Under Law

[Gustave]

7 hours ago, 8thdaypriest said:

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. 

I try too but readily admit I fall very short ALL THE TIME.  The way I understand it  -provided I stay between the defined marker buoys I'm at liberty to believe the way I see it to be. 

I use as a primary tool the Biblia Clerus - which is totally free. 

http://www.clerus.org/bibliaclerus/index_eng.html

 

 

[Gustave]

7 minutes ago, Gregory Matthews said:

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.

I'd agree with this position - originally, as I understand it and as the Jews understood it - the Sabbath rest was intended to be never ending, a perpetual Sabbath we were intended to live in forever. That's not the way it worked out so the 1st Book of Scripture is how we got kicked out of God's Rest and the rest of it is the story of how we get back into it - with all the bumps along the way. 

[JoeMo]

12 hours ago, Gustave said:

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.

God may not have given the Sabbath to gentiles, but he certainly promised great things to those who kept it:

"For this is what the Lord says:

“To the eunuchs who keep my Sabbaths,
    who choose what pleases me
    and hold fast to my covenant—
 to them I will give within my temple and its walls
    a memorial and a name
    better than sons and daughters;...

And foreigners who bind themselves to the Lord
    to minister to him,
to love the name of the Lord,
    and to be his servants,
all who keep the Sabbath without desecrating it
    and who hold fast to my covenant—
 these I will bring to my holy mountain
    and give them joy in my house of prayer.
Their burnt offerings and sacrifices
    will be accepted on my altar;
for my house will be called
    a house of prayer for all nations.” (Is. 56:4-7)

Unfortunately, Israel never bothered to consistently share God with the surrounding nations; in fact they avoided it "religiously".  The nations around Israel were more successful sharing their gods with Israel than Israel was in sharing the true God with the nations.  God may have given the Law exclusively to the Israelites, but He also commanded them to share it with the surrounding nations.  They didn't do that very well.

[Gustave]

37 minutes ago, JoeMo said:

God may not have given the Sabbath to gentiles, but he certainly promised great things to those who kept it:

"For this is what the Lord says:

“To the eunuchs who keep my Sabbaths,
    who choose what pleases me
    and hold fast to my covenant—
 to them I will give within my temple and its walls
    a memorial and a name
    better than sons and daughters;...

And foreigners who bind themselves to the Lord
    to minister to him,
to love the name of the Lord,
    and to be his servants,
all who keep the Sabbath without desecrating it
    and who hold fast to my covenant—
 these I will bring to my holy mountain
    and give them joy in my house of prayer.
Their burnt offerings and sacrifices
    will be accepted on my altar;
for my house will be called
    a house of prayer for all nations.” (Is. 56:4-7)

Unfortunately, Israel never bothered to consistently share God with the surrounding nations; in fact they avoided it "religiously".  The nations around Israel were more successful sharing their gods with Israel than Israel was in sharing the true God with the nations.  God may have given the Law exclusively to the Israelites, but He also commanded them to share it with the surrounding nations.  They didn't do that very well.

Abraham was somewhat of a missionary, a pretty serious one so I would agree that God didn't close off individuals recognizing what Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and later on Moses' teaching on the ONE True God. I agree with this. What I'm saying is that Sabbath observance was alien to Abraham, Noah, etc. God did not give the aforementioned the Sabbath or the feast of tents, etc. This was given to the Children of Israel. This is what I'm saying. 

[Ron Amnsn]

On 9/15/2019 at 8:19 PM, Gustave said:

For your understanding to be correct there would have had to be a NEW COVENANT made with Israel at Deut 5 because you're asserting that when the Scripture says the covenant was not made with their fathers it must mean the actual and literal immediate father's of those alive at the point of Deut 5. This isn't correct - the meaning is distant ancestors. Like the following.

