Announcement

Collapse

Theology 201 Guidelines

This is the forum to discuss the spectrum of views within Christianity on God's foreknowledge and election such as Calvinism, Arminianism, Molinism, Open Theism, Process Theism, Restrictivism, and Inclusivism, Christian Universalism and what these all are about anyway. Who is saved and when is/was their salvation certain? How does God exercise His sovereignty and how powerful is He? Is God timeless and immutable? Does a triune God help better understand God's love for mankind?

While this area is for the discussion of these doctrines within historic Christianity, all theists interested in discussing these areas within the presuppositions of and respect for the Christian framework are welcome to participate here. This is not the area for debate between nontheists and theists, additionally, there may be some topics that within the Moderator's discretion fall so outside the bounds of mainstream evangelical doctrine that may be more appropriately placed within Comparative Religions 101 Nontheists seeking only theistic participation only in a manner that does not seek to undermine the faith of others are also welcome - but we ask that Moderator approval be obtained beforehand.

Atheists are welcome to discuss and debate these issues in the Apologetics 301 or General Theistics 101 forum without such restrictions. Theists who wish to discuss these issues outside the parameters of orthodox Christian doctrine are invited to Unorthodox Theology 201.

Remember, our forum rules apply here as well. If you haven't read them now would be a good time.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Does Mark 7:19 declare all foods to be clean?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Does Mark 7:19 declare all foods to be clean?

    (Copied from Facebook)

    The context of Mark 7 is stated here:

    Mark 7:3-4 (The Pharisees and all the Jews do not eat unless they give their hands a ceremonial washing, holding to the tradition of the elders. 4 When they come from the marketplace they do not eat unless they wash. And they observe many other traditions, such as the washing of cups, pitchers and kettles.)

    The Pharisees had many traditions that they needed to follow or else food that was normally clean could become unclean. So their objection in verse 5 was not that the disciples were breaking dietary laws found in the Torah, but that they were becoming ceremonially unclean by eating bread with unwashed hands.

    Mark 7:16 “Whoever has ears to hear, let them hear.”

    This phrase in verse 16 was commonly used to indicate the end of a parable, and indeed the disciples asked Jesus about the meaning of the parable in verse 17, so the parable must have been verse 15.

    Mark 7:15 Nothing outside a person can defile them by going into them. Rather, it is what comes out of a person that defiles them.”

    Being a parable, it does not have a literal meaning, but a figurative meaning that is use to give a moral teaching. Jesus explains in verses 18-23 that it is immoral thoughts and actions that make us unclean, rather than eating with unwashed hands.

    Matthew 15:19-20 For out of the heart come evil thoughts-murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false testimony, slander. These are what defile a person; but eating with unwashed hands does not defile them.

    The conclusion of the parallel account in Matthew 15 makes it clear that Jesus was still talking in contrast to ceremonial hand washing and never switched topics to eating unclean meat. So the hypocrisy of the Pharisees was that they were more concerned with their own traditions concerning ceremonial purity than with what God said about spiritual purity. By adding their own traditions on top of what the Torah said they were obscuring it and completely missing the moral teaching. In verses 6-13, Jesus criticized them for setting aside the commands of God in favor of keeping their traditions, so it would have been very hypocritical if Jesus had turned around and set aside the commands of God a few verses later and declared everything was permissible to eat. That would have immediately disqualified him from being the Messiah and caused the Pharisees to try to kill him.

    Deuteronomy 13:1-5 If a prophet, or one who foretells by dreams, appears among you and announces to you a sign or wonder, 2 and if the sign or wonder spoken of takes place, and the prophet says, “Let us follow other gods” (gods you have not known) “and let us worship them,” 3 you must not listen to the words of that prophet or dreamer. The LORD your God is testing you to find out whether you love him with all your heart and with all your soul. 4 It is the LORD your God you must follow, and him you must revere. Keep his commands and obey him; serve him and hold fast to him. 5 That prophet or dreamer must be put to death for inciting rebellion against the LORD your God, who brought you out of Egypt and redeemed you from the land of slavery. That prophet or dreamer tried to turn you from the way the LORD your God commanded you to follow. You must purge the evil from among you.

