An attempt to eliminate God.

[BornAgainBrian]

Americans were once under British law, now American law.

So what if some of the laws are the same. If Americans aren't allowed to murder, and that was part of British law too, is it a sound argument to say that because Americans aren't allowed to murder, they are under British law still?

 

[Elder 111]

Why do you promote the covenant of law over its replacement covenant of unconditional promises?

Unconditional!!!! Saved regatdless, that was not said but the tenants of the presentation promotes the idea. All you have to do is believe and you have heaven. Once saved always saved.
All of these ideas are at the center of the rejection of God Holy Ten commandment law. With the removal of thou should do or thou should not do as in the Ten commandments leaves us with nothing to do and still be saved. Does that mark biblical accuracy? Is that what the bible teaches. It just goes to show that when the idea that the law is abolished is closely examine it can not stand.

 

[Elder 111]

Originally Posted by Elder 111

Jesus does not share your claim. Mat 7:
21Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. ("Listed" would be interested in this part)

22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.
​

Why do you think I would be interested in that part?

Did you not suggest that it was the law of Jesus and not the Father that we are called to?

 

[BornAgainBrian]

Keep on deliberately misrepresenting by insisting on using "abolish" and you show us exactly how well you comprehend what we are saying.

 

[Elder 111]

No one claims anything was abolished, no matter how often you try to impose that.

In exodus, for whom was that a test, Israelites or gentiles?

Please permit me to answer your question with a question. Did salvation come through the Israelites or the Gentles? We need to stop this folly of separation when it comes to the truth of God!

 

[Elder 111]

Testimony, covenant, testament... These are synonyms.

This was the ark of the covenant... the old covenant

Bother you are fighting the truth. This same covenant, testimony, testament all that you want to term it was seen in Heaven by John. It therefore has not been abandoned by God. That is the point. You want to ignore that , it is your privilege, but please don't make it seen like it is not there and that it only existed in the "old covenant". This kind of reaction to God's plainly stated word hurts me to the core. If we are bearer of the truth why treat it so? That is the difference between we being a Saul or a Paul.

 

[Elder 111]

Which one of the two parties mentioned in this passage are you? The house of Israel or the house of Judah?

Both! Gal 3:29 And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.
And I am happy to be.

 

[Elder 111]

Americans were once under British law, now American law.

So what if some of the laws are the same. If Americans aren't allowed to murder, and that was part of British law too, is it a sound argument to say that because Americans aren't allowed to murder, they are under British law still?

The ruler(S) changed in your presentation, but in God kingdom there is no change of ruler. Old or new testament same God same ruler, no comparison.

 

[VictorC]

• The law ordained by 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)

Why? Because the law that say we should have no other God is obsolete? Because the law that says we should not kill is obsolete. Or because for one as shown in Heb 7, that Christ is the new High priest which was not of the tribe of Levi? Which is of the law of the priesthood and not the ten commandments.

Instead of accepting 'what' transpired according to the epistle to the Hebrews, you choose rather to question 'why'. In short, you don't accept Scripture explaining that God took away the first covenant, which was the Ten Commandments and the Book of the Law.

 

[VictorC]

Both! Gal 3:29 And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.
And I am happy to be.

It goes without saying that if you claim to be Abraham's seed, then you are neither of the House of Israel nor Judah.

 

[VictorC]

Bother you are fighting the truth. This same covenant, testimony, testament all that you want to term it was seen in Heaven by John.

False.
And this was proven to you two years ago.
John saw the ark with the Mercy Seat - not the Mosaic covenant the Law specifies was exclusive to the children of Israel.
Not space aliens, nor other fables conjured by the false prophet.

 

[Elder 111]

Keep on deliberately misrepresenting by insisting on using "abolish" and you show us exactly how well you comprehend what we are saying.

In the context what is the difference in saying "fulfill". You are making the point that it does not apply to us. Abolished put us in the same place. Do not apply, not necessary, uncalled for. Is that not also the result of your "fulfilled"?

 

[VictorC]

Please permit me to answer your question with a question. Did salvation come through the Israelites or the Gentles? We need to stop this folly of separation when it comes to the truth of God!

Go back to Exodus 16, and answer the question instead of avoiding the obvious.

 

[VictorC]

Unconditional!!!! Saved regatdless, that was not said but the tenants of the presentation promotes the idea. All you have to do is believe and you have heaven. Once saved always saved.
All of these ideas are at the center of the rejection of God Holy Ten commandment law. With the removal of thou should do or thou should not do as in the Ten commandments leaves us with nothing to do and still be saved. Does that mark biblical accuracy? Is that what the bible teaches. It just goes to show that when the idea that the law is abolished is closely examine it can not stand.

Yes, unconditional was accurate - reliance on the promises and performance of a Holy God Who made those promises.

Romans 4
13 For the promise that he would be the heir of the world was not to Abraham or to his seed through the law, but through the righteousness of faith. 14 For if those who are of the law are heirs, faith is made void and the promise made of no effect, 15 because the law brings about wrath; for where there is no law there is no transgression.
16 Therefore it is of faith that it might be according to grace, so that the promise might be sure to all the seed, not only to those who are of the law, but also to those who are of the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all 17 (as it is written, “I have made you a father of many nations”) in the presence of Him whom he believed—God, who gives life to the dead and calls those things which do not exist as though they did; 18 who, contrary to hope, in hope believed, so that he became the father of many nations, according to what was spoken, “So shall your descendants be.” 19 And not being weak in faith, he did not consider his own body, already dead (since he was about a hundred years old), and the deadness of Sarah’s womb. 20 He did not waver at the promise of God through unbelief, but was strengthened in faith, giving glory to God, 21 and being fully convinced that what He had promised He was also able to perform. 22 And therefore “it was accounted to him for righteousness.”
23 Now it was not written for his sake alone that it was imputed to him, 24 but also for us. It shall be imputed to us who believe in Him who raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead, 25 who was delivered up because of our offenses, and was raised because of our justification.​

Over and over Scripture tells us that you will never, ever be justified before God by your performance to the Mosaic covenant that you as a Gentile in a foregn land never had, and never will have.

 

[VictorC]

In the context what is the difference in saying "fulfill". You are making the point that it does not apply to us. Abolished put us in the same place. Do not apply, not necessary, uncalled for. Is that not also the result of your "fulfilled"?

Links and definitions of the Greek pleroo that is rendered as 'fulfill' in most English translations has been provided to you for years, and you still don't accept the promise Jesus made of consummating the Mosaic covenant in His Blood.

 

[Steeno7]

So excuse me please. Is not obeying God doing His will? To worship God only as in the first commandments is not doing His will??? Come on speak up!!

Well of course you would miss it entirely.

 

[BornAgainBrian]

Please permit me to answer your question with a question. Did salvation come through the Israelites or the Gentles? We need to stop this folly of separation when it comes to the truth of God!

The Savior came from Judah, if that's what you mean.

 

[BornAgainBrian]

Bother you are fighting the truth. This same covenant, testimony, testament all that you want to term it was seen in Heaven by John. It therefore has not been abandoned by God. That is the point. You want to ignore that , it is your privilege, but please don't make it seen like it is not there and that it only existed in the "old covenant". This kind of reaction to God's plainly stated word hurts me to the core. If we are bearer of the truth why treat it so? That is the difference between we being a Saul or a Paul.

Here is where your refusal to acknowledge the difference between "abolished" and "fulfilled" hurts you. If something was abolished, your point may hold water. But if fulfilled, it still exists in full, but no longer need be fulfilled. It hasn't been abandoned or abolished. It has been fulfilled and is a fantastic testimony to the work of the Savior.

 

[BornAgainBrian]

Both! Gal 3:29 And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.
And I am happy to be.

Abraham's seed and "Israel" or "Judah" aren't entirely synonymous.

 

[BornAgainBrian]

The ruler(S) changed in your presentation, but in God kingdom there is no change of ruler. Old or new testament same God same ruler, no comparison.

The point is that two sets of laws may have overlaps.