/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

>>641915

there are moral laws and there are ceremonial laws

that part was a ceremonial law intended to prepare Jews for the arrival of the messiah (and some economic and hygienic reasons for desert dwelling people). Jesus came, so they fulfilled their function. You don't keep a ticket after the ride is over.

>>641915

>What about when Jesus said he wouldn't abolish the law, and how the Old Testament said that these Mosaic Laws would stand for all of time? Yet the vast, vast, majority of Christian congregations don't adhere to the Law at all, cherrypicking what they follow.

There's ceremonial law and moral law. Ceremonial law is fulfilled by Christ's sacrifice. Moral law lasts until the end of time.

>One being that the Bible is not entirely consistent, which leads me to question of human tampering

Modern Bibles are certainly tampered. When something sounds fishy to me I check the Vulgate and compare my interpretation to the first edition RVA. I'm through trusting what's put in front of my face. Babylonian rule has made lackadaisically receiving truth impossible even through well meaning family and friends who are likely deceived.

Join the Orthodox church. Apologetics has always been a race to the bottom. God is not to be understood with the intellect. The truth of scripture isn't a literal plain reading that anyone can just simply pick up the book (in their language of choice) and ascertain.

There are no contradictions in the Bible. Certainly not about the major dogmatic issues (i.e. not autism tier stuff about "how many many did David have, was it 300,000 men or 300,000 horsemen? Checkmate"!)

Christ didn't abolish the law, but He fulfilled. Remember also that He is the author of that Law, so it is His to do with as He pleases, it just so happens that in His infinite mercy and love for mankind He took it upon Himself to fulfill it.

http://www.contradictingbiblecontradictions.com/

Happy reading.

>>641941

This very statement brings into question the theological issue between the seperation of God and Jesus.

>>641945

How so? Since He is God it is fair to make this point, in just the same way you can make liberal Christians squirm when you remind them that He also levelled Sodom and Gomorrah and flooded the world.

There aren't any in KJV

>>641915

In my opinion, you got it in the wrong order. You can literally watch the living "Law" with the life of Jesus. The problem I see is that many protestants put all the books of the bible at the same level of importance so is not suprising if you end in a mess. Is not a good idea if you try to read the bible like a normal book (I did the same mistake).

>>641940

<The truth of scripture isn't a literal plain reading that anyone can just simply pick up the book (in their language of choice) and ascertain.

This is false as no prophecy of scripture is of a private interpretation as stated in 2 peter 1:20.

>>641941

<Remember also that He is the author of that Law

Which law?

>>641951

This is the third time I have tried responding to OP. Each winnie the pooh time my computer crashes for some (((reason :^) ))). If you will wait like ten mintues I will give a proper response finally.

>>641924

>>641928

>There's ceremonial law and moral law.

Wrong, there are no biblical definitions to either of those words. "Moral law"/morals/ or mores https://archive.fo/4V1Ul https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/mores , is just a word that means to do what society as a majority thinks, rather then what God says.

>>641915

>How do I get past Biblical contradictions?

Care to name some that are bothering you? As there are no contradictions, atleast in the KJV Bible.

>For example, one cannot eat pork in the Old Testament, but because Jesus said only what comes out can defile a man, therefore we are allowed to eat pork?

Yes, also see acts 10:10-15 and 1 timothy 4:3-5.

>What about when Jesus said he wouldn't abolish the law,

And He didn't.

>and how the Old Testament said that these Mosaic Laws would stand for all of time?

Stop there, the "precepts" and "ordinances" of the old testament like in exodus 18:20, leviticus 18:4, and numbers 9:23 are hebrews 9:19

>For when Moses had spoken every precept to all the people according to the law, he took the blood of calves and of goats, with water, and scarlet wool, and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book, and all the people,

They are "precept" 's "according to the law" and are not the law themselves.

<but anon this is just verbage, do we follow the old precepts or the new precepts to obtain righteousness?

As spoken of in hebrews 7:11-17

>If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron?

>For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law.

>For he of whom these things are spoken pertaineth to another tribe, of which no man gave attendance at the altar.

>For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Juda; of which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning priesthood.