    Any prophet who teaches God’s people to go against God’s commands is by definition a false prophet. Christians who claim that Jesus tried to turn the people from the way that God commanded them to follow are the number one reason why religious Jews reject him today.

    Matthew 5:17-19 “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. 18 For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. 19 Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

    Again, I have trouble reconciling these verses with the claim that Jesus was setting aside commands of God in Mark 7:19. Even if you think the Resurrection did away with the Law, this was said before that happened.

    We still consider certain foods to be unclean, we just disagree about which ones they are. In Leviticus 11 and Deuteronomy 14, God told the Jews which things were permissible to eat as food and which things weren’t, so they didn’t even consider the things that weren’t to be in the same category as food, in a similar way that we don’t consider the meat of rats, bats, snakes, lizards, vultures, humans, etc. to be food. So when Jews talk about eating from the category of things that are food, it would be a mistake to think they are also talking about eating unclean animals, unless it is specifically mentioned. It’s important to note that the Greek word koinais (“common”) is used in reference to manmade traditions and does not connote the same thing as the Greek word for what God has declared to be “unclean”, so there is no indication the food mentioned in Mark 7 is anything other than what the Torah permits Jews to eat. I think Mark 7:19b could be fairly paraphrased as: Thus he declared all things given by God as food to be clean, regardless of ritual hand washing.

    There is a lot of debate surrounding the proper translation of Mark 7:19b. Some translators say it is parenthetical by Mark or Jesus while others think it should say purging all food, and that Jesus is say that the impurities from eating with unwashed hands don’t make you unclean because they are purged as waste. However you interpret it, it’s important to keep the context in mind. Did Jesus, a devout Jew who was sinless and kept the Torah perfectly, make a radical statement that was against God’s commands that would have sent shock waves through his audience, but which no one seemed to notice? Or did Jesus simply point out that it doesn’t matter how much effort you put in to being ceremonially pure if they are not spiritually pure?
    "Faith is nothing less than the will to keep one's mind fixed precisely on what reason has discovered to it." - Edward Feser

  • #2
    Originally posted by Soyeong View Post
    Or did Jesus simply point out that it doesn’t matter how much effort you put in to being ceremonially pure if they are not spiritually pure?
    That -- he was saying there's nothing magical to damn a Jew if he mistakenly eats bacon. He's not saying for Jews to go ahead and eat it though.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by JohnnyP View Post
      That -- he was saying there's nothing magical to damn a Jew if he mistakenly eats bacon. He's not saying for Jews to go ahead and eat it though.
      The subject was eating food that was normally clean being made ceremonially unclean by eating it with unwashed hands, so neither kosher laws or unintentional sins were mentioned. Furthermore, it was never a sin to become ceremonially unclean, so Mark 7 has absolutely nothing to do with the redefining what counts as sin.
      "Faith is nothing less than the will to keep one's mind fixed precisely on what reason has discovered to it." - Edward Feser

      Comment


      • #4
        The inspired commentary within verse 19 states that it is a declaration of cleanliness, so this seems to be an open and shut case.
        "I am not angered that the Moral Majority boys campaign against abortion. I am angry when the same men who say, "Save OUR children" bellow "Build more and bigger bombers." That's right! Blast the children in other nations into eternity, or limbless misery as they lay crippled from "OUR" bombers! This does not jell." - Leonard Ravenhill

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Soyeong View Post
          (Copied from Facebook)

          The context of Mark 7 is stated here:

          Mark 7:3-4 (The Pharisees and all the Jews do not eat unless they give their hands a ceremonial washing, holding to the tradition of the elders. 4 When they come from the marketplace they do not eat unless they wash. And they observe many other traditions, such as the washing of cups, pitchers and kettles.)

          The Pharisees had many traditions that they needed to follow or else food that was normally clean could become unclean. So their objection in verse 5 was not that the disciples were breaking dietary laws found in the Torah, but that they were becoming ceremonially unclean by eating bread with unwashed hands.

          Mark 7:16 “Whoever has ears to hear, let them hear.”

          This phrase in verse 16 was commonly used to indicate the end of a parable, and indeed the disciples asked Jesus about the meaning of the parable in verse 17, so the parable must have been verse 15.

