Are we subject to the Old Covenant today?

[Studyman]

I agree with you that we shouldn't put our faith in religious sects and franchises because we are each responsible for our own souls. At the same time, I believe most of the people who have posted here have read both the OT and NT many times, so “Let nothing be done through selfish ambition or conceit, but in lowliness of mind let each esteem others better than himself (Phi 2:3).”

James 1: 21 Wherefore lay apart all filthiness and superfluity of naughtiness, and receive with meekness the engrafted word, which is able to save your souls. 22 But be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves.

Yes, most people hear God's Word, but they don't believe Him.

We share what we've learned and try to understand what others have found to see if it makes sense.

But Jesus said "But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you.

Of course, at first God's Word doesn't make sense, certainly for a person who has been influenced by this worlds religious philosophies for years.

But I still say, place your faith in Him.

1 Pet. 5: 6 Humble yourselves therefore under the mighty hand of God, that he may exalt you in due time:

7 Casting all your care upon him; for he careth for you.

8 Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour:

If you are already rejecting God's Judgments, you don't have to worry about satan any more.

9 Whom resist stedfast in the faith, knowing that the same afflictions are accomplished in your brethren that are in the world.

10 But the God of all grace, who hath called us unto his eternal glory by Christ Jesus, after that ye have suffered a while, make you perfect, stablish, strengthen, settle you.

“Do not treat prophecies with contempt, but test all things. Hold fast to what is good.” (1 Th 5:20-21) It was God's will for us to test and be tested. “Examine yourselves to see whether you are in the faith; test yourselves. Can’t you see for yourselves that Jesus Christ is in you—unless you actually fail the test?” (2 Cor 13:5)

We are not told to "Test ourselves", rather, examine ourselves. God Tests and Chastises those He Loves. We are told to "Prove all things" and "Test the spirits".

I have provided you with a lot of Scriptures to study and discern. You promote a lot of this world's religious philosophies that The Bible exposes as false. Like Jesus added to God's Laws, or that God didn't teach men not to hate their brother without a cause. And many more such things you promote. There is a spirit which inspires these falsehoods, but it isn't Holy spirit.

Because I love you, I tried to point these things out, because this world religions will never teach you these truths.

I knew you would become offended, but I would rather risk my life as a friend, than watch you promote falsehoods about God, and not at least try to actually discuss the Scriptures.

God's word doesn't return void, so I know it will benefit someone, even as the studies benefited me.

Thanks for the opportunity to share.

 

[Studyman]

(I hope you don't mind me jumping in here )

In that same passage,
Therefore, whatever you desire for people to do to you, you shall also do to them; for this is the law and the prophets.

That's what he came to fulfill, doing to other people what we want done to us imo.

And boy, did he ever!

Yes, Jesus said a great many things in Matt. 5 & 7.

Matt. 7: 12 Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets. 13 Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: 14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it. 15 Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.

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.

 

[Cornelius8L]

No!! God forbid! I don't agree with any such thing. And either did Paul.

Acts 26: 13 Neither can they prove the things whereof they now accuse me. 14 But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets:

2 Tim. 3: 16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

What were the Holy Scriptures Paul had access to in this time? The only Scriptures available to him was the Law and Prophets. He had no access to Matthews letters, John's Letters, Mark or Lukes Letters. Everything HE taught came from the Law and Prophets he is now instructing the Body of Christ to "Continue in", over 14 years after Jesus Ascended.

Who told you God's Holy scriptures contradict each other?




No you don't. You select and separate a few verses in the NT and try to use them to destroy or make void the Law and Prophets. And this to justify your religious lifestyle. In my understanding, the NT is the OT in action. The NT is the testimony of Jesus and the continuation of faithful men created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.



EVERY member of the RCC, the Mormon religion, Calvinists, JW's, Baptists and all the many religions and religious sects which exist in this world God placed me in, make the same exact claim as you. "The HS is our guide". But just because a man calls Jesus Lord, Lord, doesn't mean HE knows them, much less been given His Spirit. Jesus tells men this in Matt. 7, but "many" don't really believe Him.

