Under Law

[8thdaypriest]

9 hours ago, Gustave said:

1) If, as slaves in Egypt, the Israelites had the freedom to perform circumcisions on male infants that Pharaoh had ordered to be thrown in to the Nile, then Moses was probably circumcised because he was older than 8 days. 

Moses was 3 months.  (Exo 2:2)

[Gustave]

Quote

 

Ron Amnsn said;

The above statement from the Catechism of Trent makes it sound like the authors attribute more authority to what they call "nature" than they do to the Bible.

 

Quote

 

Phkrause said;

Exactly!!

 

 

Guys,

the Catechism of Trent simply systematized Sacred Scriptures teaching that some things the Patriarchs' &  Children of Israel were commanded to do met their ultimate and final fulfillment in Christ. Because SOME of those things commanded were never written on the heart and in fact were added due to the transgressions of the group targeted they met their end at the point of Jesus' Resurrection.

Asserting that the Bible teaches that Christians are required to observe circumcision and other Old Covenant rubrics is trying to push water uphill with a strainer. 

[Gustave]

11 minutes ago, 8thdaypriest said:

Moses was 3 months.  (Exo 2:2)

Ron said that.

[8thdaypriest]

9 hours ago, Gustave said:

Abraham knew what God told him and unless, as you say, you want to speculate about it - Abraham was not provided with the same Mitzvot Moses relayed to the Children of Israel. 

Ancient Israel was "chosen" by God, to portray (through the commands they carried out) an acted prophecy of Messiah.   Instead of saying something like, "I am going to send the perfect Messiah to die at 3pm on the 14th day of Nissan", God command them to act it out. 

Exodus 12:5 'Your lamb shall be an unblemished male a year old; you may take it from the sheep or from the goats. 6 'And you shall keep it until the fourteenth day of the same month, then the whole assembly of the congregation of Israel is to kill it at twilight. 7 'Moreover, they shall take some of the blood and put it on the two doorposts and on the lintel of the houses in which they eat it. 8 'And they shall eat the flesh that same night, roasted with fire, and they shall eat it with unleavened bread and bitter herbs. 9 'Do not eat any of it raw or boiled at all with water, but rather roasted with fire, both its head and its legs along with its entrails. 10 'And you shall not leave any of it over until morning, but whatever is left of it until morning, you shall burn with fire." (NAS)

1Corinthians 5:7  "For our Passover has been sacrificed, that is, Christ;"

The Passover lambs were sacrificed at 3PM.  Christ died at 3PM in fulfillment of the prophecy. 

He was resurrected by His Father, and ascended to present Himself before His Father in heaven on the Feast of Firstfruits. 

1 Corinthians 15:23 "But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming." (KJV)

Trace it right on through.  Every command for every moed, was a prophecy of Christ.  I have absolutely no problem with the method God used to give us a prophecy of His Son.  Acted story telling was something well know in the ancient world. 

What's wrong with acted prophecy? 

[Gustave]

3 minutes ago, 8thdaypriest said:

Ancient Israel was "chosen" by God, to portray (through the commands they carried out) an acted prophecy of Messiah.   Instead of saying something like, "I am going to send the perfect Messiah to die at 3pm on the 14th day of Nissan", God command them to act it out. 

Exodus 12:5 'Your lamb shall be an unblemished male a year old; you may take it from the sheep or from the goats. 6 'And you shall keep it until the fourteenth day of the same month, then the whole assembly of the congregation of Israel is to kill it at twilight. 7 'Moreover, they shall take some of the blood and put it on the two doorposts and on the lintel of the houses in which they eat it. 8 'And they shall eat the flesh that same night, roasted with fire, and they shall eat it with unleavened bread and bitter herbs. 9 'Do not eat any of it raw or boiled at all with water, but rather roasted with fire, both its head and its legs along with its entrails. 10 'And you shall not leave any of it over until morning, but whatever is left of it until morning, you shall burn with fire." (NAS)

1Corinthians 5:7  "For our Passover has been sacrificed, that is, Christ;"

The Passover lambs were sacrificed at 3PM.  Christ died at 3PM in fulfillment of the prophecy. 

He was resurrected by His Father, and ascended to present Himself before His Father in heaven on the Feast of Firstfruits. 

