[Faith-talk] The Bible and the Law.

Sun Jun 1 22:35:17 UTC 2014

Thank you for putting trust on me.

I appreciate your eager to know.

I listed some Old testament references on the question at hand.

Here you go, and I inshallah can support you with more if you would like to.

Old testament references:

1) Genesis 9:20-26

2) Genesis 19:30-38

3) Leviticus 10:9-11

4) Numbers 6:3

5) Deuteronomy 21:20

6) Deuteronomy 29:5-6

7) Deuteronomy 32:33

8) Judges 13:4, 7, 14

9) 1 Samuel 1:14-15

10) 1 Samuel 25:32-38

11) 2 Samuel 11:13

12) 2 Samuel 13:28-29

13) 1 Kings 16:8-10

14) 1 Kings 20:12-21

15) Esther 1:5-12

16) Psalm 75:8

16) Psalm 75:8

18) Proverbs 20:1

18) Proverbs 20:1

19) Proverbs 23:19-20

29) Ecclesiastes 2:3

30) Ecclesiastes 10:17

31) Isaiah 5:11-12

32) Isaiah 5:22

On 6/1/14, Doris and Chris <chipmunks at gmx.net> wrote:
> Hey, little brother!
>
> Hubby Chris is asking where in the Old Testament you are quoting from
> that it supposedly prohibits Jews from drinking coholic beverages? To
> our knowledge, such is true for certain groups of jews such as the
> Essenes or Nazarenes but not the Jewish people in general.
>
> God Bless!
>
> Doris and Chris in Lutherland
>
> al
>
>
> At 08:23 PM 5/29/2014 +0200, you wrote:
>>Debby, I knew what chapter five of Matthew said.
>>
>>Jesus did not give you the permission to eat pork, to drink alcohol,
>>to eat unclean animals, animals that are not slautered for food.
>>
>>Peter saw a vision, and he even said; I never ate something unclean.
>>
>>He was amazed, it is something that he would have never done whilst
>>Jesus Christ was there.
>>
>>And again, as I said before, I knew Coptics who would never approach
>>the pork, they will never drink alcohol, let alone unclean bief.
>>
>>Now, let us get to the clear wrongfulness of Poppa Bear.
>>
>>He hardly trys to imply that people die because of what they call in
>>Christianity the ancestral  sin.
>>
>>The sinful action is patrimonial for Christians.
>>
>>So, does it mean that people die when the sinfulness entered into the
>> world?
>>
>>Two questions then;
>>
>>1; Why there are other creatures who die whilst they are irrelevant to
>>the supposedly imposed retribution?
>>
>>2; According to what Christians believe, Jesus was crucified to atone
>>humanity from its hereditary  wickedness.
>>
>>So as for Jesus died for our sins, he supposedly paid the bell.
>>
>>Why we are still dying?, either spiritually or physically.
>>
>>I believe we should think a little before we utter any random
>> explanations.
>>
>>I never heard of such doctrine that death is caused by the sin of Adam.
>>
>>So if Adam had not sinned, would have not we been dying?
>>
>>Would have we been infinite?
>>Let us now get back to the main point.
>>
>>I believe that Christians today should critically reconsider their
>>apprehension of the dietary statute  and its parental essence with
>>what Jesus peace be upon him said he has to fulfill.
>>
>>Jesus did not explicitly permit to you to eat from that what is
>>prohibited for Jews.
>>
>>He talked about moral standards, and they are primarily pertained to
>>what you should have of clean food for you and for your household.
>>
>>Let me be quite outspoken with you.
>>
>>I believe that Christians today have evidently violated and
>>extraordinarily perverted the covenant.
>>
>>They selectively approve what satisfys their desire and they basicly
>>abandon what does otherwise.
>>
>>I want someone to search the Bible from the beginning of Genesis to
>>the end of Revelation, and let him just find for me something that
>>Jesus explicitly uttered in which he plainly abrogates the passage of
>>Matthew, the statement in which he says he shall fulfill the law and
>>the prophets.
>>
>>I accuse Christian missionary activists of textual selectiveness and
>>of interpretative distortions.
>>
>>They condemn homosexuality and they consent alcoholic beverages.
>>
>>Yet they are both reprobated  in the same covenant of the divine statuary.
>>
>>I fathom we will never agree on that regard, and we are not expected to.
>>
>>I am just asking you to refrain from the preconceived notions of
>>deliberately selecting these contorted conclusions.
>>
>>Why Allah forbids intoxicants for Jews and Muslims, and He favorably
>>makes it permissible for you.
>>
>>I am afraid but it does not make any sense to me.
>>
>>I cannot measure its justification with my humble intellects.
>>
>>If you know someone who is involved in the pastoral profession, I can
>>felicitously converse with him on Skype.
>>
>>I am available to talk on either Friday and Saturday morning my time.
>>
>>Please pay attention that I live in Egypt, and that you are mostly
