Skip to comments.What Jesus said about homosexuality -- Part 1
Posted on 11/30/2011 11:38:02 AM PST by ReformationFan
It's another slogan that passes for thought among the thinking-averse: "Jesus didn't say anything about homosexuality...." The rest of the sentence remains unspoken for fear that laughter might break out. "Jesus didn't say anything about homosexuality; therefore He approves of it."
First of all, that's what's known as an "argument from silence;" a logical fallacy. By this rule Jesus would be made to endorse rape, cannibalism and lots of other nasty stuff. Secondly, we cannot know whether Jesus, in His brief earthly ministry, ever mentioned homosexual sin specifically (see John 21:25), so the claim can't be substantiated. But the slogan is not only unverifiable and non-rational; it reveals ignorance of what we know Jesus did say. Though His teachings recorded in the gospels don't directly address the issue of same-sex sex, the Scriptures leave no room for an honest reader to conclude that Christ condones any sin, including this one.
Before we look at what Jesus said about homosexuality, let me explain my purpose in writing this. It isn't to put anyone down, or to say, "Jesus hates fags." If the Lord hated homosexual sinners, He would have to hate heterosexual sinners (like King David), and certainly murderers (like David, Moses and Paul), thieves, and so on, right down to jaywalkers. And me. And all Christians. If the Son of God had hated us sinners, He certainly wouldn't have endured torture and death on the cross to rescue us. To rescue us from our sins. My one intention is to help other believers respond to the far-less-than-half-truth that "Jesus didn't say anything about homosexuality."
Jesus' affirmation: The morality of the Old Testament is still valid
Contrary to the popular misconception, Jesus is not the Second Moses. He didn't come to give us new laws, or to hand out free passes to break the old ones. Christ didn't have to stand on a mountain and repeat by name every sin mentioned in the Old Testament for all of those sins to remain sins. God, by definition, doesn't change; therefore He does not change His ideas about what's right and wrong. If sin is not sin, then God is not God. *
Jesus addressed all sins generally when He said, "Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish, but to fulfill. For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass away from the Law, until all is accomplished." (Matt. 5:17,18) Again in Luke 16:16,17 He said, "The Law and the Prophets were proclaimed until John; since then the gospel of the kingdom of God is preached, and everyone is forcing his way into it. But it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for one stroke of the Law to fail."
Far from smashing the moral code revealed to Israel, Jesus didn't even relax it He tightened it.
"You have heard that the ancients were told, 'You shall not commit murder....' But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother shall be guilty before the court.... You have heard that it was said, 'You shall not commit adultery,' but I say to you, that every one who looks on a woman to lust for her has committed adultery with her already in his heart." (read Matt. 5:21ff)
In this less-loved portion of the Sermon on the Mount, the Lord continues with four more laws each time with that same formula: You have heard...but I say each time showing not that the Law of God has been repealed; rather, that it reaches deeper than we ever knew.
Jesus' premise: The original pattern is God's will
In answering a question about divorce, Christ lays a foundation that has implications for our topic.
And some Pharisees came to Him, testing Him, and saying, "Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any cause at all?" And He answered and said, "Have you not read, that He who created them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, 'For this cause a man shall leave his father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife; and the two shall become one flesh'? Consequently they are no longer two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate." They said to Him, "Why then did Moses command to give her a certificate and divorce her?" He said to them, "Because of your hardness of heart, Moses permitted you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it has not been this way." (Matt. 19:3-8 NASB, emphasis mine see also Mark 10:2-9)
His argument assumes that God created things a certain way because (duh) that's the way He wanted them. If we can get back to the original pattern, before sin marred the picture, we'll be able to see God's will for human sex and marriage. That heavenly will, restated here by the Lord, is one man and one woman united in marriage for life.
Christ taunts the Pharisees, faulting them for not deducing God's perfect will regarding marriage from the simple words, the two shall become one flesh. The implications of the fact that before God joined them, He made them male and female are even more elementary.
Homosexual behavior and "gay marriage" aren't going to fit into this primal pattern, which Jesus here places above the Law of Moses. If "serial monogamy" between man/woman couples isn't God's will, then neither is anything further outside the lines drawn in the opening chapters of Genesis. Jerry Falwell popularized this argument, "God created Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve." He created them male and female for a reason. Creation involves design, and design reveals intent.
There are at least two other ways that Jesus spoke out against same-sex sex. I hope to examine those next time.
* Disbelievers have been known mock this truth, conflating universal laws with rules given to Israel to make it unique; failing to differentiate the ceremonial from the moral; and confusing changing punishments for sin, with the unchangeable sinfulness of sin. A digression for their sake is either unnecessary or unmerited.
three words: Sodom and Gomorrah
Homosexuality is a corruption of natural human sexuality. It is obvious that sexuality has a intended purpose given to it by God through the laws of nature. It is also obvious that homosexuality perverts that purpose and corrupts the process of sexuality. This is not simply based upon religion but is scientific fact.
That Jesus said that our sins go beyond the act of corruption to even the thought of being willing to commit such corruption simply speaks to the fact that sin refers to the heart and mind of man whereas the term corruption could imply to any process at all. Jesus was simply saying that it is your heart and mind that will be judged and not just simply your actions.
This contradicts what others have said claiming that some, if not all, of the laws handed to Moses do not apply to Christians.
Yashua was saying that either in thought, word, or deed you fail. That’s why you need Him to save you from your sins.
They would be incorrect. Christ never abolished the law, instead he finished the law. We are held to an even higher standard than obeying the written law by not committing the act, we must not even allow the notion to enter our hearts. Christ told us that even were we to lust after a woman, then we have committed adultery in our hearts.
That's kind of the point of the article.
If we confess Jesus as God, the third Person of the Trinity, and we state that the Bible is the Word of God, then of course Jesus spoke of homosexuality, the entire Bible is His Word.
And if the homosexual lobby still had doubts, then they should Paul’s letters to the Corinthians.
Because the doctrine of Christendom claims their doctrine begins in Matthew instead of Genesis, the doctrine fails on its face in that it claims that Yah’shua gave them a new commandment to form a new church and that this new church is the new chosen ones.
Mt 22:37 Jesus said to him, You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind. 38 This is the first and great commandment. 39 And the second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself...”
But what they fail to add is verse 40: “...On these two commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets.
And since they neither teach or study Torah(Moses), they miss the fact that Yah’shua was quoting from Torah.
Dt 6:5 You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your strength.
Lev 19:18 You shall not take vengeance, nor bear any grudge against the children of your people, but you shall love your neighbor as yourself
"For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished." ... Matthew 5:18
26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.
28 Furthermore, just as they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, so God gave them over to a depraved mind, so that they do what ought not to be done. 29 They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips,
Doesn’t He know what your sins will be, before you even commit them or are even born? Why would He breath life into someone that He knows will commit these sins?
Funny thing is that Jesus and The Word are synonomous in such that the Scriptures not only reveal Christ but thay are equivalent to Him.
So...Leviticus and even Romans witness to the fact that Jesus spoke quite a few words regarding “homosexuality”.
And further on that...
I believe we need to think and approach this issue differently.
What the “arseno-koits” do is not sex at all. It is simply self-gratification through the consensual “use” of another person. Those examples from the animal realm (anecdotally some dogs and some penguions) are never embellished with proof of an arseno-koit act...only that these “gay” animals hang out together. It is the physical act that defines a “homosexual” and that act is not intended to propagate mankind.
The word “sex” means the physical act intended to propagate mankind. We should not allow the arseno-koits alter the pure definition of words and terms.
Jesus makes mention of homosexuality in several passages.