As far as I know there is no example in Scripture where the term "fathers" excludes the actual dads from the line of forefathers, as you have asserted without any supporting evidence.  Your interpretation of what Moses said requires that the dads be skipped over in preference to distant ancestors, but your interpretation is quite different from what the individuals listening to Moses would have understood.  Moses specifically said that he was speaking to ALL of the Israelites alive and present that day.

There isn't a need of a new covenant in Deuteronomy 5 because the point of what Moses is saying in verse 2 is that the covenant already made at Horeb belongs to ALL of the Israelites of all generations.  My point was that Moses was using a non-literal figure of speech to emphasize the fact that in God's eyes the covenant is not exclusive to, nor more applicable to, the generations of Israelites that actually stood at Horeb, but applies to each subsequent generation of Israelites as if each generation stood at Horeb personally, including the two generations of Israelites to whom Moses was speaking who had not been at Horeb.  So the covenant made at Horeb applies to Jesus and to Benjamin Netanyahu just as much as it applied to Caleb and Joshua.

[8thdaypriest]

22 hours ago, Gustave said:

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.

It wasn't the Law "of Moses".  It was God's Law transmitted through Moses.  With that in mind, I agree that "some elements" of that law, were "changed" (not ceased) when shadow met Substance.  We still have a priesthood - "the firstborn" (Christ and those who are His).  We still have a High Priest.  We still offer sacrifices - spiritual ones. 

"The priesthood" is the only law specifically said to have been "changed". 

Which brings us back to my question:  What does it mean to be "under the Law" ????   When Paul said that he was "not under the Law" did he mean that he regarded the entire Law as abolished? 

The Temple is gone for now, but will be restored - I believe - for the 8th millennium.   (Ezekiel's Temple)  Once resurrected at the 8th millennium, "the rest of the dead" will "go up to the Mountain of the LORD" to learn His ways.  (Isaiah Cpt 2 and Micah Chapt 4).  

The New Jerusalem will not descend to earth until Christ has put down every rebellion and finally cleansed the earth (by fire), and destroyed "the last enemy" (death).  

[8thdaypriest]

16 hours ago, Gustave said:

as the Jews understood it - the Sabbath rest was intended to be never ending, a perpetual Sabbath we were intended to live in forever.

The Jews understood the Sabbath to be "the 7th day" - not "perpetual" - without a beginning or end.  The Sabbath had defined boundaries.   The LORD defined the Sabbath as "the 7th day" when He gave manna every other day - even a double portion on the 6th day in preparation, and no manna on the 7th day.   That was before He spoke the command from Sinai, and before He wrote it on the stones. 

The commands HE wrote on the stones, are the same ones HE will write on our hearts.   They will be "forever".

In the earth made new, "all flesh" will come before the LORD to worship Him on the Sabbaths and the New Moons (Isa 66:22-23).  That's forever. 

Isaiah 56:6 "Also the foreigners (Gentiles) who join themselves to the LORD, To minister to Him, and to love the name of the LORD, To be His servants, every one who keeps from profaning the sabbath, And holds fast My covenant; 7 Even those I will bring to My holy mountain, And make them joyful in My house of prayer. Their burnt offerings and their sacrifices will be acceptable on My altar; For My house will be called a house of prayer for all the peoples." (NAS)

Certainly appears the LORD expected Gentile believers to keep the Sabbath, once "grafted in". 

Isaiah 58:13 "If because of the sabbath, you turn your foot From doing your own pleasure on My holy day, And call the sabbath a delight, the holy day of the LORD honorable, And shall honor it, desisting from your own ways, From seeking your own pleasure, And speaking your own word, 14 Then you will take delight in the LORD, And I will make you ride on the heights of the earth; And I will feed you with the heritage of Jacob your father, For the mouth of the LORD has spoken."
 (NAS)

 

 

[8thdaypriest]

Exodus 12:49 "The same law applies both to the native-born and to the foreigner residing among you." (NIV)

Numbers 15:16 "The same laws and regulations will apply both to you and to the foreigner residing among you. '" (NIV)

[Gustave]

2 hours ago, 8thdaypriest said:

The Jews understood the Sabbath to be "the 7th day" - not "perpetual" - without a beginning or end.  The Sabbath had defined boundaries.   The LORD defined the Sabbath as "the 7th day" when He gave manna every other day - even a double portion on the 6th day in preparation, and no manna on the 7th day.   That was before He spoke the command from Sinai, and before He wrote it on the stones. 