>>seven hours behind us.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>On 5/28/14, Poppa Bear <heavens4real at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Hello Mustafa, your reply is good, but unfortunately you are trying to
>> > diagnose something in the cars motor without opening the hood, you may
>> > be
>> > able to draw on brawd inferences and attempt to use some methods of
>> > deduction to solve the problem and feel that you are coming to a proper
>> > conclusion, but when you write a sentence or two about a point of
>> > theology
>> > and feel that you have solved the answer, or mystery about it, you walk
>> > in
>> > error. I believe that we even talked about Adam in the garden when we
>> > were
>> > on Skype and you seemed to be in accordance with the premise I put
>> > forth.
>> > When Adam and eve had not yet sinned, their physical and Spiritual
>> > lives
>> > were perfect and the touch of deaths degrading affects upon the body,
>> > the
>> > mind, cells, the entire molecular structure of their anatomy had not
>> > been
>> > touched by the finger of death, the moment they tasted from the tree,
>> > death
>> > came upon them. Their bodies became like yours and mine, our bodies are
>> > touched by death from the day we are born, every day we are moving on
>> > the
>> > path of death, our cells, hair, heart, it is all aging and the final
>> > conclusion to the disease called death is what we see when somebody
>> > finally
>> > is laid into the ground. Now, if you want to discount whatever
>> > scriptures
>> > you want in order to make your argument, then you are defining your own
>> > rules of interpretation. You would first have to be able to discount any
>> > of
>> > the books in the Bible that you don't want to be used in these
>> > discussions
>> > and you would have to present a very exhaustive argument for the
>> > exclusion
>> > of each book, not just some blanket statements and expect others to bow
>> > down
>> > to your observations. Now, going back to Adam and the idea of a
>> > covenant,
>> > you still have not given any reason why covenants are bad, or are not
>> > used
>> > in the Bible. If this is a crucial point to understanding the Bible,
>> > and
>> > you
>> > can acknowledge that they are in the Bible, but dismiss them, then you
>> > again, are shaping your own argument according to your reasoning and
>> > not
>> > taking into consideration the evidence laid out before you, you then
>> > create
>> > an irrational argument based on your own narrow evidence, this is what
>> > a
>> > bad
>> > prosecution looks like, excluding information/evidence in order to
>> > paint
>> > the
>> > picture they want weather it is true or false. Also, who says that
>> > Christians believe that Justice and grace cannot be compatible?
>> > Addressing
>> > your question about the Old testament being one way and the New
>> > testament
>> > being another, if you are really interested in understanding the
>> > dispensation of truth and Gods plan of salvation then there is more
>> > than
>> > enough information available to give you a balanced understanding of all
>> > of
>> > this, but when you attack a mountain with a little hammer, you may want
>> > to
>> > do some more surveying of the mountain in question.
>> >
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: Faith-talk [mailto:faith-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of
>> > Mostafa
>> > Almahdy via Faith-talk
>> > Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2014 10:32 AM
>> > To: Brandon Olivares
>> > Cc: Faith-talk, for the discussion of faith and religion
>> > Subject: Re: [Faith-talk] The Bible and the Law.
>> >
>> > Thank you all for writing me back.
>> >
>> > I believe that Brandon is getting quite close to my crucial point.
>> >
>> > We do not disagree on the existence or the documentation of the text.
>> >
>> > We are in factional discernments because of how we interpret the text
>> > that we knew it exists.
>> >
>> > Let me clarify a bit further;
>> >
>> > We find a text which the Gospel of Matthew attributes to Christ as he
>> > asserts that he did not come to abolish the law, but to rather fulfill
>> > it.
>> >
>> > That text is reliable for Christians today, because it is kept in
>> > their scriptures.
>> >
>> > So if someone later in the book of Acts proclaims in some form or
>> > another that he will abrogate, replace, cancel, alternate, or even
>> > upgrade the law, he exactly goes against what Jesus explicitly
>> > asserted back then.
>> >
>> > If the chief of the supreme court has decreed a creed, can someone who
>> > is lower than him in authority abrogate its legitimacy?
>> >
>> > Christians consider Jesus to be divine, yet he said he will not
>> > extinguish the law.
>> >
>> > And then they come Peter or Paul, they basicly dismiss the denotative
>> > commandment of Christ and they say they will do away with the law
