• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Semantics: fulfill vs. abolish.

You've never really studied the issue in depth, have you? Well, here's the JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA on CEREMONIAL LAW:

CEREMONIES AND THE CEREMONIAL LAW - JewishEncyclopedia.com

Thanks for the link. My study of Judaism was more general, and the recognition of different classifications of law is not universal within Judaism. From your link.

Joseph Albo ("Iḳḳarim," iii. 25), if not Simon ben Ẓemaḥ Duran (see Zunz, "G. S." ii. 194), is the first who divides the Biblical laws into ceremonial, juridical, and moral laws. He admits, however, that he adopted this classification from a Christian controversialist; and, as a matter of fact, he forced himself in consequence to declare, with Maimonides (l.c. iii. 46), the sacrifices of the Mosaic law to be a concession to the pagan propensities of the people, and (in accordance with Sifre to Deut. xi. 13) prayer to be the true "service of the Lord"—a standpoint hardly to be reconciled with the belief in supernatural revelation and the permanence of the Mosaic law.
...
The issue between Reform and Orthodoxy hinges chiefly upon the view taken of the ceremonial law; the Talmudical conception of the Law knows of no such distinction as is claimed to exist between ceremonial and moral laws.
 
I tell you what. To show there's no ill will

I'll tell you how to show me there's no ill will...when I'm wrong tell me, look, you're ****ing wrong! Then send me a link/proof.
 
I'll tell you how to show me there's no ill will...when I'm wrong tell me, look, you're ****ing wrong! Then send me a link/proof.

I think I've explained the basics of that passage pretty clearly. I'd rather not go into exactly where in the NT circumcision (Paul) and food (Jesus to Peter, in a vision) are declared ceremonial.

I find the weekly Sabbath debate interesting, as Adventists and Witnesses hold it is moral and not ceremonial law (they observe the weekly Sabbath on Saturday). Mainstream Christianity holds that Sabbath is a ceremonial law. While there is limited support for the SDAs and JTs, it's really the only law with controversy about its classification.

A link or "proof" are hardly of use. You need to understand the concepts and examine the text in light of that understanding while maintaining the context of the verses you quote above (that being ceremonial, etc).

Above, I give a rather concise explanation of the purposes of the ceremonial and moral laws.
 
Last edited:
A link or "proof" are hardly of use.

I suppose it is typical to nearly everyone...they find themselves reasonable and logical, and I'm no different. I tend to think facts and a good arguments do sway my decisions. Links, when the explanation is already on the Internet; proof is a good, short argument.
 
Jesus fulfilled the Ceremonial Law, which served to provide insight into the beauty of God and foreshadow the Christ. Jesus also repaired the understanding of Moral Law, as a fruit of the Spirit and not a means of salvation.

See, and if Jesus fulfilled ceremonial law, they would be in full effect, not ignored, done away with or abolished, or classed as some type of unnecessary "ceremonial law".
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom