Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: BenKenobi
"“You shall have no other gods besides me” is something you don’t have to follow because it was a command given to Abraham?"

I take it you meant Moses, not Abraham. But, the question is still a good one. This quote originates in the Decalogue, the so-called ten commandments given to Israel as a precursor to the entire Mosaic Law. I trust that you have read Jesus' commentary on these requirement as He developed their full weight (Matt. 5 - 8). The entire purpose of the Law was to drive Israel to its knees to say, "Now I see, I do not, cannot, will not obey. If you do not reach inside and save us, we have no hope." But, Israel began to formulate ways to believe they were actually obeying these things.

Notice, Jesus amplifies the "Thou shalt not commit adultery" to the point where even a glance at a woman is the equivalent of sinning. And, "If your right eye causes you to stumble..." well, you know the rest. He is driving Israel to cry, "Then what can we do?" Read the rich young ruler's episode. Even the disciples say, "Well then who can be saved?" Jesus' answer, "With man it is impossible, but with God it is possible." Catch the direction of the argument? The Law corners us until we say, "Help, I am evil and only you are holy." Even that cry is managed by God in those whom He is rescuing.

You probably don't actually attemtpt to do most of the so-called "commands" you have read in the Scriptures. You are not building an ark (I knew that), you are not marching around Jericho, you are not going home from Babylon, you are not naming the animals, you are not coming down from a tree. You intuitively know something/someone else is involved. That comes from hermeneutics. I am just saying pay attention to the audience.

But, yes, the devotion to the God of Israel, alone, is set out for us non-Jewish believers in the NT letters written specifically to us. Thus, I am not obeying the Exodus passage, or the Deut. passage, but I am obeyeing the same thing from my own (and your own) mail.

79 posted on 10/26/2011 3:30:04 PM PDT by Dutchboy88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies ]


To: Dutchboy88

“You probably don’t actually attemtpt to do most of the so-called “commands” you have read in the Scriptures.”

The problem with your argument is that Jesus does go back and refer to “be fruitful and multiply” in the same way that he does the decalogue.

So we are still bound to this command given to Adam today, just as we are bound to the commands given to Moses.

Jesus talks about how “the two become one flesh, such that they are neither two, but one.” Contraception impairs this bond, because you are trying to get the sex without the true union. You are holding back.

The result of contraception has been very obvious. If sex is for fun, and pleasure only, then there is nothing wrong with other forms of sex that are not restricted to man and woman. See, this is the point. Men and women are made for each other. This is why sex works the way that they do. To argue that sex should be between a man and a woman, is to argue for their fruitfulness.

You cannot tear the two apart. When you do, you get homosexuality.

Blessings,


81 posted on 10/26/2011 3:44:44 PM PDT by BenKenobi (Honkeys for Herman! 10 percent is enough for God; 9 percent is enough for government)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson