Posted on 03/30/2002 7:53:37 PM PST by malakhi
| Statesmen may plan and speculate for liberty, but it is religion and morality alone which can establish the principles upon which freedom can securely stand. The only foundation of a free constitution is pure virtue. - John Adams |
Then why have communion? Why have baptism? I'm sure you would agree that these things are an indication, a sign, of what is in our hearts.
Circumcision is the basis, the "baptism" of the Old Covenant. If we can accept, and the NT is very clear here, that circumcision is not required, then it follows that the rest of the ceremonial aspects also are not required.
Circumcision is still a valid concept except scripture clearly changed it to a circumcision of the heart.
As for whether Kosher eating is our future in Heaven, I don't think this will be the case. Frankly, I'm with the animal nuts on this one -- I can't see slaughter being part of Heaven. One thing a Catholic understands fully is that God feeds us of Himself. I won't need anything else, be it kosher hot dog or pulled pork sandwich.
Animal offering are prophesized in a milleniel kingdom. The reasons are known only to God. Perhaps as a reminder of Christ's sacrifice. Perhaps as an object lesson in what sacrifice is. Surely it won't be wasted. It will be used as food.
Sure. And as I indicate, the keeping kosher is a metaphor for the later obedience to God, not its ultimate expression.
Not sure I follow here. But it is an expression of obedience to God while we're here on earth.
And the coming of Jesus didn't change any of this? The giving of the Law at Sinai? It's all been downhill?
As I've said there have been people throughout the ages that have received revelations from God, but it always lapses back into apostasy. Look at Israel in the OT. Constant falling away and turning to idolatry despite having direct contact with God himself. Look at the new testament when it refers to false prophets creeping into the church so quickly.
Here we see the great chasm between us. Those whose focus is on the individual and the individual only versus those who see a corporate body of Christianity which has lived and grown throughout the last two millennia.
Here are the conditions when Christ returns:
Mat 24:5 For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many.
Mat 24:11 And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many.
Rev 12:9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.
2 Timothy Chapter 3 is also a good description.
Christ returns to save us from ourselves.
This is interesting, and typical, "Davespeak". Which "corporate body of Christianity" has lived and grown throughout the last two millennia, in relative terms, and in what way?
First, I apologize for the redundancy of "coporate body."
Second, if speaking of Christianity as a body of believers who live and grow is "Davespeak," there must be a lot of Dave's out there.
Third, obviously, only the Catholics, Orthodox, and assorted Copts and one-offs qualify as being around for 2000 years.
My overall point to Doug and others is that there are two schools of thought: one that there is a school of thought and the other that there is not.
Some people believe that Christians were given something to treasure and pass on, and that as a collective body we have, generally, increased our understanding of the Truth we were originally given. There is a Body of Truth, Wisdom, and Understanding that is transmitted through the ages.
Other people believe that, more or less, each individual Christian starts from the same place, contemplating the same static written text. There is no growth, there is no generation after generation building up understanding.
There is only each individual and the Book.
SD
Then why have communion? Why have baptism? I'm sure you would agree that these things are an indication, a sign, of what is in our hearts.
Yes, they are signs (and much more) of the New Covenant. It is for this reason we do them. People under the Old Covenant did OC things -- we do NC things. The Old things were but a foretaste, a shadow of what was to come.
To continue to do them is to act as if the New Covenant had not happened.
Things which tell of a coming Savior, need not happen once the Savior has come. Things which set apart one race, need not happen now that all are one.
Circumcision is the basis, the "baptism" of the Old Covenant. If we can accept, and the NT is very clear here, that circumcision is not required, then it follows that the rest of the ceremonial aspects also are not required.
Circumcision is still a valid concept except scripture clearly changed it to a circumcision of the heart.
Well, yes. Lopping off one's foreskin is a very crude and literal way to dedicate oneself to the Lord. As was avoiding unclean items or actions.
Now we are called to a spiritual cleanliness that is not affected by the foods we eat, but our actions toward others and God.
As for whether Kosher eating is our future in Heaven, I don't think this will be the case. Frankly, I'm with the animal nuts on this one -- I can't see slaughter being part of Heaven. One thing a Catholic understands fully is that God feeds us of Himself. I won't need anything else, be it kosher hot dog or pulled pork sandwich.
Animal offering are prophesized in a milleniel kingdom. The reasons are known only to God. Perhaps as a reminder of Christ's sacrifice. Perhaps as an object lesson in what sacrifice is. Surely it won't be wasted. It will be used as food.
I'm not sure where you are getting this from. Of coruse, I don't believe in any millennial stuff anyway. Where do you see animal sacrifice returning?
The only sacrific in Heaven is the eternal one of the Lamb.
Sure. And as I indicate, the keeping kosher is a metaphor for the later obedience to God, not its ultimate expression.
Not sure I follow here. But it is an expression of obedience to God while we're here on earth.
For a person under the Old Covenant, sure. I'm not. Like the animals "clean" and "unclean," God seperated His people out from the others for a time. That time has passed.
We are no longer known by the shunning of the pork, but in the breaking of the bread. You don't have to be Jewish to be Christian.
SD
SD
This concept of "increased understanding" has led, IMO, to "invention", the invention of such things as Papal Infallibility, Bodily Assumption, and Real Presence.
Though I don't accept Perpetual Virginity as a known truth, I recognize it, or the converse, can't be proven from Scripture; therefore, I won't lump it in with the "inventions".
I don't feel your "increased understanding/inventions" will affect your potential salvation, but I do think it unnecessarily complicates your life.
The Bible is sufficient!
Not a bad idea. After the chaos at my folks' this year (and now the colds that my girls picked up from a cousin that should not have been there), I think we might give your idea some serious consideration next year.
If the body of believers has not grown in a helpful way, then they have grown in a way that harms understanding. Or in a way that they are totally irrelevant.
I don't agree with either one of those. Jesus started a Church for a reason, and it wasn't just so the NT could get written.
This concept of "increased understanding" has led, IMO, to "invention", the invention of such things as Papal Infallibility, Bodily Assumption, and Real Presence.
Indeed, it is your opinion that development is "invention." Your results may vary, depending on how much you insist upon doing everything for yourself.
SD
With small group it is also unnecessary to do an entire turkey. A few years back we did a small dinner using a bonelesss turkey breast, which we roasted all day in a crock pot. It was the best, moistest turkey I'd ever had.
SD
I think this is a false dichotomy, Dave. You've created only two categories which probably doesn't accurately reflect the diversity of thought on either side. I don't believe that there's only an individual and a Book. I believe that there is a progressive nature to revelation. And I believe that the history of Christianity has much for us to learn and treasure. But I do not believe that the progressive revelation will ever be self-contradictory (which you do not believe either). And it is here that we find our disputes with various branches of Christianity. I disagree with some Catholic views which they would simply characterize as development of doctrine, or the progressive nature of revelation (the liberals here take this to the next level with Process Theology).
I think to paint us Proddies as simply believing in a static text and the individual is hyperbolic. It would seem to be evidence of a poor understanding of Protestantism's view of Scripture and the church and their role in the life of the believer.
Yup. Couldn't agree more.
To continue to do them is to act as if the New Covenant had not happened.
We emulate Christ and follow scripture when laws and principles fall outside of the old and new covenants.
Things which tell of a coming Savior, need not happen once the Savior has come. Things which set apart one race, need not happen now that all are one.
Yah, but he's coming back. And Christians are certainly set apart by God from others. That's what sanctification is.
Now we are called to a spiritual cleanliness that is not affected by the foods we eat, but our actions toward others and God.
Well yeah, but physical lessons teach spiritual principles. Discernment of clean and unclean is still a lesson that people need to learn. Not all spirits are of God.
I'm not sure where you are getting this from. Of coruse, I don't believe in any millennial stuff anyway. Where do you see animal sacrifice returning?
Ezekiel 46 prophesizes this...
The only sacrific in Heaven is the eternal one of the Lamb.
In the eternal kingdom true. Apparently animal sacrifices still play a role not in the earthly kingdom.
We are no longer known by the shunning of the pork, but in the breaking of the bread. You don't have to be Jewish to be Christian.
I don't follow Jewish dietary laws. Let me ask you this: Catholics for a long time didn't eat meat on Fridays. Maybe some still don't. Why was this?
Ezekiel chapters 40-48.
With small group it is also unnecessary to do an entire turkey. A few years back we did a small dinner using a bonelesss turkey breast, which we roasted all day in a crock pot. It was the best, moistest turkey I'd ever had.
We figured that we did enough with the extended family at other holidays!
We roasted a whole turkey, a 10 pounder. You can get them even smaller, 7-9 pounds. It took only 2 1/2 hours to roast, and there was ample meat for all of us, plus leftovers for a few days worth of turkey sandwiches. Yum!
It's certainly a stark statement, a statement of extremes. But I don't think it's false. There is a fundamental difference between the two.
You've created only two categories which probably doesn't accurately reflect the diversity of thought on either side. I don't believe that there's only an individual and a Book. I believe that there is a progressive nature to revelation. And I believe that the history of Christianity has much for us to learn and treasure. But I do not believe that the progressive revelation will ever be self-contradictory (which you do not believe either).
Correct, but you are not one of the normal Protestant types one finds around here. Remember, you are the one who recognizes that he views Scripture through "Protestant lenses."
