Is it okay to eat pork?

[L.A.M.B.]

Are we adherents of the old Mosaic Covent given to Israel bc of their rebellious nature or are we of the NT bc our testator died sealing his new testatement in his blood for our salvation ?

Do we discount the law of liberty in Christ, spoken of by Paul, Peter and the Apostles and give thanks for God, who by his grace, has cleansed all things by his word?

1 Timothy 4:3-5

3 Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.

4 For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving:

5 For it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.

 

[Big Boy Johnson]

Isaiah 66:15-17 KJV says when Jesus comes with fire and with fiery chariots and with a fiery sword and condemns all (guilty) flesh, those found eating abominable things like pork are going to be burned up.

Yeah, eating pork... isn't that the unpardonable sin?

I mean the pork pirate situation in the nation has been getting pretty bad lately!

 

[Big Boy Johnson]

Are we adherents of the old Mosaic Covent given to Israel bc of their rebellious nature or are we of the NT bc our testator died sealing his new testatement in his blood for our salvation ?

I'll take the New Testament Alex for eternal life in Christ Jesus!

 

[Ronald Nolette]

See, I keep showing you how Jesus' words contextually are referring to "SPIRITUAL" defilement when He says it ain't what goes in but what comes out is that which defiles.

However, YOU can't point to any time when Jesus had come with fire IN THE PAST, had come with chariots like a whirlwind IN THE PAST, had come with a flaming sword IN THE PAST, had come to plead with all flesh ("condemn" all flesh) IN THE PAST, etc.

All these we immediately recognize as the Second Coming...but because it says He's going to consume with fire those that are found indulging abominable things like pork...well, then, we throw out common sense and look for ways to "spiritualize" and explain away what is a plain "thus saith the Lord".

well pork doesn't physically defile a man and you say it doesn't spiritually defile so why do you argue?

If you do not wish to eat pork that is fine. but don't judge those that do!

Paul wasn't spiritualizing when He gave this command to the church:

Romans 14

King James Version

​

14 Him that is weak in the faith receive ye, but not to doubtful disputations.
2 For one believeth that he may eat all things: another, who is weak, eateth herbs.
3 Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not; and let not him which eateth not judge him that eateth: for God hath received him.
4 Who art thou that judgest another man's servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth. Yea, he shall be holden up: for God is able to make him stand.

1 Timothy 4:3
Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.

Matthew 15:10-11

King James Version

​

10 And he called the multitude, and said unto them, Hear, and understand:
11 Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man; but that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man.

Mark 7:18-20

King James Version

​

18 And he saith unto them, Are ye so without understanding also? Do ye not perceive, that whatsoever thing from without entereth into the man, it cannot defile him;
19 Because it entereth not into his heart, but into the belly, and goeth out into the draught, purging all meats?
20 And he said, That which cometh out of the man, that defileth the man.

Can't you yet see? Jesus and Paul both said eating pork does not defile a person for it is eaten, goes to the belly and out the poop chute!

so there is no longer any defilement! I can't speak for sure to the Isaiah passage, but I can say with certainty the church is not under a ban to abstain from pork if it wishes not to. Both Jesus and Paul and Peter by example when he ate with the gentiles proved this.

 

[Phoneman777]

well pork doesn't physically defile a man

Isaiah says it's an abomination and Jesus will consume those who defile themselves with it

and you say it doesn't spiritually defile so why do you argue?

When Jesus and the Jews were in disagreement, it was over CLEAN meat, NOT unclean meat like pork.

If you do not wish to eat pork that is fine. but don't judge those that do!

Isaiah is clear that Jesus is going to burn up those found eating pork at the Second Coming, and a true Christian will read that and make the decision to stop doing that which offends Him, including throwing out bacon and pork chops.

Paul wasn't spiritualizing when He gave this command to the church:

Romans 14​

14 Him that is weak in the faith receive ye, but not to doubtful disputations.
2 For one believeth that he may eat all things: another, who is weak, eateth herbs.
3 Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not; and let not him which eateth not judge him that eateth: for God hath received him.
4 Who art thou that judgest another man's servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth. Yea, he shall be holden up: for God is able to make him stand.

All scholars agree Paul was constantly faced with Jewish converts who insisted Christians must keep the annual Jewish feast days. Therefore, when we read one "eateth herbs" and "one man esteemeth one day above another" Paul is referring to the annual feast days not the weekly Sabbath or the laws of clean/unclean which predate Moses, according to Genesis 7 and Genesis 26.

