Evidence for God from Science

RickD wrote:Gman,

I noticed something that you said before, and it brought back something I had touched on as well. And actually, it seems this thought may bring us closer instead of further apart like it seems we've been doing here.

G, back on page 19 of this thread you said:

I believe Christian’s graft into the commonwealth of Israel and are co-citizens of the promises with the Jews

Now I've been doing some looking into what believers are grafted into. And from what I can see, I believe the commonwealth of Israel seems to make sense, so hear me out. The commonwealth of Israel is those who believe in Christ. First it was only the Jews who were given the gospel. So, those Jews who placed their faith in Christ are the commonwealth of Israel, or a kind of "spiritual Israel" that I mentioned a while back. Which is not the same as the nation of Israel. Now the promises given to this Commonwealth of Israel seems to be what gentile believers are grafted into. So, I can see that you're saying that we are grafted into Israel if that's what you mean. But, here's where I think we still disagree. I see you as saying that when God gave Moses the 10 Commandments, they were given to this commonwealth of Israel, and therefore to us as well. I see the 10 commandments given to The nation of Israel, not spiritual/commonwealth of Israel. That's why the law of Moses and all the 613 OT laws don't apply to us. They only applied to the OT nation of Israel, which included all Jews justified by faith or not. Those laws don't apply to the commonwealth of Israel which is only made up of the Jewish believers in Christ, and now gentile believers as well. Now, the branches who were cut off are the unbelieving Jews. And, they can be grafted back in if they place their faith in Christ.

Am I making any sense here?

No.. You are not making any sense.. Read what I wrote before. The commandments are never evil or replaced...

Gman wrote:

RickD wrote:Gman,

I noticed something that you said before, and it brought back something I had touched on as well. And actually, it seems this thought may bring us closer instead of further apart like it seems we've been doing here.

G, back on page 19 of this thread you said:

I believe Christian’s graft into the commonwealth of Israel and are co-citizens of the promises with the Jews

Now I've been doing some looking into what believers are grafted into. And from what I can see, I believe the commonwealth of Israel seems to make sense, so hear me out. The commonwealth of Israel is those who believe in Christ. First it was only the Jews who were given the gospel. So, those Jews who placed their faith in Christ are the commonwealth of Israel, or a kind of "spiritual Israel" that I mentioned a while back. Which is not the same as the nation of Israel. Now the promises given to this Commonwealth of Israel seems to be what gentile believers are grafted into. So, I can see that you're saying that we are grafted into Israel if that's what you mean. But, here's where I think we still disagree. I see you as saying that when God gave Moses the 10 Commandments, they were given to this commonwealth of Israel, and therefore to us as well. I see the 10 commandments given to The nation of Israel, not spiritual/commonwealth of Israel. That's why the law of Moses and all the 613 OT laws don't apply to us. They only applied to the OT nation of Israel, which included all Jews justified by faith or not. Those laws don't apply to the commonwealth of Israel which is only made up of the Jewish believers in Christ, and now gentile believers as well. Now, the branches who were cut off are the unbelieving Jews. And, they can be grafted back in if they place their faith in Christ.

Am I making any sense here?

No.. You are not making any sense.. Read what I wrote before. The commandments are never evil or replaced...

Ok, now I'm confused. Where in this post did I say The commandments are evil or replaced?

Hey everyone I have a new commandment for everyone.. Just love, love, love, love... We don't know what it means... But we are commanded to do it... So just DO IT... Fill in the blanks youself... Have fun!!! Yahooo...

After all we don't want to be told what to do... That's legalism.... Heaven forbid...

RickD wrote:My guess is because Jewish converts had the freedom to continue following their customs. Customs in following the law is fine. Salvation by following the law is not. Now I know that you agree with that. But the problem comes when Gentiles are told to live by the law that was given to the NATION of ISRAEL only. Paul was clear that Gentile believers were not bound by the law.


Gman wrote:
Ok this is wrong on many levels... G-d's laws were not only given to the Jews but also to the gentiles or foreigners as well.

Exodus 12:49 The same law applies both to the native-born and to the foreigner residing among you.”

