« Discussing Same-sex Marriage (Audio) | Main | Anti-Christian Violence »

August 03, 2009

Comments

A very strange book.

I couldn't tell you which parts to follow and which parts to frown upon if you gave me a million dollars.

Can't really blame the masses for being morbidly confused about it.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHaVUjjH3EI

http://stallman.org/dr-laura.html

After watching this video, I would love to see a follow-up that addresses tithing. Are NT Christians required to give 10%?

NT Christians are not required to give 10%. Remember in the OT, a tithe consisted of money, food, etc. In fact, in some circumstances, you were required to take food and share with others (and eat of it yourselves) as part of the tithe. The tithe was to support the Levitical priests.

NT Christians are required to give their life. So asking how much of your money you are to give is in a sense, missing the point. Having said that, 10% (pre-tax) is a great starting point to be at - it starts to force us to our knees in dependence on Christ, and teaches us to not rely on our wordly possessions, forces us to make lifestyle changes and forces us to start thinking about where we invest - here vs. eternity.

Alas, the average evangelical giving is currently around 2-3% according to surveys.

ToNy, even if you could figure out which parts to follow or not, you still wouldn't be able to follow what you thought was applicable.

So why bother trying? And having given up trying, why bother pondering which parts are applicable or not?

kpolo,

Thanks for the useful information. Can you give me some scripture references for your statements or can you point me toward a good reference book?

Lumbergh: The best book on Christian money affairs is by Randy Alcorn: The Treasure Principle.

Rather than try and quote verses, I'd ask you read Randy's book. It is singularly the best on Biblical money management, particularly because Randy lives what he preaches.

Of course people are so biblically illiterate today they fall for all these straw man opinions like this uneducated president gave in this t.v. show. We don't live under the old covenant system with all its laws and bylaws, but we base most of our morals and laws from it. footballs are called pigskin and made of cowhide and so even if you were a worrisome Jew you could still touch it. Penises are made for Vagina's not anuses. This otta get a response.

>>ToNy, even if you could figure out which parts to follow or not, you still wouldn't be able to follow what you thought was applicable.

So why bother trying? And having given up trying, why bother pondering which parts are applicable or not?
-------------------
Mike W,

What makes you so sure ToNy couldn't follow what he thought was applicable?

Well, assuming that ToNy would find that at least the commandment, "Love your neighbor as yourself" applicable, I stand by the assertion that he (or any of us) wouldn't be able to keep it.

I hope I'm not assuming too much, though.

Given the one commandment you pointed out, Mike, your absolutely right. Its impossible to fufill that commandment as it was intended. No one ever has, no ever will!

*** "Can't really blame the masses for being morbidly confused about it."

I share with mike in his reservation (I hope im not assuming too much), but Tony it seems like your basing this off of your own inability to comprehend. You ought to take some time to categorize christian disagreements by thier significance. Most of the stuff you cite as being non-agreed upon issues, are also non-essentials that will be sorted out much later. But you seem to stretch this issue to the point of tearing it in half, that is, the majority of things christians disagree on, though important, are not primary issues. This 'mass confusion', for the most part, is simply a matter of perspective. Christians, like anoyne, are free to disagree, so long as those christians love Jesus! I hope you come to understand this point sometime soon!

What about the people to whom the commands were originally given? Did they have any hope of fulfilling any of the commands or was it an impossible request in the first place?

In a discussion that prompted me to write to Greg, a fellow Christian stated that in general, Jesus took those moral laws from the Old Covenant and up'd the ante on essentially every one. So for example, adultery was against the law, but then Jesus came along and said if you commit lustful thoughts in your mind, you've committed adultery. The bar has been raised from a physical act to a mere thought.

I need to do some research in the bible on this to know if Christ raised the moral/obligatory bar in all cases from the Old Covenant law because I just don't know. This came up in a larger context of tithing and if the 10% still applies to Christians today. His argument is that 10% is only a starting point because Christ raised the bar on all other areas of moral obligation, so hence he would have on tithing as well, had he spoken directly about it.