Why do Christians ignore this and insist God had no laws or commandments at all until Moses? So they can argue that all laws ceased after the Cross and do what they want instead of what God wants, even Isaiah 66:15-17 KJV warns them what will happen if they do that at the Second Coming.

1 Timothy 4:3
Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.

An apt description of the Antichrist power, the papacy, which prohibits marriage among their clergy, commands no meat to be eaten on Friday, which is a mortal sin during Lent.

Of course, catholic sympathizers give the Antichrist a pass and always point to the SDA church as the subject of 1 Timothy 4:3 although Isaiah 66 absolutely affirms eating unclean mean will get you burned to a crisp at the Second Coming, no matter how high you raise the praise in church.

Matthew 15:10-11
10 And he called the multitude, and said unto them, Hear, and understand:
11 Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man; but that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man.

Mark 7:18-20
18 And he saith unto them, Are ye so without understanding also? Do ye not perceive, that whatsoever thing from without entereth into the man, it cannot defile him;
19 Because it entereth not into his heart, but into the belly, and goeth out into the draught, purging all meats?
20 And he said, That which cometh out of the man, that defileth the man.

Unnecessary ritual hand washing was the issue here. The Jews insisted the ritual prevented "spiritual defilement" while consuming clean foods - so Jesus had to tell them it ain't what goes in that defiles you, it's the unconverted heart in us which is made known by evil words and actions.

Can't you yet see? Jesus and Paul both said eating pork does not defile a person for it is eaten, goes to the belly and out the poop chute!

What kind of food did Jesus refer to as going in and coming out the poop chute?

Clean food - not unclean. You eaters of abominable things are twisting the Scriptures to the point that you are in danger of "your own destruction" on the day Jesus comes with fire, according to Isaiah 66:15-17 KJV.

so there is no longer any defilement!

Perhaps you should read Isaiah 66:15-17 KJV where it PLAINLY says Jesus is coming with fire to burn to a crisp those found eating pork, no matter how high they raise their praise hands in church.

I can't speak for sure to the Isaiah passage, but I can say with certainty the church is not under a ban to abstain from pork if it wishes not to. Both Jesus and Paul and Peter by example when he ate with the gentiles proved this.

You will not find a single text where believers ate anything unclean and twisting the words of Paul and Jesus out of context will not establish that. If Peter didn't know what his dream meant, who are YOU to insist it means everything is now on the menu, especially after Peter himself said the dream was about racism, not a lunch menu?

 

[Phoneman777]

Yeah, eating pork... isn't that the unpardonable sin? View attachment 39161

I mean the pork pirate situation in the nation has been getting pretty bad lately!

I can only tell you what the Bible says, which according to Isaiah 66:15-17 KJV is that when Jesus comes with fiery condemnation at His Second Coming, among the crispy critters will be those found consuming pork chops and bacon, no matter how high they raise the praise in church.

 

[Big Boy Johnson]

I can only tell you what the Bible says, which according to Isaiah 66:15-17 KJV is that when Jesus comes with fiery condemnation at His Second Coming, among the crispy critters will be those found consuming pork chops and bacon, no matter how high they raise the praise in church.

1 Timothy 4:4
For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving:

The New Covenant is in force now... not the old covenant.

I see your quote from the old testament... which has been done away with and replaced by a new High Priest (Jesus) and the law has been changed from the law of Moses to the Law of Christ, aka the Law of Liberty

God's Word teaches the old covenant has been done away with because we now have a NEW covenant

Hebrews 10:9
Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second.

God's Word teaches that Christians are NOT following Moses as their high priest because now we have a NEW High Priest Who is Jesus Christ?

Hebrews 7:12
For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law.

God did away with the old covenant where Moses was the high priest and made a new Covenant where Jesus Christ is the High Priest and since the priesthood has been changed, there has been a change of the law from the law of Moses to the Law of Christ..

Galatians 5:4
Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.

Those who try to keep the law of Moses are responsible for keeping ALL of the law of Moses and if they don’t keep all of the law, they are guilty of failing to keep the law. Christians are NOT called to keep the law of Moses... we are under the law of Christ now. (see - Galatians 6:2, 1 Corinthians 9:21, James 2:12, James 1:25, Romans 8:2, 2 Peter 1:4-10)

James 2:10
For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.

 

[L.A.M.B.]