>And it is yet far more evident: for that after the similitude of Melchisedec there ariseth another priest,

>Who is made, not after the law of a carnal commandment, but after the power of an endless life.

>For he testifieth, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec.

With this new preisthood came a new law and new precepts to that law. And a new covenant hebrews 8:7-8,13

>For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.

>For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:

>In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.

So although the old law/precepts/covenant have "vanished away" they haven't stopped existing. You could technically obtain righteousness by the leviticul priesthood just like Jesus Christ did. Except that romans 3:9-10,19-22 exists

>What then? are we better than they? No, in no wise: for we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin;

>As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:

>Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.

>Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.

>But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets;

>Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:

Therefore obtain righteousness by the faith that is of Jesus Christ, and not by the law of sin.

>>641970

<but anon, what is the law then?

Read romans 7:25

>I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.

There is a law of sin, which obviously God would have created, and a law of God also known as the law of faith in romans 3:27

>Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith.

The law of sin is this: romans 6:23

>For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

The law which is of faith is this: galatians 3:11-13

>But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith.

>And the law is not of faith: but, The man that doeth them shall live in them.

>Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree:

Christ is the law of faith being made a curse for us.

<but anon what about verses like josiah 8:31 where "the law of moses" is mentioned

galatians 3:15

>Brethren, I speak after the manner of men; Though it be but a man's covenant, yet if it be confirmed, no man disannulleth, or addeth thereto.

First off is the "law" "moses"? No, it is the law of moses. Secondly the references to such are not truly a law themselves, being simply of a man/moses as they can be broken as Jesus Himself points out in matthew 12:3-8

>But he said unto them, Have ye not read what David did, when he was an hungred, and they that were with him;

>How he entered into the house of God, and did eat the shewbread, which was not lawful for him to eat, neither for them which were with him, but only for the priests?

>Or have ye not read in the law, how that on the sabbath days the priests in the temple profane the sabbath, and are blameless?

>But I say unto you, That in this place is one greater than the temple.

>But if ye had known what this meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice, ye would not have condemned the guiltless.

>For the Son of man is Lord even of the sabbath day.

What matters is Christ and the law of Him which is in faith as 1 corinthians 7:19 applies

>Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but the keeping of the commandments of God.

>>641915

>How do I get past Biblical contradictions?

ignore protestant theology

>>641940

ya that st.thomas aquinas guy was just a bad seed, no way can you use rationality to correlate truth with truth

>>641978

As if Catholic theology is any better. You all worship Mary and pretend it's not idolatry because it's only asking her to PRAY FOR YOU, while simultaneously praying to her.

Join the Catholic Church. God didn't leave a Bible for it to be a free for all for anyone to interpret it. Jesus left us a Church, which is the pillar of all truth. That church produced the Bible, written for us, to be interpreted by us.

>>641979

>>641980

No we pray to her. And yeah the church fathers were heretics too right? I hope the church recognizes that protestants aren't even christians anymore. some meme larp religion at this point.

>>641980

>As if Catholic theology is any better.

Yes, we have about 2,000 years of solid theology.

Let's test it right now; is Mary the Mother of God? And if She is, is it not proper to venerate Her as such? For in doing so, we acknowledge Christ is God…sorry, I kinda answered it for you.

Protestants still trip up with basic trinitarian concepts LOL

>>641983

As long as the baptism is valid, they are our way-ward brothers. Correct them; but don't reject them.

I only get worked up when they insult Our Lady or our Church. How can one harm a man's wife and still be friends with the husband?

>>641979

He unironically was. The kind of doctrine that has come out of the Catholic church has amounted to prime fedora fuel.

>>641985

>is Mary the Mother of God?

No. She is mother to Jesus, the Son of God.

>>641983

>No we pray to her. And yeah the church fathers were heretics too right? I hope the church recognizes that protestants aren't even christians anymore. some meme larp religion at this point.

Please pull up the quotes from the Bible saying to worship God and God alone and get back to me. Do you think Peter worshiped Mary?

>>641996

>No. She is mother to Jesus, the Son of God.

