Posted on 10/20/2009 8:00:19 AM PDT by Gamecock
I know what you mean.
If new covenant believers wish to keep traditions for traditions sake, that’s fine by me. It’s not something I would do based on the testimony of the Bible and the opportunity for undermining the true religion. (BTW, I’ve noticed in recent years how these “Christ in the Passover” presentations are all the rage in liberal churches. I can’t help but wonder it is has anything to do with their downplaying of orthodox Christian teaching.)
However, when someone comes along and claims that they have a better, more pleasing way of honoring God that involves old covenant shadows, that’s to me than they have walked off the deep end.
The Jewish Law was never intended to bind Gentiles as the Gentiles were not chosen by God for that purpose.
The problem I think that Paul was dealing with is the subtlety of the error. Folks start off sounding all fine and good, until group pressure makes it clear that you are not really measuring up to God’s standard unless you do thus and so from the old covenant.
Besides, there is still the unresolved error that leads folks to think they are keeping old covenant law (say, wrt feast days), when in reality they are not. God commanded in the Law of Moses how these days were to be observed with great precision. God never gave any commands other than those. So anyone who comes along today and claims they are keeping the feast days is being dishonest, unless they are doing exactly as God told the Israelites to do it. This is where human traditions take over. Post-apostolic rabbinic notions are no replacement for the Word of God.
Just for the record, what we are talking about here are not “traditions” but “commandments”, at least that was how that were given by God to Israel. God never authorized a change of status. Even the sojourner in Israel was expected to keep them as written.
How they got retained but turned into an option is beyond me. Perhaps that is the subtlety of the error. If folks (not you) were honest in calling them commandments and acting as if they were, perhaps others would not be enticed into trying to maintain them.
“I don’t know about you, but my shadow follows me right through the church doors.”
What about a cloud of witnesses? They must cast a shadow otherwise why would you call them a cloud.
p.s. I pinged you twice to include your shadow. Don’t want to leave him out.
That's what Roman Catholics say about their seven sacraments and their prayers to dead people and their veneration of Mary and all the other rituals and observances that make them feel more pious in and of themselves.
For we commend not ourselves again unto you, but give you occasion to glory on our behalf, that ye may have somewhat to answer them which glory in appearance, and not in heart." -- 2 Corinthians 5:11-12"Knowing therefore the terror of the Lord, we persuade men; but we are made manifest unto God; and I trust also are made manifest in your consciences.
Glory in the heart of flesh, not in appearance; in the renewed conscience, not in the renewed ritual.
For not he that commendeth himself is approved, but whom the Lord commendeth." -- 2 Corinthians 10:17-18 "But he that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord.
While there is "no condemnation," Paul is clearly preaching a "better testament." Why worship according to the covenant that has passed away? Seems like a stubborn clinging to what now has been made better by Christ, for Christ, through Christ.
Israel was not redeemed out of Egypt by keeping the Torah--Israel was redeemed out of Egypt so that they might learn and keep the Torah.
The Christian and/or Messianic is not redeemed out of the world by keeping the Holy One's commandments. We are redeemed out of the world in order that way might learn and keep His commandments (Eph. 2:8-10).
All of this talk about observing the Passover or keeping kosher is somehow putting one's self "under the law" is as foolish as claiming that staying faithful to one's wife is a matter of being "under the law." We all recognize that there are commandments that we should keep as followers of the Messiah; the only debate is which ones.
And Calvinists really need to stop reading 1st Century Jewish documents and theology through the lense of 15th Century squabbles--Orthodox Judaism has always taught that salvation is by the Holy One's grace received by faith.
Shalom.
Wow, more false information about the Catholic Church posted by Dr. Eckleburg. Color me sooooo surprised.
How they got retained but turned into an option is beyond me. Perhaps that is the subtlety of the error. If folks (not you) were honest in calling them commandments and acting as if they were, perhaps others would not be enticed into trying to maintain them.
Gosh, is that ever a good point.