1 Timothy 4:4
For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving:

The New Covenant is in force now... not the old covenant.

I see your quote from the old testament... which has been done away with and replaced by a new High Priest (Jesus) and the law has been changed from the law of Moses to the Law of Christ, aka the Law of Liberty

God's Word teaches the old covenant has been done away with because we now have a NEW covenant

Hebrews 10:9
Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second.

God's Word teaches that Christians are NOT following Moses as their high priest because now we have a NEW High Priest Who is Jesus Christ?

Hebrews 7:12
For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law.

God did away with the old covenant where Moses was the high priest and made a new Covenant where Jesus Christ is the High Priest and since the priesthood has been changed, there has been a change of the law from the law of Moses to the Law of Christ..

Galatians 5:4
Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.

Those who try to keep the law of Moses are responsible for keeping ALL of the law of Moses and if they don’t keep all of the law, they are guilty of failing to keep the law. Christians are NOT called to keep the law of Moses... we are under the law of Christ now. (see - Galatians 6:2, 1 Corinthians 9:21, James 2:12, James 1:25, Romans 8:2, 2 Peter 1:4-10)

James 2:10
For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.

Why would anyone be a member of this cult with all the woman made misinterpreted scriptures per private visions? ( I'm surprised they were /are allowed to read the scripts for themselves, yet still are blinded)

Obey God, follow God and reject the fleshly desire of others to follow their father in usurping God's supremacy!

 

[Ronald Nolette]

When Jesus and the Jews were in disagreement, it was over CLEAN meat, NOT unclean meat like pork.

No they weren't. clean meats would not defile a man.

Isaiah says it's an abomination and Jesus will consume those who defile themselves with it

And Jesus said nothing a person eats defiles a man. who is more important?

Isaiah is clear that Jesus is going to burn up those found eating pork at the Second Coming, and a true Christian will read that and make the decision to stop doing that which offends Him, including throwing out bacon and pork chops.

Then you have to show why a prophecy given to the nation and people of Israel applies to the church.

An apt description of the Antichrist power, the papacy, which prohibits marriage among their clergy, commands no meat to be eaten on Friday, which is a mortal sin during Lent.

Of course, catholic sympathizers give the Antichrist a pass and always point to the SDA church as the subject of 1 Timothy 4:3 although Isaiah 66 absolutely affirms eating unclean mean will get you burned to a crisp at the Second Coming, no matter how high you raise the praise in church.

Well they gave up the3 mortal sin on Fridays, and this says meats period. Not on certain days. Stop deflecting.

All scholars agree Paul was constantly faced with Jewish converts who insisted Christians must keep the annual Jewish feast days. Therefore, when we read one "eateth herbs" and "one man esteemeth one day above another" Paul is referring to the annual feast days not the weekly Sabbath or the laws of clean/unclean which predate Moses, according to Genesis 7 and Genesis 26.

Why do Christians ignore this and insist God had no laws or commandments at all until Moses? So they can argue that all laws ceased after the Cross and do what they want instead of what God wants, even Isaiah 66:15-17 KJV warns them what will happen if they do that at the Second Coming.

All Scholars? Not even close!

Unnecessary ritual hand washing was the issue here. The Jews insisted the ritual prevented "spiritual defilement" while consuming clean foods - so Jesus had to tell them it ain't what goes in that defiles you, it's the unconverted heart in us which is made known by evil words and actions.

And Jesus went further to say NOTHING that enters the mouth defiles a man. that is more than having dirt on your hands.

What kind of food did Jesus refer to as going in and coming out the poop chute?

Clean food - not unclean. You eaters of abominable things are twisting the Scriptures to the point that you are in danger of "your own destruction" on the day Jesus comes with fire, according to Isaiah 66:15-17 KJV.

Wrong again. Jesus is not a moron. Clean foods would not defile a man so your argument has no merit.

Perhaps you should read Isaiah 66:15-17 KJV where it PLAINLY says Jesus is coming with fire to burn to a crisp those found eating pork, no matter how high they raise their praise hands in church.

So to you salvation is trusting in Jesus and not eating pork and mice?

You will not find a single text where believers ate anything unclean and twisting the words of Paul and Jesus out of context will not establish that. If Peter didn't know what his dream meant, who are YOU to insist it means everything is now on the menu, especially after Peter himself said the dream was about racism, not a lunch menu?

