reply to post by Bilw85
The same people who say that we can now eat pork because that covenant, also want to hold others to that covenant for being gay. Jesus
accepted the people that the pharisees condemned. Drop the OT # already.
That I know of there are no dietary laws in the New Testament. None.
If you want to eat pork, shrimp et al..have at it. Now prudence is needed in many things..including food and drink. But there are no dietary
restrictions of which I know.
Those limites were put in there in the Olde Testament to separate the Hebrews from the nations surrounding them. To show that they were a peculear
people..not like the nations surrounding them who did not like them.
The Hebrews were given instructions on what to eat..not eat..how to prepare their food...sow and glean their fields...dress..etc etc. To cover the
width and breadth of their lives. All to show that they were not like the people surrounding them...the uncircumcision as they were sometimes called.
Gentiles is another name for these outsiders.
Will there be gays in heaven...I think so. But not for reasons of the Gays or anyone else..but for God's reasons..not ours. We have no part is who
goes..gay or not.
With the New Testament put in place with the advent of the Cross..a change took place. A change which was foretold in the Olde Testament that this was
But it went into effect with the death of the Testator on the Cross.
That is what a testament is...a Will and Testament. A Will and Testament goes into effect by the act of the death of the Testator. There is now a
change in the Testament by the death of the Testator.
For no one died under the Olde Testament.
A Will and Testament can be changed many times..but the one which is in effect is the one at the time of the death of the Testator.
This is very common and a known practice throughout the world. A last Will and Testament.
You might find this interesting about those under Olde Testament law. Those who believe in the Olde Testament as the way to go.
This concerns two sons by one man Abraham. Two women but one man. One woman a bondservent, Hagar,..the other a freewoman..Sarah...
Sarah was wife to Abraham..and Hagar was bond servant to Sarah.
Sarah could not concieve..and decided to send in her bondservant to Abraham to concieve and this son would be of Abraham by law and satisfy the
requirements at law. This boy's name was Ishmael.
Later on Sara was to concieve very late in life and her son was named Issac.
These two women..were to go on to dispute the inheritance due because of their sons. Sarah was determined that Ishmael would not inherit but her son
This is what is recorded and why in the New Testament concerning this.
Oh..and it is not only the gay community which has a problem with this..the straight community does as well. So do many Believers who are not well
versed in the Word.
From The Book of Galatians 4:21.
4:21 Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law?
4:22 For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman.
4:23 But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise.
4:24 Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar.
4:25 For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children.
4:26 But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.
4:27 For it is written, Rejoice, thou barren that bearest not; break forth and cry, thou that travailest not: for the desolate hath many more children
than she which hath an husband.
4:28 Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise.
4:29 But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now.
4:30 Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the
4:31 So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman, but of the free.
This passage from the book of Galatians is very telling to those under good tutorage concerning both the Olde Testament and also the New Testament.
Here we have the Apostle Paul describing the significance and importance of the Olde and New Testament using allegory. In the Olde Testament ..Abraham
had two sons by two different women. Hagar and Sarah.These sons are the Two Covenants..the Olde Testament and the New Testaments.
Paul did not say..these sons are kind of like..could be..maybe..perhapsed..but he said they are the Two Covenants.
Agar is Mt Siani..in Arabia, and gendereth to bondage...pertains to bondage. Mt Siani..where the Olde Testament was given to Moses on the Mt.
Agar/Hagar is Mt. Siani..in Arabia, is the Olde Testament, and is Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children. Those under Olde
Testament Law are in Bondage and also pertains to Jerusalem which now is. Which is Ishmael..son of Agar/Hagar. Those under Olde Testament Law.
Jerusalem which now is is in bondage as well..with her children.
But Jerusalem which is above is free..not the Jerusalem here now on this earth. Any attempt to substitute the present Jerusalem as holy is a
counterfeit..and I know the name of the counterfeiter. Our Jerusalem is not the Jerusalem of this world. The one above is our Jerusalem and the
mother of us all...speaking to Believers in His Word.
And Paul goes on to say...For it is written..Rejoice, thou barren, that bearest not..speaking of Sarah; Break forth and cry thou that travailest not;
here we have the travail of birth lacking in Sarah. For the desolate;speaking of Agar/Hagar here..as desolate;hath many more children than she which
hath an husband.
She which hath and Husband here is Sarah. Agar/Hagar hath no husband and yet hath many more children than Sarah.
Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise.
But we Bretheren, We are not the children of the bondwoman Agar/Hagar but of the freewoman...Sarah. We are of Issac..and not Ishmael. We are of the
New Testament and Issac and not the bondage of the Olde Testament and Ishmael.
But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now. This is very true and also telling
..especially to those of us somewhat versed in occult principles and history. This is happenig even today. Nothing changed from those days. Those
staunchly under the Olde Testament are persecuting those who are well versed in the New Testament. They are still trying to make Ishmaelites out of us
privily ..by occult means. And just like the Pharisees and Hebrew leadership of olde ..they are still secretly trying to overlay occult doctrine and
dogma on the New Testament and pass it off to us as holy and Biblical when with just a little thought you can see that it is not. Much of this
counterfeit is done in the form of Prophecy.
Clarence Larkin, Ironsides, John Darby, C. I, Schofield are all known for such substitution.
Nevertheless, what sayeth the scrpture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son. For the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the free
Abraham did not want to cast out the bondwoman and her son..for he loved Ishmael. But God told him..harken unto your wife. Cast her out. This was a
very hard thing for Abraham to do but in faithfullness to God he obeyed.
The son of the bondwoman...Ishmael..the Olde Testament...those under the Olde Testament shall not be heir to the promises of God in the New
Testament...to the Jerusalem which is above...the mother of us all ..speaking to Believers.
So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman, but of the free. We are not under the Olde Testament bondage nor of Jerusalem which now is
and is in bondage with her children. We are not of Ishmael/Agar/Hagar...but of Issac.
Whenever I get into such debates as this..the sure fire way to know what is happening is to check what someone is saying and determine whether they
are trying to make the children of the bondwoman heir with the children of the free woman. Whether they are trying by various means...to make us
Ishmaelites. To bring us into bondage with the Jerusalem which now is and is in bondage with the children of Agar/Hagar.
This is how I know what todays Jerusalem and also the nation today called Israel actually is. They can have it ..nothing holy about it at all. As far
as I am concerned the Muslims can have it..for the same reasons. Nothing holy about it at all.
I have nothing particularly against todays nation called Israel and Jews..I just know there is nothing holy about them, their nation..or Jerusalem.
And if the Muslims get it ..the same thing applies. Nothing holy about them either. Nor the nation. I also have nothing in particular or favor of the
Muslims as well.
Galatians Chapter 4 is very very telling to those with the capacity to see hear and understand...even in todays social/political events.