The ten commandments Old covenant, and the law "done away" and "abolished" as paul said

[Frogster]

Yes he did. But he did not remove the yoke from his own shoulders or the shoulders of fellow Jews.

You don't think Peter remembered the prophecy about 70 AD that would finally end Judaism?

Hebrews was a warning letter, that is why the 40 year testing period is in Hebrews, they were also coming upon the 40 year mark, 70AD!

Besides, again, Peter said no law for the disciples, that means all disciples, the disciple word in Acts, by the time Peter used it, had been used for both parties already, with Luke, so you are wrong.

Peter said Jews and Greek are both saved the same way, faith and grace, yes, he talked about the Jews too in Acts 15.

enough is enough!...kitties need to eat a little less Purina kitty chow, and eat the cat chow, that is for doctrinally mature cats, time to leave the kitty chow!

 

[Meowzltov]

One gospel for Jew and Greek

I've never denied that there is one gospel of grace for all. Nor have I denied that we are one body. What I've said is that Jews and Gentiles have different responsiblities the way men and women do.

time to leave the kitty chow!

Pfft Pfft Meow meow!

 

[Meowzltov]

So the Pauline corpus is not for the 2 Jews in your church?

The parts about leaving the law? That is correct. It is not for us.

 

[Meowzltov]

You don't think Peter remembered the prophecy about 70 AD that would finally end Judaism?

Peter died in 64 AD. He knew nothing about 70 AD.

 

[Meowzltov]

Peter said Jews and Greek are both saved the same way, faith and grace, yes, he talked about the Jews too in Acts 15.

Like I said, the gospel of grace is for all. The law abiding of Jews was not addressed in Acts 15 except to say that it was a burden -- the council left obeying the Law intact by their silence.

 

[Wordkeeper]

Like I said, the gospel of grace is for all. The law abiding of Jews was not addressed in Acts 15 except to say that it was a burden -- the council left obeying the Law intact by their silence.

The council of Jerusalem recognised the law was a burden and were in transition to throw it out.

Paul understood the law was an attempt by Israel to glorify herself, just as Sarah tried to use her election by God to glorify herself, Israel's attempt to defeat Canaan by human effort an attempt to glorify herself and Jesus's refusal to jump from a building top NOT to glorify Himself:

Galatians 4:28And you brethren, like Isaac, are children of promise. 29But as at that time he who was born according to the flesh persecuted him who was bornaccording to the Spirit, so it is now also.

30But what does the Scripture say?
“CAST OUT THE BONDWOMAN AND HER SON,
FOR THE SON OF THE BONDWOMAN SHALL NOT BE AN HEIR WITH THE SON OF THE FREE WOMAN.”

 

[Frogster]

The parts about leaving the law? That is correct. It is not for us.

PUUL SAID NOT UNDER LAW, HE WAS NOT, JEWS ARE NOT..SEE ROM 6:14, AND GAl 5:18....stop ignoring all of the common sensed things i have said.

one church, not 2.....one faith, one baptism.

 

[Frogster]

Peter died in 64 AD. He knew nothing about 70 AD.

wha???????....you don:t think he knew the Lord said, "not one stone left???

Oh my...sis...this is a total blunder you posted!...lol.......................

 

[Frogster]

Like I said, the gospel of grace is for all. The law abiding of Jews was not addressed in Acts 15 except to say that it was a burden -- the council left obeying the Law intact by their silence.

spin.....

 

[Hank77]

wha???????....you don:t think he knew the Lord said, "not one stone left???

Oh my...sis...this is a total blunder you posted!...lol.......................

Pretty sure he did...
Mar 13:1 And as he is going forth out of the temple, one of his disciples saith to him, `Teacher, see! what stones! and what buildings!'
Mar 13:2 and Jesus answering said to him, `Seest thou these great buildings? there may not be left a stone upon a stone, that may not be thrown down.'
Mar 13:3 And as he is sitting at the mount of the Olives, over-against the temple, Peter, and James, and John, and Andrew, were questioning him by himself,

 

[Meowzltov]

The council of Jerusalem recognised the law was a burden and were in transition to throw it out.

And where is the council that threw it out?

 

[Meowzltov]

stop ignoring all of the common sensed things i have said.

Well you ignore the common sense things I say. So neener neener.

I've been gone a few days. Didja miss me?

 

[Meowzltov]

wha???????....you don:t think he knew the Lord said, "not one stone left???

He knew the prophecy but not the reality. Sheesh.

 

[Wordkeeper]

hy·poc·ri·sy (hĭ-pŏk′rĭ-sē)
n. pl. hy·poc·ri·sies
1. The practice of professing beliefs, feelings, or virtues that one does not hold or possess; falseness.
2. An act or instance of such falseness

Galatians 2:12For prior to the coming of certain men from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles; but when they came, he began to withdraw and hold himself aloof, fearing the party of the circumcision. 13The rest of the Jews joined him in hypocrisy, with the result that even Barnabas was carried away by their hypocrisy. 14But when I saw that they were not straightforward about the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas in the presence of all, "If you, being a Jew, live like the Gentiles and not like the Jews, how is it that you compel the Gentiles to live like Jews?

And where is the council that threw it out?

 

[bugkiller]

The parts about leaving the law? That is correct. It is not for us.

So who is Paul referring to in Rom 7:6 when he says "we?"

bugkiller

 

[bugkiller]

And where is the council that threw it out?

Mat 26:28

For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.

bugkiller

 

[Meowzltov]

So who is Paul referring to in Rom 7:6 when he says "we?"

I think you are more interested in what it means when he says, "been released from the law." You and I are never going to agree on what this means.

 

[Meowzltov]

For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.

Non answer. I asked for the supposed council that through out the ruling of the Jerusalem council. You didn't provide one. You appealed to a teaching of Jesus which came before the Jerusalem council. IF THAT overrules the council's decision, then what you are REALLY saying is NOT that the decision was subsequently overthrown but that the decision of the council itself was in error. Is that what you really want to say?

 

[Hank77]

I think you are more interested in what it means when he says, "been released from the law." You and I are never going to agree on what this means.

If you can't explain who the 'we' in Romans 7:6 is then how can you say that practicing the Law of Moses is Not for the non-Jew let alone For the Jew only?

IF THAT overrules the council's decision, then what you are REALLY saying is NOT that the decision was subsequently overthrown but that the decision of the council itself was in error.

You appear to believe that the ruling of the Council was a ruling that effected what the Jewish Christians did. It didn't.
So if you are trying to use it to state that the Jews still had to follow the Law of Moses because of this ruling, you are mistaken. They have nothing to do with each other.

 

[Meowzltov]

You appear to believe that the ruling of the Council was a ruling that effected what the Jewish Christians did. It didn't.
So if you are trying to use it to state that the Jews still had to follow the Law of Moses because of this ruling, you are mistaken. They have nothing to do with each other.

The council left INTACT the requirement that Jewish believers follow the Law. The whole point of the decision was that it was making an exception for Gentiles, saying they did not need to do what Jews needed to do.