          Mark 7:15 Nothing outside a person can defile them by going into them. Rather, it is what comes out of a person that defiles them.”

          Being a parable, it does not have a literal meaning, but a figurative meaning that is use to give a moral teaching. Jesus explains in verses 18-23 that it is immoral thoughts and actions that make us unclean, rather than eating with unwashed hands.

          Matthew 15:19-20 For out of the heart come evil thoughts-murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false testimony, slander. These are what defile a person; but eating with unwashed hands does not defile them.

          The conclusion of the parallel account in Matthew 15 makes it clear that Jesus was still talking in contrast to ceremonial hand washing and never switched topics to eating unclean meat. So the hypocrisy of the Pharisees was that they were more concerned with their own traditions concerning ceremonial purity than with what God said about spiritual purity. By adding their own traditions on top of what the Torah said they were obscuring it and completely missing the moral teaching. In verses 6-13, Jesus criticized them for setting aside the commands of God in favor of keeping their traditions, so it would have been very hypocritical if Jesus had turned around and set aside the commands of God a few verses later and declared everything was permissible to eat. That would have immediately disqualified him from being the Messiah and caused the Pharisees to try to kill him.

          Deuteronomy 13:1-5 If a prophet, or one who foretells by dreams, appears among you and announces to you a sign or wonder, 2 and if the sign or wonder spoken of takes place, and the prophet says, “Let us follow other gods” (gods you have not known) “and let us worship them,” 3 you must not listen to the words of that prophet or dreamer. The LORD your God is testing you to find out whether you love him with all your heart and with all your soul. 4 It is the LORD your God you must follow, and him you must revere. Keep his commands and obey him; serve him and hold fast to him. 5 That prophet or dreamer must be put to death for inciting rebellion against the LORD your God, who brought you out of Egypt and redeemed you from the land of slavery. That prophet or dreamer tried to turn you from the way the LORD your God commanded you to follow. You must purge the evil from among you.

          Any prophet who teaches God’s people to go against God’s commands is by definition a false prophet. Christians who claim that Jesus tried to turn the people from the way that God commanded them to follow are the number one reason why religious Jews reject him today.

          Matthew 5:17-19 “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. 18 For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. 19 Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

          Again, I have trouble reconciling these verses with the claim that Jesus was setting aside commands of God in Mark 7:19. Even if you think the Resurrection did away with the Law, this was said before that happened.

          We still consider certain foods to be unclean, we just disagree about which ones they are. In Leviticus 11 and Deuteronomy 14, God told the Jews which things were permissible to eat as food and which things weren’t, so they didn’t even consider the things that weren’t to be in the same category as food, in a similar way that we don’t consider the meat of rats, bats, snakes, lizards, vultures, humans, etc. to be food. So when Jews talk about eating from the category of things that are food, it would be a mistake to think they are also talking about eating unclean animals, unless it is specifically mentioned. It’s important to note that the Greek word koinais (“common”) is used in reference to manmade traditions and does not connote the same thing as the Greek word for what God has declared to be “unclean”, so there is no indication the food mentioned in Mark 7 is anything other than what the Torah permits Jews to eat. I think Mark 7:19b could be fairly paraphrased as: Thus he declared all things given by God as food to be clean, regardless of ritual hand washing.

          There is a lot of debate surrounding the proper translation of Mark 7:19b. Some translators say it is parenthetical by Mark or Jesus while others think it should say purging all food, and that Jesus is say that the impurities from eating with unwashed hands don’t make you unclean because they are purged as waste. However you interpret it, it’s important to keep the context in mind. Did Jesus, a devout Jew who was sinless and kept the Torah perfectly, make a radical statement that was against God’s commands that would have sent shock waves through his audience, but which no one seemed to notice? Or did Jesus simply point out that it doesn’t matter how much effort you put in to being ceremonially pure if they are not spiritually pure?
          Umm the Deut verses has to do with those who are preaching in the name of other gods, not about eating "unclean" foods. The Matthew verses just say that the Old covenant will remain intact until Heaven and earth pass away. Check Matt 24:35 for a parallel (see here http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/...24&version=NIV)
          -The universe begins to look more like a great thought than a great machine.
          Sir James Jeans

