🚀 go-pugleaf

Merlin Dorfman wrote in message ...

>Interesting.  Most of the discussion on this topic that I've read
>previously centers on Jesus releasing Christians from certain
>of the ceremonial Old Testament obligations like circumcision and
>keeping Kosher.  But John seems to be saying that the laws and
>obligations are still there, but he knows he'll be forgiven so he
>needn't even try to stop violating them.  Or am I misunderstanding
>something?


Well ... not exactly.  See Matt 12:3-13:1 for an example of where the law
can be violated, and the violator remain innocent.  In 1 Cor 6:12, Paul
writes "All things are lawful for me, but not all things are profitable",
and continues with an explanation.  In 1 Cor 10:13, he again writes "All
things are lawful, but not all things are profitable.  All things are
lawful, but not all things edify.", and again continues with an explanation.
In 1 Cor 8:1-13 he discusses using liberty with care, and continues by
discussing his own use of liberty in chapter 9.

So ... yes, I'm saying that the laws and obligations are still there, and
yes, I'm also saying that a believer is not subject to them, as he's
forgiven.  However, I'm not saying that he shouldn't try to stop violating
them - that's what I meant when I said it shouldn't be taken as a blanket
license.

Let me try to describe it this way ... a child will sometimes do things that
doesn't please the parents.  The parents can then either punish the child,
or else express their displeasure and forgive him.  If the child truly loves
and honors the parents, he will try to avoid displeasing them in the future,
though he may not be successful at all times simply because of his
immaturity.  Okay so far?

Now, if he's an older child with younger siblings, his parents will probably
expect him to "set an example" for the younger children.  As he is more
mature, the older child may well have more privileges than his siblings, but
may also be expected by his parents not to exercise certain of those
privileges in the presence of the younger children.  He may also have
privileges that he is allowed to exercise within his own family, but isn't
expected to exercise outside the home.

If you were to make the parents "God", the mature believer the "older
child", the new believer the "younger child", and unbelievers "outside the
home", you'd have a fair  description of the relationships as concerns
privileges.  It's not exactly right, as it doesn't include telepathic
abilities on the part of the children that allow them to read the minds of
the parents and know what would displease them in advance, but it's close.

Of course, this is now drifting pretty far and wide of the specific issue of
abortion vs. capital punishment, so we should probably start a new thread if
we continue this aspect of the discussion.