Picking and Choosing

Lindqvist · Aug 14, 2009

If you are easily offended or can not accept anyone doubting or questioning your beliefs stop reading now.

Still here? Okay I've been reading up on my bible and generally trying to learn more about christianity and one thing I find that I just can't wrap my head around is what seems to me the picking and choosing of what counts in the bible and what does not.

First off. there's the new covenant of Jesus. Most agree that yes, the old laws does not count anymore because of the coming of Christ. But have you read it? I mean truely looked at the words?

17 Do not think that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets. I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill. 18 For amen I say unto you, till heaven and earth pass, one jot, or one tittle shall not pass of the law, till all be fulfilled. 19 He therefore that shall break one of these least commandments, and shall so teach men, shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven. But he that shall do and teach, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I tell you, that unless your justice abound more than that of the scribes and Pharisees, you shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.

Nowhere in here can I find the whole "Yes but the laws doesn't count anymore because of Jesus"
"till heaven and earth pass" Which sounds a whole lot like the end of the world not the coming of Christ.
And even then if we are now free from the previous laws. (The commandments we are appearantly not free from I can't find this anywhere but hey I assume people know more than me.)
If we now are free from the previous laws why do people keep quoting them? Shouldn't we pretty much ignore everything that's in the OT? Fornicate away and sodomise to our hearts content?
Where exactly are these exact guides on what we shall ignore and what we shouldn't? Any help would be appriciated. And if you decided to read this despite the warning and now feel like lecturing me for advocating sin or being an infidel. Well I warned you. So you could have gone elsewhere.

Reesegirl · Aug 14, 2009

A couple of things come to mind when I read this, but first let me say something about picking and choosing. You are right: pulling out just one verse or passage and ignoring scriptures that seem to conflict with your own ideas is not only wrong, but dangerous. A great many false religions are either grounded in incomplete scriptures without considering the rest, or else on parts of the scriptures plus the writings of other men.

Now, as far as what you bring up about the law. There are two places you might want to study along side of Matthew 5. The first is the book of Galations. Consider these Scriptures:

"We who are Jews by nature, and not sinners of the Gentiles, Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified. But if, while we seek to be justified by Christ, we ourselves also are found sinners, is therefore Christ the minister of sin? God forbid. For if I build again the things which I destroyed, I make myself a transgressor. For I through the law am dead to the law, that I might live unto God. I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me. i do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain." Galations 2:15-21

"For as many as are of the works of the law are under the cures: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them. But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith." Galatians 3:10-11

Then, also consider Romans 6:1-2 "What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound? God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?"

If you are serious about learning what part the law plays in your Christian walk, I would suggest studying both of these books in their entirety. I say that simply because I believe you will find your answers there, not to push some doctrine. Quite frankly, I am human: I can be wrong, and 2 Peter 1:20 says that, "no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation." But I also know that the Bible is true, complete, and without error. Reading through it and studying it are both important, but will never be exhausted even in a lifetime. So keep reading to renew your mind and get background and context, and keep studying to find your answers...and don't get discouraged.

Lindqvist · Aug 14, 2009

Thank you I shall look this up.

Densetzu · Aug 14, 2009

It's not an easy question. Now obviously I don't think we should fornicate to our heart's content (even if that were possible, as promiscuity can't really satisfy the heart, only the body.)

On the other hand, there is a passage in Luke in which Jesus declared that the food that goes into the body cannot make the spirit unclean, that only wicked thoughts of the heart can do that. This has been the traditional Christian justification for ignoring the dietary laws.

Also note that at the time Matthew and Luke were written, there was a division in the church on whether all the Old Testament regulations still applied. Luke was in Paul's camp, and Paul taught that only faith, hope, and love mattered. The other camp, the Judaisers, wanted the Jewish laws to apply to everyone, and insisted on going as far as circumcizing gentile believers.

It's clear from the verse you cited that Matthew was in that camp (as well as the fact that Matthew refers to the 'Kingdom of God' as the 'Kingdom of Heaven', indicating that he was writing for a Jewish audience.)

Ultimately you have to make a choice on how to view the Old Testament regulation and trust that God has led you to the correct one.

