Calendar
Retailers
Stack & Reach
Custom Geometry Calculator (beta)
More To Come...
MAIN
INDEX
RULES &
LEGEND
LOG
IN
Search
this forum
this category
all forums
for
All words
Any words
Whole Phrase
(
options
)
Newsletter Signup
Slowtwitch Forums
:
Lavender Room
:
The Bible Thread: some passages "correct only for that time"?
1
2
3
4
5
6
View All
Tri Forum
Classifieds
Lavender Room
Jobs
The Womens
Print Thread
Old and Haggard
Jun 25, 08 8:39
Post #1 of 139 (932 views)
The Bible Thread: some passages "correct only for that time"?
Can't Post
Here ya go.
How is it that the Old Testament contains some stuff that is only applicable to the times in which they were written?
Who decides which stuff is no longer applicable?
Why would the inerrant word of God not be timeless?
Why is some stuff to be taken literally and some only as allegory?
Again, who decides which is which?
-----------------------------------
Ken Lehner
"reread klenher [sic] and pretty much skip the rest." - desert dude 5/25/2008
BarryP
Jun 25, 08 8:46
Post #2 of 139 (923 views)
Re: The Bible Thread: some passages "correct only for that time"? [klehner]
[
In reply to
]
Can't Post
Quote
Again, who decides which is which?
You do, and you get to tell everyone else they are wrong and they get to tell you that you are wrong. Then you all get to live, eat, sleep, poop, and die just like people have been doing for years.
______________________________________________
-Barry Pollock (aka Baron Von Speedypants)
-Running Coach
RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485
or you can search Runtraining## where ## is a number from 1-16.
TriToy
Jun 25, 08 10:10
Post #3 of 139 (872 views)
Re: The Bible Thread: some passages "correct only for that time"? [klehner]
[
In reply to
]
Can't Post
Jewish view is that it is shorthand - that at the same time the Torah was given the oral tradition was given - which is all the details. That was handed down directly. Later codified as the gemara.....
The Sanhedrin (12 rabbis) used to decide what was applicable....or rather how to interpret the laws in the Torah for the current time....
In the end each individual picks and chooses - some directly some by following what their spiritual leader tells them.
---
cat formerly CatIsTriing
Sponsored by Suntheanine, Lycored and Celadrin
really I am sponsored - not a joke!
Well-Behaved Women Seldom Make History
--Laurel Thatcher Ulrich
last tri in 83
Jun 25, 08 10:32
Post #4 of 139 (852 views)
Re: The Bible Thread: some passages "correct only for that time"? [klehner]
[
In reply to
]
Can't Post
Short Answer:
Before Jesus - strict adherence to God's laws was the ticket to heaven.
After Jesus - new covenant between God and mankind, adherance to OT laws not a ticket to heaven. Salvation is through belief in Jesus.
_____________________________________________
Conservative in exile.
(This post was
edited
by last tri in 83 on Jun 25, 08 10:34)
Maui
Jun 25, 08 10:32
Post #5 of 139 (850 views)
Re: The Bible Thread: some passages "correct only for that time"? [CatIsTriing]
[
In reply to
]
Can't Post
For some of us common sense is just enough.
slowbern
Jun 25, 08 10:39
Post #6 of 139 (841 views)
Re: The Bible Thread: some passages "correct only for that time"? [klehner]
[
In reply to
]
Can't Post
Ken,
Catistriing gave a good answer.
It is important to remember too that the OT, particularly the Pentateuch, is really the basis for a Theocracy...not necessarily a mystical religion.
I also think that it is important for Christians to take into consideration the NT and how Jesus interpreted the OT and the old laws. He didn't preach against them, but I think he redefined them.
Language and translation are important things to take into consideration too. I have listened to lectures by Jewish linguists who explain (in English) how the OT translates from the original languages doesn't really work neatly into the Thee's and Thou's of the King James. Understanding the historical significance of language and translation is HUGE.
Bernie
_______________
There, Sphere, are you happy?
TriToy
Jun 25, 08 10:41
Post #7 of 139 (838 views)
Re: The Bible Thread: some passages "correct only for that time"? [Maui]
[
In reply to
]
Can't Post
In Reply To
For some of us common sense is just enough.
That wasn't what the OP was asking
---
cat formerly CatIsTriing
Sponsored by Suntheanine, Lycored and Celadrin
really I am sponsored - not a joke!
Well-Behaved Women Seldom Make History
--Laurel Thatcher Ulrich
Marco in BC
Jun 25, 08 10:44
Post #8 of 139 (831 views)
Re: The Bible Thread: some passages "correct only for that time"? [last tri in 83]
[
In reply to
]
Can't Post
In Reply To
After Jesus - new covenant between God and mankind, adherance to OT laws not a ticket to heaven. Salvation is through belief in Jesus.
if that was the case there wouldn't be the whole 'homosexuality is wrong because the Bible says so', looking at things from the outside it seems that the Bible is brought up only when it's convenient to do so...
--
A wise man can learn more from a foolish question than a fool can learn from a wise answer.
Old and Haggard
Jun 25, 08 10:44
Post #9 of 139 (831 views)
Re: The Bible Thread: some passages "correct only for that time"? [last tri in 83]
[
In reply to
]
Can't Post
In Reply To
Short Answer:
Before Jesus - strict adherence to God's laws was the ticket to heaven.
After Jesus - new covenant between God and mankind, adherance to OT laws not a ticket to heaven. Salvation is through belief in Jesus.
Short question: so what do we do with God's laws as stated in or interpreted from the OT?
-----------------------------------
Ken Lehner
"reread klenher [sic] and pretty much skip the rest." - desert dude 5/25/2008
Maui
Jun 25, 08 10:46
Post #10 of 139 (825 views)
Re: The Bible Thread: some passages "correct only for that time"? [CatIsTriing]
[
In reply to
]
Can't Post
I know, sorry, kinda bored at work today.
( and, clearly, I didn't use the "common sense" I brag about. :p )
TriToy
Jun 25, 08 11:00
Post #11 of 139 (811 views)
Re: The Bible Thread: some passages "correct only for that time"? [Maui]
[
In reply to
]
Can't Post
no problem...
---
cat formerly CatIsTriing
Sponsored by Suntheanine, Lycored and Celadrin
really I am sponsored - not a joke!
Well-Behaved Women Seldom Make History
--Laurel Thatcher Ulrich
slowbern
Jun 25, 08 11:08
Post #12 of 139 (804 views)
Re: The Bible Thread: some passages "correct only for that time"? [klehner]
[
In reply to
]
Can't Post
Short question: so what do we do with God's laws as stated in or interpreted from the OT?
Sometimes it is important to know where stuff came from.
I have a contract at work. It is a continuous Working Agreement that is a history of 60 years of collective bargaining. There is some stuff in there that really doesn't apply too much any more, but we leave it in mostly as a reference.
The same is true of our Constitution. When we made our amendments, why didn't we just change the wording of the Articles?
Christianity's roots are in Judaism and the Old Testament.
Bernie
_______________
There, Sphere, are you happy?
Old and Haggard
Jun 25, 08 11:16
Post #13 of 139 (795 views)
Re: The Bible Thread: some passages "correct only for that time"? [slowbern]
[
In reply to
]
Can't Post
In Reply To
I have a contract at work. It is a continuous Working Agreement that is a history of 60 years of collective bargaining. There is some stuff in there that really doesn't apply too much any more, but we leave it in mostly as a reference.
Are you not bound by that stuff?
-----------------------------------
Ken Lehner
"reread klenher [sic] and pretty much skip the rest." - desert dude 5/25/2008
slowbern
Jun 25, 08 11:30
Post #14 of 139 (782 views)
Re: The Bible Thread: some passages "correct only for that time"? [klehner]
[
In reply to
]
Can't Post
Are you not bound by that stuff?
It depends. If there is more recent language that interprets the older language (for instance a Memorandum of Understanding about a Grievance resolution or an Arbitration award) than we are bound by the more recent language.
But if there is nothing to contradict the older language than it would still be binding...on both sides. For instance, we have a clause that says something like "There will be no use of efficiency reports." It has been there longer than any current member of the department and it is the only mention of efficiency reports in any departmental publication (rules and regs, policies and procedures, SOP's, etc.). Last year our Chief got an ad in an e-mail from a company that you would hire to "improve the efficiency of your workplace." So, he went to their website and printed off some of their questionnaires and suggestions and tried to implement them. So I whipped out that clause and told him that if he wanted to work with us and negotiate some sort of a system like that, fine. But he wasn't going to just steal a company's system (in part) and implement it as a way to improve our department. I don't know if that answers your question or not.
Bernie
_______________
There, Sphere, are you happy?
Monk
Jun 25, 08 11:34
Post #15 of 139 (774 views)
Re: The Bible Thread: some passages "correct only for that time"? [klehner]
[
In reply to
]
Can't Post
Its like the Constitution--a "living" document.
last tri in 83
Jun 25, 08 11:44
Post #16 of 139 (765 views)
Re: The Bible Thread: some passages "correct only for that time"? [klehner]
[
In reply to
]
Can't Post
Short question: so what do we do with God's laws as stated in or interpreted from the OT?
I don't really know of any firm statements in new testament scripture that tell us what to do with OT laws. The debate on that issue goes on and is the basis for the formation of many different denominations. Suffice it to say, new testament Christians as not bound to those laws and tranditions as a basis for their salvation.
_____________________________________________
Conservative in exile.
TriFloyd
Jun 25, 08 12:04
Post #17 of 139 (743 views)
Re: The Bible Thread: some passages "correct only for that time"? [last tri in 83]
[
In reply to
]
Can't Post
Short Answer:
Before Jesus - strict adherence to God's laws was the ticket to heaven.
After Jesus - new covenant between God and mankind, adherance to OT laws not a ticket to heaven. Salvation is through belief in Jesus.
You guys weren't kidding.
This is definitely wrong. The means to salvation is consistent throughout the Bible ... by grace alone through faith alone in God alone. The OT was forward looking; the NT was backward looking. For a short Bible proof, look at Hebrews 11 ... all these OT characters were saved "by faith."
sphere
Jun 25, 08 12:05
Post #18 of 139 (737 views)
Re: The Bible Thread: some passages "correct only for that time"? [slowbern]
[
In reply to
]
Can't Post
Catistriing gave a good answer.
"In the end each individual picks and chooses..."
That, she did.
"The nice part about being a pessimist is that you are constantly being either proven right or pleasantly surprised." - George F. Will
TriFloyd
Jun 25, 08 12:15
Post #19 of 139 (726 views)
Re: The Bible Thread: some passages "correct only for that time"? [klehner]
[
In reply to
]
Can't Post
How is it that the Old Testament contains some stuff that is only applicable to the times in which they were written?
Let's use the regulative principle of worship here. What God has mandated remains until God changes it. The ceremonial laws are no longer necessary in the NT because of Jesus. Many governership laws are no longer applicable because we don't have a theocracy anymore. The moral laws remain.
Who decides which stuff is no longer applicable?
God decides. The Holy Spirit (the Another Counselor promised by Jesus) guides God's church. It's the same way that Jesus held his followers accountable to the OT laws notwithstanding God not saying, "I hereby adopt these books in the OT." Beyond that, let's talk about specific laws that you have in question. For the most part, it's not that difficult to figure it out.
Why would the inerrant word of God not be timeless?
In one sense, it is timeless. In other sense, it's not timeless because Jesus' coming changed things. In the OT, God adopted a signle people group (the Israelites) to bring the good news. The Israelites failed. God (as we see in Romans 1; and promised in Jer. 27?) then writes his code on everyone's heart and expands his people to include all nations, tribes, etc. (Acts / Romans).
Why is some stuff to be taken literally and some only as allegory?
Context. Beyond that, you'll have to ask more particular circumstances. When God says he owns the cattle on a thousand hills, then, of course, that does not mean that on hill #1001 suddently God's ownership ends. Context. When God says your descendents will be as sands on the seashore, that just means lots of descendents more than you can count; not a particular restriction to the exact number of sand particles.
Again, who decides which is which?
Context and the church. Beyond that, please use a specific example.
TriFloyd
Jun 25, 08 12:19
Post #20 of 139 (719 views)
Re: The Bible Thread: some passages "correct only for that time"? [last tri in 83]
[
In reply to
]
Can't Post
I don't really know of any firm statements in new testament scripture that tell us what to do with OT laws.
Read Acts 10 about Peter's vision.
The Penguin
Jun 25, 08 12:21
Post #21 of 139 (716 views)
Re: The Bible Thread: some passages "correct only for that time"? [last tri in 83]
[
In reply to
]
Can't Post
Short Question: for Christians, I think it comes down to how you evaluate different revelations. If the crux (no pun intended) of your belief system is Jesus Christ, then I think you interpret the Hebrew Bible, or Old Testament, through how Jesus lived and what he taught. Your belief would indicate that if Jesus is the son of God, then God incarnate is a better revelation of God and God's will than oral tradition. (Much of the Sermon on the Mount in the Gospel of Matthew involves interpretation of Jewish teachings, including Hebrew Bible texts so this might be a natural place to start.)
Its interesting to note that many of Jesus' teachings weren't necessarily all that revolutionary. There is ample evidence in Rabbinic tradition preceding Jesus birth of teachings very similar to or identical to Jesus teachings.
To answer the OP, determining what scriptures are still relevant and what scriptures can be disregarded as being "of another time" is not a clear-cut process. Otherwise, there would be fewer churches and fewer people getting killed for theological reasons. Generally, though, I think its important to understand the context of what's being read (date of writing, intended audience, motivation for writing, etc.) and to treat like passages similarly. For example, the sections in Leviticus that refer to homosexuality as an abomination (e.g., Leviticus 18) are accompanied by texts indicating that wearing cloth spun from multiple types of fibers (even bike shorts) or getting tattoos (even m-dot ones) is a sin. I think its difficult to discard one of these texts as having "cultural" basis (and so can be disregarded), but not the other. At any rate, the question you ask is an important, difficult one and, like everything that attempts to articulate the will of God, answering the question ought to be done with no shortage of humility.
MattinSF
Jun 25, 08 12:24
Post #22 of 139 (706 views)
Re: The Bible Thread: some passages "correct only for that time"? [klehner]
[
In reply to
]
Can't Post
Show me a man who is an expert on the Bible and I'll show you one who has wasted a huge chunk of his life.
Just my cynical opinion.
----------------------------------------------------------
HOPE is a plan that worked. CHANGE is a plan that worked. BELIEVE is a plan that worked.
last tri in 83
Jun 25, 08 12:34
Post #23 of 139 (694 views)
Re: The Bible Thread: some passages "correct only for that time"? [TriFloyd]
[
In reply to
]
Can't Post
That's not exactly a clear answer as to how we are to observe OT law, and in fact seems to reinforce what I said about no OT religious conditions having to be met to qualify for NT salvation.
_____________________________________________
Conservative in exile.
TriFloyd
Jun 25, 08 12:39
Post #24 of 139 (686 views)
Re: The Bible Thread: some passages "correct only for that time"? [The Penguin]
[
In reply to
]
Can't Post
For example, the sections in Leviticus that refer to homosexuality as an abomination (e.g., Leviticus 18) are accompanied by texts indicating that wearing cloth spun from multiple types of fibers (even bike shorts) or getting tattoos (even m-dot ones) is a sin. I think its difficult to discard one of these texts as having "cultural" basis (and so can be disregarded), but not the other. At any rate, the question you ask is an important, difficult one and, like everything that attempts to articulate the will of God, answering the question ought to be done with no shortage of humility.
These examples are good. Homosexuality is a great example. It violates God's created order (Romans 1) and it's reinforced in the NT (Romans 1). So, these are 2 ways that might help the church decide if it endures into the New Covenant. The tatoos are another great example ... a harder one. I've heard arguments both ways ... 1) that it was just an OT rule to against the Israelites being like other nations (i.e., not applicable in the NT); or 2) it's more than just an OT rule becuase it's against the created order and it's close proximity to the homosexuality rules (i.e., applicable in the NT), although it's never reinforced in the NT. I don't have tatoos because in this case I'm erring on the side of the restriction. Who decides finally? I've never seen a new denomination started over the application of tatoo restrictions as it's kind of a peripheral issue.
jepvb
Jun 25, 08 12:48
Post #25 of 139 (674 views)
Re: The Bible Thread: some passages "correct only for that time"? [MattinSF]
[
In reply to
]
Can't Post
In Reply To
Show me a man who is an expert on the Bible and I'll show you one who has wasted a huge chunk of his life.
Just my cynical opinion.
That means a lot coming from someone w/ 8000+ posts on a triathlon internet forum.
1
2
3
4
5
6
View All
Print Thread
MAIN
RULES &
LOG
