1 Peter2:4-9 Peter speaking to annointed christians:
Nope, Peter never wrote this epistle. It is written by an unknown author, definitely not Peter. It doesn't come from Jesus or his disciples. It comes from someone who is lying about who they are. I see very little credibility in the account then. At best, it shows what Christians later believed and taught, and really, I'm not interested in that. Because Christians later believed many different things.
the apostles of Christ would never have allowed the writing of a false prophet to be circulated among the new christian congregation.
But Hebrews was, and we have no idea who that was written about. More than half of the Epistles of Paul are by people who are lying and claiming to be him (as in, they are not written by Paul, but people claiming to be Paul). The other Epistles were also written by people lying about who they were.
More so, we know from early texts, many of these texts were later changed by scribes for theological purposes. Some of these changes were by what we now call heretics. So there is more than enough reason to believe that the apostles allowed possible writing of false prophets, or simply had no control over the matter.
Only the priests could offer sacrifices. Approach to God was through the priesthood, therefore, no priests, no sacrifices and no way to make atonement for ones sins.
look back through the history of Isreal....when the priests became corrupt God left the entire nation...when the priests were faithful, God kept the nation safe.
One could pray to God whenever. The Temple was for the sacrifices, but it was not the only way to approach God. If that was true, the vast majority of Jews would never have contact with God, and Jews living today would be completely separated from God. However, the fact is just the opposite.
More so, one could atone for sins in other ways than just animal sacrifice. Repentance was a major factor here, as well as prayer. So even without the priesthood, there was ways to atone for one sins.
Also, it wasn't said that just when priests became corrupt that God left the nation. It was when the people, in general, became corrupt.
No because Paul was able to experience the Mosaic law in its full form when the priests were administering it.
The jews today do not practice the law in its full form because they do not have a priesthood to administer the sacrificial system. They have a completely different religion to what jews of the 1st century practiced.
Not at all. Paul changed the law to fit himself. He did many things that was against the law. And he stated ideas about the law that simply were not supported. Really, Paul may have had a good understanding of the law, but he twisted it greatly in his writings and preachings.
As for Judaism during this time and the first century, it is not completely different. There are some changes. However, the law did not revolve around the priests. That was an extremely small aspect of the law. You are putting to much weight on the priesthood. You need to inform yourself about Judaism, and not just continue with this biased view point.
Philipians 3:4-5 If any other man thinks he has grounds for confidence in the flesh, I the more so: 5 circumcised the eighth day, out of the family stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew [born] from Hebrews; as respects law, a Pharisee
Acts 26:4-5 Indeed, as to the manner of life from youth up that I led from [the] beginning among my nation and in Jerusalem, all the Jews 5 that have been previously acquainted with me from the first know, if they but wish to bear witness, that according to the strictest sect of our form of worship I lived a Pharisee"
What's your point here? You are not defending the idea that you don't know anything about the law. The only thing you are doing is showing that Paul was extremely arrogant.
And even then, it is not showing that Paul knew the law more than anyone else. At most, it shows that he claimed that. But if one reads the verses, he never states such an idea. All he is saying is that he was a devout Jew.
The Isrealites had to be clean physically, mentally and spiritually... the Kosher laws helped to keep them physically clean. it is well known that certain foods contain high concentrations of toxins...pig meat is difficult for our digestive system to process and therefore can make a person unhealthy.
The worship of God was to be carried out in a clean and holy way. That is the 'spirit' behind that kosher laws....cleanliness is next to Godliness.
Doesn't answer the question. It never addresses how the Kosher laws lead Jews to the Messiah. It doesn't even in a round about way address the question. I won't address anything else there.
you dont think that just maybe, the reason he allowed the temple to be destroyed was because he had grander plans?
Isaiah 66:1 The heavens are my throne, and the earth is my footstool. Where, then, is the house that you people can build for me, and where, then, is the place as a resting-place for me?
Again, not addressing what I stated. The Kingdom of God that Jesus was preaching about was a kingdom that would be right here on Earth, and would replace the earthly kingdom.
So lets make a quick some of what we have here:
- One, there is no credible evidence that Jesus is the Messiah. Instead, he failed to fulfill Messianic prophecy.
-Second, there is no real reason to think of a new covenant that replaced the old. First, Jesus states the opposite, as in, his followers had to follow the laws, to the letter. He was very clear that the law was not suppose to be abolished, not even the smallest of the laws. Second, Jesus's disciples seem completely unaware that a new covenant has been enacted.
-Third, you are lacking an understanding of what Jewish laws are, and are meant to be. They are kept by Jews out of Love for God. They are not an obligation. More so, sacrifice was not the only way to salvation.
-Fourth, as with Jewish law, you show a lack of understanding of Islamic law, or even what the Quran teaches.
-Fifth, that lack of understanding has been shown by you saying that Muslims can not practice Islam in non-Arabic countries. However, since the vast majority of Muslims do not live in Arabic countries, such a statement is patently false.
-Sixth, and final, the OT has to be considered in Christianity. Thus, any comment about a divine justice system applies to both the Quran and the Bible.