The commands HE wrote on the stones, are the same ones HE will write on our hearts.   They will be "forever".

In the earth made new, "all flesh" will come before the LORD to worship Him on the Sabbaths and the New Moons (Isa 66:22-23).  That's forever. 

Isaiah 56:6 "Also the foreigners (Gentiles) who join themselves to the LORD, To minister to Him, and to love the name of the LORD, To be His servants, every one who keeps from profaning the sabbath, And holds fast My covenant; 7 Even those I will bring to My holy mountain, And make them joyful in My house of prayer. Their burnt offerings and their sacrifices will be acceptable on My altar; For My house will be called a house of prayer for all the peoples." (NAS)

Certainly appears the LORD expected Gentile believers to keep the Sabbath, once "grafted in". 

Isaiah 58:13 "If because of the sabbath, you turn your foot From doing your own pleasure on My holy day, And call the sabbath a delight, the holy day of the LORD honorable, And shall honor it, desisting from your own ways, From seeking your own pleasure, And speaking your own word, 14 Then you will take delight in the LORD, And I will make you ride on the heights of the earth; And I will feed you with the heritage of Jacob your father, For the mouth of the LORD has spoken."
 (NAS)

 

 

Judaism's understanding of the Shabbat here on earth is that it's a fore taste of the Olam Ha-ba (the world to come) and that the world to come will be living in a Shabbat that never ends. Judaism's understanding of the prohibited  Sabbath acts will be unnecessary in the world to come because none of things (that precipitate acts prohibited on the 7th day) will exist in the new world.

Perhaps I've got this wrong????

[Gustave]

5 hours ago, Ron Amnsn said:

As far as I know there is no example in Scripture where the term "fathers" excludes the actual dads from the line of forefathers, as you have asserted without any supporting evidence.  Your interpretation of what Moses said requires that the dads be skipped over in preference to distant ancestors, but your interpretation is quite different from what the individuals listening to Moses would have understood.  Moses specifically said that he was speaking to ALL of the Israelites alive and present that day.

There isn't a need of a new covenant in Deuteronomy 5 because the point of what Moses is saying in verse 2 is that the covenant already made at Horeb belongs to ALL of the Israelites of all generations.  My point was that Moses was using a non-literal figure of speech to emphasize the fact that in God's eyes the covenant is not exclusive to, nor more applicable to, the generations of Israelites that actually stood at Horeb, but applies to each subsequent generation of Israelites as if each generation stood at Horeb personally, including the two generations of Israelites to whom Moses was speaking who had not been at Horeb.  So the covenant made at Horeb applies to Jesus and to Benjamin Netanyahu just as much as it applied to Caleb and Joshua.

Perhaps we're not understanding each other here. I'm not asserting that Deut 5 is describing a New Covenant in the sense of something additional to Horeb. I'm saying that Deut 5 is more detailed description of the Horeb Covenant.

 

[JoeMo]

7 hours ago, Gustave said:

What I'm saying is that Sabbath observance was alien to Abraham, Noah, etc. God did not give the aforementioned the Sabbath or the feast of tents, etc. This was given to the Children of Israel. This is what I'm saying. 

?

[8thdaypriest]

1 hour ago, Gustave said:

Judaism's understanding of the Shabbat here on earth is that it's a fore taste of the Olam Ha-ba (the world to come) and that the world to come will be living in a Shabbat that never ends. Judaism's understanding of the prohibited  Sabbath acts will be unnecessary in the world to come because none of things (that precipitate acts prohibited on the 7th day) will exist in the new world.

Perhaps I've got this wrong????

