter misunderstood what he was being told. As he said he had never eaten anything unclean before (and up to this point too, even though it was way after the crucifixion and resurrection). Jesus never told him before then or after that the dietary laws were done away with.
You will notice in the story Peter never eats anything.
Are you expanding the thread topic? If so, cool!Please define your understanding of 'wrong'. Murder (recorded) goes back to Cain and Abel. The LORD said sin was crouching at the door. If there were no law then how could it be a sin?
Deuteronomy reiterates some things, expands some things imo.Deut is Moses speaking to the children of those that came out of Egypt. Those who left Egypt were not allowed to go in so they wandered 40 years until they all died (all but a few) and Moses was going over the law with them. It is not an interpretation, but a reiteration.
For thousands of years the Jews have held to the explanation that shaatnez was about mixing linen and wool, nothing else.
the law does not define morals
What the law does is expose our sin
The moral constructs themselves predate the law
So it is not law that defines what is right/wrong it is God
goodness itself is a product of God which exists separate to law
God predates the whole thing, before there was darkness and light there was God.
not when law is created
Why the snark?did you know the Messiah has come? so why are we continuing to pave the road he has already passed along?
You still haven't answered my question, what do you define as 'wrong'?the law does not define morals. What the law does is expose our sin and inability to fix ourselves and the subsequent need for a savior. The moral constructs themselves predate the law. what is good, is of God, what is wrong is against God. So it is not law that defines what is right/wrong it is God, I know this because God is good so goodness itself is a product of God which exists separate to law. God predates the whole thing, before there was darkness and light there was God. Those constructs are his will and our first glimpse of them is when he said "Let there be light" not when law is created.
More snark? why? I was just trying to understand what you were trying to say here.the law echos God's will and plan. I called them constructs that the law is based on thus they predate the law. if constructs are too abstract for you then simply think of God's will or God himself who clearly predates everything.
The laws, the mitzvot may precede mankind but not all the ordinances, or statutes and judgements came into being for the purpose I listed above.Everything the law proclaims preexisted the law, the law is there to echo it, not to establish it. So then the law is based on preexisting constructs and it manifests these contracts through very physical or concrete means. by the laws themselves are limited to the covenant they are established in.
No he did not. Foreigners were equated with unclean animals of the four footed kind and such.God reveals to Peter what the deeper meaning of the dietary laws
But has nothing to do with the dietary laws which are more involved than just unclean and clean animals.are and it parallels God's outpouring to the Jews first than to the gentiles which are broadly defined as clean/unclean animals.
God did not change the genetic makeup of animals at this time, neither did Jesus when the translators added (and he made all things clean). What was clean in Moses time and even Noah's time remains still today.Yet God makes it all clean to show his spirit is released to all and what was formerly unclean is now clean, he has to emphasize this to Peter to get him out of his law vacuum.
It's a misinterpretation of Gods revelation. It had to do with eating together with foreigners not eating foreigners.This is the meaning God himself reveals to Peter so we know we can trust it. The thing is you can't have it both ways, the dietary laws mirror the unclean/clean state of the nations and since all has been made clean then the dietary laws mirror the same state, so that all is made clean too. to say the dietary laws are only about food would be viewing the law as 1 dimensional not to mention negating God's revelation.
No it does not. And all the nations have not been made clean. There are still boundless pagans.If God has made all the nations clean he has made all the food clean with it. if food is still regarded as clean/unclean then it implicitly negates what God revealed to Peter. This is a further indication that we are no longer under the law because the law is made complete.
That is open to many interpretations.Christ himself said on the cross "It is finished"
the grounds are from the context that light is spoken into. "the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters." what is innate about before day 1 is a state of disorder, hence why day 1-3 are about ordering. what is innate is emptiness hence why days 4-6 are about filling, what is innate is it is unrest hence why day 7 is about rest. everything creation is about, before the light is spoken is the opposite.
I was just asking for clarification of the posters understanding of the word 'wrong' so I could answer appropriately.Are you expanding the thread topic? If so, cool!
I've been talking about this subject over here, post #78
Creation Sabbath Origin
But there's not a lot of activity there. I'd love to talk about it here.
You mean like when Jesus said:Deuteronomy reiterates some things, expands some things imo.
You mean these Jews who lived with him and witnessed his ministry, crucifixion and resurrection?The Jews have believed lots of things that I don't hold to, for example that if Jesus were the Messiah he would have restored the kingdom to Israel. So I've heard.
Anyways, it's a valid interpretational question imo: do laws in Leviticus stand alone, or can they be interpreted based on what Deuteronomy says?
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?