Jesus abolished the entire Old Testament.

[Elder 111]

Not true. Moses made everything shown to him in the heavenly sanctuary, and did not make the Mosaic covenant - because the covenant exclusive to the children of Israel doesn't apply to space aliens and angels, contrary to SDA mythology. The testimony is there in plain sight, comprised of the Mercyseat.

Where is your biblical text?

 

[Elder 111]

I'm now quite convinced that that the Law doesn't change sinful human behavior.

Hebrews 7:18-19
For on the one hand there is an annulling of the former commandment because of its weakness and unprofitableness, for the law made nothing perfect; on the other hand, there is the bringing in of a better hope, through which we draw near to God.​

The law referred to here is the levitical law of the priesthood and not the 10 C's. You should know that!

 

[Elder 111]

Your rejection and unbelief is on you not me. I do not ask you to accept my position. Some seed falls on good ground and some falls on bad ground.

It is not my position! It is what the bible says. Did I not quote scripture? How then can it be "my position"?

 

[Elder 111]

Originally Posted by Elder 11125 I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin

SoWhat? Are you remotely paying attention here?

Are you? What do you mean my the comment? It is scripture you are responding to.

 

[Elder 111]

You are confused and I will not confess your confusion as my own.

Scripture is confused too? You can not plain text that does not conform to your position. Can all you believe stand up to all scripture. NO! Then as you say it is "your position" not God's.

 

[Elder 111]

The truth includes verse 6 - which you have repeatedly discarded as anathema to the Adventist message. Besides, Romans 3:31 upholds the reliability of the Law's testimony, immediately quoting from the Law 430 years before the Ten Commandments existed to show righteousness imputed to Abraham by faith.

When you reduce this wonderful epistle to sound bites, you don't see the message it conveys in fluid narrative. That's the whole truth of the Gospel.

So what are you saying?

 

[VictorC]

So what are you saying?

That you keep throwing away the message conveyed in Romans chapter 7. And it isn't because the passage identifying our (who know the Law) deliverance from the Law identified by a quote from the Ten Commandments hasn't been shown to you.
Repeatedly, no less.
You also keep repeating the fallacy Romans 3:8 condemns, as well.

 

[VictorC]

Where is your biblical text?

You know Hebrews 8 has been called on for over a year to prove your thesis wrong. What you don't recognize is that your wrongness is an Adventist distinctive. The answer you gave to Listed in this thread is prudent in this case:

Scripture is confused too? You can not plain text that does not conform to your position. Can all you believe stand up to all scripture. NO! Then as you say it is "your position" not God's.

When you contradict Scripture, your own words work against you.
You don't know the Testimony of God in His sanctuary, and suggesting the Mosaic covenant existed in heaven -contrary to what Moses did when he made all things shown to him in the heavenly example (hebrews 8:5)- is pure mythology.

 

[VictorC]

The law referred to here is the levitical law of the priesthood and not the 10 C's. You should know that!

Absolute mythology.
You know the epistle to the Hebrews addresses God's disposition on the entire covenant from Mount Sinai, and not some mere subset of it.

• The law codified in the first covenant demanded change (Hebrews 7:12)
• It was annulled (v.7:18)
• It was charged with a fault that called for a new covenant (v.8:7)
• It was rendered obsolete and ready to vanish away (v.8:13)
• Jesus redeemed our transgressions under the first covenant and is now the Mediator of the new covenant (v.9:15)
• He took the first covenant away by His own Hand, in order to establish that new covenant (v.10:9)

Besides, you already know that if you merely reduce God's disposition to sacrifices, that alone ends the weekly Sabbath because of the burnt offerings mandated by the Law (Numbers 28:9-10, addressed in Hebrews 10:8).

 

[listed]

It is not my position! It is what the bible says. Did I not quote scripture? How then can it be "my position"?

Your selected verse has nothing to do with the law.

 

[listed]

It is not my position! It is what the bible says. Did I not quote scripture? How then can it be "my position"?

Then by your application only my mind needs to be parked in a pew on Saturday. Are you arguing it is my body that is subject to the law or is it my mind? The body and the mind must not be connected in your verse making it say what you wish.

 

[listed]

Originally Posted by Elder 11125 I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin
Are you? What do you mean my the comment? It is scripture you are responding to.

Then by your application only my mind needs to be parked in a pew on Saturday. Are you arguing it is my body that is subject to the law or is it my mind? The body and the mind must not be connected in your verse making it say what you wish.

 

[listed]

Scripture is confused too? You can not plain text that does not conform to your position. Can all you believe stand up to all scripture. NO! Then as you say it is "your position" not God's.

Look you can trample on and belittle me all you like. I am tired of your trampling on the Scripture. That is why I am not posting much Scripture. If you know the Scripture you know exactly what I am referring to and am solidly based on the Scripture.

 

[Steve Petersen]

To say that Jesus came to annul the Law is to contradict his words.

Matthew 5:17 and Luke 16:17

 

[listed]

To say that Jesus came to annul the Law is to contradict his words.

Matthew 5:17 and Luke 16:17

Only in word games denying full word definitions and usage.

 

[Steve Petersen]

Only in word games denying full word definitions and usage.

or cultural and historical context.

 

[Elder 111]

That you keep throwing away the message conveyed in Romans chapter 7. And it isn't because the passage identifying our (who know the Law) deliverance from the Law identified by a quote from the Ten Commandments hasn't been shown to you.
Repeatedly, no less.
You also keep repeating the fallacy Romans 3:8 condemns, as well.

Deliverance from the law does not mean the law is abolished.

 

[Elder 111]

You know Hebrews 8 has been called on for over a year to prove your thesis wrong. What you don't recognize is that your wrongness is an Adventist distinctive. The answer you gave to Listed in this thread is prudent in this case:

When you contradict Scripture, your own words work against you.
You don't know the Testimony of God in His sanctuary, and suggesting the Mosaic covenant existed in heaven -contrary to what Moses did when he made all things shown to him in the heavenly example (hebrews 8:5)- is pure mythology.

I said the 10 C's where you get this Moses covenant from?

 

[Elder 111]

Absolute mythology.
You know the epistle to the Hebrews addresses God's disposition on the entire covenant from Mount Sinai, and not some mere subset of it.

• The law codified in the first covenant demanded change (Hebrews 7:12)
• It was annulled (v.7:18)
• It was charged with a fault that called for a new covenant (v.8:7)
• It was rendered obsolete and ready to vanish away (v.8:13)
• Jesus redeemed our transgressions under the first covenant and is now the Mediator of the new covenant (v.9:15)
• He took the first covenant away by His own Hand, in order to establish that new covenant (v.10:9)

Besides, you already know that if you merely reduce God's disposition to sacrifices, that alone ends the weekly Sabbath because of the burnt offerings mandated by the Law (Numbers 28:9-10, addressed in Hebrews 10:8).

Heb 7 speaks of the priesthood, period!

 

[Elder 111]

Then by your application only my mind needs to be parked in a pew on Saturday. Are you arguing it is my body that is subject to the law or is it my mind? The body and the mind must not be connected in your verse making it say what you wish.

That is what the bible says. Why are you insisting on saying that i want you to do this or that? It is what God says, why are you missing that!