          -This most beautiful system (The Universe) could only proceed from the dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being.All variety of created objects which represent order and Life in the Universe could happen only by the willful reasoning of its original Creator, whom I call the Lord God.
          Sir Isaac Newton

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Quantum Weirdness View Post
            Umm the Deut verses has to do with those who are preaching in the name of other gods, not about eating "unclean" foods.
            Deuteronomy 13:1-5 If a prophet, or one who foretells by dreams, appears among you and announces to you a sign or wonder, 2 and if the sign or wonder spoken of takes place, and the prophet says, “Let us follow other gods” (gods you have not known) “and let us worship them,” 3 you must not listen to the words of that prophet or dreamer. The LORD your God is testing you to find out whether you love him with all your heart and with all your soul. 4 It is the LORD your God you must follow, and him you must revere. Keep his commands and obey him; serve him and hold fast to him. 5 That prophet or dreamer must be put to death for inciting rebellion against the LORD your God, who brought you out of Egypt and redeemed you from the land of slavery. That prophet or dreamer tried to turn you from the way the LORD your God commanded you to follow. You must purge the evil from among you.

            Deuteronomy speaks both of teaching them to follow other gods and teaching them to not follow God's commands. The kosher laws are part of God's commands, so if Jesus had been teaching against keeping kosher in Mark 7, then he would have been a false prophet.

            The Matthew verses just say that the Old covenant will remain intact until Heaven and earth pass away. Check Matt 24:35 for a parallel (see here http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/...24&version=NIV)
            I don't think he was talking about the Old covenant there.
            "Faith is nothing less than the will to keep one's mind fixed precisely on what reason has discovered to it." - Edward Feser

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by KingsGambit View Post
              The inspired commentary within verse 19 states that it is a declaration of cleanliness, so this seems to be an open and shut case.
              I'm bringing into question both whether the commentary is the correct translation and if it is whether the context refers to ceremonial cleanliness because kosher laws were never brought up. He's an article that deals with the Greek:

              http://www.torahresource.com/English...9ShortNote.pdf
              "Faith is nothing less than the will to keep one's mind fixed precisely on what reason has discovered to it." - Edward Feser

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Soyeong View Post
                The subject was eating food that was normally clean being made ceremonially unclean by eating it with unwashed hands, so neither kosher laws or unintentional sins were mentioned. Furthermore, it was never a sin to become ceremonially unclean, so Mark 7 has absolutely nothing to do with the redefining what counts as sin.
                Mark 7:15 "Nothing..." would seem to be nothing, including kosher. So I would stick with the idea that it's not the food in some magic way, but disobedience to God, that defiles.

                Jesus and disciples had been healing people including the woman with an issue in Mark 5. Leviticus 15 does command washing after touching such people. Since Jesus was not a false prophet teaching to ignore God's Laws, I assume they observed that part of the Law. However I don't see anything about washing before you eat in that part of Written Law.

                So it seems some Jews were overdoing it just to play it safe, and Jesus was admonishing them for being superstitious and adding to God's Law. As well as for not being more concerned about spiritual purity.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Soyeong View Post
                  Deuteronomy 13:1-5 If a prophet, or one who foretells by dreams, appears among you and announces to you a sign or wonder, 2 and if the sign or wonder spoken of takes place, and the prophet says, “Let us follow other gods” (gods you have not known) “and let us worship them,” 3 you must not listen to the words of that prophet or dreamer. The LORD your God is testing you to find out whether you love him with all your heart and with all your soul. 4 It is the LORD your God you must follow, and him you must revere. Keep his commands and obey him; serve him and hold fast to him. 5 That prophet or dreamer must be put to death for inciting rebellion against the LORD your God, who brought you out of Egypt and redeemed you from the land of slavery. That prophet or dreamer tried to turn you from the way the LORD your God commanded you to follow. You must purge the evil from among you.

                  Deuteronomy speaks both of teaching them to follow other gods and teaching them to not follow God's commands. The kosher laws are part of God's commands, so if Jesus had been teaching against keeping kosher in Mark 7, then he would have been a false prophet.




