The Seventh Day is the SABBATH of the Lord thy God Exodus 20:10

[yeshuaslavejeff]

You can't be blind to what he is implying.

I did not imply anything - I stated clearly several times,
whenever anything contradicts Scripture, it is wrong,
no matter who told you or taught you.

The Apostles even said clearly, NOT to believe them , IF they gave any message that was not in harmony with Scripture.

 

[1stcenturylady]

I did not imply anything - I stated clearly several times,
whenever anything contradicts Scripture, it is wrong,
no matter who told you or taught you.

The Apostles even said clearly, NOT to believe them , IF they gave any message that was not in harmony with Scripture.

An angel of light is the devil. That didn't escape anyone reading it.

I wouldn't expect you to think there was anything wrong. (Men rarely apologize, believing they are always right, if not loving. But just for the record, I didn't contradict scripture at all.)

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

An angel of light is the devil.

I wouldn't expect you to think there was anything wrong. (Men rarely apologize)

Do you mean a real [true] angel of light is also a devil ? Sorry - that's not what is written in Scripture - you contradicted Scripture again.
If there were not real [true] angels of light, it would not do any good for the enemy to appear as if an angel of light.

What is wrong, if anything, is anything that contradicts Scripture, as noted many times before,
no matter who tells you. It could be a national favorite preacher, if they contradict Scripture, they are wrong. If you believe them and post it, you continue the error.

The reference to angel of light is a simple and clear BIBLE REFERENCE to when the APOSTLE said (IT IS WRITTEN IN THE BIBLE) TEST EVERYTHING even if an APOSTLE, or an "angel of light" appears and delivers a message.

 

[1stcenturylady]

Do you mean a real [true] angel of light is also a devil ? Sorry - that's not what is written in Scripture - you contradicted Scripture again.
If there were not real [true] angels of light, it would not do any good for the enemy to appear as if an angel of light.

What is wrong, if anything, is anything that contradicts Scripture, as noted many times before,
no matter who tells you. It could be a national favorite preacher, if they contradict Scripture, they are wrong. If you believe them and post it, you continue the error.

The reference to angel of light is a simple and clear BIBLE REFERENCE to when the APOSTLE said (IT IS WRITTEN IN THE BIBLE) TEST EVERYTHING even if an APOSTLE, or an "angel of light" appears and delivers a message.

Jeff, "But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed." Again with the mean accusation. The devils are the only angels from heaven who are accursed. That's why they are called fallen angels. They are still angels. Everyone but you knows when anyone refers to an angel of light, they are referring to a demon. And you accused me of listening to demons. And BobR AGREED with you. Do you think I'm made of iron? Sorry, but that hurt.

Doesn't the Spirit convict you when you are being hateful and unloving? Or is the law of sin and death more important to you than the law of the Spirit of life in Christ?

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

Jeff, "But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed." Again with the mean accusation. The devils are the only angels from heaven who are accursed. That's why they are called fallen angels. They are still angels. Everyone but you knows when anyone refers to an angel of light, they are referring to a demon. And you accused me of listening to demons.

Doesn't the Spirit convict you when you are being hateful and unloving? Or is the law of sin and death more important to you than the law of the Spirit of life in Christ?

OOPS...... you keep digging deeper and deeper in error, and now false accusations.

Whoever you listened to, whenever it was, anything or anyone that contradicts Scripture,
THAT is where the problem lies.
Something you believed, why ever you believed it, no matter who told you - even if a so-called famous preacher,
when it contradicts Scripture, is wrong.

 

[BobRyan]

No, but that I follow scripture, and try not to react to baiting. Like your agreeing with Jeff's mean post on my birthday that "even if a spirit or an apparition or an angel of light told you this." You can't be blind to what he is implying.

on your birthday? I don't know anything about what might have happened on someone's birthday - but I do know this ...

I did not imply anything - I stated clearly several times,
whenever anything contradicts Scripture, it is wrong,
no matter who told you or taught you.

The Apostles even said clearly, NOT to believe them , IF they gave any message that was not in harmony with Scripture.

How am I supposed to be opposed to that statement?? Gal 1:6-9 agrees.

 

[1stcenturylady]

on your birthday? I don't know anything about what might have happened on someone's birthday - but I do know this ...



How am I supposed to be opposed to that statement?? Gal 1:6-9 agrees.

You and Jeff implied that Galatians 1:6-9 applied to me, as if I am listening to demons. I listen to the Spirit of Truth, which is the Holy Spirit. The law of the Spirit of life in Christ has freed me from the law of sin and death. If you had any idea what that means you could never have scorned me in such a way. If you hate your brother (or sister) you have murdered them.