Reesegirl · Aug 14, 2009

I would have to disagree with you as far as making a choice in the scriptures. 2 Peter 1:19-20 says, "We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts: Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.

Also, as far as the two camps, consider: Galations 2:11-14, Paul writes, "But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed. For before that certain came from James, he did eat with teh Gentiles: but when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them which were of the circumcision. And the other Jews dissembled likewise with him; insomuch that Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation. But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter before them all, If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of the Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?

Also consider that Peter, in 2 Peter 3:14-16, refers to Paul's writing as scriptures: "Wherefore, beloved, seeing that ye look for such things, be diligent that ye may be found of hm in peace, without spot, and blameless. And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that aree unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction."

The difference in these two camps therefore, is not a difference in doctrine, but rather in the difference in the approach that one takes in reaching out to two different groups of people.

Paul was sent to the Gentiles, which all people who are not Jews fall into. He writes "For I speak to you Gentiles, inasmuch as I am the apostle of the Gentiles, I magnify mine office" Romans 11:13.

James and Peter (also called Cephas John 1:42) and John went to the Jews (also called the circumcision), as found in Galatians 2:9 "And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision."

This difference in approach was necessary mostly because the Jews had the oracles of God, and the Gentiles did not. "What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision? Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God." Romans 3:1-2

"For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom: But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness; But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God." I Corinthians 1:22-24

loveschild · Aug 14, 2009

The old testament was for the Jews. The new testament for all man kind. Jesus said the commandments to obey except the sabbath. The new T church was the first day of the week Sunday. The blood of Jesus was the start of the new T. We don't burn animals any more. All of the bible is still very important because it shows us when we follow God we are blessed and when we don't we get cursed. The old they could only eat cetain things the new we can eat what ever. The old they lived under law, the new we live under grace. The free gift from Jesus by his blood that he shed for us. When Jesus comes it will be the end of the world. He will take us to heaven and the world will be without the holy spirit and christians won't be here to pray. It will be very sad for anyone who is still on the earth. Some will still turn to God thr the hell they are in. After the trib Jesus will come back again with us and it will be a new world here on earth with him as our king forever. God bless, Love

Ryan1976 · Aug 14, 2009

lol - nice disclaimer.

From a Catholic perspective (both Orthodox and Roman), we reject Sola Scriptura "scripture alone" because it winds up throwing Tradition out the window and replacing it with other traditions/teachings. Corporate interpretation of the bible, through the body of Christ, that is, through the Church is how most Catholics "interpret" the bible.

For an excellent article on how Orthodox read the bible CLICKER-ROO

Keeps Catholics from splintering into a buh-jillion denominations.

However, there are many *ways in which people and groups of people approach the bible. If you would like to learn about how different denominations/individuals approach the bible be prepared to call yer ophthalmologist. You could read yer eyes out. You could get a brain cramp too. It's a heady endeavor.

First off. there's the new covenant of Jesus. Most agree that yes, the old laws does not count anymore because of the coming of Christ. But have you read it? I mean truely looked at the words?

Yeah, you probably hear people say all kinds of things about the Old Testament, the law and Tradition and then subsequently Pharisees etc.

Here are a few interesting verses to take note of:

Matthew 23:1-3 (New International Version)

1Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples: 2"The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat. 3So you must obey them and do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach.

1 Timothy 1:8
We know that the law is good if one uses it properly.

2 Thessalonians 2:15
So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught, whether by word of mouth or by letter from us.

The thing is, Moses seat was part of Tradition. The Jews were and are corporate.

Often times, Jesus was doing as many rabbis do (though Jesus is God - don't get it twisted now) and simply putting emphases on a certain part of the law which then shed light on how we should approach, not only the law, but our walk with God.

Leviticus 19:18
" 'Do not seek revenge or bear a grudge against one of your people, but love your neighbor as yourself. I am the LORD.

Sound familiar?

The law with its punishments were externals of what God promised to establish internally; that is to say, because Jesus had not yet come, become a curse for us and triumphed over death, the law stood in as a shadow of the realities of what was yet to be established and restored: communion with God through His Son's perfect sacrifice.