G, the laws were given to the Jews and gentiles and foreigners living IN Israel. Not to Gentile believers outside the Nation of Israel. I changed my quote to show you. When I say Jews, I mean the nation of Israel, when I'm referring to the OT nation where Jews resided at the time of Moses.

Again... We graft into the commonwealth of Israel as I stated many time before. There is no special separate covenant of the gentiles...

G, I pretty much said I agree with that. As long as the "commonwealth of Israel" means Jewish believers.

The eternal covenant G-d made with Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and their descendants has NOT been set aside (Romans 9:4, Galatians 3:15-17). We must graft into those promises..

I think if you read my post, you'd see I agreed with this too...

However you missed the verse before in Deuteronomy 5:14 which ALSO applied to the stranger or gentile among them as well...

Deuteronomy 5:14 but the seventh day is a sabbath to the Lord your God. On it you shall not do any work, neither you, nor your son or daughter, nor your male or female servant, nor your ox, your donkey or any of your animals, nor any foreigner residing in your towns, so that your male and female servants may rest, as you do.

G, I didn't miss this. It actually helps make the case that I'm making. The Sabbath was given to the nation of Israel. To it's inhabitants including gentiles residing there. Keep in mind, the gentiles there weren't believers in Jesus, were they? When I say the the law wasn't given to gentile believers, I mean gentiles who believe in Jesus. Not gentiles who lived in Israel before Jesus died and rose again.

RickD wrote:Now, 9 of the 10 commandments are in Christ's law to love God and your neighbor. There is nowhere in the NT that says gentile believers are required to obey the Jewish sabbath laws. Nowhere.

Gman wrote:
Ok if you want to go with this logic, then where did Christ ever teach against homosexuality in Christ's Law?

In the New Testament? He never did. And, I never argued that he did. Unless you want to refer to Matthew 19:9

"And I say to you, whoever * divorces his wife, except for immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery ."

One could argue that the word "immorality", which is "porneia" refers to homosexual sex.

RickD wrote:G, Christ fulfilled the law. Christ's law is now written on the hearts of believers. Christ's law is over and above the OT law. If believers now follow Christ's law which is written on our hearts, not tablets of stone, in essence, that written law is obsolete. It is no longer needed. It has served its purpose.

Gman wrote:
Therefore we are free to sin.... We can do anything we want. Why? Because G-d's laws are nothing more than stumbling blocks and curses to the believer...

Where did I say we are free to sin? Galatians 5:13:

For you were called to freedom, brethren; only do not turn your freedom into an opportunity for the flesh, but through love serve one another.

Gman wrote:
Then love has multiple multiple meanings... What about bestiality? Homosexuality? Robbing from our neighbors? What is this weird love? In other words, you yourself define what love is.. If G-d's words are so repulsive...

G, I think you've gone off the deep end. We as believers are under the law of Christ. To Love God and our neighbor. I have said this before. Why do you think that means something else?

RickD wrote:No G. I still see you conflating Israel with believers. I agree that God gave the laws to Israel to set them apart from the other nations among them. God has now given us Jesus Christ. And faith in him through life by the spirit sets us apart from non-believers. We are not to be forced away from society, but are called to be a "light" within a dark society. We ourselves are not the light, but we are a reflection of God's light.

Gman wrote:
Well both Paul and Christ were Israeli... They dressed, ate, and talked Hebrew... Were they not light unto the nations?

G, God gave the laws to the nation of Israel to set them apart from the heathen nations at that time. God gave us Jesus Christ, so that all who believe in him are set apart from the unbelievers. That's what I'm saying.

RickD wrote:G, we as gentile believers don't have dress codes, eating codes, etc. given by God. Gentile believers are not prohibited from getting tattoos. That is a liberty we have in Christ. By you saying we as gentile believers don't put tattoos on our bodies, it seems you are saying that we are under the law.
Again, those laws were to separate Israel from the pagan nations they lived near. Tattoos were a pagan tradition. Pigs were used in pagan rituals. Shaving ones beard in certain ways was for pagan rituals.
We are separated from non believers by faith in Christ. Not by obedience and submission to Jewish laws.


Gman wrote:
Rick.. There is really nothing I can do to convince you... I would suggest if you don't want to follow G-d's ways or plots, that you do your own thing, make up your own rules, buy a big TV set and watch it all unfold after a commercial..