OK, so you deny Christ is God. What's the word for this heresy? Sabatellianism? monisdism? someone help me out

>Do you think Peter worshiped Mary?

we do not worship Mary

>>641995

Name me some doctrine that is "prime fedora fuel" unless you believe Christ can walk on water, multiple fish and turn water into wine, but did not (or cannot) consecrate bread and wine into His Flesh and Blood.

>>641996

>>is Mary the Mother of God?

Yes Mary is the Mother of God. To say otherwise is idiocy. Jesus is fully God and Mary is his Mother. She is the Mother of God, but not the Mother of God the Father, or the Mother of God the Holy Spirit. She is the Mother of God the Son, our Lord Jesus Christ.

She is also Queen of Heaven and Queen of the Universe.

Sancta Maria, Ora Pro Nobis!

>>641996

Exodus 20:1 - 20:3

"2 I am the LORD thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. 3 Thou shalt have no other gods before me."

Acts 10:25–26

"25 When Peter entered, Cornelius met him and fell down at his feet and worshiped him. 26 But Peter lifted him up, saying, “Stand up; I too am a man.”

Revelation 4:11

"11 Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power: for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created."

Nehemiah 9:6

"6 Thou, even thou, art Lord alone; thou hast made heaven, the heaven of heavens, with all their host, the earth, and all things that are therein, the seas, and all that is therein, and thou preservest them all; and the host of heaven worshippeth thee."

Revelation 15:4

"4 Who shall not fear thee, O Lord, and glorify thy name? for thou only art holy: for all nations shall come and worship before thee; for thy judgments are made manifest."

>>641997

>OK, so you deny Christ is God. What's the word for this heresy? Sabatellianism? monisdism? someone help me out

Tread softly mate. You obviously lack the common sense to understand the way the Trinity works, although Jesus is God, he is though the Son of God, he is different from the Father and the Holy Ghost.

To say that Mary is the Mother of God is to hold the idea that she is both the mother of Jesus and the mother of the Father, who are the same yet different. Do not accuse me of heresy when you do not even understand the words you were taught.

I am convinced that modern Catholics lack knowledge in the Bible itself, as they instead hold to the traditions of the Popes and their Idolizers much like the Pharisees. Yet blatantly ignoring God's many, many condemnations of Idolatry.

>>641997

basically any time the Catholic church presumed to speak on the nature of God The Father. Anselm single-handedly created the very personification of God that atheists use to attack Christianity. Not to mention he created the doctrine of atonement that paved the way for Protestantism. Eliminating the notion of mystery was a mistake.

>>641999

Correct them, don't reject them.

>To say that Mary is the Mother of God is to hold the idea that she is both the mother of Jesus and the mother of the Father, who are the same yet different.

And where did I contradict the core concept of the Trinity, you liar?

>Do not accuse me of heresy when you do not even understand the words you were taught

Do not bear false witness, liar.

>I am convinced that modern Catholics lack knowledge in the Bible itself, as they instead hold to the traditions of the Popes and their Idolizers much like the Pharisees. Yet blatantly ignoring God's many, many condemnations of Idolatry.

I can't tell if you're a genuine protestant or a D&C poster.

>>642003

and how did the Catholic Church eliminate the notion of mystery? do you know even know what the term "the sacred mysteries" mean?

you do know this is still a core concept of Catholicism, right?

>>642005

The only mystery the Catholic church hasn't attacked with ruthless intellectualization is this double-speak on the pope's divinity.

>>642002

You are beyond stupid. I just clarified to you. Jesus is FULLY GOD, not PARTIALLY GOD, unless you are worse heretic than you already are. Mary is the mother of Jesus, so she is the Mother of God, not part of God.

You should just jump the shark and begome gnostic.

>>642007

>Although the term is not used equally by all Christian traditions, many if not most basic aspects of Christian theology require a supernatural explanation. To name but a few key examples, these include the nature of the Trinity, the Virgin birth of Jesus, and the Resurrection of Jesus. These are mysteries in the sense that they cannot be explained or apprehended by reason alone.

even wikipedia can get this right, you don't have any excuse for your lies or ignorance

>>642005

>And where did I contradict the core concept of the Trinity, you liar?