I do believe the rest of the 7th day, is a TYPE of the rest to come - in the earth made new.   The LORD spoke of giving them "rest" from their enemies.  Certainly our greatest enemies are Satan and the demons he rules.  We will have a "rest" from those enemies, for 1000 years (the 7th millennium).  

Deuteronomy 12:10 "But you will cross the Jordan and settle in the land the LORD your God is giving you as an inheritance, and he will give you rest from all your enemies around you so that you will live in safety." (NIV)

Doesn't mean the Sabbath will go away when Satan is consigned to the Lake of Fire.  We can continue to celebrate and commemorate God our Creator who "rested" on the 7th Day. 

Besides, who won't be physically "resting" all the time.  Lots of "work" to do. 

Isaiah 65:21 "They will build houses and dwell in them; they will plant vineyards and eat their fruit." (NIV)

Isaiah 65 is the same passage where

Isaiah 65:25 "The wolf and the lamb will feed together, and the lion will eat straw like the ox, and dust will be the serpent's food. They will neither harm nor destroy on all my holy mountain," says the LORD." (NIV)

Definitely the Messianic Kingdom. 

[8thdaypriest]

6 hours ago, Ron Amnsn said:

So the covenant made at Horeb applies to Jesus and to Benjamin Netanyahu just as much as it applied to Caleb and Joshua

I know that Jesus was "born under the law", but were Paul and the disciples "under the law" - after the death of Christ?

Romans 6:14 For sin shall no longer be your master, because you are not under the law, but under grace. (NIV)

Romans 6:15 What then? Shall we sin because we are not under the law but under grace? By no means! (NIV)

Galatians 5:18 But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law. (NIV)

I personally regard the covenant made at Horeb as "obsolete".  It was broken by the 10 Northern Tribes (Israel) whom the LORD "divorced" and it became "obsolete" when the "Husband" of that marriage covenant died. 

That is why there had to be a "NEW Covenant" with "another man" - our resurrected LORD Jesus.

That NEW Covenant said, "I will write My Law on your hearts".   What Law?   I believe it's the Ten. 

Why? 

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

What "requirements" of what "Law" ?    What "Law" were believing Gentiles keeping?  I believe it's the Ten. 

This man is obviously uncircumcised.  He is not offering animals for sacrifice at Jerusalem.  He is not traveling to Jerusalem for moed.  What "requirements" is he keeping, that render him "circumcised" (therefore part of Israel and part of the covenants made with Abraham and Israel)? 

This goes back to the vision of Peter - "call no man unclean".   Jews regarded the uncircumcised as "unclean" - therefore not acceptable to enter the Temple court.   Paul says that "wall" has been demolished by Christ's death.  

Acts 21:28 [The riot in the Temple court against Paul]  shouting, "Fellow Israelites, help us! This is the man who teaches everyone everywhere against our people and our law and this place. And besides, he has brought Greeks into the temple and defiled this holy place." 29 (They had previously seen Trophimus the Ephesian in the city with Paul and assumed that Paul had brought him into the temple.) (NIV)

 Acts 13:42 "So when the Jews went out of the synagogue, the Gentiles begged that these words might be preached to them the next Sabbath."  Paul didn't tell them to meet him on Sunday instead. 

Acts 13:44 "On the next Sabbath almost the whole city came together to hear the word of God." (NKJ)

I don't read Paul ever telling anyone that the 7th Day is no longer the day of rest.

[8thdaypriest]

Just now, 8thdaypriest said:

I personally regard the covenant made at Horeb as "obsolete".  It was broken by the 10 Northern Tribes (Israel) whom the LORD "divorced" and it became "obsolete" when the "Husband" of that marriage covenant died. 

Besides, that contract was fulfilled by Christ.  He kept that Covenant perfectly, and his reward will be the things promised in that Covenant.   

[Gustave]

5 hours ago, 8thdaypriest said:

Exodus 12:49 "The same law applies both to the native-born and to the foreigner residing among you." (NIV)

Numbers 15:16 "The same laws and regulations will apply both to you and to the foreigner residing among you. '" (NIV)

Key phrase "residing among you". 