Just do your own thing... Whatever it is...

Sorry G. By believing on Jesus Christ, loving God and my neighbor, I'm not doing my "own thing". My "own thing" would be to selfishly attend to my own needs and desires, instead of giving a hoot about anyone else. I don't make up my own rules to live by, G. As I am being sanctified, I am living more by the spirit, and less by the flesh. Sometimes it seems like God isn't moving fast enough for my tastes, but He's transforming me nonetheless.

Gman wrote:Hey everyone I have a new commandment for everyone.. Just love, love, love, love... We don't know what it means... But we are commanded to do it... So just DO IT... Fill in the blanks youself... Have fun!!! Yahooo...

After all we don't want to be told what to do... That's legalism.... Heaven forbid...

Gman, we(meaning believers, not OT Jews) are told what to do here:
Galatians 5:14:

For the whole Law is fulfilled in one word, in the statement, "YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF."

And here:
John 6:29

Jesus answered and said to them, "This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent."

Seems pretty clear cut, doesn't it?

KBCid wrote:Hey Gman,
I just wanted to say that this thread has been an extremely valuable resource of information for the subject I'm researching but it has come to the point where being insulted is outwaying the benefit of this interaction. I just wanted to let you know that I'm going to find a different avenue to continue my research in so you won't wonder why I'm not posting here anymore. I will still keep up with the engineering thread tho since that was a primary drive for me in the first place. Stop in and say high sometime as the spirit moves you. and thx for your input.

Gman wrote:I'm sorry you were insulted KBCid.. Actually you are right.. And I'm as guilty as well with my words too.... Therefore I'm going to limit myself on this topic as well. Whatever you do please don't leave your ID postings... They are very helpful to many..

You have nothing to be sorry for G since you never took it upon yourself to tell me or others what I believe. Each of us has gained understanding from Gods word that may or may not be correct and without researching these understandings then it is hard to know whether to believe the understanding or not. When I read and got an understanding about the message of evolution I gained an understanding but not a belief. It wasn't until I was able to fully research the understanding before I could make up my mind what to believe. I had the hope that I could apply this same methodology here in order to gain further understanding prior to making a decision on what is correct. However, that ability to decide and choose based on research has essentially been removed since understandings and beliefs have become one and the same for some here and thus I was judged.
I would say you are correct in your view on limiting yourself when intercourse becomes unproductive for learning then it has ceased to be a benefit to any of the participants. The biblical position from my understanding says that we should not engage in pointless or fruitless discussions so when a discussion turns from a fruitful exchange where you can absorb a better understanding than you began with then it is time to exit stage left. I will not give up on trying to find an avenue where I can test my understandings as I am sure that such a place does exist. I simply have to remain persistent in finding it.
I will indeed do my best to keep up with my ID postings as I 'believe' and have faith in the concept that many people are under an evolutionary veil of understanding. Even if for all my postings it only draws one person back from the heretical belief that nature can form all the majesty we observe it will have been worth every moment.

Good luck G and may God direct your path always

KBC wrote:
You have nothing to be sorry for G since you never took it upon yourself to tell me or others what I believe.

That's hogwash KBC, and you know it. I never told you what you believe. You told me yourself what you believe about Christ here:
http://discussions.godandscience.org/vi ... 3&start=75

I would say you are correct in your view on limiting yourself when intercourse becomes unproductive for learning then it has ceased to be a benefit to any of the participants.

He said "intercourse".
But seriously, I just posted something that shows that I saw something in what Gman said that I agree with. Unfortunately, G didn't see that I was agreeing with him whatsoever. So, this is still productive, IMO. Jlay asked you a question on another thread. If you've changed your mind, now's the time to let him know. If you say nothing else, we can only go on what you've said before.

All or nothing, Aristotelian dualism makes my feet itch, no matter which direction it comes from.

Canuckster1127 wrote:All or nothing, Aristotelian dualism makes my feet itch, no matter which direction it comes from.

