For the Christians (Abrahamic only)

[FranklinMichaelV.3]

Huh and here I thought humans were kicked out the garden cause they had become like God....

 

[dantech]

Huh and here I thought humans were kicked out the garden cause they had become like God....

Nice curveball

 

[FranklinMichaelV.3]

Nice curveball

I try my best.

 

[roger1440]

Isn’t forbidden fruit usually the sweetest?

 

[Shermana]

were those creatures not creatures that God had created and did he not call them all 'good'?

Did those creatures exist inside Eden?




“Though the sins of you people should prove to be as scarlet, they will be made white just like snow; though they should be red like crimson cloth, they will become even like wool.” Isaiah 1:18

Sin does not stain, it cannot stay upon a person who repents and stops practising the sin.




probably because it would be viewed as an act of adultery. Gods original standard was for one man to marry one woman for all his life. By divorcing and remarrying then divorcing and remarrying again, he would be defiling Gods original righteous and perfect arrangement.

Did you notice that nothing was said that would prohibit him from remarrying his divorced wife if she had not remarried after the legal severance of their marriage tie ? This shows that is it is the act of remarrying and having multiple sexual partners that God does not accept....it makes both men and women defiled in his eyes because it is out of harmony with his original righteous purpose for marriage.



the reason is because something which is 'holy' complies to Gods righteous standards and his holy Will. As soon as it is used for a purpose other then what God Wills, it is no longer 'sanctified' for use according to Gods righteousness.

When Adam and Eve disobeyed, they were no longer in harmony with the righteous standards of Gods perfect will....hence they became defiled.

Everything God created, he created with his own holy purpose in mind. When we take something he created and change its purpose, it becomes defiles.



menstruation is the source of life.... it is where God creates new life, but that life is defiled by being born into sin. So the laws regarding menstruation and seminal flows were to remind us that life is defiled. It is not as God intended it to be. His holy purpose was for all of mankind to be members of his household as his perfect children... but sin prevents that holy purpose and everytime a new child is born, it is born outside of the holy purpose and will of God. It is born sick, dying and in need of a savior.

You completely missed the point. The text clearly defines "Defilement" in the context of "Becoming polluted" in a physical as well as spiritual sense. It's not just the consequence of disobeying.

 

[Pegg]

You completely missed the point. The text clearly defines "Defilement" in the context of "Becoming polluted" in a physical as well as spiritual sense. It's not just the consequence of disobeying.

actually, no

i think you've missed the point.

 

[Shermana]

actually, no

i think you've missed the point.

Think what you want. There's no really way to convince you of you my point, and you're not going to convince me of your point, for each of us has their confirmation bias of what they think is right. Mine just happens to be consistent with the text. Yours involves some abstract extra-textual concepts that don't even show up in any non-canonical writings. As usual.

Pshaw, Menstruation is Filthy, not a "reminder that life is defiled". What gobbledygook.

 

[Pegg]

Think what you want. There's no really way to convince you of you my point, and you're not going to convince me of your point, for each of us has their confirmation bias of what they think is right. Mine just happens to be consistent with the text. Yours involves some abstract extra-textual concepts that don't even show up in any non-canonical writings. As usual.

Pshaw, Menstruation is Filthy, not a "reminder that life is defiled". What gobbledygook.

does God create things which are defiled?

your reasoning is basically saying that God created some things which are good, but many more, including his female creation, as filthy and defiled things.

Is that what you are suggesting?

 

[Shermana]

does God create things which are defiled?

your reasoning is basically saying that God created some things which are good, but many more, including his female creation, as filthy and defiled things.

Is that what you are suggesting?

God creates DEFILING things. He also creates abominations.

In your twisted logic of what I said, he also created men impure since they commonly have naughty dreams and wake up polluted.

So yes I am in fact suggesting that God created "Abominations" which defile and pollute. Is that a problem?

 

[Pegg]

God creates DEFILING things. He also creates abominations.

In your twisted logic of what I said, he also created men impure since they commonly have naughty dreams and wake up polluted.

So yes I am in fact suggesting that God created "Abominations" which defile and pollute. Is that a problem?

no, it is WE who 'defile' things.

God does not defile his own creations. Men ARE impure by their OWN thoughts and ideas.

If they actually knew God and upheld Gods righteous standards, they would not defile anything and nothing would be defiled.

“All things are clean to clean persons. But to persons defiled and faithless nothing is clean.” TITUS 1:15

 

[Shermana]

All things are clean to clean persons. But to persons defiled and faithless nothing is clean.” TITUS 1:15

Yet another reason to believe the Pastoral Epistles are forged...err, Pseudipigrapha. They clearly contradict what the Tanakh plainly says about how abominations defile a person.

So menstrual blood doesn't defile a clean person?

 

[Pegg]

Yet another reason to believe the Pastoral Epistles are forged...err, Pseudipigrapha. They clearly contradict what the Tanakh plainly says about how abominations defile a person.

So menstrual blood doesn't defile a clean person?

why did God create it?

 

[Shermana]

why did God create it?

Abominations are part of life. Why did God create poison? Why did he create Hemlock? Why did he create Black Widow Spiders? Why did he create mold?

 

[james2ko]

no, it is WE who 'defile' things.

God does not defile his own creations. Men ARE impure by their OWN thoughts and ideas.

If they actually knew God and upheld Gods righteous standards, they would not defile anything and nothing would be defiled.

“All things are clean to clean persons. But to persons defiled and faithless nothing is clean.” TITUS 1:15

Mark 1:5 "And there went out to him ALL the land of Judea, and they of Jerusalem and were ALL baptized in the river Jordan"​

Certainly not every single man, woman, and child (bar none) in the Land of Judea went to get baptized that day, correct? The "ALL" there is qualified.

John 8:2 "And early in the morning he came again into the temple, and ALL the people came unto him; and he sat down and taught them."
​

Again, the "ALL" is qualified. Even though it says "ALL" it doesn't mean every single person on earth came to listen to Jesus. It must be qualified based on the context and scope of God's law. Now compare the term "all" in the above passages with its use in Titus 1:15?

Tit 1:15 To the pure all things are pure, but to those who are defiled and unbelieving nothing is pure; but even their mind and conscience are defiled.​

Is the Yew berry pure to those who are pure? Or how about the fool's mushroom or Rhubarb leaves? No, they are all poisonous to our bodies. Hence they must be excluded from the term "all". Once again the term "all" is qualified and implies things that are safe for us to eat. Utilizing the same interpretive principle, the term "all" can be qualified to mean foods that are clean according to the law (Deu 14; Lev 11) Paul said he did not make void (Rom 3:31).

 

[Pegg]

Abominations are part of life. Why did God create poison? Why did he create Hemlock? Why did he create Black Widow Spiders? Why did he create mold?

everything has its purpose and place....they are not defiled in themselves.

Nor do they defile someone who might happen to touch them.

Shermana, you were born from menstrual blood....its what fed you & kept you alive in your mothers womb. You need to see things from Gods perspective.

 

[FranklinMichaelV.3]

Huh and here I thought God created everything....

 

[Brickjectivity]

Abominations are part of life. Why did God create poison? Why did he create Hemlock? Why did he create Black Widow Spiders? Why did he create mold?

Don't forget snakes and scorpions. A lot of effort goes into reconciling the existence of both goodness and evil in the world. Recently I've seen articles about a Grasshopper Mouse that is immune to scorpion poison. I saw a video of one catching a scorpion and taking several stingers to the face. The cruel, evil mouse then started to chow down on the scorpion while it was still alive! What an amazing creation.

 

[Shermana]

everything has its purpose and place....they are not defiled in themselves.

Nor do they defile someone who might happen to touch them.

Shermana, you were born from menstrual blood....its what fed you & kept you alive in your mothers womb. You need to see things from Gods perspective.

As if you know God's perspective and I don't?

I didn't say they were defiled, I said they were "abominations." Or "That which defiles".

Whether I was born in menstrual blood or not, the fact is that a man cannot touch a woman or anything she has touched during her period, or he becomes, "defiled". There's more to it than just not being able to enter the Temple. In some cases, if a person remains "defiled" for too long without cleansing, he is permanently exiled from the camp.

Even if everything "has their place", that doesn't mean some aren't abominations that defile what is holy.

 

[BlandOatmeal]

Hi, Dantech

If you are a believer of what you call "The OT", then there is no logical reason for you to believe in the NT.

I fail to see any connection here.

if you still somehow believe in the NT, then all logic and most scripture will point you towards the Torah which asks you not to eat pork, to keep the Sabbath ON THE SEVENTH day because IT is holy. It's all nice and well to make things easy and "keep" the Sabbath on any other day, but that's not what scripture asks of us.

I observe all the above and, as you say, believe the NT (We light candles and do kiddush just before Fri. nox, the same time the early church did in the NT). I'm reading your post here, to see where "all logic" leads me...

I am Jewish, these laws are binding to me. You are not Jewish, these laws are NOT binding to you. If you are however a believer that Jesus was the most righteous and perfect person ever, then wouldn't you, logically, want to be as much like him as you could? He was Jewish, the law was binding to him. If he never sinned, then he never ate pork, and he kept the Sabbath on the 7th day, every Sabbath until his death.

You say the dietary laws pertaining to Jews are not binding on me. I tend to agree. As for Shabbat, that preceeded Moshe Rabbeinu, going back to before Adam. There's actually nothing Jewish about what day it is; it's the same day it has always been, after היום השישי.

If to you, being the most perfect person in the world in God's perspective means being like Jesus, then you would need to be Jewish to be that way.

It's the Muslims that call Jesus the "perfect" prophet. I don't recall the NT saying such a thing. Jesus exhorted EVERYONE to be "perfect":

Matt 5
[44] But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;
[45] That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.
[46] For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same?
[47] And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? do not even the publicans so?
[48] Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.