[8thdaypriest]

1 hour ago, JoeMo said:

8 hours ago, Gustave said:

What I'm saying is that Sabbath observance was alien to Abraham, Noah, etc. God did not give the aforementioned the Sabbath or the feast of tents, etc. This was given to the Children of Israel. This is what I'm saying. 

How do you know? 

"On the same day the LORD made a covenant with Abraham",  He said his descendants would be strangers in a land not theirs, and would be afflicted four hundred years  (Genesis 15:13, 18).   Exactly 430 years later - to the day, Israel came out form Egypt.  That day was the Feast of Unleavened Bread (Exodus 12:41). 

The Passover in Egypt, was eaten on the anniversary of the evening when the "burning torch and the "smoking oven" passed between the halved animals, as Abraham lay in vision. 

I'm willing to bet that Abraham commemorated that night/day every year from then on.   The LORD's appointed times are His times.  We see them repeated, even before they had names like Passover or Sakkot. 

 

[Gustave]

54 minutes ago, 8thdaypriest said:

I do believe the rest of the 7th day, is a TYPE of the rest to come - in the earth made new.   The LORD spoke of giving them "rest" from their enemies.  Certainly our greatest enemies are Satan and the demons he rules.  We will have a "rest" from those enemies, for 1000 years (the 7th millennium).  

Deuteronomy 12:10 "But you will cross the Jordan and settle in the land the LORD your God is giving you as an inheritance, and he will give you rest from all your enemies around you so that you will live in safety." (NIV)

Doesn't mean the Sabbath will go away when Satan is consigned to the Lake of Fire.  We can continue to celebrate and commemorate God our Creator who "rested" on the 7th Day. 

Besides, who won't be physically "resting" all the time.  Lots of "work" to do. 

Isaiah 65:21 "They will build houses and dwell in them; they will plant vineyards and eat their fruit." (NIV)

Isaiah 65 is the same passage where

Isaiah 65:25 "The wolf and the lamb will feed together, and the lion will eat straw like the ox, and dust will be the serpent's food. They will neither harm nor destroy on all my holy mountain," says the LORD." (NIV)

Definitely the Messianic Kingdom. 

What prohibitions pertaining to the Sabbath do you envision being applicable in world to come? 

 

[Gustave]

5 hours ago, 8thdaypriest said:

It wasn't the Law "of Moses".  It was God's Law transmitted through Moses.  With that in mind, I agree that "some elements" of that law, were "changed" (not ceased) when shadow met Substance.  We still have a priesthood - "the firstborn" (Christ and those who are His).  We still have a High Priest.  We still offer sacrifices - spiritual ones. 

"The priesthood" is the only law specifically said to have been "changed". 

Which brings us back to my question:  What does it mean to be "under the Law" ????   When Paul said that he was "not under the Law" did he mean that he regarded the entire Law as abolished? 

The Temple is gone for now, but will be restored - I believe - for the 8th millennium.   (Ezekiel's Temple)  Once resurrected at the 8th millennium, "the rest of the dead" will "go up to the Mountain of the LORD" to learn His ways.  (Isaiah Cpt 2 and Micah Chapt 4).  

The New Jerusalem will not descend to earth until Christ has put down every rebellion and finally cleansed the earth (by fire), and destroyed "the last enemy" (death).  

It's called / referred to 'The Law of Moses' by the New Testament. 

IF the Priesthood was the only thing that changed why do you take issue with the Sacrament of Confession? It's no longer Jewish Priests engaged in the practice of Judaism doing it. 

[8thdaypriest]

11 minutes ago, Gustave said:

Key phrase "residing among you". 