Bart, is this what you mean:

Although Aristotelian Dualism has withstood the test of time by besting its rivals, the process of Dualism fails the test of internal consistency and coherency when subjected to rigorous logical analysis.  Under the scrutiny of Formal Sociological evaluation, Dualism appears to represent either an insidious type of Intellectual Indolence, an elegantly constructed Logical Fallacy or a cynical Rhetorical Device deliberately designed to discredit the content of rival philosophies.

if that's not what you mean, I'll ask you nicely. Could you dumb that down for me, and explain what you mean? Pretty please?

RickD wrote: G, the laws were given to the Jews and gentiles and foreigners living IN Israel. Not to Gentile believers outside the Nation of Israel. I changed my quote to show you. When I say Jews, I mean the nation of Israel, when I'm referring to the OT nation where Jews resided at the time of Moses.

No... Israel is not only a nation that is composed of land..... But it is also a people... Think of it this way. Can you still be German and do German things like the Oktoberfest outside the land of Germany? Of course you can....

RickD wrote:G, I pretty much said I agree with that. As long as the "commonwealth of Israel" means Jewish believers.

Israel has always been a combination of Jews and Gentiles.. Gentiles grafting into Israel and becoming the commonwealth of Israel.. But not replacing ethnic Jews, just bonding with them. And then do Israeli things... Like the Biblical Sabbaths, like the festivals... etc.. etc..

Think of it like the multinational expansion of Israel proper, not the actual land itself, the extension of it..

RickD wrote:G, I didn't miss this. It actually helps make the case that I'm making. The Sabbath was given to the nation of Israel. To it's inhabitants including gentiles residing there. Keep in mind, the gentiles there weren't believers in Jesus, were they? When I say the the law wasn't given to gentile believers, I mean gentiles who believe in Jesus. Not gentiles who lived in Israel before Jesus died and rose again.

No it does not help you... Gentiles have ALWAYS been grafting into Israel. The process has never changed between the OT and the NT.... That is the point I'm trying to make.

RickD wrote:In the New Testament? He never did. And, I never argued that he did. Unless you want to refer to Matthew 19:9

"And I say to you, whoever * divorces his wife, except for immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery ."

One could argue that the word "immorality", which is "porneia" refers to homosexual sex.

No.. Christ never spoke against homosexuality directly... But does that mean we just throw out all the other laws that he didn't specially address? What do you expect Christ to do? Take the entire list of 613 laws and cross out the ones you need to do and do the others? Or do you use the existing framework of G-d's word for interpretation?

Christ didn't seem to have a problem with going to the synagogue on the sabbath. Is He in error too?

Luke 4:16 He went to Nazareth, where he had been brought up, and on the Sabbath day he went into the synagogue, as was his custom. He stood up to read,

Where did I say we are free to sin? Galatians 5:13:

You have no working definition of sin if you throw out His words... Just your own interpretation of sin.

RickD wrote:I, I think you've gone off the deep end. We as believers are under the law of Christ. To Love God and our neighbor. I have said this before. Why do you think that means something else?

Again... You don't know what it means to love your neighbor as yourself if you think G-d's definitions of sin are now void...

RickD wrote:IG, God gave the laws to the nation of Israel to set them apart from the heathen nations at that time. God gave us Jesus Christ, so that all who believe in him are set apart from the unbelievers. That's what I'm saying.

No He did not... Israel (the theocracy) is NOT going away, it's not temporal.... Israel will be restored sometime in the future.. Christ will be coming to restore His kingdom back to Israel (Acts 1:6). Christ will set His feet upon the Mount of Olives in Jerusalem as the King (Zechariah 14:4, Acts 1:11-12). Not New York.. Not China... Not India...

How many times do I have to repeat this?

RickD wrote:Sorry G. By believing on Jesus Christ, loving God and my neighbor, I'm not doing my "own thing". My "own thing" would be to selfishly attend to my own needs and desires, instead of giving a hoot about anyone else. I don't make up my own rules to live by, G. As I am being sanctified, I am living more by the spirit, and less by the flesh. Sometimes it seems like God isn't moving fast enough for my tastes, but He's transforming me nonetheless.

Then according to your logic can't teach against homosexuality or other sins since Christ never specifically addressed them. That's all I'm saying.

RickD wrote:

Gman wrote:Hey everyone I have a new commandment for everyone.. Just love, love, love, love... We don't know what it means... But we are commanded to do it... So just DO IT... Fill in the blanks youself... Have fun!!! Yahooo...