Jesus didn't say anything about "being Jewish" here. Is it your opinion, that the Jews are perfect?

Again this all depends on whether or not you believe in the Torah. If you don't then just move on.

If you've read any of my posts, it ought to be clear to you that I believe in "Torah" -- which is to say, in the books of Moses. If by "Torah", you mean the latest verdict of your rabbis, then perhaps you yourself should move on and meet with your little circle -- it has nothing to do with me.

But if you do, please show me, logically, and with the help of scripture, that you don't need to eat kosher, you don't need to keep the Sabbath, you don't need to follow all of our written laws to the dot.

Dantech, I don't live to argue, as you seem to. It's getting near suppertime, at which my wife will assuredly serve no pork, shellfish, etc., and will even scrupulously be sure that she does not boil a kid in its mother's milk. As for not eating the "sinew that shrank", I don't see anywhere that Moses commands anything about it: He simply said that Jews don't do it, that it's a custom. Your MAIN objection to my diet, no doubt, is that my wife, a goy, cooked the meal. You're missing out on something good, that's all. You like salty, expensive food; the Bible doesn't say we need to eat like that.

Can't wait to hear your thoughts about hot Jesus fulfilled the law.

Hello? How didn't he? The Pharisees invited him into their houses to eat, and you say he was a lawbreaker? I fail to see your point in any of this.

 

[dantech]

Hi, Dantech


I fail to see any connection here.

The connection is that it has been pointed out God knows how many times in this thread, numerous verses from the Torah that say that it is binding on us forever, and is everlasting. So a Christian who eats pork, while claiming to believe in the NT is not making much sense.

I observe all the above and, as you say, believe the NT (We light candles and do kiddush just before Fri. nox, the same time the early church did in the NT). I'm reading your post here, to see where "all logic" leads me...

To be fair, I didn't know you did these things. My arguments are more pointed towards all the Christians who don't follow the laws of the Torah. To me, the NT could only be acceptable, if you accept on you the laws of the Torah as well. The NT can't go without the Torah.
Just curious, do you cook on the Sabbath?

You say the dietary laws pertaining to Jews are not binding on me. I tend to agree. As for Shabbat, that preceeded Moshe Rabbeinu, going back to before Adam. There's actually nothing Jewish about what day it is; it's the same day it has always been, after היום השישי.

I'm not sure I understand. For you, following the dietary laws is not necessary because it was given to us by Moses, and therefore was part of the covenant between God and Israel, right?

It's the Muslims that call Jesus the "perfect" prophet. I don't recall the NT saying such a thing. Jesus exhorted EVERYONE to be "perfect":

This is maybe what the NT says, and what you believe, but go through the posts, you will see that most Christians don't see it the same way. To them, Jesus could do no wrong. He was perfect in every way. My argument was based on whether or not you believe Jesus to be perfect.

Jesus didn't say anything about "being Jewish" here. Is it your opinion, that the Jews are perfect?

Not at all, it is my opinion that it's best to try and be like whoever YOU believe is the most perfect example for a person. In most of the Christians I spoke with's opinions, Jesus was perfect.

If you've read any of my posts, it ought to be clear to you that I believe in "Torah" -- which is to say, in the books of Moses. If by "Torah", you mean the latest verdict of your rabbis, then perhaps you yourself should move on and meet with your little circle -- it has nothing to do with me.

I honestly don't remember whether or not I read your prior posts, but it's quite obvious I missed that you believe in the Torah, the way we do. the arguments I made are valid towards the opinions of most Christians. I wrongly assumed you were like most of the ones that have been arguing with me.

Dantech, I don't live to argue, as you seem to. It's getting near suppertime, at which my wife will assuredly serve no pork, shellfish, etc., and will even scrupulously be sure that she does not boil a kid in its mother's milk. As for not eating the "sinew that shrank", I don't see anywhere that Moses commands anything about it: He simply said that Jews don't do it, that it's a custom. Your MAIN objection to my diet, no doubt, is that my wife, a goy, cooked the meal. You're missing out on something good, that's all. You like salty, expensive food; the Bible doesn't say we need to eat like that.

I don't live to argue. I did take the defensive on this thread simply because of all the responses that are the complete opposite of yours that I have gotten from most.

Hello? How didn't he? The Pharisees invited him into their houses to eat, and you say he was a lawbreaker? I fail to see your point in any of this.

I don't blame him of being a lawbreaker. It's not within my rights to judge anyone. What I meant to say, but obviously failed to was that "Jesus did not fulfill the law FOR OTHERS" in the way that most Christians believe. As you probably know, pretty much every response I have gotten is that the law is no longer binding because Jesus fulfilled it. Jesus somehow abided to the law so perfectly (hence, Jesus is perfect), that we for some reason no longer have to. I don't argue that the law is not binding to Christians, I argue why it isn't binding.