                  I don't think he was talking about the Old covenant there.
                  Yeah you are to obey God but what if God wishes to annul a commandment? Why cant God do that?

                  The prophet tried to turn them from YHWH by speaking in the name of other gods and say that these other gods should be worshipped specifically.
                  And can't God command different things that don't contradict his character?

                  The parallel was to heaven and earth passing away (which links back to matt 5 where the same Greek (I think) is used).
                  Jesus is more or less saying in Matt 5 that the Old covenant was still available (in his day) and that he was not there to abolish it.
                  The part about the commandments refers to the commandments he gave them after matt 5:19 (the logic follows from verses 17 and 18 because these commandments are based on the law which Jesus set out to teach).
                  -The universe begins to look more like a great thought than a great machine.
                  Sir James Jeans

                  -This most beautiful system (The Universe) could only proceed from the dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being.All variety of created objects which represent order and Life in the Universe could happen only by the willful reasoning of its original Creator, whom I call the Lord God.
                  Sir Isaac Newton

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by JohnnyP View Post
                    Mark 7:15 "Nothing..." would seem to be nothing, including kosher. So I would stick with the idea that it's not the food in some magic way, but disobedience to God, that defiles.
                    There is a difference between the word used for unclean animals and becoming ceremonially unclean. The Greek word used in Mark 7:15 is koinais, which refers to nothing entering the body making it ceremonially unclean. Both the context and the word used do not refer the kosher laws. I'm not sure why you're bringing up magic, it's about Temple purity.

                    Jesus and disciples had been healing people including the woman with an issue in Mark 5. Leviticus 15 does command washing after touching such people. Since Jesus was not a false prophet teaching to ignore God's Laws, I assume they observed that part of the Law. However I don't see anything about washing before you eat in that part of Written Law.
                    When the woman touched Jesus in Mark 5 he became ceremonially unclean, but as I said earlier, there is no sin in that. That just means that Jesus had to purify himself before he did things related to the Temple. You are correct that washing hands before you eat is not part of the written law; it is part of the oral law. It is this oral law that Jesus countermanded; not the written law.

                    So it seems some Jews were overdoing it just to play it safe, and Jesus was admonishing them for being superstitious and adding to God's Law. As well as for not being more concerned about spiritual purity.
                    It had nothing to do with being superstitious and everything to do with interpreting the Torah on the side of caution. It really does make no sense for Jesus to criticize them for setting aside the commands of God in favor of keeping their traditions, only to set aside the commands of God a few verses later.
                    Last edited by Soyeong; 01-18-2014, 11:32 PM.
                    "Faith is nothing less than the will to keep one's mind fixed precisely on what reason has discovered to it." - Edward Feser

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Soyeong View Post
                      There is a difference between the word used for unclean animals and ceremonially unclean. The Greek word used in Mark 7:15 is koinais, which refers to nothing entering the body making it ceremonially unclean. Both the context and the word used do not refer the kosher laws.
                      Eating an unclean animal makes one unclean.

                      Leviticus 11:43 Ye shall not make yourselves abominable with any creeping thing that creepeth, neither shall ye make yourselves unclean with them, that ye should be defiled thereby.
                      Originally posted by Soyeong View Post
                      I'm not sure why you're bringing up magic, it's about Temple purity. When the woman touched Jesus in Mark 5 he became ceremonially unclean, but as I said earlier, there is no sin in that. That just means that Jesus had to purify himself before he did things related to the Temple.
                      Commands aren't necessarily related to the Temple (there was no Temple in days of Leviticus anyway), for example:

                      Leviticus 15:18 The woman also with whom man shall lie with seed of copulation, they shall both bathe themselves in water, and be unclean until the even.
                      They had to wash, whether they went to a Temple or not.

                      Originally posted by Soyeong View Post
                      You are correct that washing hands before you eat is not part of the written law; it is part of the oral law. It is this oral law that Jesus countermanded, not the written law.
                      Agree.

                      Originally posted by Soyeong View Post
                      It had nothing to do with being superstitious and everything to do with interpreting the Torah on the side of caution.
                      Superstition as in, God's gonna get me if I don't wash my hands just in case...