 Ezekiel 47:21 "You are to distribute this land among yourselves according to the tribes of Israel. 22 You are to allot it as an inheritance for yourselves and for the foreigners residing among you and who have children. You are to consider them as native-born Israelites; along with you they are to be allotted an inheritance among the tribes of Israel. 23 In whatever tribe a foreigner resides, there you are to give them their inheritance," declares the Sovereign LORD." (NIV)

Ezekiel is writing about the Kingdom after the "return" to "the land" promised.  After the miraculous river of life is flowing from the new Temple of God, and everything is coming back to life. 

We Gentiles (as well as Jews) "inherit" only "in Christ".   He is the inheritor.  We share in His inheritance.  He is the only one who fulfilled the terms of the covenant promising "the land".  The "foreigners" are those "grafted in" to Israel, because they believe in Messiah.  These Gentiles are treated "as native-born Israelites". 

We are all traveling together, living together - those who believe in God and His Son.  Whatever is still valid for the "native born" is valid for the "foreigners" living among them. 

The Sabbath

Ezekiel 46:1 "'This is what the sovereign LORD says: The gate of the inner court that faces east will be closed six working days, but on the Sabbath day it will be opened and on the day of the new moon it will be opened." (NET)

This is Ezekiel's vision of a future day when Israel would be settled in the land and Jerusalem would be restored.  I believe this will be the 8th millennium.  Joe thinks it will be the 7th.  Whichever - it is a future day, beyond Paul's day or ours - and "the Sabbath" is still special. 

[8thdaypriest]

17 minutes ago, Gustave said:

What prohibitions pertaining to the Sabbath do you envision being applicable in world to come? 

Hmmmm.  Plowing, planting, harvesting, threshing, treading grapes or pressing olives, etc. etc. etc.  Work!

[8thdaypriest]

11 minutes ago, Gustave said:

It's called / referred to 'The Law of Moses' by the New Testament. 

IF the Priesthood was the only thing that changed why do you take issue with the Sacrament of Confession? It's no longer Jewish Priests engaged in the practice of Judaism doing it. 

New Testament says,  "Confess your trespasses to one another, and pray for one another, that you may be healed."  (Jam 5:16 NKJ)

Doesn't say to confess transgressions to someone especially appointed as bishop or priest. 

Main problem I have is with a Catholic priest absolving the sinner - something only God our Father can do.  Jesus told us how to pray.

"Our Father . . . forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us"  (Matthew 6:12).

Jesus also said,  "And do not call anyone on earth your father; for One is your Father, He who is in heaven" (Mat 23:9).

Isn't that what Catholics say, "Forgive me Father for I have sinned." 

 

 

[B/W Photodude]

On September 15, 2019 at 2:35 PM, 8thdaypriest said:

I never call it "the ceremonial law".   Some of the "forms" have changed.  Otherwise the Law remains.  "The priesthood" has been "changed" to Christ and all those who are "in Christ".   Circumcision of the flesh (prophetic) has become "circumcision of the heart", and one day will be true circumcision of our flesh, when we exchange this flesh for our new spiritual bodies.  The Law "written on stones" is now written on our hearts.  

When God created Adam (foreskin and all), He declared everything was good. But it amazes me that Christian parents in America seems to think they can improve on God's creation. There are even those who claim it is what God wants, which demonstrates they cannot even read their Bibles. It is very clear that for Jews and Greeks, circumcision no longer had any merit.

Without a lengthly dissertation on the history of circumcision, a couple of points to consider. Circumcision as given to Abraham was not original. The Egyptians were already doing it. Circumcision as practiced today is nothing like what Abraham was given. The young men of Jewish background were able to nearly pass for intact (uncircumcised) where they competed in the olympics games nude. The "sages" were upset about this and came up with a more radical damaging type of circumcision which took more than a couple of centuries to become accepted. Unfortunately, what they came up with was what the Egyptians originally performing as part of their worship of the baboon gods. So, circumcision as practiced today is part of an ancient practice of a false god worship!

