What Laws are still valid to christians
- Thread starter vic1980
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
The way I understand it is that Christ was one with the Father from the creation of the world. Then he became a human being and was under the law. He obeyed the law perfectly, as far as I can tell, so that he could be the perfect sacrifice. When he was resurrected I believe he was eventually translated into Heaven. So what we have to ask ourselves is do the earthly laws apply to the heavenly realm? Do they apply to God? Or were they made for Man? What is their proper application? This is my only concern, as I believe the law is still profitable for teaching and for training in righteousness (2 Timothy 3:16-17). Make no mistake. I believe we, as limited and sinful human beings, would do well to meditate on and observe what David calls righteous rules (Psalm 119). It only makes sense. 
C
And God said in the vision "Do not call anything impure that God has made clean" and Peter still wouldn't listen. We all know that snakes, rats, roaches and for that matter monkeys, dogs, cats even feces are all clean, don't we?
Jokes aside. one has to wonder why god forbade his beloved Israelites to eat pork, if pork is that great.
Jokes aside. one has to wonder why god forbade his beloved Israelites to eat pork, if pork is that great.
The "Mosaic Law" - the law that was given to Moses directly from God's mouth - applied to human beings. When Christ became human he was "born under the law" and therefore subject to it. Currently I do not believe he is any longer subject to it. But human beings should obey it if they desire to live in a holy fashion. Saying that the law has been set aside in this case is like saying the law of ritual purification regarding child birth has been set aside for a man. The law never applied to the man - only to women, so of course it's set aside in his case. However, that does not abolish the law since it still carries its proper application.[/QUOTE]
If they desire to live in a holy fashion, should human beings obey the laws requiring animal sacrifices,
or have they been set aside (Heb 7:18-19)?
If they desire to live in a holy fashion, should human beings obey the laws requiring animal sacrifices,
or have they been set aside (Heb 7:18-19)?
Last edited:
I addressed that here...
http://christianchat.com/bible-disc...ws-still-valid-christians-32.html#post1214161
http://christianchat.com/bible-disc...ws-still-valid-christians-32.html#post1214161
E
No, What I know is you never listen to a thing anyone says.
If you did, You would Know I believe the law. As origionally intended. Is still in complete effect today. It still does what it was supposed to.
But again, Since you never listen to anyone, You would I guess not know I believe this, even though I have said it MANY times.
If you did, You would Know I believe the law. As origionally intended. Is still in complete effect today. It still does what it was supposed to.
But again, Since you never listen to anyone, You would I guess not know I believe this, even though I have said it MANY times.
C
To me 1 Cor 13:4-13 is the way to, or to use, the gifts of the Holy Spirit which the best is prophecy which is also the worst. I looked at Isaiah and Jeremiah. I looked around and saw what happens to those with a different "opinion" in the real world and in cyberspace. It takes more than love thy neighbour. If that's what you are saying then thanks, not now. Otherwise kindly clarify. Thanks
The law received by the people was the whole Mosaic law, not just the laws for the priesthood.
Note, first of all, that the law was based on the Levitical priesthood, was subject to the Levitical
priesthood for its administration, therefore, the law received by the people had to be changed
because the priesthood on which it was based was set aside, and replaced with the priesthood
in the order of Melchizedek.
Then secondly, note vv. 18-19 below:
Was it obedience just to the laws regarding the priesthood that was supposed to make the people
perfect, or was it obedience to the law that was supposed to make the people perfect?
Which law was weak and unprofitable to make righteous?
It was all of the law, not just the laws regarding the priesthood.
The law that was set aside was the law that was weak and unprofitable to make righteous,
which was the whole Mosaic law.
'Tis you who is not reading Heb 7:18-19 in context.
Note, first of all, that the law was based on the Levitical priesthood, was subject to the Levitical
priesthood for its administration, therefore, the law received by the people had to be changed
because the priesthood on which it was based was set aside, and replaced with the priesthood
in the order of Melchizedek.
Then secondly, note vv. 18-19 below:
Was it obedience just to the laws regarding the priesthood that was supposed to make the people
perfect, or was it obedience to the law that was supposed to make the people perfect?
Which law was weak and unprofitable to make righteous?
It was all of the law, not just the laws regarding the priesthood.
The law that was set aside was the law that was weak and unprofitable to make righteous,
which was the whole Mosaic law.
'Tis you who is not reading Heb 7:18-19 in context.