Since my youth I have listened to preachers talk about how the HS inspires them. For some, it inspires them to promote ancient pagan rituals and festivals, by placing Jesus name on them. The HS inspires them to despise and pollute God's Sabbaths, even rejecting God's and creating their own. The HS apparently inspires them to create huge religious businesses and sell Jesus name for profit. The HS inspires them to create images of God in the likeness of some long haired men's hair shampoo model. I actually saw for sale, a Jesus Bobblehead. 2 for 50$ and 25% to be sent to poor Ethiopians in service to Christ.

And then I heard you declare to the world, by what you now say was inspired by the Holy Spirit of Gold, "I love to eat swine's flesh, I ate some last night".

You simply don't understand that your disdain for the simplest, easiest to follow Judgments and Commandments of God are a symptom of a much greater problem. I can show you the Scriptures which spell this out. But I can't make you even consider them, much less believe.

Rom. 1: 21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,




Again, "you" got rid of God's Judgments and Commandments, not the NT. The religions of this world got rid of God's Judgments and Commandments, not the NT. The serpent in the garden convinced Eve to get rid of God's Judgments and Commandments. But Jesus never did. And Paul never did. And the New Testament never did.

This is a perfect example of why I didn't want to engage in the first place. PAUL said there was a "LAW" ADDED because of Transgressions 430 years after Abraham.

"Wherefore then serveth the law? "It was added" because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator."

I pointed out to you the Biblical Fact that the Levitical Priesthood Sacrificial "works of the Law" for forgiveness of Sins, didn't exist before Moses. Abraham was forgiven his Sins, but not by this Law of forgiveness "ADDED" 430 years after him. God said that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws., but the Levitical Priesthood didn't exist in his time. Levi wasn't even born.

You can read it for yourself. You attribute this "ADDED" term to me. But I am simply believing what is written.

Paul called the Traditions of the Pharisees "LAW". He called the 10 Commandments "LAW". He called the Priesthood Covenant with Levi "LAW". As it is written, he is hard to understand, and "many" twist his words, as they do the Holy Scriptures to promote their own religions.

But God's Laws, including what animals were Clean and what animals were unclean, adultery, about hating your brother without a cause, existed even before Abraham. The religion of this world you have adopted, doesn't teach you these things. And of course they don't The entire Bible warns you of this very thing.


Again, you attribute to me, what God did in scriptures over and over.

1 Sam. 15: 21 But the people took of the spoil, sheep and oxen, the chief of the things which should have been utterly destroyed, to sacrifice unto the LORD thy God in Gilgal.

22 And Samuel said, Hath the LORD as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the LORD? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams. 23 For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness is as iniquity and idolatry. Because thou hast rejected the word of the LORD, he hath also rejected thee from being king.

What the Jews did, was "work iniquity" knowing that they could just take a goat to the Levite Priest and be forgiven. This was not the purpose of the Levitical Priesthood. Its purpose was to prepare men and Lead men to the Rock of Israel, their redeemer. Like it did the Faithful obedient like Zacharas and Simeon and Rehab.

Hosea 6: 6 For I desired mercy, and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings.

Psalms 51: 16 For thou desirest not sacrifice; else would I give it: thou delightest not in burnt offering. 17 The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit: a broken and a contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise.

So your religious philosophy that God didn't separate the Levitical Priesthood that changed, from God's Commandments and Judgments this "LAW" was ADDED to, is simply your religious philosophy. Because in the Scriptures, God separated the LAWS of God defining righteousness and Sin, from the "ADDED Priesthood LAW", added to provide for forgiveness to those who transgressed, "till the Seed should come.

But again, I can't make you believe what is written.



This is my whole point, LOL. Are you even reading my posts? There was a Priesthood Law, (After the Order of Aaron) "ADDED" to God's Laws 430 years after Abraham obeyed, that was to be in force until the Prophesied Priest of God, "After the Order of Melchizedek" should come. Once the New Priest, who forgave sins apart from animal blood, but with His Own came, this Priesthood "After the Order of Aaron" was no longer needed.