Hebrews 10:1-3 (New International Version)

1The law is only a shadow of the good things that are coming—not the realities themselves. For this reason it can never, by the same sacrifices repeated endlessly year after year, make perfect those who draw near to worship. 2If it could, would they not have stopped being offered?

Deuteronomy 21:23
you must not leave his body on the tree overnight. Be sure to bury him that same day, because anyone who is hung on a tree is under God's curse.

Galatians 3:13
Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us, for it is written: "Cursed is everyone who is hung on a tree."

My advice to you is try to understand the resurrection because what happens is the resurrection will shed light on the law. Dying to self, putting on Christ, baptism, our own private Golgotha/also the womb from which we are born anew, etc. being found IN Christ. All this is what allows us to escape many of the externals of the law. If we are dead, then what power does the law have over us?

We have to remember that (John 3) all things through him did happen, and without him happened not even one thing that hath happened. Jesus was crucified and laid down his life so in him, all of existence was also crucified. Because he is life, the author of life! anything outside of Christ is dead. So, being found in him is key.

So, pray for wisdom on the resurrection. You'll bump into the law from a new direction.

When the NT refers to scripture, it's referring to the OT. People often forget the following verse which is pretty much the backbone of interpretation in regards to interpretation:

Luke 24:27
And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he (Jesus) explained to them what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself.

Do you think that the Apostles kept secret what Jesus explained to them about the Old Testament, the law etc. and how it all pointed to him??? No! That's why a Catholic will often say that The Church is the deposit of the faith. There are teachings/interpretations/traditions that are handed down from Jesus to the Apostles to the Church that takes a lot of guess-work out of "interpretation", private or denominationally (don't think that's a wurd

)

The Church?

For some Orthodox Church history and doctrine - click (carpal tunnel here we come)

God bless,
He IS risen!

Ryan1976 · Aug 14, 2009

Also interesting! In regards to the relationship of Tradition and Scripture.

click - JEWISH AND CHRISTIAN ORTHODOX IN DIALOGUE - click

Ryan1976 · Aug 14, 2009

Densetzu said:

That's why we have councils - read Acts.

These councils not only define what the Trinity is not but also canonized Holy Scripture. The councils are a continuation of men being led by the Holy Spirit to determine solutions to problems such as they faced when it came to the circumcision sect. This is why it is so vital to recognize the Holy Spirit having acted throughout human history and use that in relation to scripture so that we won't superimpose modernity onto an ancient text or vice versa. Safeguards us from private interpretation.

It's always a matter of Trusting God and not just as an individual but also as a corporate body.

God bless

Thaddaeus · Aug 14, 2009

Ryan1976 said:

I am not debating because you said you were catholic, but for what you said Because I have always been told by others even including Catholics that the reason you all throw out sola scriptura is because the pope has the final authority, you mean you guys actual let lay persons help intrepret scriptures I never knew that??

Ryan1976 · Aug 14, 2009

Thaddaeus said:

Hm, Orthodox Catholic don't have the Pope. In regards to lay people interpreting scripture, sure. It's just that the litmus is that it must be in line with what Orthodox folks have believed all the way back to the Apostles. So, if someone comes up with something novel, they have a boatload of history to look back on. The checks and balances kind of weed out any would be person that might have some niche/novel interpretation.

I think for the Roman Catholics, they have a much more "progressive" approach. They kind of, from my impression anyway, build up. Things filter up and into the Roman SEE/Pope where they yay or neigh stuff. I don't really know how that system works other than it is, like Orthodox, Corporate and uses Tradition to establish continuity.

But yah, we have bible studies and book groups and we get together and just talk bible and stuff and often times the Priest isn't even around. One of the lay persons is teaching our Monday night study on Ignatius which is purty cool. Lots of bible and history. Reading Ignatius is like trying to figure out what bible verse he's referring to when he says pretty much everything he says. Ignatius quotes a lot of Paul (but you'd think he'd quote John more since he studied under him and knew him and all)

Sola Scriptura has more to do with the lack of Tradition and an abundance of personal rights - to me anyway. A doctrine that seems to give everyone the right to believe whatever they interpret the scriptures to mean. Don't get me wrong, no sect/denomination is immune to disagreement and lack of unity in some regards but if you look at protestantism as a whole - if you just survey all the posts on this forum example - you have a zillion and one interpretations out there. Soon as someone disagrees a new denomination is born.