 

[1stcenturylady]

OOPS...... you keep digging deeper and deeper in error, and now false accusations.

Whoever you listened to, whenever it was, anything or anyone that contradicts Scripture,
THAT is where the problem lies.
Something you believed, why ever you believed it, no matter who told you - even if a so-called famous preacher,
when it contradicts Scripture, is wrong.

It was the Spirit of Truth

 

[Doveaman]

1. Law written on their hearts - Romans 2
2. Romans 1 - shows that they know the judgment of God is upon them.

18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, 19 because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. 20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. 21 For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22 Professing to be wise, they became fools, 23 and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals and crawling creatures.
..

28 And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper, 29 being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, evil; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malice; they are gossips, 30 slanderers, haters of God, insolent, arrogant, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, 31 without understanding, untrustworthy, unloving, unmerciful; 32 and although they know the ordinance of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of death, they not only do the same, but also give hearty approval to those who practice them.

=====================

Christ said - "If you were blind you would have no sin... but you say "we see"..."

Christians cannot use pagans that have no access to the Bible as their "high standard for morals and light"

It is true that instead of "re-typing the text letter by letter" to get it included as the obvious answer to your question - I use ctl-c and ctl-v to copy paste the very same text I would be typing letter-by-letter. (Surely the "process being less labor intensive" to get the answer posted is not your complaint -- is it???)

I don't mind you copy and pasting, just as long as you offer a meaningful explanation of what you are copy and pasting.

Obviously yes since BOTH texts explicitly point to gentiles knowing about the LAW of God -
Actually, Paul did say in Romans 2 that the Gentiles were obeying the requirements of the law from their heats:

“For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature the things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law, since they show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts” -- (Romans 2:14-15).

Paul is not saying the Gentiles knew about God's law. That's just your spin. Paul is saying the opposite. He is saying the Gentiles did not know about God's law. That was the whole point of Paul's argument. The Gentiles were able to fulfill the requirements of the law despite not having the law as the Jews did:

“The one who is not circumcised physically and yet fulfills the law will condemn you who, even though you have the written letter and circumcision, are a transgressor of the law.” -- (Romans 2:26-29).

It is your argument that the letter of the law is now written in our hearts, but it is Paul's argument that the Gentiles did not have the letter of the law, period.

Holy Spirit... New Covenant "I will write my LAW on the heart".

And Romans 2 points this out as already quoted.

Romans 2 - INSTEAD he says this --

25 For indeed circumcision is of value if you practice the Law; but if you are a transgressor of the Law, your circumcision has become uncircumcision. 26 So if the uncircumcised man keeps the requirements of the Law, will not his uncircumcision be regarded as circumcision? 27 And he who is physically uncircumcised, if he keeps the Law, will he not judge you who though having the letter of the Law and circumcision are a transgressor of the Law? 28 For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh. 29 But he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that which is of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter; and his praise is not from men, but from God.

The answer is simple. We see them "every Sabbath in the synagogues" both Jews and gentiles in Acts 18:4 - hearing GOSPEL preaching.

Romans 2 does not tell us God wrote the letter of the law in our hearts. That is just your personal conclusion, which is flawed. Paul is telling us that the Gentles did not have the letter of the law but were still able to fulfill the requirements of the law. This fact shows that fulfilling the requirements of the law is not dependent on our obedience to the letter, no matter where that letter is written.

I hope you can point to where the confusion could possibly exist.

The confusion exists in your explanation of Romans 2:

“For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature the things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law, since they show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts” -- (Romans 2:14-15).

“If those who are not circumcised keep the righteous requirements of the law, will they not be regarded as though they were circumcised? The one who is not circumcised physically and yet fulfills the law will condemn you who, even though you have the written letter and circumcision, are a transgressor of the law.” -- (Romans 2:26-29).

Paul tells us the Gentiles did not have the letter of the law, period. But you are contradicting Paul by telling us that the Gentiles had the latter of the law written in their hearts.

It was not the letter of the law that was written in the hearts of Gentiles, it was the "requirements" of the law that was written in their hearts:

"they show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts” -- (Romans 2:14-15).

It is the "requirements" that are written, not the "letter". Big difference.

The answer between these gentiles in Acts 18:4 and the Jews in Acts 18:4 is found in Romans 3.

Romans 3
Then what advantage has the Jew? Or what is the benefit of circumcision? 2 Great in every respect. First of all, that they were entrusted with the oracles of God.

Paul accounts the JEWS with having the scriptures , the Word of God, the Commandments of God - the written text given to them as the nation-church-evangelists charged with world wide evangelism to the gentiles.