If Mary is the Mother of God you therefore believe she is mother to both the Father and the Son which places her above both. You attempted to trap me with my words as a pharisee did, saying that I denied Christ as God, yet I did not, I denied Mary as the Mother of God. If you do not understand this you do not understand the Trinity.

>>642005

>Do not bear false witness, liar.

Who is lying? Stop with your ridiculous accusations you Pharisee.

>>642005

>I can't tell if you're a genuine protestant or a D&C poster.

Read THE BIBLE. It IS the word of God. The Pope is a human. Stop venerating him.

>>642009

You are the Divide and Conquer shill now. You claim I should renounce my faith (ignoring God's penalties for driving away one who loves Him). Because I reject the notion that Mary is to be prayed to above God Himself. You pray the Rosary and worship her yet ignore God himself.

1 Timothy 2:5

"5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;"

Are you going to ignore this Bible verse as well? Is it not divinely inspired? Does it not mean what I think it means? What's the answer my friend?

Stop praying the Rosary and start praying to Jesus Christ, your Lord and Savior, amen.

>>642010

I don't have any excuse for my lies wherever they might appear but I certainly have an excuse for my ignorance because, well I'm human and cannot go around pridefully thinking I able know everything. There are certainly more mysteries than those.

>>642012

>If Mary is the Mother of God you therefore believe she is mother to both the Father and the Son which places her above both.

wut

>You attempted to trap me with my words as a pharisee did

no, you tried to play a game of semantics and tripped up on your own argument, bozo

>The Pope is a human. Stop venerating him.

wut

>Stop praying the Rosary and start praying to Jesus Christ, your Lord and Savior, amen

LOL, ok you're a muslim aren't you?

>>642014

hey, as long as you accept you were wrong in your accusation, I forgive you.

>>642018

(you)

>>641966

>The problem I see is that many protestants put all the books of the bible at the same level of importance so is not suprising if you end in a mess.

And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God. Luke 4:4

>>642002

>I am convinced that modern Catholics lack knowledge in the Bible itself, as they instead hold to the traditions of the Popes and their Idolizers much like the Pharisees.

And the sad part is that they relegate Scripture to a lower authority and don't even regard it as having the authority of God's word. Instead they place more authority on their own fallible doctrine of men, like in this case the chalcedonian definition is given the predominant authority. That is really the base of this issue, and the implications of the chalcedonian definition which denies the eternal pre-existence of Jesus Christ. They really do have a different Jesus because of this.

>>642009

>You should just jump the shark and begome gnostic.

Shame on you for even suggesting this.

>>642040

Why do people take the same verses and recycle them over and over for different scriptural arguments. I doubt you people even read the Bible.

>>642059

no u

Also, what's there to misinterpret about Luke 4:4?

>>642040

It is nice to see that some decent Christians still exist. The state of this board has become worse and worse.

>>642061

Nothing but Matthew 5:18 or Revelation 22:18 would be more relevant.

>>641915

>For example, one cannot eat pork in the Old Testament, but because Jesus said only what comes out can defile a man, therefore we are allowed to eat pork?

That is not a contradiction. Read it again.

>What about when Jesus said he wouldn't abolish the law, and how the Old Testament said that these Mosaic Laws would stand for all of time?

I don't wholeheartedly know how to answer this question OP, but I know Jesus fulfilled the law. Some laws were for Israel and other laws were for all men; such as the ten commandments.

>>641997

>OK, so you deny Christ is God. What's the word for this heresy? Sabatellianism? monisdism? someone help me out

He came into the world through Mary. Jesus is God, but he existed before her.

John 8:58

Jesus said to them, “Most assuredly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM.”

Christ was not dead before Mary. Are you implying that Mary begat God? If not, then please explain to me why you pray to Mary despite judgement day having not come about yet for those who have slept?

>>642074

Did Mary give birth to Jesus Christ, true man and true God?

Yes or no. You keep introducing conditionals that have no bearing on the theological conception of the immaculate conception. We're not saying Jesus did not exist before Mary, we're saying She gave birth to Christ, the true man and true God, the promised Messiah.

