>>/204/
> Mate, I simply said that "defilement" via it being shared is what the word meant. I never denied that the concept is both metaphorical and literal. You're blabbering on about nothing relevant to my argument here.
Listen, we're having some obvious problems with communication here. First you say koinos simply means 'common'. Semantic fields of 'common' in English and 'common' as used by Jews don't line up very well. Then you say I wrote koinos means literally DIRTY and that's what the article you've linked was saying which wasn't true either. Then you say I'm blabbering about something irrelevant when I'm trying to explain what I'm saying since you've given me all the reasons to suspect you're having problems understanding it.
>>/205/
> This is why man in his fallen state should adhere to the Levitical Law. Done.
Wow you actually hadn't explained anything and you don't even realize that. If Levitical Law is the way God wants man, tainted by sin, to live why wasn't it given to Noah and Abraham?
I think I recall Abraham being justified by something else, despite not following the Law, and that could be easily attributed to Noah too if it wasn't in scriptures.
> however as detailed by Paul, the Law of Moses was never abolished
And the same Paul also wrote Gal 3:19 and how we've died in Christ so we're not under the Law, and how kingdom of God is about righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit. You'll maybe want to say that righteousness IS the act of keeping the Law but since the Law included dietary requirements this cannot be the case. Everything that's not done in faith is sin. Spirit of the Law needs to be fulfilled and it's fulfilled by agape.
> What nonsense are you talking about.
It's pointless to go into that until we get on the same page about the basics. It's not pivotal in this discussion. It could help you to understand what's going on but if that's not clear and I need to explain it then it's counterproductive now.
> Exactly.
Not exactly. Again you show you don't understand what I wrote. There's more to it, you might disagree and I don't think I can make you see what I see anyway so I'll just drop it. Maybe it'll crop up in your mind later in your life if you change your views.
> You keep forgetting that the reason why we're "freed" from it is because the Law doesn't save us
Oh there's more. It gives the power to death.
> You cannot get saved by following the Law and trying to avoid sin by your own works, but only through Jesus.
Then why do you seek to be bound by it?
"In the freedom, then, with which Christ did make you free — stand ye, and be not held fast again by a yoke of servitude;
lo, I Paul do say to you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing; and I testify again to every man circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law; ye were freed from the Christ, ye who in law are declared righteous; from the grace ye fell away; for we by the Spirit, by faith, a hope of righteousness do wait for, for in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth anything, nor uncircumcision, but faith through love working."
You cannot in intellectual honesty advocate Levitical Law without rejecting Paul and mental gymnastics concerning Jesus' words.
> Jesus isn't correcting the Law, he's correcting the bad, divisional interpretation of the Law that the Pharisees had.
Huh?
"if your righteousness may not abound above that of the scribes and Pharisees, ye may not enter to the reign of the heavens"
And then he goes talking how 'thou shalt not kill' isn't enough and so on. He is effectively correcting the Law - giving examples of what spirit of the Law is. You can either live by what Jesus says or by what letter of the Law says.
It's tiring for me. If you again come up with something showing you don't understand what you're talking about or what I wrote this might be my last response. I understand in general why you think as you do. Scriptures aren't clear at all on many matters, if they were we wouldn't have so many denominations... but you have to ignore so m