Yes in Galatians. Peter lived like the gentiles, which means he ate what teh gentiles ate.

Also Paul said this:

25 Whatsoever is sold in the shambles, that eat, asking no question for conscience sake:

26 For the earth is the Lord's, and the fulness thereof.

27 If any of them that believe not bid you to a feast, and ye be disposed to go; whatsoever is set before you, eat, asking no question for conscience sake.

28 But if any man say unto you, this is offered in sacrifice unto idols, eat not for his sake that shewed it, and for conscience sake: for the earth is the Lord's, and the fulness thereof:

The shambles were in Gentiles cities and they sacrificed many unclean animals (according to the law of Moses) and Paul said eat.

And remember Paul said this:

1 Timothy 4

King James Version

​

4 Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;
2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;
3 Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.

And a basic word study shows that it was a command to abstain always from meats, not just on fridays or Lent . As Paul said god created pigs to be received with thanksgiving to those who believe.

 

[Phoneman777]

1 Timothy 4:4
For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving:

So, if I placed a plate of baked skunk smothered in stinkbug sauce, you're not allowed to refuse it...right? After all, "every" creature of God is good...right?

(If you keep reading, it says what we're allowed to eat is "sanctified by the Word of God" - now ask yourself: Where in Word of God does the Lord "sanctify" or "set apart" animals that are acceptable for food? Leviticus 23, which we can safely conclude existed before Moses, according to Genesis 7 and Genesis 26.)

The New Covenant is in force now... not the old covenant.

The Old Covenant was the Ten Commandments written in stone, the New Covenant is the Ten Commandments written in our heart. The 6th commandment forbids murdering ourselves - not only with swords and guns but with poisonous animals that bring disease and death.

I see your quote from the old testament... which has been done away with and replaced by a new High Priest (Jesus) and the law has been changed from the law of Moses to the Law of Christ, aka the Law of Liberty

The Mosaic Law was nailed to the Cross, but the Ten Commandments "stand fast forever and ever" (Psalms 111:7-8 KJV).

What "law" is the "Law of Liberty"?
James 2:10-12 KJV
[10] For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.
[11] For he that said, Do not commit adultery, said also, Do not kill. Now if thou commit no adultery, yet if thou kill, thou art become a transgressor of the law.
[12] So speak ye, and so do, as they that shall be judged by the law of liberty.

The same law that allows me to walk the streets in liberty and freedom is the same law that condemns thieves and murderers.

God's Word teaches the old covenant has been done away with because we now have a NEW covenant

The New Covenant is the same law that was written in stone now written on the heart.

God's Word teaches that Christians are NOT following Moses as their high priest because now we have a NEW High Priest Who is Jesus Christ?

Jesus is the God of the Old Testament and is the very same God Who wrote the Ten Commandments on stone at Sinai, and when He came to us in flesh, He said to everyone, "If ye love Me, keep My commandments".

Those who truly love Jesus obey His commandments - they don't fight for excuses to disobey Him.

Hebrews 7:12
For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law.

God did away with the old covenant where Moses was the high priest and made a new Covenant where Jesus Christ is the High Priest and since the priesthood has been changed, there has been a change of the law from the law of Moses to the Law of Christ..

More reckless interpretation. The "change" Paul is here talking about is the requirement that the High Priest come through the line of the Levites.

Jesus is the Lion of the tribe of Judah.

This "change" has nothing to do with the Ten Commandments, unless you're willing to argue the Christian is free to murder, sleep around, steal, and worship at the throne of Satan. Are you? I don't think so.

Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.

No one argues we are justified by keeping the Ten Commandments - we're justified by grace through faith which is evidenced by keeping the Ten Commandments (1 John 2:3-4 KJV).

Those who fight against the law prove they are not yet saved by grace and in danger of hellfire.

Those who try to keep the law of Moses are responsible for keeping ALL of the law of Moses and if they don’t keep all of the law, they are guilty of failing to keep the law. Christians are NOT called to keep the law of Moses... we are under the law of Christ now. (see - Galatians 6:2, 1 Corinthians 9:21, James 2:12, James 1:25, Romans 8:2, 2 Peter 1:4-10)

James 2:10
For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.