After all we don't want to be told what to do... That's legalism.... Heaven forbid...

Gman, we(meaning believers, not OT Jews) are told what to do here:
Galatians 5:14:

For the whole Law is fulfilled in one word, in the statement, "YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF."

And here:
John 6:29

Jesus answered and said to them, "This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent."

Seems pretty clear cut, doesn't it?

No... You have not working definition of what sin is..... That is why we need G-d's laws.. For instruction.. Otherwise you will simply add your own meaning to what Love means. I don't know how to make this any easier...

Example...

Love and Brotherhood

To love all human beings who are of the covenant (Lev. 19:18) (CCA60). See Love and Brotherhood.
Not to stand by idly when a human life is in danger (Lev. 19:16) (CCN82). See Love and Brotherhood.
Not to wrong any one in speech (Lev. 25:17) (CCN48). See Speech and Lashon Ha-Ra.
Not to carry tales (Lev. 19:16) (CCN77).
Not to cherish hatred in one's heart (Lev. 19:17) (CCN78). See Love and Brotherhood.
Not to take revenge (Lev. 19:18) (CCN80).
Not to bear a grudge (Lev. 19:18) (CCN81).
Not to put any Jew to shame (Lev. 19:17) (CCN79).
Not to curse any other Israelite (Lev. 19:14) (by implication: if you may not curse those who cannot hear, you certainly may not curse those who can) (CCN45).
Not to give occasion to the simple-minded to stumble on the road (Lev. 19:14) (this includes doing anything that will cause another to sin) (CCN76).
To rebuke the sinner (Lev. 19:17) (CCA72).
To relieve a neighbor of his burden and help to unload his beast (Ex. 23:5) (CCA70). See Love and Brotherhood.
To assist in replacing the load upon a neighbor's beast (Deut. 22:4) (CCA71). See Love and Brotherhood.
Not to leave a beast, that has fallen down beneath its burden, unaided (Deut. 22:4) (CCN183). See Love and Brotherhood.

The Poor and Unfortunate

Not to afflict an orphan or a widow (Ex. 22:21) (CCN51).
Not to reap the entire field (Lev. 19:9; Lev. 23:22) (negative) (CCI6).
To leave the unreaped corner of the field or orchard for the poor (Lev. 19:9) (affirmative) (CCI1).
Not to gather gleanings (the ears that have fallen to the ground while reaping) (Lev. 19:9) (negative) (CCI7).
To leave the gleanings for the poor (Lev. 19:9) (affirmative) (CCI2).
Not to gather ol'loth (the imperfect clusters) of the vineyard (Lev. 19:10) (negative) (CCI8).
To leave ol'loth (the imperfect clusters) of the vineyard for the poor (Lev. 19:10; Deut. 24:21) (affirmative) (CCI3).
Not to gather the peret (grapes) that have fallen to the ground (Lev. 19:10) (negative) (CCI9).
To leave peret (the single grapes) of the vineyard for the poor (Lev. 19:10) (affirmative) (CCI4).
Not to return to take a forgotten sheaf (Deut. 24:19) This applies to all fruit trees (Deut. 24:20) (negative) (CC10).
To leave the forgotten sheaves for the poor (Deut. 24:19-20) (affirmative) (CCI5).
Not to refrain from maintaining a poor man and giving him what he needs (Deut. 15:7) (CCN62). See Tzedakah: Charity.
To give charity according to one's means (Deut. 15:11) (CCA38). See Tzedakah: Charity.

Treatment of Gentiles

To love the stranger (Deut. 10:19) (CCA61). See Love and Brotherhood.
Not to wrong the stranger in speech (Ex. 22:20) (CCN49).
Not to wrong the stranger in buying or selling (Ex. 22:20) (CCN50).

Are these things evil stumbling blocks?

Gman, so much of what you just posted is not at all what I'm saying. So it's probably best to just end this conversation now, and say God Bless You, and Happy New Year.

Dualism and all or nothing thinking, approaches questions by proposing two alternatives (in this case law or grace) and asking which we are under in a manner in which both are mutually exclusive, meaning you can only pick for one and against the other. The assumptions that end up being argued then in pitting the one against the other are found in the question.