1 Corinthians 15:23 "But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming." (KJV)

Trace it right on through.  Every command for every moed, was a prophecy of Christ.  I have absolutely no problem with the method God used to give us a prophecy of His Son.  Acted story telling was something well know in the ancient world. 

What's wrong with acted prophecy? 

Without getting into the weeds on your specific religious beliefs I think I more or less agree with you. The Old Testament pointed toward Christ in ways people are today still discovering. I have no problem with this and agree with it. 

"Ignorance of Scripture is Ignorance of Christ". St. Jerome 

[8thdaypriest]

On 9/14/2019 at 4:46 PM, Gustave said:

This Commandment about the observance of the Sabbath, on the other hand, considered as to the time appointed for its fulfillment, is not fixed and unalterable, but susceptible of change, and belongs not to the moral, but the ceremonial law.

Hmmm.  I thought the SDAs came up with that word "ceremonial" law.  It was the Catholics!  Interesting. 

The Catholics certainly have added a load of ceremonial laws themselves.  Confession to a Catholic priest, mass,  trans-substitution, last rites, baptism of infants, baptism by sprinkling, confirmation, images, prayers to dead saints, etc. etc.  None of it taught in the Bible.  And you think the law of God to Moses was loaded with "ceremony".  Hmmmm

[8thdaypriest]

32 minutes ago, Gustave said:

SOME of those things commanded were never written on the heart and in fact were added due to the transgressions of the group

They were "added" due to the transgression of all mankind. 

[Gustave]

15 minutes ago, 8thdaypriest said:

Hmmm.  I thought the SDAs came up with that word "ceremonial" law.  It was the Catholics!  Interesting. 

The Catholics certainly have added a load of ceremonial laws themselves.  Confession to a Catholic priest, mass,  trans-substitution, last rites, baptism of infants, baptism by sprinkling, confirmation, images, prayers to dead saints, etc. etc.  None of it taught in the Bible.  And you think the law of God to Moses was loaded with "ceremony".  Hmmmm

It's a loose way of describing it. There was only ONE LAW with a combination of Moral and Ceremonial Commands. Basically any command that by nature or morally is in force perpetually all the time (24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year). 

Jimmy does a good Job explaining this.

 

[Gustave]

4 hours ago, 8thdaypriest said:

Hmmm.  I thought the SDAs came up with that word "ceremonial" law.  It was the Catholics!  Interesting. 

The Catholics certainly have added a load of ceremonial laws themselves.  Confession to a Catholic priest, mass,  trans-substitution, last rites, baptism of infants, baptism by sprinkling, confirmation, images, prayers to dead saints, etc. etc.  None of it taught in the Bible.  And you think the law of God to Moses was loaded with "ceremony".  Hmmmm

It would be enjoyable to slowly walk you though some of these things so you would better understand their Biblical nature and how they fit into the New Covenant. I'm not here to proselytize, just to give answers that are within my ability for the way I believe the way I do. All of which is taught by the Bible.

[Gustave]

4 hours ago, 8thdaypriest said:

They were "added" due to the transgression of all mankind. 

The Children of Israel were not given ceremonial commandments because of something someone living in China did or didn't do. 

Isaiah 28,10: "For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little:For with stammering lips and another tongue will he speak to this people. To whom he said, This is the rest wherewith ye may cause the weary to rest; and this is the refreshing: yet they would not hear. But the word of the Lord was unto them precept upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little; that they might go, and fall backward, and be broken, and snared, and taken. Wherefore hear the word of the Lord, ye scornful men, that rule this people which is in Jerusalem."

 

 

[8thdaypriest]

9 hours ago, Gustave said:

The Children of Israel were not given ceremonial commandments because of something someone living in China did or didn't do. 

The Son of God was coming for all mankind.  The prophecies acted out by Israel were to be fulfilled by that Son of God, therefore those prophecies were given for all mankind.   Here I am, an American of English heritage, living far from the Middle East.  Yet I read those acted prophecies, and my faith in Jesus Christ as the One who was to come, is strengthened.  Also my faith in the Bible, and my understanding of God's foreknowledge.  Those prophecies were given - for me too.  

