Why does it make sense to you to think that we can follow a principle, but not the things that are examples of a principle that were given to teach us how to follow it?
In Revelation 2:20, it also speaks against eating food offered to idols, so that is not permitted in the NT either in principle or in action. What Paul did was interpret that being a prohibition from eating food directly from the altar and participating in the sacrifice, not has causing something wrong with
It should not make sense to you to think that the weaker brother is the one who is obeying what God has commanded, but rather that is the stronger brother. It is important to distinguish between what the Bible says in regard to obeying God's commands and what it says in regard to following man's opinions, where someone's conscience prevents them from doing what God as permitted them to do. In Acts 21:20-24, Paul planned to take steps to disprove false rumors that he was teaching against obeying God's law and to show that he continued to live ion obedience to it, and in Acts 24:14, he testified that he worshiped the God of our fathers, believing everything laid down by the Law and written in the Prophets, so should not be interpreted as speaking against obeying the Law or in a way that would include himself or Jesus for that matter as the weaker brother.
Everything that proceeded from the mouth of God includes everything that God said in the OT, so I don't see how you can use that to justify focusing on reading a small part of what has proceeded from the mouth of God. Likewise, I don't see how you can believe that we should live by every word that proceeds from the most of God while also believing that we shouldn't live by things that proceeded from God's mouth in the OT.
In Revelation 2:20, it also speaks against eating food offered to idols, so that is not permitted in the NT either in principle or in action. What Paul did was interpret that being a prohibition from eating food directly from the altar and participating in the sacrifice, not has causing something wrong with
It should not make sense to you to think that the weaker brother is the one who is obeying what God has commanded, but rather that is the stronger brother. It is important to distinguish between what the Bible says in regard to obeying God's commands and what it says in regard to following man's opinions, where someone's conscience prevents them from doing what God as permitted them to do. In Acts 21:20-24, Paul planned to take steps to disprove false rumors that he was teaching against obeying God's law and to show that he continued to live ion obedience to it, and in Acts 24:14, he testified that he worshiped the God of our fathers, believing everything laid down by the Law and written in the Prophets, so should not be interpreted as speaking against obeying the Law or in a way that would include himself or Jesus for that matter as the weaker brother.
Everything that proceeded from the mouth of God includes everything that God said in the OT, so I don't see how you can use that to justify focusing on reading a small part of what has proceeded from the mouth of God. Likewise, I don't see how you can believe that we should live by every word that proceeds from the most of God while also believing that we shouldn't live by things that proceeded from God's mouth in the OT.
do you know what time it is in redemptive history?