Grace then becomes it's own form of law in the minds of some. We argue that we're under Grace, but we then set-up our own system of belief and interpretation of Scripture and make it rigid and infer that anyone who sees or understands Scripture and a walk with God differently, is wrong and under the "law." It doesn't have to be that way, but there are elements of "grace" theology that become just as rigid as anything under the Old Covenant and we become more concerned about pushing people into our hermeneutics and systematic solutions and afraid if they don't conform to our framework that they will place themselves outside of God's Grace by that misunderstanding or misplacing of their faith (which in effect makes salvation about our understanding and faith rather than God's mercy and grace.)

This is probably more than what people want to hear here, and it's not an easy concept for most of us who are steeped in Greek Philosophical thinking to learn to free ourselves from or challenge ourselves to look outside of.

Those of us, like myself who are more focused on Grace and Paul's message to the Gentiles instead of the messages to the Jews look at the Jewish Law and culture and we push it into our Greek philosophical constructs, characterizing it in particular by the errors of the Pharisees who were lovers of money we're told in Scripture, and power and control. That was a significant element in contemporary Judaism and one which Christ repudiated and spoke against. It's not the whole of Judiasm however. There is also the elements of Mishnah http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mishnah that embody an approach to the law that is very different that the Greek Philosophically based approaches that we drive things into. If you look at many of the teachings of Christ in the New Testament that refer to the Old Testament, you'll see elements of this Mishnah employed that were understood by the original audiences that is lost on many of us. There is a rich symbolism in the Old Testament festivals and symbolism, but it's not about celebrating them from a sense of obligation or reducing God to a transactional deity who functions like a distant Santa Claus rewarding good little boys and girls who celebrate the right festivals at the right times in the right ways in order to avoid His wrath. That is twisted. That's why I believe Paul spoke as he did in several of his epistles warning against legalistic pharisees who pushed Mosaic Law, Circumcision etc. from a point of view of keeping rituals for their own sake as a measure of obedience to separate the real Christians from the false or carnal ones.

That's why I don't argue with people so much in these areas any more. When we separate Grace and Law into contrary concepts that are designed to keep one another in tension and in balance then we've exchanged the fullness of Christ in which both meet, for a system of abstract philosophical ideas. This isn't the gospel of the New Testament and Christ. It's the philosophy of Plato, Aristotle and Socrates with elements of gnosticism and syncretism trying to keep each other is check as we look toward those abstract ideals that are separate from our experience. Those analogies fail eventually as all analogies must and instead of going beyond them and embracing mystery in the person of God as expressed as Father, Son and Holy Spirit, we mistake the symbols and the abstract ideas for the things themselves that the represent and we become more about policing how other people are understanding and building their systematic beliefs instead of what the practical relationship and expression of them is as we reach out to God.

This probably doesn't make a lot of sense. I don't always express it well.

Since you asked me, RIckD, this isn't a repudiation of what you're saying. I err on the side of Grace and Freedom without apology. I don't have a problem with others who see some of these elements as important for christian community and expression, but I am very sensitive to when the conversation becomes about other peoples behavior or compliance with their practices rather than about what they symbolize and embody in Christ. I'm generally resistant to traditional institutions because it becomes far to easy for the chaff to replace the wheat especially when people lose the significance of what is symbolized and instead make an idol of the symbol. It's very easy to do, and it's a matter of heart attitude more than it is cognitive understanding. Human nature however, being what it is, mine included, becomes more concerned about being right than we do about being in right relationship with God and others and allowing the symbols to be birthed from that.

I'm writing this at near 1 am in the morning and have been awake for the past 48 hours so if this sounds manic or confused, please forgive me. I'm trying to capture it before I go to bed. It's a lot to consider and I've only really been tuned into this for the past 4 or 5 years and I'm still growing with it and I don't know how well I convey it.

RickD wrote:Gman, so much of what you just posted is not at all what I'm saying. So it's probably best to just end this conversation now, and say God Bless You, and Happy New Year.

Ok no problem Rick... You take care as well... And happy holidays.

Canuckster1127 wrote:
This probably doesn't make a lot of sense. I don't always express it well.

.

Bart.. Someday we will be able to understand what you are saying... Well someday maybe...

Take care champ. Grace and peace....