That's correct. Except the laws for "atonement for ones sin" in the OT, do not apply to the NT teaching, of course.

Blood of bulls and goats compared to the precious blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, for example.

Amen Bro. Forrest! ;)

ah, so Linda you are Jewish? that explains a lot.

Please elaborate...what do you mean by "that explains alot"?

Still waiting for your response to my question.

Your silence in responding to a simple question brings me to the conclusion that you meant that as an anti-semetic statement...am I correct? If not, why won't you answer?

Rest Assured I am not making any type of anti-semetic statement. I have plenty of frineds who are Jewish. it only verifies a personal experience I have had with other women who are also saved Jewess.

I was praying about whether to share it with you. But after reading what you just posted about concluding I was making an anti-semetic statement I wil not share it with you.

Shalom

Sorry I've been so delayed in replying.

You've clearly established that the atonement attained by the blood of bulls and goats (OT) is not applicable to the NT believer today. Now since all scripture is...profitable for doctrine,... it becomes just as clear that not all scripture is to be applied to the NT believer - although it is doctrine, it's not YOUR doctrine (you said so yourself).

So, all scripture is profitable for establishing the perameters of doctrine, yet not all of the doctrines established can be pronounced applicable to the NT believer today. I know you understand the concept, and it really is that simple.

Now, does the OT apply to believers at all? Well, simply put, there's a reason that it's called the OLD testament.

I've got to go, but I'm sure you'll find somebody's posts about the three applications of scripture (historical, doctrinal, and spiritual). Search George's posts for this, I'm confident that he's covered it, and know it will resolve the questions previously posted. Knowing how and which application you can receive without crossing the doctrinal perameter will open it all up for you.

I understand "doctrine" to simply mean that which is taught. There are specific doctrines in the Old Testament that clearly do not "apply" (cannot be applied) to the Christian who is now under the "New Covenant" or "New Testament" teaching. A example of this would be the doctrine on atonement through the blood of Jesus Christ which was shed once, for all.

A "Old" Testament doctrine (that which is taught) such as:

"My son, if sinners entice thee, consent thou not" (Proverbs 1:10).

Is "applicable" to me as a person who is part of the "New" Testament. This "Old" Testament teaching is profitable for both "doctrine (that which is taught) and applicable (that which can be applied to my life). We can clearly understand the Old Testament doctrine which can also be applied to a New Testament believer.

To quote you,

Taking doctrine at simply "that which is taught," allow me to catagorize some things. First, realize who is doing the teaching (be specific, don't say God for each one), and also who is being taught. To mention a few...


There is doctrine as taught to the nation of Israel.
There is doctrine as taught to the church.
There is doctrine as taught to those in the future tribulation.
There is doctrine as taught to those living during the Millennial kingdom, etc.

These doctrines are not the same, and find application in different ages to different peoples. You understand the point.

Proverbs 1:10 would fall into which of these catagories?

Writer: Solomon, king of Israel
Recipient: "My son,..." the son(s) of King Solomon

This follows the HISTORICAL application of scripture, that is, (1) a writer wrote the verse in question (2) to a recipient (3) at a certain point in history (probably late in the life of Solomon). Simply put, "it was good advice from dad."

Now for the doctrine.

The verse finds itself lending DOCTRINAL information to someone who had better stay away from sinners and "forsake not the law," verse 8. The chapter lends itself to the context of the Second Coming of Christ before it ends, and points the Jew to living right (works) in order to "dwell safely." (The cross references here a plenteous, noticing the words used by God to connect it with other passages.)

So here the doctrine is not aimed at the believer in the NT. But what about us?

The third and final application of scripture is SPIRITUAL application. Here's where we can get insight and not create problems in the Bible. While the passage is not directly written to us, nor is it in it's context aimed at the church, we can still gain application of the spiritual nature. Here, the truth is obvious (and again the backing from Paul writings to the church is plenteous).

The book of Proverbs (as is the whole OT) is loaded with spiritual truths. However, there are places where Proverbs does not match Pauline doctrine to the church. So when establishing doctrine, you had better stay with the "apostle to the Gentiles," and the doctrines that were given and aimed at you.


P.S. This is not the JW's form of doing away with scripture ("spiritualizing") to match their own doctrine. This is a form of sound right division of the word of truth.