You illegitimately lump the Mosaic Law in with the Moral Law of Ten Commandments. The Mosaic Law was nailed to the Cross, while the Moral Laws "stand fast forever and ever". The Mosaic Law began at Sinai and ended at the Cross, while the Ten Commandments existed BEFORE Sinai: Cain knew not to murder, Rachel knew not to steal, Abraham knew not to lie, Joseph knew not to "sin" in adultery and Ezekiel says Satan "sinned" in heaven (Ezekiel 28:16 KJV) and "sin is the transgression of the law" (1 John 3:4 KJV).

 

[Ronald Nolette]

The Old Covenant was the Ten Commandments written in stone, the New Covenant is the Ten Commandments written in our heart. The 6th commandment forbids murdering ourselves - not only with swords and guns but with poisonous animals that bring disease and death.

7 But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away:

The Mosaic Law was nailed to the Cross, but the Ten Commandments "stand fast forever and ever" (Psalms 111:7-8 KJV).

7 But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away:

The Mosaic Law was 613 commands of which ten were written in stone. NO Jew would agree with you that the ten were not part of the Mosaic Law.

 

[Big Boy Johnson]

So, if I placed a plate of baked skunk smothered in stinkbug sauce, you're not allowed to refuse it...right? After all, "every" creature of God is good...right?

(If you keep reading, it says what we're allowed to eat is "sanctified by the Word of God" - now ask yourself: Where in Word of God does the Lord "sanctify" or "set apart" animals that are acceptable for food? Leviticus 23, which we can safely conclude existed before Moses, according to Genesis 7 and Genesis 26.)

Feel free to ignore 1 Timothy 4:4.

People can actually eat skunk, after it's been de-skunked! It would not be a sin to eat skunk under the New Covenant.

I'm not a fan of skunk meat but if I was starving and had no other options... pass the ketchup!

The Old Covenant was the Ten Commandments written in stone, the New Covenant is the Ten Commandments written in our heart. The 6th commandment forbids murdering ourselves - not only with swords and guns but with poisonous animals that bring disease and death.

Feel free to remove 1 Timothy 4:4 from your bible then.

Yes, God's moral law has been around since the beginning when He first created man.

This is not the law of Moses which modern day judaizers are trying to get Christians to go back to and forsake the New Covenant as we see in the book of Galatians.

What "law" is the "Law of Liberty"?

In the New Testament, many mentions of “the law” is actually referring to Law of Christ (aka the Law of Liberty) and is not talking about the old testament law. Christians are NOT called to keep or live under the old testament law, but we ARE called to live under the Law of Christ.

Ultimately this means we are called to abide In Christ which is living after the Spirit and not after the flesh, or to be spiritually minded and not carnally minded (see Romans 8). As we see in Romans 8, to be spiritually minded is life and peace but to be carnally minded is death which is separation from the Lord.

Galatians 6:2
Bear ye one another's burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ.

1 Corinthians 9:21
To them that are without law, as without law, (being not without law to God, but under the law to Christ,) that I might gain them that are without law.

James 2:12
So speak ye, and so do, as they that shall be judged by the law of liberty.

James 1:25
But whoso looketh into the perfect law of liberty, and continueth therein, he being not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed.

Romans 8:2
For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death.

*Free as in no longer being a slave to sin, as in stop doing sinful things!

2 Peter 1:4-10
Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust.
And beside this, giving all diligence, add to your faith virtue; and to virtue knowledge;
And to knowledge temperance; and to temperance patience; and to patience godliness;
And to godliness brotherly kindness; and to brotherly kindness charity.
For if these things be in you, and abound, they make you that ye shall neither be barren nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ.
But he that lacketh these things is blind, and cannot see afar off, and hath forgotten that he was purged from his old sins.
Wherefore the rather, brethren, give diligence to make your calling and election sure: for if ye do these things, ye shall never fall:

1 Thessalonians 4:3-8
For this is the will of God, even your sanctification, that ye should abstain from fornication:
That every one of you should know how to possess his vessel in sanctification and honour;
Not in the lust of concupiscence, even as the Gentiles which know not God:
That no man go beyond and defraud his brother in any matter: because that the Lord is the avenger of all such, as we also have forewarned you and testified.
For God hath not called us unto uncleanness, but unto holiness.
He therefore that despiseth, despiseth not man, but God, who hath also given unto us his holy Spirit.