>> > which Jesus incisively conforms he comes to fulfill.
>> >
>> > I believe the one who constitutes a principled legislation is  only
>> > the one who can later abrogate it.
>> >
>> > I also want to look at another aspect of Christianity.
>> >
>> > Christianity believes that Jesus brought the message of love and mercy.
>> >
>> > So does it mean that the former message was of wrath, damnation and
>> > misery?
>> >
>> > As Muslims, we believe in the one covenant of Allah glory be to Him.
>> >
>> > Poppa Bear unambiguously  mentioned the contract that was made with
>> > Adam.
>> >
>> > Perhaps he meant the divine injunction of not to eat from the forbidden
>> > trea.
>> >
>> > As I mentioned in  many times before, the story is quite similar in
>> > the Koranic narration, unless therein, they were given the chance to
>> > basicly repent.
>> >
>> > But for Adam and Eve in the Bible, they were not given the chance to
>> > repent.
>> >
>> > They were cursed, expelled, and the temptation to eat from the
>> > forbidden trea was blamed on Eve, as exactly it was blamed on the
>> > devil, which is graphically portrayed as a cerpent in Genesis.
>> >
>> > Adam was told that if he eats from the forbidden trea, surely a death
>> > he shall die.
>> >
>> > But did he die?
>> >
>> > I am afraid, he actually did not.
>> >
>> > I do not want to hear about the spiritual death interpretation,
>> > because the commandments of God are plain, explicit, straightforward,
>> > and they do not rely on metaphorical based.
>> >
>> > The question which I repeatedly raised on that regard;
>> >
>> > Was not God capable of giving them the chance to basicly repent?,
>> > especially if it  was their ever first time to sin.
>> >
>> > I think I asked that question many times before.
>> >
>> > Christians inaccurately assume that justice and grace contradict with
>> > each other.
>> >
>> > Who said they do?
>> >
>> > They are quite applicable with each other if the wisdom of God
>> > intervened.
>> >
>> > If someone sinned, he can basicly return to Allah with weep, regret
>> > and repentance.
>> >
>> > I believe we need to think about that.
>> >
>> > Thank you, and have a pleasant time.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On 5/28/14, Brandon Olivares <programmer2188 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> Mostafa,
>> >>
>> >> I think you are quite right here. Jesus himself said he did not come
>> >> to
>> >> replace the law:
>> >>
>> >> Matthew 5:17-18
>> >>
>> >> 17 "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets;
>> >> I
>> > have
>> >> not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.18 For truly I tell you,
>> > until
>> >> heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least
>> >> stroke
>> > of
>> >> a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is
>> >> accomplished.
>> >>
>> >> Make of it what you will.
>> >>
>> >> Not to be crass, but perhaps Peter just really wanted some pork. :)
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Brandon
>> >>
>> >> www.EscapeTheDream.org: Put an End to Suffering and Return to Joy
>> >>
>> >> Latest blog post: The Illusion of Choice
>> >>
>> >> Facebook: Brandon.Olivares
>> >> Twitter: @devbanana
>> >>
>> >> On May 28, 2014, at 1:32 AM, Mostafa Almahdy via Faith-talk
>> >> <faith-talk at nfbnet.org> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Hello.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> I appreciate everyone trying to explain.
>> >>>
>> >>> You all sound genuine in your attempts to express your point, and I
>> >>> quite appreciate that.
>> >>>
>> >>> Let us not forget that the text of Matthew is uttered by Jesus,
>> >>> whilst
>> >>> the text of acts is uttered by others.
>> >>>
>> >>> My question to Brandon was, can somebody else abrogate what Jesus
>> >>> said
>> >>> he comes to fulfill?
>> >>>
>> >>> I want now to comment on the point that sister Linda articulated,
>> >>> because it is a quite interesting one.
>> >>>
>> >>> Thank you so much Linda for conveying your contribution, I really
>> >>> appreciate it.
>> >>>
>> >>> I believe I competently comprehend English.
>> >>>
>> >>> I never heard of  replace being the synonym of fulfill.
>> >>>
>> >>> I am not sure though, do we write  English properly here?
>> >>>
>> >>> Fulfill is interpreted as replace?
>> >>>
>> >>> I am afraid but I believe that such interpretation is lingually
>> >>> incorrect.
>> >>>
>> >>> It does not work from even the metaphorical standpoint.
>> >>>
>> >>> Fulfillment is to bring an action into completion and fruition.
>> >>>
>> >>> Whilst replacement is the permutation of something by what equates it
>> >>> in either its value or significance.
>> >>>
>> >>> Without being offensive, but I think we need to interpret things in
