Heresy Watch #1
I saw the Metro Lutheran when I was down in the Twin Cities this weekend. A man named Sven Erlandson had written a letter that had created some contraversy in basically stating that Christians don't take the Bible literally, since they don't follow Levitical laws to a tea. Erlandson has already written a book called Rescuing God from Christianity. Which is a book taken shots at Fundamentalists and how they have corrupted the Christian Faith. I only read reviews I didn't sit down and read this book. The basic point is I guess basically a rehash of Baruch Spinoza's idea, where you need to just love your neighbors and love God and this is a religion. So doctrines like the Trinity, and the Resurrection can be discarded according to the review I read, and this was from someone who liked the Book.
Erlandson in the Minneapolis Star Tribune wrote http://ivarsvoice.blogspot.com/2005/09/word-alone.html
As far as what he says about Leviticus 20:13b-Leviticus 20 deals with punishments for sins in Theocratic Israel. So this is why we don't put people to death for Idolatry. Since the state is not the one's enforcing but human self-righteousness in John 8 with the Women at the Well, this is why Jesus tells them "Let though without sin, cast the first stone." So John 8 would also seem to address why people aren't put to death for Sexual Sin. But in Romans 13:4 the state is one who enforces people's behaviors. So if we were living in a Theoacry this law would be valid. This question also probably goes to a degree how as blatant disregard of God's law in such a way as in violating the sabbath, would put someone to death as Hebrews 3-4 or Colossians 2:16-23 seem to argue because Christ has made us right with God. The observances of God that previously made us right with God are no longer valid.
But people like Erlandson, and classmates at Seminary like to point out how we eat Shellfish so we don't take the Bible literally along these lines. But hopefully they know well enough that in Acts 10, Peter has a vision which says all foods are permissible to eat this is backed up in Colossians 2:16-17.
We don't follow Old Testament Sacrifical system because Christ is the ulitmate high preist as stated in Hebrews 6-10. So this is quite well laid out in the New Testament. Laws dealing with issues of cleaniness fall along these lines, since Christ took away any need to make pure sacrifices for sin.
But yet Old Testament moral law is unchanging. So issues like Leviticus 20:13a- would seem to be cover. You're not permitted anywhere to engage in Murder, Theft, or Adultery. As I have stated earlier on this blog, who would argue for any changes to anything stated in Leviticus 18.
This might seem like a minor issue, but people throwing Levitical references, and pointing out how we don't follow them, so we should promote any behavior they want, has happened on more than one occasion. So this is why I felt the need to respond to Erlandson.
Works consulted
1. http://thirdmill.org/answers/answer.asp/file/99757.qna/category/ot/page/questions/site/iiim
2. http://thirdmill.org/answers/answer.asp/category/ot/file/99939.qna
3. http://www.lcms.org/pages/internal.asp?NavID=7486
Erlandson in the Minneapolis Star Tribune wrote http://ivarsvoice.blogspot.com/2005/09/word-alone.html
As far as what he says about Leviticus 20:13b-Leviticus 20 deals with punishments for sins in Theocratic Israel. So this is why we don't put people to death for Idolatry. Since the state is not the one's enforcing but human self-righteousness in John 8 with the Women at the Well, this is why Jesus tells them "Let though without sin, cast the first stone." So John 8 would also seem to address why people aren't put to death for Sexual Sin. But in Romans 13:4 the state is one who enforces people's behaviors. So if we were living in a Theoacry this law would be valid. This question also probably goes to a degree how as blatant disregard of God's law in such a way as in violating the sabbath, would put someone to death as Hebrews 3-4 or Colossians 2:16-23 seem to argue because Christ has made us right with God. The observances of God that previously made us right with God are no longer valid.
But people like Erlandson, and classmates at Seminary like to point out how we eat Shellfish so we don't take the Bible literally along these lines. But hopefully they know well enough that in Acts 10, Peter has a vision which says all foods are permissible to eat this is backed up in Colossians 2:16-17.
We don't follow Old Testament Sacrifical system because Christ is the ulitmate high preist as stated in Hebrews 6-10. So this is quite well laid out in the New Testament. Laws dealing with issues of cleaniness fall along these lines, since Christ took away any need to make pure sacrifices for sin.
But yet Old Testament moral law is unchanging. So issues like Leviticus 20:13a- would seem to be cover. You're not permitted anywhere to engage in Murder, Theft, or Adultery. As I have stated earlier on this blog, who would argue for any changes to anything stated in Leviticus 18.
This might seem like a minor issue, but people throwing Levitical references, and pointing out how we don't follow them, so we should promote any behavior they want, has happened on more than one occasion. So this is why I felt the need to respond to Erlandson.
Works consulted
1. http://thirdmill.org/answers/answer.asp/file/99757.qna/category/ot/page/questions/site/iiim
2. http://thirdmill.org/answers/answer.asp/category/ot/file/99939.qna
3. http://www.lcms.org/pages/internal.asp?NavID=7486
posted by Stew at 9:08 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home