*shrug

God bless

Densetzu · Aug 14, 2009

The problem is, most Protestants are inherently hostile to 'church tradition' because of how Tradition was corrupted in the Middle Ages. This is unfortunate, and it's something you really do have to work around when trying to figure out to the truth.

Ryan1976 · Aug 15, 2009

Densetzu said:

Hm. Are you referring to something in particular? Are you referring to Roman Catholicism or to both Orthodox Catholics and Roman Catholics?

What was corrupted and where and what isn't corrupted? Which pieces of Tradition survived?

Did this happen both in Roman Catholicism and Orthodox Catholicism simultaneously?

Cup-of-Ruin · Aug 15, 2009

Just read the 'Book of Hebrews' as it explains quite clearly how and why Jesus Christ fulfills Mosaic law of the old covenant.

Densetzu · Aug 15, 2009

Ryan1976 said:

I'm talking about stuff like INdulgences and Papal Infalibility--tradition wasn't generally considered a good thing before the Roman Catholic/Eastern Orthodox split, but it gradually got so bad that Martin Luther nailed 95 Theses to a church door.

Protestants, being the theological descendants of Martin Luthor's protest, have probably unnessesarily lumped in a lot of legitimate Church Tradition from the pre-Roman Catholic era in with the abuse of tradition that was rampant in the medieval times.

MahogonySnail · Aug 15, 2009

I like Barnes's interpretation of :

Mat 5:20
Your righteousness - Your holiness; your views of the nature of righteousness, and your conduct and lives. Unless you are more holy than they are, you cannot be saved.
Shall exceed - Shall excel, or abound more. The righteousness of true Christians is seated in the heart, and is therefore genuine. Jesus means that unless they had more real holiness of character than the scribes and Pharisees, they could not be saved.
The righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees - See the notes at Mat_3:7. Their righteousness consisted in outward observances of the ceremonial and traditional law. They offered sacrifices, fasted often. prayed much, were punctilious about ablutions, and tithes, and the ceremonies of religion, but neglected justice, truth, purity, and holiness of heart. See Mat. 23:13-33. The righteousness that Jesus required in his kingdom was purity, chastity, honesty, temperance, the fear of God, and the love of man. It is pure, eternal, reaching the motives, and making the life holy.
The kingdom of heaven - See the notes at Mat_3:2. Shall not be a suitable subject of his kingdom here, or saved in the world to come.

So in this respect it is pretty easy for a Christian to have their righteousness exceed the scribes and Pharisees, simply by believing , Christ becomes our righteousness:

Php 3:9 and be completely united with him. I no longer have a righteousness of my own, the kind that is gained by obeying the Law. I now have the righteousness that is given through faith in Christ, the righteousness that comes from God and is based on faith.

2Co 5:21 Christ was without sin, but for our sake God made him share our sin in order that in union with him we might share the righteousness of God.

This was even prophesied back in the old testament:

Jer 33:15 In those days, and at that time, I will cause the Branch of righteousness to grow up to David. And He shall do judgment and righteousness in the land.
Jer 33:16 In those days Judah shall be saved, and Jerusalem shall dwell safely. And this is the name with which she shall be called, JEHOVAH OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS.

DinoDillinger · Aug 16, 2009

loveschild said:

The old testament was for the Jews. The new testament for all man kind. Jesus said the commandments to obey except the sabbath. The new T church was the first day of the week Sunday. The blood of Jesus was the start of the new T. We don't burn animals any more. All of the bible is still very important because it shows us when we follow God we are blessed and when we don't we get cursed. The old they could only eat cetain things the new we can eat what ever. The old they lived under law, the new we live under grace. The free gift from Jesus by his blood that he shed for us. When Jesus comes it will be the end of the world. He will take us to heaven and the world will be without the holy spirit and christians won't be here to pray. It will be very sad for anyone who is still on the earth. Some will still turn to God thr the hell they are in. After the trib Jesus will come back again with us and it will be a new world here on earth with him as our king forever. God bless, Love

where did Jesus say to not obey the Sabbath? the Sabbath was made for man as in a blessing (to rest).