(*Notice what Paul said about his own body in 1 Corinthians 9:27)

Colossians 3:6-10
For which things' sake the wrath of God cometh on the children of disobedience:
In the which ye also walked some time, when ye lived in them.
But now ye also put off all these; anger, wrath, malice, blasphemy, filthy communication out of your mouth.
Lie not one to another, seeing that ye have put off the old man with his deeds;
And have put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him:

Those that do not put on the New Man and quit walking after the flesh, the wrath of God comes upon them for their disobedience because God is NOT mocked, if we sow to the flesh we shall of the flesh reap corruption (Gal 6:7,8)

2 Thessalonians 1:7-9
And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels,
In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ:
Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power;

Things end very badly for those that do not obey the gospel.

The New Covenant is the same law that was written in stone now written on the heart.

Wrong. Jesus upped the standard!

Hebrews 7:12
For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law.

Hebrews 10:9
Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second.

In the New Testament... there is a new priesthood where Jesus is our High Priest instead of Moses and as such we are no longer under the law of Moses, but now we are under the Law of Christ.

In the New Testament, many mentions of “the law” is actually referring to Law of Christ (aka the Law of Liberty) and is not talking about the old testament law. Christians are NOT called to keep or live under the old testament law, but we ARE called to live under the Law of Christ.

Ultimately this means we are called to abide In Christ which is living after the Spirit and not after the flesh, or to be spiritually minded and not carnally minded (see Romans 8). As we see in Romans 8, to be spiritually minded is life and peace but to be carnally minded is death which is separation from the Lord.

Jesus is the God of the Old Testament and is the very same God Who wrote the Ten Commandments on stone at Sinai, and when He came to us in flesh, He said to everyone, "If ye love Me, keep My commandments".

Those who truly love Jesus obey His commandments - they don't fight for excuses to disobey Him.

Yes, 9 of the 10 commandments are in the New Testament... but Saturday sabbath is not because the REST we have been called to under the New Covenant is much more than setting aside one day as being holy in which to rest and worship the Lord.

Under the New Covenant was are called to abide IN Christ where everyday is a day of rest and every day is holy unto the Lord where everyday we cease from doing our own work.

This "change" has nothing to do with the Ten Commandments, unless you're willing to argue the Christian is free to murder, sleep around, steal, and worship at the throne of Satan. Are you? I don't think so.

Only the free gracers and the OSAS people claim all that.

Those who fight against the law prove they are not yet saved by grace and in danger of hellfire.

Well enjoy keeping the law of moses... I'll stick with Jesus and the Law of Christ as taught under the New Covenant.

You illegitimately lump the Mosaic Law in with the Moral Law of Ten Commandments.

God's moral law has been around since the beginning... But, the 10 Commandments were written down as part of the Law of Moses. The Mosaic Law refers to the laws God gave Moses on Mount Sinai after releasing the Israelites from slavery in Egypt. They include the Ten Commandments, ordinances for living in society, and regulations for worship (requirements for priests, sacrifices, feasts, and the temple).

Under the New Covenant the moral law includes 9 of the 10 commandments but the standard is higher under the New Covenant as we are called to abide in Christ and allow Christ to abide in us as we our lives to the leading of the Holy Spirit from within

 

[Phoneman777]

7 But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away:

7 But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away:

Yes, the glorious law that existed long ago before Moses but was later "codified" in stone during the time of Moses has passed and now shines brightly in the "fleshly tables of the heart" of the true Christian.

The Mosaic Law was 613 commands of which ten were written in stone. NO Jew would agree with you that the ten were not part of the Mosaic Law.

The Bible makes a distinction between the Law of God/Law of Moses. Disagree? Here's the clearest one:

Name a single one of the Ten Commandments God allows us to break.
Name a single one of the Law of Mose God commands us to keep.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Yes, the glorious law that existed long ago before Moses but was later "codified" in stone during the time of Moses has passed and now shines brightly in the "fleshly tables of the heart" of the true Christian.

The Bible makes a distinction between the Law of God/Law of Moses. Disagree? Here's the clearest one:

Name a single one of the Ten Commandments God allows us to break.
Name a single one of the Law of Mose God commands us to keep.

The church is not under the sabbath law . we are not required ot keep Saturday as the Sabbath, we have entered in to full Sabbath rest.

 

[Big Boy Johnson]

Yes, the glorious law that existed long ago before Moses but was later "codified" in stone during the time of Moses has passed and now shines brightly in the "fleshly tables of the heart" of the true Christian.

That would be the moral law and it does not include Saturday sabbath since we see Saturday sabbath is not given as a requirement for Christians under the New Covenant

The church is not under the sabbath law . we are not required ot keep Saturday as the Sabbath, we have entered in to full Sabbath rest.