What the deceiver promotes, is the deception that God's Laws defining sin cannot be separated from God's Priesthood Covenant with Levi. So that even after the Prophesied Priest came, they preach that to "keep God's Commandments", means also to continue to bring sacrifices to the Levite Priest, as to the ADDED Law. The Pharisees promoted this deception because their power and wealth came directly through their version of the Levitical Priesthood, making people come to them for redemption. The deceivers of this modern world, that come in Christ's Name, promote the same deception, to prove that God's Laws were abolished, claiming that one cannot be obedient to God's Laws, unless they partake of the Old Priesthood. Paul understood this lie about the God's Priesthood Law not being Separate from God's Law defining Righteousness and Sin. He exposed this by bringing to Light the truth of the Scriptures, which is Abraham was Justified by God "Apart" from this "ADDED" Law of forgiveness. And after the Faith of Christ is come, we are also Justified, apart from the "works of the Law" of forgiveness.

Again, I can show you the Scriptures, but I can't make you believe them.

So we don't agree that the texts of the OT and NT contradict each other. Paul wrote a lot of letters to get rid of these customary practices, and now you want to bring them back. What the NT shows is how things changed from how they were done in the OT.

Also, when the NT talked about HS, it talked about the Spirit that searches the deep things of God (1 Cor 2:10), not some random commercial stuff you used to see in your youth. NT also said that all spirits should be tested (1 John 4:1). And yes, you heard me right, I did say in CF that I love to eat pork, and I won't change the fact that I did. What you are preaching is either (a) the law before Moses or (b) the law after Moses ["Added"], both of which discuss clean and unclean animals, but you deny what the NT has shown us. Both (a) and (b) require animal sacrifices, but you took them out because it fits better with your lifestyle. In fact, you can't engage because you broke some of the laws you tried so hard to teach others about . When talking about Levi, didn't the NT say that Levi was always with Abraham's loin when Levi gave tithes to Melchizedek? (Heb 7:9-10) Wasn't Melchizedek the high priest? Abraham also made sacrifices, didn't he? If it wasn't the priesthood law, which law backs up what they did? Melchizedek is talked about, but you don't know what he did as a priest.

All references to "LAW" in the NT only refer to the one OT Law. When you said, "The religion of this world you have adopted doesn't teach you these things," are you saying that we don't follow the order to stop hating our brothers and committing adultery? You should already know what our standards are for situations like this. Still, you don't pay attention to what we say and accuse us, just like the Pharisees did to Jesus.

Also, the part of 1 Samuel 15:21–22 that you misquoted about separating the (a) and (b) in the OT doesn't fit your argument because it was about animals that were meant to be discarded. The Jews were not told to stop giving offerings in Hos 6:6 and Psalm 51:16. If not, Mary would have stopped giving offering after Jesus was born (Luke 2:24).

 

[Cornelius8L]

No, Hebrews 11 highlights people in Christ through faith, which you claimed didn’t exist in the OT. Note, Rehab in Hebrews 11, not a Jew but saved by faith. Ruth, not a Jew- your people are my people, your God, my God. Grafted in through faith, not a nationality.


Hebrews 11:13 These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off were assured of them, embraced them and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth. 14 For those who say such things declare plainly that they seek a homeland. 15 And truly if they had called to mind that country from which they had come out, they would have had opportunity to return. 16 But now they desire a better, that is, a heavenly country. Therefore God is not ashamed to be called their God, for He has prepared a city for them.

In the OT it was faith looking forward to Jesus in the NT it is faith looking back at the Cross. It’s always been faith of Jesus Christ. There are only two groups, those who are with Jesus and those who are against, the saved or the lost, those who are in Christ through faith or those who are not, not a nationality. Those who have faith in Christ walk a certain way as demonstrated throughout the entire bible. Romans 3:31, Revelation 14:12

Let's not get off track from where we started our conversation. We talked about whether or not prophecy is a riddle, and you said that it isn't. You said that God's people would understand, which is different from Hosea 4:6, which says, "My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge," I pointed out through the Apostle John that God also called the Jews who didn't believe in Jesus His people, but you disagree in post#581.