                      Originally posted by Soyeong View Post
                      It really does make no sense for Jesus to criticize them for setting aside the commands of God in favor of keeping their traditions, only to set aside the commands of God a few verses later.
                      Agree.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Quantum Weirdness View Post
                        Yeah you are to obey God but what if God wishes to annul a commandment? Why cant God do that?

                        The prophet tried to turn them from YHWH by speaking in the name of other gods and say that these other gods should be worshipped specifically.
                        And can't God command different things that don't contradict his character?
                        Romans 7:12 So the law is holy, and the commandment is holy and righteous and good.

                        James 1:25 But the one who looks into the perfect law, the law of liberty, and perseveres, being no hearer who forgets but a doer who acts, he will be blessed in his doing.

                        1 John 3:4 Everyone who makes a practice of sinning also practices lawlessness; sin is lawlessness.

                        The Torah is perfect and holy, why would God change it? Sin is an affront to God's character, why we He change what was sin? Jesus said he came not to interpret the Torah in a way that undermines, but to interpret it properly. Teaching against keeping the kosher laws would have undermined it. There is consistent high praise for the Torah throughout the OT and NT and Jesus kept the Torah perfectly, so it doesn't strike as something that he would be annul. And if he had planned to annul some of his commands, it doesn't make much sense to instruct his people to kill anyone who taught against his people keeping them.

                        The parallel was to heaven and earth passing away (which links back to matt 5 where the same Greek (I think) is used).
                        Jesus is more or less saying in Matt 5 that the Old covenant was still available (in his day) and that he was not there to abolish it.
                        The part about the commandments refers to the commandments he gave them after matt 5:19 (the logic follows from verses 17 and 18 because these commandments are based on the law which Jesus set out to teach).
                        I think you're confusing the Old covenant with the Torah.
                        Last edited by Soyeong; 01-19-2014, 12:16 AM.
                        "Faith is nothing less than the will to keep one's mind fixed precisely on what reason has discovered to it." - Edward Feser

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Eating an unclean animal makes one unclean.
                          My mistake. I wasn't thinking and overstated my case, sorry. It still stands though that the word for animals that God has declared unclean is different from the word used for made common in Mark 7:15. The distinction between the different words is clear in the Greek in Acts 10:14.

                          Commands aren't necessarily related to the Temple (there was no Temple in days of Leviticus anyway), for example:

                          Leviticus 15:18 The woman also with whom man shall lie with seed of copulation, they shall both bathe themselves in water, and be unclean until the even.

                          They had to wash, whether they went to a Temple or not.
                          It's true that they had to wash, but I'm talking about the consequences of being made unclean being primarily in regards to the Temple. In other words, Leviticus 15:18 is not saying the man and woman sinned, they just needed to wash and couldn't do anything in regards to the Temple until the evening.

                          Superstition as in, God's gonna get me if I don't wash my hands just in case...
                          The consequence of sin is death and Jews had to slay a spotless animal as a sacrifice that died in their place, so avoiding sin was very important to them. It was possible to sin accidentally, so they erred on the side of caution, out of the desire to be holy and obedient to God. Perhaps some were superstitious, but that was not the purpose of the oral law.
                          "Faith is nothing less than the will to keep one's mind fixed precisely on what reason has discovered to it." - Edward Feser

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            This phrase in verse 16 was commonly used to indicate the end of a parable
                            It was used in Revelation to indicate the end of a teaching, not necessarily a parable.
                            That's what
                            - She

                            Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
                            - Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)

                            I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
                            Stephen R. Donaldson

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Soyeong, I want to clarify your stand: Christians are supposed to follow the OT laws recorded in Exodus, Leviticus, and Deuteronomy. Is that accurate?

                              Comment

                              Related Threads

                              Collapse

                              Topics Statistics Last Post
                              Started by FarEastBird, 09-02-2020, 11:39 AM
                              83 responses
                              568 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post footwasher  
                              Started by lee_merrill, 06-29-2020, 06:29 PM
                              208 responses
                              2,311 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Dave L
                              by Dave L
                               
                              Started by Esther, 08-30-2019, 12:42 PM
                              72 responses
                              11,032 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post footwasher  
                              Working...
                              X