[Gustave]

7 minutes ago, 8thdaypriest said:

The Son of God was coming for all mankind.  The prophecies acted out by Israel were to be fulfilled by that Son of God, therefore those prophecies were given for all mankind.   Here I am, an American of English heritage, living far from the Middle East.  Yet I read those acted prophecies, and my faith in Jesus Christ as the One who was to come, is strengthened.  Also my faith in the Bible, and my understanding of God's foreknowledge.  Those prophecies were given - for me too.  

Salvation - yes, the commandments people know without “special revelation” also yes.

There were certain commandments that were to be a sign between God and Israel only and those were never for Gentiles and ceased being obligatory for Jews at the point the law of Christ fulfilled the law of Moses.

[8thdaypriest]

Re: circumcision

Romans 2:26 "If therefore the uncircumcised man keeps the requirements of the Law, will not his uncircumcision be regarded as circumcision?" (NAS)

Question is:  What "requirements of the Law" was the uncircumcised man keeping, for him to be regarded (in the eyes of God) as circumcised (and therefore a citizen of Israel)?  

He wasn't traveling to Jerusalem for the moed.  He wasn't offering blood sacrifices.   No atonement was being made for him, by Aaronic priests.  So what requirements - of the Law?    Those "requirements" had to those mentioned in "the Law".   (Which does support those "requirements" are continually binding.) 

He could certainly have been keeping The Ten Commandments - if the LORD was filling that man with His spirit and writing His law on that man's heart.  And the man would be regarded as "grafted in" to Israel, because that man was keeping the Covenant.

Exodus 34:28 "So he was there with the LORD forty days and forty nights; he did not eat bread or drink water. And he wrote on the tablets the words of the covenant, the Ten Commandments." (NAS) 

It's called "the Ark of the Covenant" because the two stone tablets were carried around in that golden box. 

All the way to Revelation - it's still His Covenant.  

Revelation 11:19 "Then the temple of God in heaven was opened and the ark of His covenant was visible within his temple. And there were flashes of lightning, roaring, crashes of thunder, an earthquake, and a great hailstorm."

Strongly suggests "The Ten" are continually/forever binding.

I'm so glad the LORD wrote His Sabbath command on the stones.  It makes the argument a lot easier. 
 

[8thdaypriest]

18 minutes ago, Gustave said:

There were certain commandments that were to be a sign between God and Israel only and those were never for Gentiles and ceased being obligatory for Jews at the point the law of Christ fulfilled the law of Moses.

Define "Israel". 

If you define "Israel" as "those of physical DNA descent from Jacob, then you'd have an argument.   But the Israel of God includes all those of faith, and does not include those without "belief" in the Son of God. 

You and I and all who believe are "grafted in" to Israel (the Tree of Romans 11).   We have become Israelites - by faith.   Which means the Sabbath is a sign between God and us. 

Paul said,  "For not all who are descended from Israel are Israel." (Rom 9:6)

God made believing Gentiles part of Israel (as if circumcised) and he made unbelieving Jews NOT part of Israel ("because of unbelief they were broken off") even though they had been circumcised. 

Israel is still the name of God's Covenant keeping people.   "All Israel" (all those left attached to the Tree), and only Israel - will be saved. 

Which is why the gates into the Holy City are named for the 12 tribes of Israel.  

I've no idea which tribe I've been "grafted in" to.  I'll find out one day. 

[8thdaypriest]

35 minutes ago, Gustave said:

the law of Christ fulfilled the law of Moses

You think that Christ has a different law, from His Father?    I don't. 

Christ had to fulfill the Law of Moses perfectly, in order to be the perfect sacrifice - in order to recover dominion of the earth. 

Are you saying that once Christ fulfilled "the law of Moses", He then set "The Covenant" (the Ten) aside, or retained only part of it?

[Gustave]

5 minutes ago, 8thdaypriest said:

Re: circumcision

Romans 2:26 "If therefore the uncircumcised man keeps the requirements of the Law, will not his uncircumcision be regarded as circumcision?" (NAS)

Question is:  What "requirements of the Law" was the uncircumcised man keeping, for him to be regarded (in the eyes of God) as circumcised (and therefore a citizen of Israel)?  