Which confirms Paul's point in Romans 2, that the Gentiles did not have God's law, period.

 

[Doveaman]

speaking of the JEWs of Romans 2 and Gal 6

Paul was claiming that the Jews were in rebellion against the LAW of God.

Not so.

“If those who are not circumcised keep the righteous requirements of the law, will they not be regarded as though they were circumcised? The one who is not circumcised physically and yet fulfills the law will condemn you who, even though you have the written letter and circumcision, are a transgressor of the law.” -- (Romans 2:26-29).

Paul is claiming that the Jews were not obeying the requirements of the law as the Gentiles did, even though they had the letter of the law and the Gentiles did not.

 

[1stcenturylady]

I don't mind you copy and pasting, just as long as you offer a meaningful explanation of what you are copy and pasting.
Paul is not saying the Gentiles knew about God's law. That's just your spin. Paul is saying the opposite. He is saying the Gentiles did not know about God's law. That was the whole point of Paul's argument. The Gentiles were able to fulfill the requirements of the law despite not having the law as the Jews did:

“The one who is not circumcised physically and yet fulfills the law will condemn you who, even though you have the written letter and circumcision, are a transgressor of the law.” -- (Romans 2:26-29).

It is your argument that the letter of the law is now written in our hearts, but it is Paul's argument that the Gentiles did not have the letter of the law, period.
Romans 2 does not tell us God wrote the letter of the law in our hearts. That is just your personal conclusion, which is flawed. Paul is telling us that the Gentles did not have the letter of the law but were still able to fulfill the requirements of the law. This fact shows that fulfilling the requirements of the law is not dependent on our obedience to the letter, no matter where that letter is written.
The confusion exists in your explanation of Romans 2:

“For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature the things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law, since they show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts” -- (Romans 2:14-15).

“If those who are not circumcised keep the righteous requirements of the law, will they not be regarded as though they were circumcised? The one who is not circumcised physically and yet fulfills the law will condemn you who, even though you have the written letter and circumcision, are a transgressor of the law.” -- (Romans 2:26-29).

Paul tells us the Gentiles did not have the letter of the law, period. But you are contradicting Paul by telling us that the Gentiles had the latter of the law written in their hearts.

It was not the letter of the law that was written in the hearts of Gentiles, it was the "requirements" of the law that was written in their hearts:

"they show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts” -- (Romans 2:14-15).

It is the "requirements" that are written, not the "letter". Big difference.
Which confirms my point that the Gentiles did not have God's law, period.

I did not imply anything - I stated clearly several times,
whenever anything contradicts Scripture, it is wrong,
no matter who told you or taught you.

The Apostles even said clearly, NOT to believe them , IF they gave any message that was not in harmony with Scripture.

You bore false witness. What I said was true and of the Spirit, not a spirit. You would know that if you had ever been baptized by fire.

 

[BobRyan]

Is this your answer to my original question?

speaking of the JEWs of Romans 2 and Gal 6

BobRyan said: ↑
Ok but Paul specifically says they were not obeying the law. Says it again in Galatians 6.

Gal 6
13 For neither they themselves who are circumcised keep the law; but desire to have you circumcised, that they may glory in your flesh. (KJV)

13 For not even those who are circumcised keep the law, but they desire to have you circumcised that they may boast in your flesh. (NKJv)


Romans 2
3 Do you really think—anyone of you who judges those who do such things yet do the same—that you will escape God’s judgment?

21 you then, who teach another, don’t you teach yourself? You who preach, “You must not steal”—do you steal? 22 You who say, “You must not commit adultery”—do you commit adultery? You who detest idols, do you rob their temples? 23 You who boast in the law, do you dishonor God by breaking the law? 24 For, as it is written: The name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you.


Obviously Paul was claiming that the Jews were in rebellion against the LAW of God.

Not so.

You have free will of course - you can choose any path.

“If those who are not circumcised keep the righteous requirements of the law, will they not be regarded as though they were circumcised? The one who is not circumcised physically and yet fulfills the law will condemn you who, even though you have the written letter and circumcision, are a transgressor of the law.” -- (Romans 2:26-29).

Paul is claiming that the Jews were not obeying the requirements of the law as the Gentiles did,

You post appears to undermine your starting conclusion.

even though they had the letter of the law and the Gentiles didn't.

As I said regarding Romans 3:1-4 Jews had the "oracles of God" the gentiles didn't. Says nothing against Paul's claim that the Jews were breaking the law.

"They were rebelling against the "requirements" of the law, which most certainly included the "letter".

Paul never says - "The Jews kept the "letter" of 10 Commandments."

If he had - in all these years someone would have found that text. So far people only "quote themselves" for such statements.

