tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6881054.post113355607717804587..comments2024-03-27T09:50:53.662-05:00Comments on Happy Catholic*: Notes on Mark: Real Defilement Comes From WithinJulie D.http://www.blogger.com/profile/08384291674560438678noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6881054.post-73072155269030005712013-06-27T11:39:43.908-05:002013-06-27T11:39:43.908-05:00Ahhhhhhh ... gotcha! So I misunderstood! Oh, if on...Ahhhhhhh ... gotcha! So <b>I</b> misunderstood! Oh, if only it were the first (or last) time that happened! :-D<br /><br />Thank you for your comments and clarification ... and for your kind words. :-)Juliehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11368767968953817531noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6881054.post-75780401007774335962013-06-27T10:17:39.772-05:002013-06-27T10:17:39.772-05:00Thanks Julie. I didn't misunderstand, I was (p...Thanks Julie. I didn't misunderstand, I was (presumptuously) adding to what you had posted in case an other might need clarification. and now, you've added further clarification!<br /><br />By the way, I love your blog, and stop by fairly regularly.Roberthttp://www.briefthink.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6881054.post-59806410410483449322013-06-27T08:18:08.814-05:002013-06-27T08:18:08.814-05:00I think you are misunderstanding what is being sai...I think you are misunderstanding what is being said. The commentary above is not meant to imply that those sacrifices were in vain because that was the extent of man's knowledge of God's will at the time.<br /><br />The examples mentioned showed that those martyrs did have the right intention. It was the people, for example, who urged the old man to go ahead and eat pork, who didn't understand the intention, the love of God, that the laws signified.<br /><br />As Jesus said, he comes to fulfill the Law, not abolish it. What Barclay is saying is that Christ's declaration of the final "evolution" (if you will) of the law, in God's plan, is revolutionary. <br /><br />And so it is.Juliehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11368767968953817531noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6881054.post-40480908519458031082013-06-27T08:00:55.512-05:002013-06-27T08:00:55.512-05:00But this can't possibly mean that those martyr...But this can't possibly mean that those martyrs died in vain. Even if a physical object cannot make a person unclean, the act of disobedience by which one eats a forbidden meat makes one unclean. Jews bound by the law should obey it because it IS God's law, not on the basis of whether or not a physical thing can make one unclean. Ultimately, this is no different than the fruit in the Garden of Eden: it is not the fruit itself, but the disobedience, that made our parents sinners.<br /><br />When we begin rationalizing, as Eve did, that the fruit looks delightful, we find ourselves questioning the logic of God's command. "It looks good, it smells good, it feels good, it must be good. God must be wrong." But it cannot serve good if eating it is contrary to the command of God. This supports what Jesus said: it is all about conformity of a man's will to the will of God.<br /><br />One could attempt to take this a step further by asserting that non-marital sex cannot defile a man. How can it? "We love each other. We seek unity, and commitment, we're even open to children."<br /><br />But the fact that it is contrary to the law of God, positively expressed in his commandments, makes non-marital sex defiling, because one has set one's will against the will of God.<br /><br />Jesus' words are shocking only if you set the object or the act as independent from God's will.Roberthttp://www.briefthink.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.com