He wasn't traveling to Jerusalem for the moed.  He wasn't offering blood sacrifices.   No atonement was being made for him, by Aaronic priests.  So what requirements - of the Law?    Those "requirements" had to those mentioned in "the Law".   (Which does support those "requirements" are continually binding.) 

He could certainly have been keeping The Ten Commandments - if the LORD was filling that man with His spirit and writing His law on that man's heart.  And the man would be regarded as "grafted in" to Israel, because that man was keeping the Covenant.

Exodus 34:28 "So he was there with the LORD forty days and forty nights; he did not eat bread or drink water. And he wrote on the tablets the words of the covenant, the Ten Commandments." (NAS) 

It's called "the Ark of the Covenant" because the two stone tablets were carried around in that golden box. 

All the way to Revelation - it's still His Covenant.  

Revelation 11:19 "Then the temple of God in heaven was opened and the ark of His covenant was visible within his temple. And there were flashes of lightning, roaring, crashes of thunder, an earthquake, and a great hailstorm."

Strongly suggests "The Ten" are continually/forever binding.

I'm so glad the LORD wrote His Sabbath command on the stones.  It makes the argument a lot easier. 
 

The requirements of the law are moral because God is moral. We as part of God's creation imperfectly reflect the image and likeness of our creator (or should at the least try to). Read 2nd kings 5, 15-19 and Numbers 22, 18-19 for two examples of individuals who did not follow the law of Moses in the manner the Children of Israel were commanded to follow it. 

[Gustave]

6 minutes ago, 8thdaypriest said:

Define "Israel". 

If you define "Israel" as "those of physical DNA descent from Jacob, then you'd have an argument.   But the Israel of God includes all those of faith, and does not include those without "belief" in the Son of God. 

You and I and all who believe are "grafted in" to Israel (the Tree of Romans 11).   We have become Israelites - by faith.   Which means the Sabbath is a sign between God and us. 

Paul said,  "For not all who are descended from Israel are Israel." (Rom 9:6)

God made believing Gentiles part of Israel (as if circumcised) and he made unbelieving Jews NOT part of Israel ("because of unbelief they were broken off") even though they had been circumcised. 

Israel is still the name of God's Covenant keeping people.   "All Israel" (all those left attached to the Tree), and only Israel - will be saved. 

Which is why the gates into the Holy City are named for the 12 tribes of Israel.  

I've no idea which tribe I've been "grafted in" to.  I'll find out one day. 

In the sense of salvation, as it becoming heirs to the promise. There is now [under the Law of Christ] NO JEW and NO GENTILE. 

[8thdaypriest]

1 minute ago, Gustave said:

The requirements of the law are moral because God is moral. We as part of God's creation imperfectly reflect the image and likeness of our creator (or should at the least try to). Read 2nd kings 5, 15-19 and Numbers 22, 18-19 for two examples of individuals who did not follow the law of Moses in the manner the Children of Israel were commanded to follow it. 

I agree.   Until we are with Him in the earth made new, we will not "perfectly" have His law written on our hearts. 

[8thdaypriest]

1 minute ago, Gustave said:

In the sense of salvation, as it becoming heirs to the promise. There is now [under the Law of Christ] NO JEW and NO GENTILE. 

Just Israelites.

You think "the Law of Christ" does not include the Rest of the 7th Day?

[8thdaypriest]

10 hours ago, Gustave said:

It would be enjoyable to slowly walk you though some of these things so you would better understand their Biblical nature and how they fit into the New Covenant. I'm not here to proselytize, just to give answers that are within my ability for the way I believe the way I do. All of which is taught by the Bible.

I'd love to. 

[8thdaypriest]

I listened to the Catholic Answers man.  He said essentially what you've been saying.  Guess that means you've been giving good Catholic answers. 

[Gustave]

2 hours ago, 8thdaypriest said:

You think that Christ has a different law, from His Father?    I don't. 

Christ had to fulfill the Law of Moses perfectly, in order to be the perfect sacrifice - in order to recover dominion of the earth. 

Are you saying that once Christ fulfilled "the law of Moses", He then set "The Covenant" (the Ten) aside, or retained only part of it?