 

[Doveaman]

speaking of the JEWs of Romans 2 and Gal 6

Gal 6
13 For neither they themselves who are circumcised keep the law; but desire to have you circumcised, that they may glory in your flesh. (KJV)

13 For not even those who are circumcised keep the law, but they desire to have you circumcised that they may boast in your flesh. (NKJv)


Romans 2
3 Do you really think—anyone of you who judges those who do such things yet do the same—that you will escape God’s judgment?

21 you then, who teach another, don’t you teach yourself? You who preach, “You must not steal”—do you steal? 22 You who say, “You must not commit adultery”—do you commit adultery? You who detest idols, do you rob their temples? 23 You who boast in the law, do you dishonor God by breaking the law? 24 For, as it is written: The name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you.

Obviously Paul was claiming that the Jews were in rebellion against the LAW of God.

They were rebelling against the "righteous requirements" of the law, not against the "latter" of the law:

“If those who are not circumcised keep the righteous requirements of the law, will they not be regarded as though they were circumcised? The one who is not circumcised physically and yet fulfills the law will condemn you who, even though you have the written letter and circumcision, are a transgressor of the law.” -- (Romans 2:26-29).

You post appears to undermine your starting conclusion.

That's because you are unable to see beyond the letter of the law.

As I said regarding Romans 3:1-4 Jews had the "oracles of God" the gentiles didn't. Says nothing against Paul's claim that the Jews were breaking the law.

"They were rebelling against the "requirements" of the law, which most certainly included the "letter".

Paul never says - "The Jews kept the "letter" of 10 Commandments."

If he had - in all these years someone would have found that text. So far people only "quote themselves" for such statements.

"The Jews were rebelling against the "righteous requirements" of the law, not the "letter".

The Jews kept the letter of the law: the 10 Commandments, but they did not obey the righteous requirements of the law:

"'If you want to enter life, obey the commandments.' 'Which ones?' the man inquired. Jesus replied, '"Do not murder, do not commit adultery, do not steal, do not give false testimony, honor your father and mother,' and 'love your neighbor as yourself."' 'All these I have kept," the young man said. "What do I still lack?' Jesus answered, 'If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow Me.'"-- (Matthew 19:16-21).

It would seem the young man was not following Christ despite his obedience to the letter of the law: the 10 Commandments.

This again proves that we can obey the letter of the law and still not be obedient to Christ.

Our obedience to Christ is not dependent on our obedience to the latter of the law.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

You bore false witness. What I said was true and of the Spirit, not a spirit. You would know that if you had ever been baptized by fire.

If you knew YHWH'S WORD and obeyed Him - if YHWH gave you any understanding at all, you would know this is false (your statements),
because you contradict YHWH'S WORD .

Any spirit, man, or anything else that contradicts His Word is not of Him.

 

[1stcenturylady]

If you knew YHWH'S WORD and obeyed Him - if YHWH gave you any understanding at all, you would know this is false (your statements),
because you contradict YHWH'S WORD .

Any spirit, man, or anything else that contradicts His Word is not of Him.

I keep God's word, so your accusations are moot.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

I keep God's word, so your accusations are moot.

Several members already posted, over the last weeks/maybe months/ where you contradicted YHWH'S WORD,
and if you were abiding in Him you would not continue to contradict His Word nor to argue against His Word. The offense you took at His Word, shows you are either 'scared', or rebelling actively, or whatever, against His Word instead of remaining in Him.
No, what ever "fire" you experienced, is obviously NOT of YHWH, from your own words and posts.

 

[Doveaman]

speaking of the JEWs of Romans 2

You may notice that some of my posts here are repeated in my other thread for the benefit of the viewers there.

So no need to reply to the repeats in my other thread.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

It was the Spirit of Truth

As noted already, and all through Scripture, it could not have been the Spirit of Truth - teaching you things that contradict Scripture - YHWH never does that.

 

[1stcenturylady]

Several members already posted, over the last weeks/maybe months/ where you contradicted YHWH'S WORD,
and if you were abiding in Him you would not continue to contradict His Word nor to argue against His Word. The offense you took at His Word, shows you are either 'scared', or rebelling actively, or whatever, against His Word instead of remaining in Him.
No, what ever "fire" you experienced, is obviously NOT of YHWH, from your own words and posts.

Those who sin are still under the law of sin and death, and know nothing of living and walking in the Spirit. You teach law, I teach Spirit and so did Paul.

 

[1stcenturylady]

As noted already, and all through Scripture, it could not have been the Spirit of Truth - teaching you things that contradict Scripture - YHWH never does that.

You can make blanket statements, but show me where I contradicted the truth of Scripture.