I struggle with that logic.

"Did they have any hope of fulfilling any of the commands or was it an impossible request in the first place?"

Given the utter difficulty in fufilling the first one (love the Lord with all your heart), I would think they would have a difficult time too. For matters of culture though, I would think they would be better off than we are at obeying the first commandment.

The Law, as I see it, is extrodinarily difficult to obey.

How does the psalmist in Ps. 119 portray keeping God's law? Are there any other scriptures that would qualify such an optimism?

Understand this is a little 'off the cuff', but hopefully reasonably so.

I think the psalmist was well within his right to write of such an optimism and committment to the Law, and the break i see here is the context in which the Psalm was written versus our cultural context from which we read it. I dont think you would neccessairily need to look to other scriptures to justify his optimism, rather I would look to his cultural context -- and maybe even the outworkings of the Law itself. Perhaps the most major one being the society in which the psalmist was being brought up in, which had a much more rigid and free obedience to the Law, from much earlier on, and with a more practical understanding of the significance of such Laws. It would be my guess that his vantage of the Law is superior to ours in a practical sense. The Joy of keeping Gods commandments, and the better undrestanding of God because of it would warrant such optimism.

So in a bit of backpeddling here now, maybe what I should have said is that He seems to be in a better position to love his neighbor as himself, and love the Lord with all his heart than we are. I get the impression that the environment the writer lived in was to some degree much more "quarentined" than that from which we are reading from.

I would personally have to do more historical examination to flesh out that idea. Im basing this off of a preliminary assessment of some of the detailed Laws in books like Leviticus and Deuteronomy.

Mike,

>> why bother pondering which parts are applicable or not?

true i'm not a christian anymore so the question doesn't bother me.

but even if i still was, man, i never could make heads or tails out of that book.

I really wonder, if you forced every 'christian' in the world to actually sit down and read every single page of the bible, i wonder how many would show up at church on sunday.

** "I really wonder, if you forced every 'christian' in the world to actually sit down and read every single page of the bible, i wonder how many would show up at church on sunday."

Tony! You sound a bit evangelistic here! Lol!
Thats an interesting remark, perhaps not the way you intended it but interesting none the less. There are 'christians' (and I was one of them) who havent sat down and really looked at thier bible. There are very, very, very, frightening passages contained within which I admit cause me a bit of duress sometimes (I find it difficult to read Matthew, though I do love it). Maybe you didnt mean what you said in the way im sort of using it. Christianity, properly undrestood (the utter committment to Jesus), is the perhaps, the hardest thing you could do. Im convinced, atleast. And Tony I sympathize with your inability to comprehend the book, and I think several christians could meet you there as well. Thats why we have pastors ;). Some christians are just plain better at understanding scripture than others. I would even suggest this seems to be biblically supportable (IE, passages that speak to teachers being judged more harshly).

me too

anyway, peeps should check this out

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/world/2009/08/03/barnett.uk.athiest.camp.cnn

Atheist Kids Summer Camp

hah

God, if i had to hang out with secular humanists all day i'd slit my wrists.

I'm gonna make a nihilst summer camp.

With vodka, lots of vodka.

:0

"God, if i had to hang out with secular humanists all day i'd slit my wrists.

I'm gonna make a nihilst summer camp."

Hahaha
oh tony
that made my night
somethin boutcha
:)

Great conversation! That comment gave me a good laugh too!

You guys must be easily amused...

Actually the Apostles were asked this question by the Jewish believers regarding the gentile believers.

"As touching the Gentiles which believe, we have written and concluded that they observe no such thing, save only that they keep themselves from things offered to idols, and from blood, and from strangled, and from fornication." -- Acts 21:25.

The prohibition to abstain "from blood" is generally ignored by gentile believers. "From blood," that is the use of blood as a food or s food additive. (Like blood sausage or blood pudding.)

The comments to this entry are closed.