>> >>> according to the common sense.
>> >>>
>> >>> I never claimed I am expert in the Bible.
>> >>>
>> >>> I am just countenancing my rational standards to determine the
>> >>> sequential relationship among concepts and their based statements.
>> >>>
>> >>> If the Mosaic laws were abrogated by the teachings of Jesus, does
>> >>> that
>> >>> include the condemnation and the decisively prescribed penalty of
>> >>> lapidation regarding the trespass of homosexuality?
>> >>>
>> >>> So to be really crystal clear;
>> >>>
>> >>> Is that dietary tradition which is abrogated or the whole covenant?
>> >>>
>> >>> I believe we have instigated  a valuable scrutiny, and I am certainly
>> >>> intrigued to carry on.
>> >>>
>> >>> I so much enjoy and I quite benefit from constantly interacting on
>> >>> the
>> >>> faith talk list.
>> >>>
>> >>> I attentively follow the daily articles of brother Paul, and I learn
>> >>> quite a lot from the well written essays he posts.
>> >>>
>> >>> I like the level of English he uses there.
>> >>>
>> >>> I have been a member of the  list since last August.
>> >>>
>> >>> I have been tremendously exposed to the Christian devotion and
>> >>> earnestness about their faith.
>> >>>
>> >>> I believe we will continue to wholeheartedly disagree on the core of
>> >>> what we believe.
>> >>>
>> >>> I hope we continue to do so, whilst showing empathy, honor and
>> >>> respect
>> >>> to each other.
>> >>>
>> >>> I suggest that we may schedule  a regular meeting on Skype, in which
>> >>> we can discuss faith related subjects.
>> >>>
>> >>> We may seek for mutually agreed upon subjects to begin with.
>> >>>
>> >>> I am sure we can think of many.
>> >>>
>> >>> It is faith that brought us together.
>> >>>
>> >>> Thank you.
>> >>>
>> >>> Peace, blessings, and much respect from me.
>> >>>
>> >>> Mostafa.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> On 5/28/14, debby phillips <semisweetdebby at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>> Hi! Well, you make some interesting points.  First of all, in the
>> >>>> Acts of the Apostles, Peter has a vision where he is told to eat
>> >>>> of all that is shone him.  (I'm paraphrasing).  He says, I can't
>> >>>> do that, I've never eaten anything unclean.  He has the vision a
>> >>>> couple more times.  Then Peter is told by the Lord that there are
>> >>>> people waiting for him, Gentiles.  At that time, Jews were not
>> >>>> supposed to even enter the house of a Gentile.  Then, as Paul
>> >>>> begins preaching to the Gentiles, it comes down to the first
>> >>>> Church Council and the decision is that Gentiles do not need to
>> >>>> follow Jewish law, dietary or otherwise.  You can head all of
>> >>>> this in Chapter 15 of Acts, also in Galatians where Paul tells
>> >>>> the Gentiles not to let the Judaizers, (that is, those Jewish
>> >>>> Christians who think that they need to make all Christians follow
>> >>>> Jewish Law) from destroying them.  That's the beginning, I would
>> >>>> say.  I'm sure POPPA Bear or someone will articulate this much
>> >>>> better.    Peace,    Debby
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> --
>> >>> (Seeking knowledge is compulsory from cratle to grave because it is a
>> >>> shoreless ocean.)
>> >>>
>> >>> _______________________________________________
>> >>> Faith-talk mailing list
>> >>> Faith-talk at nfbnet.org
>> >>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/faith-talk_nfbnet.org
>> >>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>> >>> Faith-talk:
>> >>>
>> >
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/faith-talk_nfbnet.org/programmer2188%40gma
>> > il.com
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > (Seeking knowledge is compulsory from cratle to grave because it is a
>> > shoreless ocean.)
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Faith-talk mailing list
>> > Faith-talk at nfbnet.org
>> > http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/faith-talk_nfbnet.org
>> > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>> > Faith-talk:
>> >
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/faith-talk_nfbnet.org/heavens4real%40gmail
>> > .com
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>--
>>(Seeking knowledge is compulsory from cratle to grave because it is a
>>shoreless ocean.)
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>Faith-talk mailing list
>>Faith-talk at nfbnet.org
>>http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/faith-talk_nfbnet.org
>>To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info
>>for Faith-talk:
>>http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/faith-talk_nfbnet.org/chipmunks%40gmx.net
>
>

-- 
(Seeking knowledge is compulsory from cratle to grave because it is a
shoreless ocean.)