Paul did. Do you understand Grace and Torah better than he?
Shalom.
Did someone mention “shadow?”
Do you believe that Paul continued to sacrifice nearly three decades after the Cross?
Shalom.
Did someone mention "anti-Catholic fetish?"
Only you.
And who would admit to such a sorry malady, by name?
Amen.
IMO this practice is being signified for geopolitical reasons that have nothing to do with Scripture or Christ's kingdom on earth.
A careful reading of the last 150 years of history along with Scripture is helpful in revealing the agenda behind a return to these ancient Jewish mysteries and practices (heavy on the "mystery.")
To paraphrase Abraham in the Midrash, "Have your eyes not seen what your fingers have typed?"
The Holy One, who is not a man that He might change His mind, commanded Israel to keep the very commands you say are cast aside forever, "throughout your generations." Not, "Until the Messiah comes." Not, "Until the Second Temple Falls." Forever.
God wrote the Sabbath (and by extention, all the Feasts; cf. Lev. 23) into stone by His own finger. Yeshua commnaded us to keep even the least commandments of the Torah (Mat. 5:17-19). Paul does not have the authority to gainsay the voice of the King Himself. In fact, he took a voluntary Nazrite vow in his journey (Acts 18:18) and helped four other guys keep theirs in order to prove that he was not teaching Jews to forsake Moses, to cease circumcision, or even to cease from our traditions.
The only valid question is whether Gentile followers of the God of Israel should keep all of the commandments, or whether some are just for the Jewish people. Given that the commandments in question are mostly the fun ones (I can understand not wanting to keep kosher, but Passover?), I can't see Paul telling Gentiles, "There's no more Jew or Gentile . . . you're fellowheirs!" on the one hand but, "Don't come to Passover! No lamb or wine for you!" on the other.
It's just not consistant with his writings or ministry.
Shalom.
I suspect that was because the covenant was directly linked to the land.
(Which of course brings us back to the subject at hand :-)
“Because I was not denying that animal sacrifices pictured propitiation/expiation/atonement”
The question was not did they “picture” but were they “efficient” for the propriation/expiation for sin.
propriation-—propitiation
I would agree. And since there has been a transference from the physical land as it was known under the old covenant to the heavenly land that we now enjoy under the new covenant, one would naturally expect a similar radical change in the nature of the ordinances related to each.
One being temporal, has decayed and passed away, and one eternal in nature.
9 By faith he dwelt in the land of promise as in a foreign country, dwelling in tents with Isaac and Jacob, the heirs with him of the same promise; 10 for he waited for the city which has foundations, whose builder and maker is God. … 16 But now they desire a better, that is, a heavenly country. Therefore God is not ashamed to be called their God, for He has prepared a city for them. (Heb. 11)People who dwell in the heavenly city do not need to observe the ordinances related to the carnal one.22 But you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, to an innumerable company of angels, 23 to the general assembly and church of the firstborn who are registered in heaven, to God the Judge of all, to the spirits of just men made perfect, 24 to Jesus the Mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling that speaks better things than that of Abel. (Heb. 12)
21 Tell me, you who desire to be under the law, do you not hear the law? 22 For it is written that Abraham had two sons: the one by a bondwoman, the other by a freewoman. 23 But he who was of the bondwoman was born according to the flesh, and he of the freewoman through promise, 24 which things are symbolic. For these are the two covenants: the one from Mount Sinai which gives birth to bondage, which is Hagar-- 25 for this Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia, and corresponds to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children -- 26 but the Jerusalem above is free, which is the mother of us all. 27 For it is written: "Rejoice, O barren, You who do not bear! Break forth and shout, You who are not in labor! For the desolate has many more children Than she who has a husband." 28 Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are children of promise. 29 But, as he who was born according to the flesh then persecuted him who was born according to the Spirit, even so it is now. 30 Nevertheless what does the Scripture say? "Cast out the bondwoman and her son, for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman." 31 So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman but of the free. (Gal. 4)
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.