First, you have to realize that the words “homosexual” or “gay” are modern words. Instead, Jesus makes mention of Sodom and Gomorrah, where homosexual activity was known to be widespread.
He uses the term “Sodom and Gomorrah” to set a baseline for what is wrong. There are things that are worse than homosexual acts, but the implication is that homosexual acts are still pretty bad.
- in Matthew 10:14-15, where Jesus describes how his Word, as delivered by his disciples, is to be received:
“And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words, as ye go forth out of that house or that city, shake off the dust of your feet. Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah in the day of judgment, than for that city.”
- in Matthew 10:23-24, where Jesus describes the fate of cities that did not believe after seeing His Works:
“And thou, Capernaum, shalt thou be exalted unto heaven? thou shalt go down unto Hades: for if the mighty works had been done in Sodom which were done in thee, it would have remained until this day. But I say unto you that it shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom in the day of judgment, than for thee.”
A lot of people laugh when priests are limited to men because no female apostles are acknowledged, too. Is that "an 'argument from silence;' a logical fallacy"?
This article is an opinion pretending to be logic. It picks and chooses amongst it's references and definitions in favor of its oft repeated preference for an answer. And the author is well aware of his abuse of logic, which is why he starts out by denying exactly what he then does.
The ridiculous levels of fear and loathing about this subject have been exactly the fuel that has enabled it to be used as a major cultural and - most dangerously - legal wedge in our society. What nobody can see through the rage is that enforcing general child protection laws and kicking the government out of the marriage business altogether would reduce the homosexuality issue to irrelevency. Instead, it's been agitated into paranoia, and endless arrogant and hate-filled claims of who Jesus loves and who he detests. It's utterly absurd, and makes Christians look like idiots.
It is a good thing, and I thank Him for it, that He is not like you, stuart.
You keep posing questions from a ‘mocking’ viewpoint. What IS the purpose of this question? It is somewhat sophomoric. Your focus seems to be on the ‘here and now’, completely ‘humanistic’.
Obviously, from your question, you might not allow life to one that would not do as you wished. Again, I thank God He is not like that. While you / I / we are not worthy of His love, we have it.
It would seem Jesus Himself contradicted those claiming that some, if not all, of the laws handed to Moses do not apply to Christians.
“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.” (Matt. 5:17)
The traditional Christian understanding of Old Testament commands and laws is as following:
“Although the Law given from God by Moses, as touching Ceremonies and Rites, do not bind Christian men, nor the Civil precepts thereof ought of necessity to be received in any commonwealth; yet notwithstanding, no Christian man whatsoever is free from the obedience of the Commandments which are called Moral.” (from the Anglican 39 “Articles of Religion” of 1562 (and before))
Basically, this is teaching that the commands in the Old Testament can be divided into three kinds:
Ceremonial: Having to do with the ancient Jewish religion and sacrificial system—completely fulfilled/finished in Jesus Christ (this includes the Kosher dietary regulations, blood regulations, and the Jewish feasts, etc.)
Civil: Having to do with the governance of the theocracracy of ancient Israel/Judah (which ended with the Babylonian captivity of 587 BC), but also, in a sense fulfilled/finished in Jesus Christ
Moral: Centered in the 10 Commandments—but including the sexual and other moral regulations found in the Old Testament, and summarized by Jesus as loving God (with all your heart, mind, soul, & strength) and loving your neighbor (as yourself). All still binding on Christians today.
In all the law—St. Paul is teaching that law-keeping, or morality by us does NOT SAVE....or in any way EARN us God’s favor, as Jesus shows that God loves the Christian by first by loving us—to His own death, even while we were still sinners. So the law doesn’t enable Christians to be lovable—but it does help the (already) beloved—those who believe on Jesus already, to better love God and others.
Therefore the purpose of morality—compared to other religions—is turned on its head—in that it is a response to salvation....NOT an attempt to earn it.