The law of Moses is one unit that has both moral and ceremonial elements. The command pertaining to WHEN the Sabbath was to be observed had to be transmitted by supernatural revelation (man isn’t commanded to hold one day as more important to another) therefore yes,  some elements of the law (as found in the 1st 5 Books of the Bible) ceases when the shadow met the Substance.

[JoeMo]

I'm enjoying the discussion between you two.  I wish I had something to add, but I don't.  I'm learning some stuff, though.

[Gustave]

7 hours ago, 8thdaypriest said:

Just Israelites.

You think "the Law of Christ" does not include the Rest of the 7th Day?

The Law of Christ does not obligate Christians to observe a Gregorian Saturday as the Sabbath, no. 

 

Additionally, Christianity started as sect of Judaism that rapidly expanded to include non-Jews. Some Jewish Christians were adamant that Gentile believers "coming in" must 1st be circumcised AND then follow the Law of Moses - to them THIS was an issue of salvation. The Christian Church addressed this question with authoritative clarity. 

No one doubts or even questions God told Israel to observe the Sabbath.

Ezekiel 20,12: "Wherefore I caused them to go forth out of the land of Egypt, and brought them into the wilderness. And I gave them my statutes, and shewed them my judgments, which if a man do, he shall even live in them. Moreover also I gave them my sabbaths, to be a sign between me and them, that they might know that I am the Lord that sanctify them."

The disagreement we appear to be having is whether God gave the same statutes, Judgements and Sabbaths to nations other than the Children of Israel. According to what I'm reading in the Bible the answer to that question is a resounding NO.

Exodus 31,13:  Speak thou also unto the children of Israel, saying, Verily my sabbaths ye shall keep: for it is a sign between me and you throughout your generations; that ye may know that I am the Lord that doth sanctify you. Ye shall keep the sabbath therefore; for it is holy unto you: every one that defileth it shall surely be put to death: for whosoever doeth any work therein, that soul shall be cut off from among his people. Six days may work be done; but in the seventh is the sabbath of rest, holy to the Lord: whosoever doeth any work in the sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death. Wherefore the children of Israel shall keep the sabbath, to observe the sabbath throughout their generations, for a perpetual covenant. It is a sign between me and the children of Israel for ever: for in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he rested, and was refreshed.

Not much of a sign between God and Israel IF everyone else such as Noah, Abraham, etc were expected to keep it. 

Acts 2,42 states that the early Christians continued (observed) NOT the Law of Moses but "The Aposles' Doctrine". Its not reasonable to conclude that the Apostolic Church, particularly in Acts 15 AGREED with those who had no authority to teach when they taught the Gentiles coming into the Church that

Quote

"IT WAS NEEDFUL TO CIRCUMIISE THEM AND TO COMMAND THEM TO KEEP THE LAW OF MOSES."

While it's TRUE that setting aside some amount of time for the worship of something greater than yourself is MORAL (its observed in all cultures throughout time) the specific time set aside is ceremonial as man is no more commanded to set aside a Gregorian Saturday for worship than man is compelled by his internal nature to decapitate the sheath of his own penis. 

I have ZERO issues with anyone going to Church on Saturday, millions upon millions of Catholic's go to Church on Saturday. The Ethiopian Orthodox Christians go to Church every Saturday, it's no issue whatsoever at all. The Catholic Church will never round up Christians who happen to worship on Saturday - it would be like saying the Catholic Church will some day round up Catholics who go to Mass on Saturday. It just won't happen. 

 

[Gregory Matthews]

The Biblical Sabbath, as established at Creation, is much more than going to church and worshiping.  That probably came into being with the Jews.  

As established the Sabbath was a time to set apart a day that was free from the routine of live.  That day was to be centered in one's spiritual life and fellowship with God.

It is actually a perversion of the original intent to center the Sabbath focus on going to church and on worship.  Neither is wrong, just as it is not wrong to go to church and worship on Sunday.   NOTE:  As a Federal chaplain, I have conducted more worship services on Sundays than I have on Saturday. 

The Sabbath, as it should be kept today, is between the individual and God.  It is not up to me to determine for you the parameters as to how you should keep the Sabbath in both spirit and in truth.  It is O.K. for me to challenge you to think through issues related to Sabbath keeping.  But, in the end, that is between you and God.