So, yes or no?

>>642040

>And the sad part is that they relegate Scripture to a lower authority and don't even regard it as having the authority of God's word

You've blinded your own eyes. Which came first, the Church of Christ, or the Scriptures? What Church is it that Scripture speaks of?

Scripture is a foundation, just as much as Tradition (teaching of the Apostles) and the Magisterium (the living Church that makes infallible pronouncements upon faith and morals).

It was the Magisterium and Tradition that produced to you the codified Scriptures in the first place, why do you turn your eyes away?

And then you let Luther decide what books weren't kosher, because some 16th century Jews said they weren't!

>>642062

>St. Jerome[3] mentions that St. Polycarp met at Rome the heretic Marcion in the streets, who resenting that the holy bishop did not take that notice of him which he expected, said to him, "Do you not know me, Polycarp?" "Yes," answered the saint, "I know you to be the firstborn of Satan." He had learned this abhorrence of the authors of heresy, who knowingly and willingly adulterate the divine truths, from his master, St. John, who fled out of the bath in which he saw Cerinthus.

>>642018

So you wouldn't regard the idea of a self-justifying being as a mystery? You wouldn't regard free will as a mystery?

>>642076

>It was the Magisterium and Tradition that produced to you the codified Scriptures in the first place, why do you turn your eyes away?

May I remind you that this Church existed 1600 years ago and did not practice any of the blatant heresies and vain rituals found today. May I also remind you that this was before the split between the Orthodox and Catholic churches. May I also remind you that this was called Chalcedonian Christianity.

The Modern Catholic church has next to nothing to do with the church you speak of. Your "Pope" is an apostate for goodness sake.

>>642080

>May I remind you that this Church existed 1600 years ago and did not practice any of the blatant heresies and vain rituals found today.

Ugh, ok, what "heresies and vain rituals"?

>May I also remind you that this was called Chalcedonian Christianity.

dunno, but I'm part of the Church St. Ignatius of Antioch refers to as "Catholic", which should be the Church Christ founded. that's enough for me, dunno for you.

>The Modern Catholic church has next to nothing to do with the church you speak of. Your "Pope" is an apostate for goodness sake.

OK, then if the Catholic Church is not the true Church, then Christ lied and this whole Christianity thing is a farce. What Church do you offer up as the true Church? The Russian ethnic Church? The Far-East Church nobody knows about? Surely, it must be that church.

>>642076

>It was the Magisterium and Tradition that produced to you the codified Scriptures in the first place

I only get upset when people relegate the words of God and try to eclipse themselves as being above these things.

Psalm 138 says "thou hast magnified thy word above all thy name." But you are running around here telling people not to hear but just to listen to you instead. Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition is what you're doing. And highly esteeming your self. And that's what upsets me.

"Through thy precepts I get understanding: therefore I hate every false way." Psalm 119

>>642081

>le christ lied maymay

Christ didn't lie, arrogant church elders did.

Read the Church Fathers, St. John Chrysostom especially.

>>641915

>the Bible is consistent yet the people who follow it aren't, and if Mosaic Law still applies, they are all doomed for Hell

You've got it right here. Just about every thread on this board I see someone arguing in favor of something that is an explicit violation of Divine Law. Atheism and idolatry run rampant, and an entire generation of alleged Christians practically squirm at the thought of the true responsibility being handed to them. The most common form this takes is their vicious commitment to spiritual apathy that they try to dress up as tolerance.

>>642110

Listen to me? Listen to the Apostles, listen to the Church that Christ left us for our salvation. You're a wolf in sheep's clothing if you would lead anyone away from their salvation.

The birth of Jesus through Mary is liturgical, it is atemporal. Every time the nativity is celebrated Mary is giving birth to Jesus. It is through her that God entered the world. She is the door: through her God entered the world and through her we shall enter God's kingdom.

But protestants deny this; they lack liturgy. All of the sacred is reduced to mere moralism.

>>642889

I don't know where you are getting that. The Lord Jesus Christ told us in John 10 that he is the door. No one comes to the Father but by him. What is this new supposed gospel you've brought here? Why are you intentionally profaning God's word?