You cannot put God into your box, and tell him what He should and should not do. The concept of God is that He IS the Creator, and we are the created. It took Job a long trial to get to the right end point, and the poor guy was whacked around pretty roughly - more than any of us could ever have lasted - but he finally understood:
1 Then Job answered the LORD, and said,
2 I know that thou canst do every thing, and that no thought can be withholden from thee.
3 Who is he that hideth counsel without knowledge? therefore have I uttered that I understood not; things too wonderful for me, which I knew not.
4 Hear, I beseech thee, and I will speak: I will demand of thee, and declare thou unto me.
5 I have heard of thee by the hearing of the ear: but now mine eye seeth thee.
6 Wherefore I abhor myself, and repent in dust and ashes.
Job understood. God IS God. We know He is Good, but we aren't going to know all of the details that are going on in this universe. We may not like when certain things happen (certainly suffering is tough to enjoy), but we know He who does all things right is in charge, and we rest in that knowledge.
And in short, Paul responds to your question in Romans 9:
19 Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will?
20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?
21a Hath not the potter power over the clay ...
“Jesus didn’t say anything about homosexuality....” The rest of the sentence remains unspoken for fear that laughter might break out. “Jesus didn’t say anything about homosexuality; therefore He approves of it.” First of all, that’s what’s known as an “argument from silence;” a logical fallacy.
A lot of people laugh when priests are limited to men because no female apostles are acknowledged, too. Is that “an ‘argument from silence;’ a logical fallacy”?
I’m a Protestant so you’ll need to take your questions about that issue up with a Roman Catholic priest or layman. The reason I personally believe the office of teaching elder and pastor is limited to men is from the teachings of Paul the Apostle in 1 Timothy 2:12: “I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet.”
As to the main topic of the article, I just wanted to address the liberal fallacy that “Jesus didn’t say anything about homosexuality” when Mark 7:21 and Matthew 15:19 as well as his definition of marriage in Matthew 19:4-6 show clearly what He did teach concerning this subject. There’s zero biblical evidence that he ever endorsed or advocated it.
Me too. I like to ask questions to see what people think about certain things. Why is my question mocking?
If God knows the future, then He must know what a person will do, right?
If God cannot be wrong, then what He knows will happen, must happen. Right?
Why do you assume He would act like a human?
Actually not--if you are at all familiar with the biblical arguments against female ordination. Those are based primarily not simply on the fact that the primary leaders Jesus trained and ordained, the Apostles, were men--but, over the fact that specific qualifications are listed (which refer only to men), more than once, in the New Testament epistles--making clear there were no female elders (pastors/priests) allowed in the Apostolic-era 1st Century Church.
Orthodox Christianity has always said that if you cannot find biblical warrant for a change in practice or theology of the Church, then you cannot find a good reason at all to change. This is why "innovation" in theology and practice is a dirty word in orthodox Christian circles.
I don't believe the author of this article is commenting on how homosexuality is being treated politically or socially in modern America--rather he's only replying to the utterly ridiculous, a-historical claim--often made in religious circles--that Jesus would of approved of homosexual activity--since there's no record He specifically spoke about it.
The author didn't mention it, but 1st Century Judaism (like orthodox Judaism of all centuries, actually) was appalled at the rampant sexual perversion promoted and found in the Gentile world of its day.... If Jesus had deviated from that Jewish standard there is no question he would of been pilloried for it--by those who pushed for His death, and He never was... Neither were Christians later accused of being sexually permissive...by rivals who hated them. That's not an argument from silence, rather a logical deduction.
If the Bible is a unified whole--as Christianity has always taught--than one would expect Jesus to be in accord with Old Testament sexual ethics....and subsequently that the Apostles would also be in accord with Jesus and those same OT sexual ethics. This is what one finds--if you have, as Jesus put it, "the ears to hear."
Then, what’s the point of the first five books? Why haven’t the “Christian authorities” expunged them from the Bible?
No one is putting God in anyone’s box. I’m not asking God His reasons for doing what He does, I’m asking what an individual thinks is the reason.
Why do you think God did all that to Job, knowing what the outcome would be?
Is there room for just plain old common sense thinking and reasoning like yours on FR? LOL If everyone simplified their thinking like yours, half the articles and posts on these biblical subjects would disappear.
So, even lusting for a ham and cheese sandwich is a sin?
The Torah? The first 5 books are the heart of the Old Testament—and contain the moral law(s) I’m talking about. They give the earliest history of mankind, the fact that we’re made in God’s image, and his fall from Go—and the origin of sin and death—which Jesus came to save us from. They give the story of God’s people....
There is no Old Testament—or New Testament...or rational biblical message at all—without a profound understanding and acceptance of the first 5 books of the OT.
Kosher dietary regulations were clearly abrogated—with the New Covenant—that is the good news of Jesus Christ, in order to open that good news to Gentiles. The history of how this came about, practically, is found in the New Testament book of Acts.
Biblically educated Christians have not been troubled by diet since the 1st Century—and the writing of the New Testament.
People who try to make an issue of dietary regulations either WANT to cause confusion, or really don’t understand the good news of faith in Christ....or the history of the 1st Century Church at all.
Stuie and I had a little discussion yesterday, about morality. He thinks there are no moral absolutes, unchangeable right and wrong, and that no one’s moral compass can be called wrong, or that someone can have a “broken” moral compass.
His only purpose on FR that I have ever seen is to be a disruptor, and I have never seen him express one single conservative comment.
His especial fun is to slyly (in his own mind) dig at and disrupt and sow dissension on threads involving belief in God.
Why he has not been banned I will never know.
“There is no Old Testamentor New Testament...or rational biblical message at allwithout a profound understanding and acceptance of the first 5 books of the OT.”
Or obedience to its laws, all of them.
I’m not talking about people who disobey, for whatever reason, we all do some of that, knowingly, or unknowingly, that’s what Yom Kippur is all about, but Christians claim that their religion, which you have just said is founded on the Torah, openly advocates disobedience to a lot of the laws in the Torah.
No one is putting God in anyones box. Im not asking God His reasons for doing what He does, Im asking what an individual thinks is the reason.
Why do you think God did all that to Job, knowing what the outcome would be?
Job, through his trials, becomes a stronger, more faithful man than before them. I can identify with that concept. I learn more from difficult times than easy ones.
“Kosher dietary regulations were clearly abrogatedwith the New Covenantthat is the good news of Jesus Christ, in order to open that good news to Gentiles. The history of how this came about, practically, is found in the New Testament book of Acts.”
By what authority?
If God knows the future, then He must know what a person will do, right?
Yes. Bearing in mind we do have free will.
If God cannot be wrong, then what He knows will happen, must happen. Right?
He does know, read His Word.
Why do you assume He would act like a human?
I never said such a thing, quite the opposite actually.
The Triune God per sacred scripture:
‘1 Now the apostles and the brothers[a] who were throughout Judea heard that the Gentiles also had received the word of God. 2 So when Peter went up to Jerusalem, the circumcision party criticized him, saying, 3 You went to uncircumcised men and ate with them. 4 But Peter began and explained it to them in order: 5 I was in the city of Joppa praying, and in a trance I saw a vision, something like a great sheet descending, being let down from heaven by its four corners, and it came down to me. 6 Looking at it closely, I observed animals and beasts of prey and reptiles and birds of the air. 7 And I heard a voice saying to me, Rise, Peter; kill and eat. 8 But I said, By no means, Lord; for nothing common or unclean has ever entered my mouth. 9 But the voice answered a second time from heaven, What God has made clean, do not call common. 10 This happened three times, and all was drawn up again into heaven. 11 And behold, at that very moment three men arrived at the house in which we were, sent to me from Caesarea. 12 And the Spirit told me to go with them, making no distinction. These six brothers also accompanied me, and we entered the man’s house. 13 And he told us how he had seen the angel stand in his house and say, Send to Joppa and bring Simon who is called Peter; 14 he will declare to you a message by which you will be saved, you and all your household. 15 As I began to speak, the Holy Spirit fell on them just as on us at the beginning. 16 And I remembered the word of the Lord, how he said, John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit. 17 If then God gave the same gift to them as he gave to us when we believed in the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I that I could stand in God’s way? 18 When they heard these things they fell silent. And they glorified God, saying, Then to the Gentiles also God has granted repentance that leads to life.’ Acts 11: 1-18
EXACTLY!!! Deserves to be reposted.
Of course. But I also like to point out to those folks who say “I’m a Red-Letter Christian” or “I follow Jesus, not Paul” type stuff that the “Red Letter” words of Christ do not support homosexuality either.
You frame your question in a form that leads to second guess God.
It doesnt matter why I think God did what HE did to Job. HE did it, and thus it was right.
Now, although Im not going to pretend to think why God did what HE did, I can certainly state a couple of positive outcomes from Gods actions:
#1: We have the Book of Job. No matter whatever happens to us in our lives, we can look at Mr. Job and say whatever happened to me is nothing. Job got chewed up like a Doberman pinchers favorite rag doll, yet at the end he was still standing. God condescended to show Job a small portion of His Glory and Job was satisfied. He was still leprous, impoverished, deserted by family and friends yet sitting there in the dust Job was satisfied. Whatever God did was right. And we can take that with us. No matter what is happening, we know God knows and that He cares. We may not enjoy the suffering while it occurs but we can rest in the knowledge that the Good Lord knows, and if our temporal suffering serves His purposes we rest knowing that all is well. God has given us the invaluable Gift of His Word in the Bible and we are to learn from all of His Words for All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.
#2: On a personal level, Job was a righteous man and he knew he was righteous. Ezekiel even references Jobs righteousness, some 1500 years later, when he talks about Job, Daniel, and Noah being examples of righteous men in their generations. Nonetheless, self-righteousness does not get us right with God. Not by works are we saved, but by Gods Grace. This is the central message of the Gospel we are saved by the finished works of the Lord Jesus Christ not by any number of good deeds on our part. Job reached that point in Chapter 42 where he could only utter: I know that thou canst do every thing, and that no thought can be withholden from thee. Who is he that hideth counsel without knowledge? therefore have I uttered that I understood not; things too wonderful for me, which I knew not. Hear, I beseech thee, and I will speak: I will demand of thee, and declare thou unto me. I have heard of thee by the hearing of the ear: but now mine eye seeth thee. Wherefore I abhor myself, and repent in dust and ashes.
Job learned humility, and total reliance on God.
By what authority? By the authority of the Messiah, Jesus Christ, and the authority He gave His Apostles:
"Are you so dull? he asked. Dont you see that nothing that enters a person from the outside can defile them? For it doesnt go into their heart but into their stomach, and then out of the body. (In saying this, Jesus declared all foods clean.)" (Mark 7: 18,19)
"The voice spoke from heaven a second time, Do not call anything impure that God has made clean." (Act 11:9)
"Do not destroy the work of God for the sake of food. All food is clean, but it is wrong for a person to eat anything that causes someone else to stumble." (Romans 14:20) (Shows transitional phase, over "clean" (Kosher) and "unclean" food--as this was a major transitional issue to the 1st Century Church).
And apparently, if you are angry with another person, you are guilty of murder.
Mithra along with all pagan religions are based in individual spirituality with a savior and that the flesh and acts of the flesh are of no consequence. However, according to YHVH, the only thing that is based on individuality is final judgment when we all will stand before Him and give account for ourselves one by one. All things the flesh does affects the entire society. Those actions bring either blessings or curses to the entire society as well as our individual lives.(Dt 28; Joshua 7)
Take for example a person that has aids, it does not just affect that one person, it affects many for generations. Torah that came to us in the flesh as Yah’shua Messiah teaches us that disease is the result of sin(John 5:13-15) and Scripture tells us that sin is the transgression of Torah.(1 John 3:4)
When Yah’shua said in Mt 22:40 that all the law & prophets hang on Dt 6:5 & Lev 19:18, the word ‘law’ that was translated into Greek is “Torah” aka “Moses” according to Yah’shua Messiah thus it is according to Moses that all sin will be judged.
Following Torah brings both blessings & curses(Dt 28-30). Blessings for those that follow it and curses for those that don't. For the life of me I can not understand why nearly 2000 yrs ago the doctrine of Christendom chose to bring curses instead of blessing to its ecclesia and why the supposed learned theology scholars continue to hide the truth and teach that which curses rather than that which blesses.
Didn’t Jesus declare all the laws had to be followed?
No, it is those who do not study to show themselves approved who are the ones of misunderstanding. Blessings that come from following Torah are for all mankind. Yah’shua never taught that the dietary laws were abolished as these instructions are vital in obtaining the health related blessings one receives from following them. Yah’shua rebuked the rabbinic oral law of hand-washing, not the law about what is food and what is not food.
Mt 15:1 Then the scribes and Pharisees who were from Jerusalem came to Jesus, saying, 2 Why do Your disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? For they do not wash their hands when they eat bread.
3 He(Yah'shua) answered and said to them, Why do you also transgress the commandment of God because of your tradition? 4 For God commanded, saying, Honor your father and your mother; and, He who curses father or mother, let him be put to death. 5 But you say, Whoever says to his father or mother, Whatever profit you might have received from me is a gift to God 6 then he need not honor his father or mother. Thus you have made the commandment of God of no effect by your tradition. 7 Hypocrites! Well did Isaiah prophesy about you, saying:
8 These people draw near to Me with their mouth,
And honor Me with their lips,
But their heart is far from Me.
9 And in vain they worship Me,
Teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.
10 When He had called the multitude to Himself, He said to them, Hear and understand: 11 Not what goes into the mouth defiles a man; but what comes out of the mouth, this defiles a man. 12 Then His disciples came and said to Him, Do You know that the Pharisees were offended when they heard this saying?
13 But He(Yah'shua) answered and said, Every plant which My heavenly Father has not planted will be uprooted. 14 Let them alone. They are blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind leads the blind, both will fall into a ditch.
Rabbinic oral law says that unwashed hands defile food, however Yah’shua said it is the words that come out of ones mouth that defile. Also, if Yah’shua & his disciples were eating anything other than what Torah defines as food, Yah’shua would have been disqualified as Messiah as the Messiah never broke even the least of his Father's commandments let alone teach anyone else to break them.
Can you, using Scripture ALONE, define what food is?
small point of correction - Jesus is the second person of the Trinity, the Holy Spirit is the third person.
but the point is correct, the whole Bible is the word of God, since the Holy Spirit is the author.
And that..was beautiful truth perfectly articulated.
foreknowledge does not foreapproval...we have a free will and we are therefore responsible for our actions. The fact that God knows what we will do, does not mean that He approves of it!!!
The Old Covenant included the Ten Commandments, the civil laws and the priestly laws. The New Testament actually validates the Ten Commandments, but the rest of the Old Testament Law has not been validated. At the heart of the Law was the temple and the Levitical priesthood chosen to offer animal sacrifices. Obviously, today it is impossible to obey the part of the Law that requires the temple and sacrifices. The Council of Jerusalem (Acts 15) established that Gentile believers were not bound by the civil and priestly laws.
No the question doesn’t lead to second guessing God. It’s just question to you not god. Of course it doesn’t matter, but I am politely asking your opinion. Isn’t that one of the reasons for forums?
Why do you think God wanted to teach Job such a lesson?