Exactly.

To see a write up about this with lots of details - Click Here

 

[Hobie]

You are free to have sexual relations with someone other than your wife/husband because you are "free from the law"?
You are free now to worship a log of wood in the forest because that was an OT law which now doesn't exist for Christians?

Does that apply to all the Ten Commandments, and all the health laws, and all the laws concerning incest, and slavery, and restoring what you damage of your neighbours property and/or belongings... All now irrelevant because you've been forgiven of doing those things in the past? How does that make any sense? The Father sent His only begotten Son to die and suffer in your place because of your sin, and now says it's okay to continue doing those things which before Jesus had to die for?

Well, I dont think most Christians would want to do stuff like that, but thats just my humble opinion, or as some like to post, IMHO...

 

[Hobie]

The church is not under the sabbath law . we are not required ot keep Saturday as the Sabbath, we have entered in to full Sabbath rest.

This is just plain good sense being given out, God knew the danger of some of these things and gave warning, that seems good to me..

 

[BarneyFife]

7 But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away:

The introduction to this passage finds Paul declaring to the Corinthian brethren: "You are our epistle written in our hearts, known and read of all men: forasmuch as you are manifestly declared to be the epistle of Christ ministered by us, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in tables of stone, but in fleshy tables of the heart.” 2 Cor. 3:2, 3.

Here is the key to interpret the words that follow. His figure of speech is patently borrowed from the Scriptural contrast between the old and the new covenant, "Tables of stone" contrasted with “tables of the heart”, “ink" contrasted with "the Spirit of the living God.” These Corinthians, he said, were "ministered by us.”

By an easy transition Paul moves into a discussion of the two covenants by adding immediately that Christ "also hath made us able ministers of the new testament [covenant]; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter kills, but the spirit gives life.” (The word ‘testament’ in this and almost all other instances in the New Testament does not have the meaning of a “will as made by a testator in anticipation of death, but of covenant, and is so translated in the RSV.)

We might close the discussion right here, for our examination of the two covenants revealed clearly that the ratifying of the new covenant did not mean the abolishing of the, Ten Commandments. However, let us proceed.

“But if the ministration of death, written and engraved in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not steadfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away: how shall not the ministration of the spirit be rather glorious? For if the ministration of condemnation be glory, much more does the ministration of righteousness exceed in glory. For even that which was made glorious had no glory in this respect, by reason of the glory that excels. For if that which is done away was glorious, much more that which remains is glorious. Seeing then that we have such hope, we use great plainness of speech: and not as Moses, which put a vale over his face, that the children of Israel could not steadfastly look to the end of that which is abolished.” Verses 7-13.

Here is a series of contrasts, intended not so much to belittle the old dispensation as to glorify the new. It was ever Paul's studied endeavor to prove that Christ and His ministry are the blazing glory beside which the spiritual glory of the former times seems pale. This argument by contrast particularly marks the book of Hebrews, which was written for the Jewish believers, who, until they accepted Christ, had thought that the glory of Sinai and the ministration of the divine law under the Jewish priests and rulers were the last word in heavenly glory.

The contrasts that Paul seeks to make are essentially the same as the contrasts between the old and new covenants:

1. "The ministration of “death" versus ”the ministration of the spirit."​

2. "Ministration of condemnation" versus "ministration of righteousness."​

3. "Letter killes" versus -spirit gives life.”​

4. “Was glorious- versus -exceed in glory.”​

5. "Done away" versus "remains."​

Numbers one and two are simply variant expressions.

The questions before us are therefore:

1. What are these two ministrations?​

2. What is meant by letter and spirit?​

3. What is this relative "glory"?​

4. What was "done away” and what "remains "?​

The Sabbath objector quickly answers: The "ministration of death" was that which was "written and engraved in stones," and is plainly the Ten Commandments. But not so quickly. Is it correct to speak of a "ministration" and a "law" as synonymous? No. It is correct to speak of the "ministration" or, as we would say, the administering of a law. The administering of the law is the means by which it is put in operation, and is not to be confused with the law itself. Therefore, "the ministration of death," or "the ministration of condemnation," refers to the ministration, or the administering, of the law that was "written and engraved in stones.”

By a simple figure of speech, the law is called death and condemnation. On a certain occasion in Elisha's day, the sons of the prophets gathered with him around a "great pot" in which had been cooked certain "wild gourds." Evidently the gourds were poisonous, for one of those eating cried out: "There is death in the pot." (See 2 Kings 1:38-40) He meant, of course, that there was something in the pot that would cause death, and substituting cause for effect, he cried out as he died.

To be continued...

.

 

[BarneyFife]

Continued from:

7 But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away:

Paul had earlier said to the Corinthians, "The sting of death is sin: and the strength of sin is the law." 1 Cor. 15:56. That is, if it were not for the law of God, which condemns those who violate it, there would be no sin, and hence no death in penalty for sin, "for where no law is, there is no transgression.- Rom. 4:15. Thinking on this fact and the contrasting fact that ”the law is holy . . . and just, and good," caused Paul to inquire: ”Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid!" Rom. 7:12,13 Here he speaks of the law as "death." Now, how does Paul say that we escape from this "ministration of death”,- this "ministration of condemnation"? By abolishing the law of God? Listen to his words: "There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death. For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh: that the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit." Rom. 8: 1-4.

We escape from "condemnation" through Jesus Christ, who changes our hearts so that "the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us." Paul describes this changed state as walking "after the Spirit," and adds that "to be spiritually minded is life and peace." Verses 5, 6.

Here is a state of "condemnation" and "death" changed to one of "no condemnation" but rather "life." In other words, a ministration of condemnation and death exchanged for a ministration of the spirit and life. How evident that we are here discussing the two covenants. And how evident also that Paul's words in Romans 8 parallel his words in 2 Corinthians 3. That is the plain teaching of the Scripture.

The cold letter of the law as it appeared on the stone tables had no life-giving power. It could only point accusingly at every man, for all have sinned and come short of the glory of God. An administration of the law based on its letter alone results only in death for violators. But an administration of it based on the forgiveness possible through the action of God's Spirit on the heart results in life. The contrast between "letter" and "spirit" does not mean a contrast between an age of law and an age of freedom from all law. As we have already noted, when God's Spirit is in control, the law's requirements are carried out in our hearts.

What, now, of the "glory" mentioned by Paul? He plainly speaks of the relative glory of two ministrations. The justice and righteousness of God shone forth in awesome, even terrifying glory on Mount Sinai as He proclaimed His law. He stood there as a consuming fire. But how much greater the glory of God that bathed the earth with its life-giving rays where Christ came down to "save his people from their sins." Matt. 1:21. Here was the glory of justice and mercy combined, for in dying for our sins our "transgression of the law" Christ revealed how God at one and the same time could "be just, and the justifier of him which believes in Jesus." Rom. 3:26.

This brings us to the last question: What was “done away" and what "remains"? The question is really already answered. The glory attendant upon the giving of the law is so greatly excelled by the glory attendant upon the saving of men from its violation that Paul could appropriately speak of the first as "glorious" and the second as "the glory that excels.” But right here Paul weaves in an incident in connection with the giving of the law at Sinai to illustrate a point that he wishes to make in the verses that immediately follow this disputed passage. When Moses came down from the mount with the tables of stone in his hands, ”the skin of his face shone; and they were afraid to come nigh him." So Moses "put a veil on his face- while he spoke to the Israelites. (See Ex. 34:29-35)

Paul refers to this: "The children of Israel could not steadfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away." 2 Cor. 3:7. He refers to this again in verse 11, saying it was "done away," and then again in verse 13 in these words: "And not as Moses, which put a vale over his face, that the children of Israel could not steadfastly look to the end of that which is abolished."

It was the glory of the former ministration, now ended, and not the law administered, that was "done away," "abolished," even, as by historical analogy, Paul reminds them that it was the glory on Moses' face that was "done away.” The record declares that the veil was on Moses' face, not on the tables of stone, that it was his face that shone and not the tables of stone, and that it was the glory on his face that faded, not the luster that ever surrounds the divinely written Ten Commandments.

Well do Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown, in their Bible commentary, make this general observation in their comments on 2 Corinthians 3: "Still the moral law of the ten commandments, being written by the finger of God, is as obligatory now as ever; but put more on the Gospel spirit of 'love,' than on the letter of a servile obedience, and in a deeper and fuller spirituality (Matthew 5.17-48; Romans 13.9)."

 

[dev553344]

I just wanted to say that I ate some side pork the other day. My Dad lives on it and is late 70's now and going strong. Long live the pork eaters.