Last edited:
The way I understand it is that Christ was one with the Father from the creation of the world. Then he became a human being and was under the law. He obeyed the law perfectly, as far as I can tell, so that he could be the perfect sacrifice. When he was resurrected I believe he was eventually translated into Heaven. So what we have to ask ourselves is do the earthly laws apply to the heavenly realm? Do they apply to God? Or were they made for Man? What is their proper application? This is my only concern, as I believe the law is still profitable for teaching and for training in righteousness (2 Timothy 3:16-17). Make no mistake. I believe we, as limited and sinful human beings, would do well to meditate on and observe what David calls righteous rules (Psalm 119). It only makes sense.
Does that mean we must observe all of it, including the requirements for animal sacrifices?
If the bolded above are going to be hard for you to give up in your diet, don't worry; they're gross, but they won't make you unholy.
Jokes aside. Peter had been conditioned to not eat unclean animals all of his life. Kind of a hard habit to break, especially when he was immersed in a culture that observed the same habits religiously.
Jokes aside. Peter had been conditioned to not eat unclean animals all of his life. Kind of a hard habit to break, especially when he was immersed in a culture that observed the same habits religiously.
C
I trust you are talking from experience.
Yet another joke aside...
I have reasons to list feces because they are not food. Normal person would never consider them food. So did the writer in the old testament regarding the unclean - they were never considered food. They were described as detestable (yes, gross in modern English) and unclean, period.
Of course the translators have managed to put in the word "food" in many translations. Do we trust the translators or the original?
Did Jesus say all animals clean or did he say all food clean and what was it about in the context?
Yes it was big inconvenience to give up habits. Yes many say it does not affect our salvation. It's just disobedience. Not a big deal. But if "scientific" researches shown certain kinds of "food" not good for health, the health fleaks follow them like the Bible - because it's scientific afterall.
Yet another joke aside...
I have reasons to list feces because they are not food. Normal person would never consider them food. So did the writer in the old testament regarding the unclean - they were never considered food. They were described as detestable (yes, gross in modern English) and unclean, period.
Of course the translators have managed to put in the word "food" in many translations. Do we trust the translators or the original?
Did Jesus say all animals clean or did he say all food clean and what was it about in the context?
Yes it was big inconvenience to give up habits. Yes many say it does not affect our salvation. It's just disobedience. Not a big deal. But if "scientific" researches shown certain kinds of "food" not good for health, the health fleaks follow them like the Bible - because it's scientific afterall.
Last edited by a moderator:
Authoritative revelation to the Church ended with the apostles.
They were written to the Church, not to unbelievers.
What do you mean by the quote.
No he did not.
"We must pay more careful attention, therefore, to what we have heard, so that we do not drift away."
"What we have heard" is the message of the gospel; i.e., the person Christ as the God-man and his work
on the cross, from which greater revelation given through the Son (Heb 1:1-2) we must not "drift away."
Yes, Heb 2:6-8 is from the OT.
Yes, the writer of Hebrews in 2:12 puts the words of Ps 22:22 in the mouth of the Messiah.
Yes, in 2:13 the writer puts the words of Is 8:17-18 in the mouth of the Messiah.
Why? Because the writer of Hebrews was showing that Jesus is the fulfillment of Is 8:17-18:
Of Isa 8:17 - Jesus overcame by his personal faith in God's promises, which makes him the author
and finisher of our faith (Heb 12:2).
Of Isa 8:18 - the Father's children are given to the Son to be his brothers (Heb 7:11).
Boot strapping turns out again not to be good hermeneutics.
They were written to the Church, not to unbelievers.
What do you mean by the quote.
No he did not.
"We must pay more careful attention, therefore, to what we have heard, so that we do not drift away."
"What we have heard" is the message of the gospel; i.e., the person Christ as the God-man and his work
on the cross, from which greater revelation given through the Son (Heb 1:1-2) we must not "drift away."
Yes, Heb 2:6-8 is from the OT.
Yes, the writer of Hebrews in 2:12 puts the words of Ps 22:22 in the mouth of the Messiah.
Yes, in 2:13 the writer puts the words of Is 8:17-18 in the mouth of the Messiah.
Why? Because the writer of Hebrews was showing that Jesus is the fulfillment of Is 8:17-18:
Of Isa 8:17 - Jesus overcame by his personal faith in God's promises, which makes him the author
and finisher of our faith (Heb 12:2).
Of Isa 8:18 - the Father's children are given to the Son to be his brothers (Heb 7:11).
Boot strapping turns out again not to be good hermeneutics.
Last edited: