You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Contending for the Faith: part 1 of ?
@dwells, furthermore, yes, abstaining from fornication was listed and falls under sexual immorality.
Also, so James told them to abstain from blood and then from things strangled, did James not know that things strangled had to do with the blood in the first place? If things strangled has to do with pouring out the blood, why did he give "the blood" it's own category? So James really told them 3 things to abstain from, with the blood and things strangled meaning the same thing? That doesn't make sense.
From what I've researched those 4 things, with things strangled not being explicitly commanded in the Torah, as the other three were, is a reference to the most common Pagan worship practices of their day.
Abstaining from blood is referring to the pagan practice of DRINKING BLOOD, as in instead of pouring the blood out on the ground and covering it with dirt, instead they catch the blood in a pitcher and drink the blood.
Nevertheless, abstaining from drinking blood is the same as not pouring the blood out(so you don't drink the blood). You didn't resolve the issue of your interpretation of that verse as being the same direction to not drink blood. Both "commands" are talking about the same thing if your interpretation is correct. I suggest it is not. I suggest that "things strangled" is different than "the blood.". The only question is, what does it mean and why command those 4 things and not just command Circumcision right away if it is still required of us? Circumcision is the sign of the covenant. It was the entry point into the Old Covenant. It held a supreme position in all of the commandments in the Torah, along with the Sabbath, as signs of the covenant. If it was so important, and it obviously was to the Pharisees who believed, since it was the direct topic of conversation of the Jerusalem Council recorded in Acts 15. If it was that important for the new converts to enter into the covenant, why would James and the Holy Spirit not command it to be done right away? Even if, as you claim, it is not necessary for salvation, but it is necessary to receive the blessings and promises given to Abraham and to his seed, why would they just state that right then and therw?
Please answer that question.
For if it is still necessary to be circumsized, as you claim it is, then why didn't they state it in the beginning commands given to new converts?
Abstaining from things strangled pertains to eating meat that the blood was not drained out of therefore the lifeblood is still in the meat and the animal was killed in an inhumane manner.
Abstaining from blood he's talking about not drinking the blood which is also a Torah command. Two different commands pertaining to two different things.
Why not state circumcision of the flesh right out first thing, because it is written in the Torah and as first 21 states if they're going to the synagogue and hearing the Torah spoken on the Sabbath they will hear the commands concerning the circumcision and then they themselves will have to make that decision whether or not they are going to obey.
Circumcision is PAINFUL. Abstaining from drinking blood is not painful, not eating meat that came from an animal that was strangled is not painful abstaining from sexual fornication is not painful, abstaining from things offered to idols is not painful. They laid out the EASY things they could do to get started.
CIRCUMCISION IS PAINFUL!! Remember how circumcision was used by Dinah's Brothers to enact revenge upon the people who raped her? They circumcised all them and then waited till the third day when they were still in pain and came down and killed all of them.
why did they need to State circumcision right then in there? Did they State their that they needed to love God and love their neighbor? Did they State Fair that they needed to Father and mother? Did they State their that they needed to not worship other gods? The four things that they stated were the things that were detrimental to their health and well-being.
It would be like if a meth head prostitute who was a Wiccan received salvation, you wouldn't tell her that she needs to start going to church on Sunday morning and giving tithe, you would tell her she needs to stop doing meth, stop being a prostitute and stop practicing witchcraft because those are the things that are detrimental to her and the rest of the stuff she will learn as she goes just like these new converts were going to learn as they went as is stated in verse 21. it was a learning process for you wasn't it? I believe I asked you that before and you chose not to respond, probably because your response would prove my statement true.
I have learned things as I went, but the Gospel Truth that I heard and received 24 years ago now hasn't changed.
@dwells, I am not trying to prove that I am right and you are wrong so much as trying to reason with you from scripture to get to the truth.
Of course I believe I am rightly understanding what I believe the Scripture teaches, just as you. However, I am not intentionally avoiding any of your questions. If I don't address something that you want an answer to just ask me again. Hopefully, in the midst of my thoughts and the necessities of life I won't unintentionally miss your question a second time. If I do, please ask again. Please don't attribute obfuscation and deceit to me because I honestly missed a point in my replies to you. Thanks.