This practice mostly died out except for certain religious groups until the 19th century. It revived during the hysteria of the practice of masturbation. Today, most intactivists (those fighting against this barbaric practice) consider John Harvey Kellogg the father of the  circumcision cure of masturbation. Fortunately, few connect Kellogg with the Adventist church. Kellogg had some very serious personality disturbances and it showed in his treatment of children. He recommended the circumcision of boys without anesthesia believing that the pain would have a "salutory" effect in connecting punishment with masturbation. For little girls, he recommended pouring acid over the genitals of little girls. Did I say serious personality disturbances regarding Kellogg, I meant barbaric behaviors. 

Given Kellogg's practices towards children, another more modern physician (Paul Fleiss) noted that "the pain that a baby experiences during circumcision is worse that anything the average person is likely to experience in a lifetime." The pain of circumcision is so severe that baby's are often rendered comatose (yeah, they slept thru it!) after screaming so loud that some will collapse lungs. More than 100 boys a year in the US will die from this procedure, although many medical centers will try to list another cause of death. Bleeding out is the usual cause and 2 ounces of blood loss is enough in a baby to cause circulatory collapse. Babies will never be the same after this procedure. I could go on with the list (long) of problems causing damage to babies so some doc can make a dollar (it is a billion dollar business in America with OB docs fighting with pediatricians over who gets to collect easy money for cutting the baby boy). 

The sad part of this is they are coming for the little girls. There is mounting pressure to make cutting girls acceptable like they do for boys. 

There is nothing kind or gentle about this procedure which has no medical merit. It is in truth a barbaric torture of baby boys and that is no way to welcome them into the world.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BfbbJI8esOg

[Gustave]

9 minutes ago, 8thdaypriest said:

New Testament says,  "Confess your trespasses to one another, and pray for one another, that you may be healed."  (Jam 5:16 NKJ)

Doesn't say to confess transgressions to someone especially appointed as bishop or priest. 

Main problem I have is with a Catholic priest absolving the sinner - something only God our Father can do.  Jesus told us how to pray.

"Our Father . . . forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us"  (Matthew 6:12).

Jesus also said,  "And do not call anyone on earth your father; for One is your Father, He who is in heaven" (Mat 23:9).

Isn't that what Catholics say, "Forgive me Father for I have sinned." 

 

 

Do you believe the Priests of the Old Covenant were the ones forgiving sins or do you think it was God? 

Father in the sense of "in Christ Jesus" - unless you believe Paul was incorrect when he called himself a Father to Christians.

Unless you believe that the Prophet Isaiah was incorrect when he referred his target audience to their "father Abraham". 

In fact, did you sing, as a kid the "father Abraham song"? Do you regret doing that? 

[Gregory Matthews]

On the Sabbath:  There is much in Jewish practice that relates to the Sabbath.  One might argue that such is not binding on the Christian today and still argue that the Sabbath, as given to Adam and to Eve,  has an application to Christians today.   That could include a specific time-period for the Sabbath.

[8thdaypriest]

44 minutes ago, Gustave said:

Do you believe the Priests of the Old Covenant were the ones forgiving sins or do you think it was God? 

The priest - as a TYPE of Christ, "made atonement for" the one who had broken the Covenant.   The sinner (or husband in the case of a wife or daughter who had sinned) was to confess the sins over the head of the animal to be sacrificed as the "sin offering", with his hands pressing down on the animal.  We don't know whether the priest actually "heard" the confession.  It's possible.  But the sinner was talking to God, not to the priest.  The sinner would slit the animal's throat.  The priest would dissect/clean the animal, and offer it with salt and grain, on the alter.  The priest would eat a portion also, thus taking a reminder of it into the Sanctuary. 

The priest did not say, "I absolve thee".   The OT priest was acting as a mediator, presenting the sinner's offering to God as a token of the sinner's repentance.  Jesus has presented Himself - His own life, as our "sin offering". 

Jesus is the "one Mediator" between God and man.  (I Tim 2:5).   Yes, Jesus has been given authority to on earth to forgive sins (Matt 9:6).  His Father gave Him that authority.