HollyC · Aug 16, 2009

Ryan1976 said:

I'm glad your setting things straight. Most people don't realize that there are sects within the Catholic Church.

Only the Roman Catholics follow the Pope. The other sects, Catholic and Orthodox, do not follow the Pope. There is a larger participation of the Lay people in the masses and groups within the Church.

Alot depends upon the geography of the person.

Ryan1976 · Aug 17, 2009

I'm talking about stuff like INdulgences and Papal Infalibility--

Oh, those were doctrines that came about mucho later. After the council of Trent they made the selling of indulgences illegal (if I remember). Indulgences and most of the stuff Luther complained against (and his complaints are often misunderstood) were abuses and more often than not had little to do with Tradition.

Was or wasn't? I don't know of any Christian prior to the mid-fifteenth century that rejected Tradition. And the Reformers didn't toss out all Tradition. The blind rejection of all Tradition (though it's impossible to escape unless you ignore the pink elephant) is a much more recent mutation. Sola Scriptura has mutated as well. The original form (though it failed miserably - imo) was hoped to have been a unifier not a divider. But even Luther, Zwingli and Calvin couldn't agree because of their "sola" interpretations varied.

Nowadays, Sola Scriptura has been reduced to a general mindset. Whatever it is we do we had better justify doing it by backing it up with some bible verses. Doesn't have to be right so long as it sounds right which is easy enough to do if you find the right verses. What's more because I have my sola fide, it doesn't really matter because so does my protestant brother who doesn't have a theology anything like my own. We're like doctrinal snowflakes. No two are the same.

Toss out Tradition and suddenly you have 50,000 denominations and growing. Not to mention I bet you'd be hard pressed to find any two individuals within the same church that agreed across the board. Imagine what 100 years from now is going to look like. If Luther, Calvin, Wesley, Zwingli (who did a ton of damage but no one seems to mention him), returned to check out the fruits of their labor, survey the thousands upon thousands of denominations (including their own which they would disown), the 95 theses and reformation would sound like a minor disagreement compared to the fury they'd unleash (Luther was a notorious hothead, plus they headed bloody religious revolutions that included killing so-called 'heretics').

Some protestants often point at Roman Catholicism and their present doctrines and their controversial history but seem to have no ability to look in the mirror. There's a whole lot of unsound doctrine in protestantism. They say it doesn't matter because they have the Faith Alone! war-cry but they never seem to offer it to the Catholics. And in regards to history, the blind eye to tradition mindset often makes some of them believe that their beliefs just popped out of the bible as if they were there all along. Ask someone who believes in rapture if they know who John Nelson Darby is or someone that sees communion as merely symbolic who Zwingli is. If you're gentle with them, you won't let them know that it's just a few of their Church Fathers and like good catholics, have passed down the Darby, Zwingli etc. traditions to their children and children's childrens. And if those traditions and teachings are false, then their of men and not the godly kind...

Agree. Plus there's a lot of good stuff in Roman Catholicism (stuff that God established) that is missing in a lot of protestant churches, if not most.

(I always write pretty much what I'm thinking and then look it over and realize that I'm a bit passionate about the whole Catholic vs Protestant issue. My wife looked over a few of my posts and said, "I'm surprised anyone even replies to you.". LOL. I told her that they rarely do. Can't blame ya.

)

I do write this out of love. I think we should all look at our own denominations/sects and selves and try our best to iron out whatever separates us from Him and each other. But it's not looking likely...

........ phew

God bless!

Ryan1976 · Aug 17, 2009

Yeah, admittedly, there are some regions where it would be difficult for me to attend an Orthodox Church because of politics, cultural "norms" etc. Region plays a big role in that stuff. It's kind of interesting to look at the bible belt in relation to places like Boston. A West Virginian Pentecostal Church in relation to a Baptist Church in Harlem. Agree.

Picking and Choosing

Lindqvist

Guest

Reesegirl

Guest

Lindqvist

Guest

Banned

Reesegirl

Guest

Banned

Banned

Banned

Banned

Banned

Banned

Banned

Banned

Cup-of-Ruin

Guest

Banned

Banned

Senior Member

HollyC

Guest

Banned

Banned