Author Topic: vooke, What Do You Make Of Cafeteria Christians?  (Read 7984 times)

Offline Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants

  • Moderator
  • Enigma
  • *
  • Posts: 8728
  • Reputation: 106254
  • An oryctolagus cuniculus is feeding on my couch
vooke, What Do You Make Of Cafeteria Christians?
« on: January 03, 2015, 01:34:27 AM »
As one of the few people that I know who consume every word in the Bible.  Hook, line and sinker.  And manage to remain sane.  An impressive feat I respect you for. 

What is your opinion of Christians who choose and pick which aspects to believe literally, which ones to believe metaphorically, and which ones to discard entirely?  E.g those who condemn homosexuality, but ignore teachings on types of permissible foods.
"I freed a thousand slaves.  I could have freed a thousand more if only they knew they were slaves."

Harriet Tubman

Offline vooke

  • Moderator
  • Enigma
  • *
  • Posts: 5985
  • Reputation: 8906
Re: vooke, What Do You Make Of Cafeteria Christians?
« Reply #1 on: January 03, 2015, 09:29:11 AM »
Termie,
Cherry picking is a downside to any faith or belief system. People pick convenient aspects of their system and overlook the rest.

The other one is over-emphasis. Ascetics specialize on poverty, Jehovah's Witnesses obsess on the 'true name' of God, Sabbatarians won't warm food in a microwave on Saturday because that amounts to working and God said you should not work on Saturday.

About cherry picking, I need to clarify on something, the relationship between the so called Old Testament and the New Testament. God made a covenant with Israel which gave us the Torah, over 600 laws. These were binding and lasted until Jesus. God through Jesus gives man another covenant. Under this new Covenant,we are not BOUND by the regulations of the Old Covenant. For this reason, Christ followers can be perfectly obeying God without offering animal sacrifices, tithes and so forth.

Note, Jesus was born under the old covenant to save us from the old covenant. That's why he was circumcised the eight day yet that is not binding on me. I went through the knife because of my culture. Circumcision has zero spiritual value yet God commanded it for Israel. I was in Uganda last week and I saw some Muslim 'scholars' debating this. They was wondering why Christians and Paul forbid circumcision yet Jesus was circumcised. Confused bunch.

Back to your question. A Christian who cherry picks scriptures is dishonest. But a Christian who lives outside the boundaries of the Law of Moses/Old Covenant is not cherry picking.

On the specific issue you mentioned of homosexuality, the Bible is quite clear on sexuality. First, in Genesis, God made man and woman. He created this institution of marriage,one man and one woman. When He gave Moses the Laws, this issue was clarified and different abuses of sex was forbidden. This is found in Leviticus 18 is quite clear, beastiality,incest,homosexuality are forbidden.

But one may ask if these Laws are still relevant to Christians in the New Covenant. The answer is , on the basis of Leviticus ALONE, we can't dismiss homosexuality. But in the New Covenant, Paul in Romans 1 censures homosexuality as depravity and a consequence of rebellion against God

Romans 1:26 (HCSB)
26 This is why God delivered them over to degrading passions. For even their females exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. 27 The males in the same way also left natural relations with females and were inflamed in their lust for one another. Males committed shameless acts with males and received in their own persons the appropriate penalty of their error.


Paul also makes it clear that
homosexuality,

So homosexuality cuts across the covenants, very much like idolatry; it is wrong and forbidden in BOTH.

What about foods?
All Laws about food are found in Torah. We have elaborate texts on what to eat and what not to and what parts of animals are not to be eaten. Basically, carnivores are out, scavengers too,and there is the rule about hooves. But when we come into the New Testament, this is what Paul under inspiration of the Holy Spirit teaches
1 Tim 4:4-5 (HCSB)
 4 For everything created by God is good, and nothing should be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving, 5 since it is sanctified by the word of God and by prayer.


So there is nothing like kosher for a Christian. Of course we should eat sensibly and beneficial stuff. Some plants are poisonous. For vooke, the only reason I abstain from some foods is my culture. I would never eat a dog in a million years. Last week over holidays this mzee was slaughtering a goat and was telling me that in the 70s, he worked in Nairobi and Okoyus would never eat fish. They said fish looks like snakes or something. Nowadays I read of Okoyus in fish farming.

There are some ultra stupid religions like Adventists who teach that meat is bad. They teach vegetarianism. You want to aks Nuff Sed aka Daily Bread where that BS came from because it certainly is not from scriptures. They are on record claiming that Jesus never ate meat. They should rounded up and castrated to sanitize the genetic pool
2 Timothy 2:4  No man that warreth entangleth himself with the affairs of this life; that he may please him who hath chosen him to be a soldier.

Offline Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants

  • Moderator
  • Enigma
  • *
  • Posts: 8728
  • Reputation: 106254
  • An oryctolagus cuniculus is feeding on my couch
Re: vooke, What Do You Make Of Cafeteria Christians?
« Reply #2 on: January 03, 2015, 02:41:22 PM »
The way I understand you.  There were two covenants.  The old and the new.  The new being authoritative.  Is that correct?
"I freed a thousand slaves.  I could have freed a thousand more if only they knew they were slaves."

Harriet Tubman

Offline vooke

  • Moderator
  • Enigma
  • *
  • Posts: 5985
  • Reputation: 8906
Re: vooke, What Do You Make Of Cafeteria Christians?
« Reply #3 on: January 04, 2015, 07:20:39 AM »
Actually, the second abrogated the first.
But I may mention the second is founded on the first
The way I understand you.  There were two covenants.  The old and the new.  The new being authoritative.  Is that correct?
2 Timothy 2:4  No man that warreth entangleth himself with the affairs of this life; that he may please him who hath chosen him to be a soldier.