Regardless, even you would, I think, assent to the following. If you find through prayer and study that your "church" is at odds with your view of Scripture, you are compelled to follow your internal voice, not your church.
A Catholic believes the Church is the authoritative interpreter of Scripture. A Protestant believes that the Holy Spirit will personally interpret Scripture authroritatively for him.
Isn't this a fundamental difference? At the end of the day Protestants have and do just abandon the "the history of Christianity [which] has much for [them] to learn and treasure" and begin their own traditions and history.
I think to paint us Proddies as simply believing in a static text and the individual is hyperbolic. It would seem to be evidence of a poor understanding of Protestantism's view of Scripture and the church and their role in the life of the believer.
Then perhaps you have to explain it to me better. What have I said above that is incorrect? I am not saying that, necessarily, each individual Protestant is shucking the role of his church, that each individual Protestant is developing his own new theology.
But isn't that what Protestantism celebrates? What on earth is "Sola Scriptura" if not a rallying cry against any churchly authority over the individual and his Book?
Finally, if the Rams had started the Central Catholic grad, the last two weeks might have been different.
SD
Yah, but he's coming back. And Christians are certainly set apart by God from others. That's what sanctification is.
Yes, but we are not set apart or sanctified by emulating the Jews. That has passed.
Now we are called to a spiritual cleanliness that is not affected by the foods we eat, but our actions toward others and God.
Well yeah, but physical lessons teach spiritual principles. Discernment of clean and unclean is still a lesson that people need to learn. Not all spirits are of God.
They sure do. And I can see where a Christian of your type might be inclined to continue the Jewish traditions. Because they are Scriptural.
It all comes back to authority, would ya believe?
Let me ask you this: Catholics for a long time didn't eat meat on Fridays. Maybe some still don't. Why was this?
Obedience to God through His Church. Sanctification. For purposes of almsgiving.
If one believes the early Church had God's authority to release Christians from the Jewish dietary laws, and if one believes this Church remains authoritatie today, it is of little surprise that it could invoke other dietary laws.
Like I said, I can see where a Christian who does not believe in the existence of such an authoritative Church would be forced to search Scripture only for clues about how God wants us to live.
SD
I couldn't find the review on NR's website, but it sounded interesting.
SD
And the table is turned. Usually, it's the "Proddie" painting the Catholics with a broad brush.
Welcome to our world, bass. ;o)
| Wednesday, December 04, 2002 Advent Weekday |
||
|
The throng wondered, when they saw the dumb speaking, the maimed whole, the lame walking, and the blind seeing; and they glorified the God of Israel. (Matthew 15:31)
Just imagine if you followed a chaplain as he walked through your local hospital blessing the sick--and patients began coming out of their rooms, dancing in the halls, and proclaiming that they were healed! Certainly you would be astonished--and thank God for his kindness in working through this minister of the gospel. Well, that's exactly what happened wherever Jesus went. People weren't just in awe of Jesus' power; the miracles they witnessed pointed them to God!
Every one of Jesus' miracles was a sign that pointed beyond the miracle itself to the kingdom of God that Jesus had come to establish. Every miracle showed that he was the Messiah about whom Isaiah prophesied: the one who will swallow up death and wipe away every tear from the eyes of his people (Isaiah 25:8). By multiplying the loaves and fishes, Jesus showed himself to be the one who satisfies the hungry with a feast of rich food (25:6). This is why, when the people recognized these signs, they were moved to glorify the God of Israel (Matthew 15:31).
Jesus wasn't a wonder-worker or sorcerer who performed extraordinary feats to show off or to gain acclaim. Rather, his miracles revealed his Father's compassion for everyone in need or distress (Matthew 15:32). He healed the sick and fed the hungry because he loved them and was moved by their situation. In turn, those who experienced his love were moved to turn to God.
Jesus still works miracles on our behalf because he loves us. The Father's desire to draw us to himself, and the power of the Holy Spirit, continually flow through Jesus as he touches our lives in wondrous ways. As we open our hearts to God's love and to his Spirit, we too can do the miraculous. In whatever we do, we too can point people to the Father, who alone can fill them with the love and healing they are longing for.
"Jesus, thank you for the miracles I have experienced in my life. Make me a sign of your love to others. Pour your Spirit into my heart so that, through me, many may know your healing power and compassion."
----------
God bless.
AC
The book does sound interesting though. I'll see if I can find it on Amazon. Ah, here we go...
The Prophets: Who They Were, What They Are by Norman Podhoretz
Clearly there are calls for social justice in the writings of the prophets, but that is not by any means all that is in there.
Even the years I cooked for just myself, and the cat, I did a whole turkey. I'll do so until I no longer can.
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.