Your problem is that you seem to believe all laws were universal. No, God is not a racist
But he did want the OT Israelites to be seperate
Your belief is a "religious philosophy also" - it's Messianic Judaism. Who today is keeping the feasts?
Seems you have no real arguments.
The Scriptures have never been accepted by most of this world's religious men as profitable
for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.
Most simply don't believe in it, instead they cherry pick verses that can be used to justify whatever religious philosophy they have adopted. When many Scriptures are presented to them for examination and discussion, they simply ignore them, and work to discredit whoever the poor slob is that opened their own Bible and showed them something. They called Jesus a devil for doing the same thing.
As a result, men do not want to actually discuss what Scriptures say. Like Eve, they are convinced by this world's religious voices that they are "eternally secure" regardless of what God or the Scriptures HE Inspired says.
I'm not MJ, but I understand your need and lust to place me in some religious box because that is the religious tradition of this world. I would much rather actually have a discussion regarding the Scriptures, as they pertain to this Thread.
As far as your judgment of God, Yes, HE wants HIS People, Jew or Gentile, to be "Separate" from those who don't "glorify Him as God". As Paul himself teaches.
2 Cor. 6:
14 Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?
15 And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel? 16 And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. 17 Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you, 18 And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty.
And the Same God inspired this as well.
Is. 56:
6 Also the sons of the stranger, that join themselves to the LORD, to serve him, and to love the name of the LORD, to be his servants, every one that keepeth the sabbath from polluting it, and taketh hold of my covenant; 7 Even them will I bring to my holy mountain, and make them joyful in my house of prayer: their burnt offerings and their sacrifices shall be accepted upon mine altar; for mine house shall be called an house of prayer for all people.
It isn't my argument that you are working to discredit. It's the Holy Scriptures themselves. Sadly, you will still judge God as a purveyor of an "ethnostate", not because the Bible teaches this, but because the religions of this world teach this.
Indeed, the Law Moses taught, was God's. But it were both universal (and eternal) commandments such as the 10 commandments, but also those that were temporary.
Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster. Galatians 3:24-25
Has your faith not come yet?
Yes, that is my point. There was God's Eternal Laws that Paul promoted and walked in, and there was a temporary carnal Law, "ADDED" to God's Eternal Law, put in place until the SEED should come. I asked you when this LAW was ADDED, before the golden calf, or after? But it seems my questions are unworthy of your consideration. That's OK, Jesus said it would be this way.
The Bible teaches us about this temporary "added" Law.
Heb. 10:
1 For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect.
2 For then would they not have ceased to be offered? because that the worshippers once purged should have had no more conscience of sins. 3 But in those sacrifices there is a remembrance again made of sins every year. 4 For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.
11 And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins: 12 But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;
The "ADDED" Law, "because of Transgressions, Til the Seed should come", was not God's Sabbath, nor Passover and the Feasts of the Lord, nor was it God's Judgments and definition of sin. The deceiver wants men to discard these "Instruction in righteousness", as it convinced EVE to do.
It was the Priesthood that changed, that is, the manner in which God's Law is received, and the manner in which Forgiveness of sin was accomplished. You can read this for yourself in Jer. 31. The problem lies in "Belief".
You have confirmed my point
It aligns with what Barnabas (Acts 11:26) teaches:
"Now, wherefore did Moses say, “You shall not eat the swine, nor the eagle, nor the hawk, nor the raven, nor any fish which is not possessed of scales?” Is there then not a command of God they should not eat [these things]? There is, but Moses spoke with a spiritual reference. For this reason he named the swine, as much as to say, “You shall not join yourself to men who resemble swine.”
Yes, Jesus said to "Take Heed" of the "many" who come in His Name to deceive. It is doubtful the Same Barnabas in Acts was the same author who wrote this sermon you dug up to justify rejecting God's Judgments. Given the average lifespan of man was 30 to 40 years, and the Jews were still killing the true Church of God. Even If Barnabus was only 20 in Acts, and he was most surely older than that, then he would have been at the very least 90 when he wrote this, given it is said to be written between AD 70 and 130.
And God didn't believe it worthy of becoming part of the Holy Scriptures we know. But even at that, his sermon begs some simple questions.
Who established a difference between "Maggots and Swine" and a "Goat or sheep"? Why is there even a distinction made? Because God established some things as food, and some things for other purposes. Is it so strange that a Father would instruct his children what is food and what is not?
Of course, a man lusts after what his heart lusts after. For me, since I am a purchased possession, I defer to my Master, my Father. But there are those who don't trust Him to direct them.
For when they live in pleasure, they forget their Lord; but when they come to want, they acknowledge the Lord. And [in like manner] the swine, when it has eaten, does not recognize its master; but when hungry it cries out, and on receiving food is quiet again.
A goat, a deer, a camel, a pig, in fact this could be said about every animal that exists. Why is a maggot, or tape worm or swine different than a sheep or Goat or locust? For one reason, God deemed all animals good, but some were not for food. Just like many women are good, but not all women were created for you to sleep with.
I'm OK with that. So was Paul and Zacharias and every example of faith in the Bible. Yes, there are men, who call Jesus Lord, Lord, that lust after other women, and there are those who lust after things that God has deemed unclean. Shouldn't a man rule over these lusts as Paul teaches? "
Now these things were our examples, to the intent we should not lust after evil things, as they also lusted."
In this world, man can find a reason to disobey God, discredit His Words, justify their own religion, this has been going on since Eve said "
And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat,"
Jesus tries to tell men that this disobedience, lust, disrespect and dishonor all come from within, and defile a man.
I'm OK with that.
“Neither shall you eat,” says he “the eagle, nor the hawk, nor the kite, nor the raven.” “You shall not join yourself,” he means, “to such men as know not how to procure food for themselves by labor and sweat, but seize on that of others in their iniquity, and although wearing an aspect of simplicity, are on the watch to plunder others.” So these birds, while they sit idle, inquire how they may devour the flesh of others, proving themselves pests [to all] by their wickedness.
LOL, so the swan and the sparrow and hummingbird all sit idle, inquiring how they might devour the flesh of others? It's no wonder God didn't Inspire this sermon to be included in the witness of the Jesus of the Bible.
“And you shall not eat,” he says, “the lamprey, or the polypus, or the cuttlefish.” He means, “You shall not join yourself or be like to such men as are ungodly to the end, and are condemned to death.” In like manner as those fishes, above accursed, float in the deep, not swimming [on the surface] like the rest, but make their abode in the mud which lies at the bottom."
Halibut, Cod, Flounder all never make it to the surface. Instead, they lie in wait on the bottom, sometimes covered in mud, and "while they sit idle, inquire how they may devour the flesh of others, proving themselves pests". And yet, God deemed them as created for food.
The religious philosopher you have adopted makes no sense. Their argument is simply a religious theory of man who doesn't believe Paul when he says the Holy Scriptures, actually the Law and Prophets because that is where to Gospel of Christ that was given to Israel is found, should be used "
for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works."
And for what? So man can eat what God has deemed unclean? Why would a servant of God even want to do such a thing?
The law is now spiritual, no longer carnal.
God's Law was always spiritual.
Duet. 6:
4 Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD: 5 And thou shalt love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might. 6 And these words, which I command thee this day, shall be in thine heart: 7 And thou shalt teach them diligently unto thy children, and shalt talk of them when thou sittest in thine house, and when thou walkest by the way, and when thou liest down, and when thou risest up.
Duet. 10:
16 Circumcise therefore the foreskin of your heart, and be no more stiffnecked. 17 For the LORD your God is God of gods, and Lord of lords, a great God, a mighty, and a terrible, which regardeth not persons, nor taketh reward: 18 He doth execute the judgment of the fatherless and widow, and loveth the stranger, in giving him food and raiment. 19 Love ye therefore the stranger: for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt.
No don't get me wrong. You are free to SEEK out and listen to anyone you want. And this world is literally full of religious voices who can justify just about every desire and lust of a man's heart.
But it seems to me, we should follow God's instruction as Jesus teaches. After all. HE is a Great and all-knowing God, Yes? And we should honor HIM, even if others around us, who call Him Lord, Lord, do not. Isn't this why Caleb and Joshua were allowed into the Promised Land?