Posted on 04/10/2009 10:32:45 AM PDT by DouglasKC
It doesn't say that. Now it should be clear why your misinterpretations of Scripture are of no use to me.
I merely corrected your spelling.
...the Roman Catholic Church (I'm assuming that's the Catholic church you're referring to)...
Bzzzt. Wrong.
I am referring to the Catholic Church.
Or not. And that's the point -- there is no justification for your confident assertion that Christ was the One who spoke to Moses and Aaron. More likely, it was not. The nature of the Trinity is that it is three distinct persons, Who manifest God in very different ways. The Scriptures generally don't speak of the God with Whom Moses spoke, in the sense of Him being Jesus Christ of Nazareth.
But supposing for a moment that Moses did meet with the father and with Christ, do you believe that Christ and the Father would have different wills? Isn't the will of the father the will of the son?
No, their wills would be the same; but it does not follow that you properly understand what their will is.
For example, Jesus was quite clear about what defiles a person -- and it wasn't food of whatever description. For you to go back and say that "Christ" said differently in Leviticus, is to put these two passages at odds with one another. Jesus' point about the Old Testament is that the spirit of the Old Testament is what matters: the law and the prophets are summed up by "Love God and Love your neighbors as yourself." To reduce those two commandments to ritual food laws and such is precisely where Jesus found fault with the Pharisees.
A theological distinction has long been made between the moral laws of the Old Testament, and ceremonial or practical laws such as those related to foods or fabrics.
I strongly suspect that you have yourself made such distinctions between moral and ceremonial laws ... or do you actually follow the rituals described in Leviticus 1 -- the bull and the lamb, and the sprinkling of blood on the altar and the burnt offering and all that?
It's fine with me if keeping certain laws helps you to remain faithful -- I certainly won't try to talk you out of them. When you try to convince me of your position, though, I reserve the right to take exception.
Nope. The Eucharist was instituted on Passover, that much is true. But the Passover and the Eucharist are not the same thing -- and they're certainly not ceremonially the same.
There is a difference between Judaic law and scripture. Judaic law is composed of traditions and teachings that are sometimes far removed from scripture. This isn't new. Jesus himself decried the leader of Judaism for their non-scriptural tradition:
Mat 15:6 And honor not his father or his mother, he shall be free. Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition.
Mat 15:7 Ye hypocrites, well did Isaiah prophesy of you, saying,
Mat 15:8 This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoreth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me.
Mat 15:9 But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.
You should take your arrogance and modern-day Phariseeism elsewhere. We are under grace, not law. I find your attitude disgusting.
I apologize if I've done anything personally to offend you. I strive to be educational and not condemning because I believe that the vast majority of people are destined to be children of God. It's not my place to condemn.
We are under grace, but grace does not give us the freedom to break God's law. And God's laws still exist. Grace gives us forgiveness for breaking God's law. Grace gives us pardon from death for being sinners.
There's no denying that tradition has altered the clear teaching of Christ in scripture. But that doesn't make it right.
Does this include LDS, Protestants, Churches of God and other Christian groups? Are these groups part of the Catholic church?
I am referring to the Catholic Church. Is that another spelling error, or are you confused?
OOOoooookayyyyy ... now you're officially off the deep end. It is not a matter of "tradition" altering the "clear teaching of Christ."
Jesus' Institution of the Eucharist is clearly described in each of the Synoptic Gospels, and echoed by St. Paul in 1 Corinthians 11:23-26.
Jesus Christ himself drew the distinction between the old and new Covenants at that precise moment. The Passover is of the old covenant; the Eucharist is part of the new.
There seems to be no point in continuing, if you're going to try to finesse something as obvious as that.
I would offer dittos to your other observations ... the only hint we have that Peter strayed from strict observance is the scene where he sees Paul approaching and gets up from eating with gentiles and moves to be with observant Jews. That episode, btw, probably happened within fifteen years of the resurrection. Again, Gary Habermas has done superlative work as an Historian int his area.
Additionally, Peter is associating with the very observant brother James, so it is likely that Peter remained faithful to Jewish traditional observances throughout his life.
Although I wouldn't call it the eucharist, I don't disagree with you. You're not understanding my point.
I guess I must be confused. It's difficult to have a conversation if I'm unsure of your affiliation. Are you a member of the church headed by the pope with it's headquarters at the Vatican?
That's the earliest I've seen it dated. Most references I've seen put it at anywhere from 10 to 20 years. I'll be sure to study this guys work. Thanks for the reference.
Yes, the Catholic Church.
I think we're looking at it from two different perspectives. I see a great consistency between the God of the old testament and the God of the new testament. I'm not sure where you got it, but I never mis-interpreted what Christ said about what defiles a person. I did offer an alternative explanation that harmonizes the old testament with the new testament. From what I perceive, you offer an explanation that harmonizes current traditional belief and culture with the new testament.
A theological distinction has long been made between the moral laws of the Old Testament, and ceremonial or practical laws such as those related to foods or fabrics. I strongly suspect that you have yourself made such distinctions between moral and ceremonial laws ... or do you actually follow the rituals described in Leviticus 1 -- the bull and the lamb, and the sprinkling of blood on the altar and the burnt offering and all that?
You seem to be answering many arguments which I've never made and that's probably my fault for not explaining my position better.
My primary position is this: The heart of the old covenant IS the ten commandments. God always intended these to be spiritual and physical laws. However, the Israelites were a non-spiritual people. The indwelling of Gods' spirit was not generally given. This didn't occur until the formation of the new testament church on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2).
The other laws and commandments can be rightly divided by understanding that some are applicable only on a national scale. These include such things as civil and criminal penalties for prohibited behavior (think of the death penalty for certain offenses). All functions of the Levitical priesthood are not applicable to Christians because Christ is our high priest.
Heb 7:12 For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law
This is clearly explained in Hebrews.
Ditto with sacrifices. Christ the sacrifice for Christians.
The problem IS that most Christians throw out the entire bible before the book of Matthew instead of understanding that the new covenant changed specific things and didn't wipe out every utterance of God for Christians before Christ.
Great. Thanks for the clarification.
Our of curiosity would you say that everyone that is a member of the organization known as the Catholic Church has God's spirit and is a member of the body of Christ?
It's not about being on a membership roll, it's about faith and action.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.