Before I answered you before, I read Hebrews 11 about Rahab. Doesn't the Mosaic law make people who want to join the nation nation? The answer is yes.

 

[Cornelius8L]

Continue from my previous post #605,

Again, it was Paul and Jesus who exposed the truth about the "Pharisees Laws". And I posted the Scriptures for your examination. But as I feared, and said so in the beginning, you are not here to examine scriptures, but to justify your own religious philosophy. Nevertheless, here they are again.

Phil. 3: 5 Circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews; as touching the law, a Pharisee; 6 Concerning zeal, (For this Law) persecuting the church; touching the righteousness which is in the (Pharisees) law, blameless.

Will I have to now have to convince you that God's Law didn't promote the Persecution of His Own Church?

Gal. 1: 13 For ye have heard of my conversation in time past in the Jews' religion, how that beyond measure I persecuted the church of God, and wasted it: 14 And profited in the Jews' religion above many my equals in mine own nation, being more exceedingly zealous of the traditions of my fathers.

Again, will you now preach to the world that God's LAW persecuted His Own Church? Or can we agree that the Pharisees established their own Righteousness?

Matt. 15: 7 Ye hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying, 8 This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. 9 But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

John 19: 7 The Jews answered him, We have a law, and by our law he ought to die, because he made himself the Son of God.

John 7: 19 Did not Moses give you the law, and yet none of you keepeth the law? Why go ye about to kill me?

So again, your religious philosophy, and the teaching of the NT are two completely different gospels. To believe you, that when the NT speaks to the Pharisees Law it speaks to God's Laws, I would have to render both Paul and Jesus a liar.

And why would I do that? To justify some random religious philosophy of this world? No thank you. I would rather that you stand back, and consider what is actually written, and maybe consider that the warnings God gave us are for both you and I, in this world HE placed us in.


I knew this would happen from the onset, and I explained as much. There is no "conversation" about what the Scriptures actually say. There is only your religious philosophy, and your justification of it. It is you who created the term "category of Laws". I am simply pointing out a Biblical Fact that God's Priesthood Covenant with Levi was Temporary in its conception. God surely knew this Priesthood would change, and prophesied of this change in the Law and Prophets over and over, even promising us a New Covenant.

But if God is true, and His Priesthood Covenant was the Covenant that changed, that is;

#1. The manner in which God's Laws are administered.

#2. The manner in which transgressions of His Law is Forgiven.

That means the Religions of this world of Jesus and Paul's Time, and also the religions of this world of You and My's time, are deceived and deceiving.

Which aligns perfectly with every Scripture and Every Warning from the beginning to the end of the Bible.




Well I am thankful that you are at least addressing actual Scriptures.

I was hoping you might actually consider why God created a human with Flesh that must be ruled over or removed, in order to receive Salvation. I also showed you where God defined His Circumcision as "Circumcise therefore the foreskin of your heart, and be no more stiffnecked." And also that Paul teaches the body of Christ that Circumcision is still required.

Paul also told you;

Rom. 2: 25 For circumcision verily profiteth, if thou keep the law: but if thou be a breaker of the law, thy circumcision is made uncircumcision.

Jer. 9: 24 But let him that glorieth glory in this, that he understandeth and knoweth me, that I am the LORD which exercise lovingkindness, judgment, and righteousness, in the earth: for in these things I delight, saith the LORD. 25 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will punish all them which are circumcised with the uncircumcised; 26 Egypt, and Judah, and Edom, and the children of Ammon, and Moab, and all that are in the utmost corners, that dwell in the wilderness: for all these nations are uncircumcised, and all the house of Israel are uncircumcised in the heart.

Again, you are promoting falsehoods about Paul and God. Paul didn't "Remove" God's Law of Circumcision, nor did he make it void. But as he himself teaches. "Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law."

He exposed the mainstream preachers of his times teaching of Circumcision, who rejected the Flesh which was to be removed.

19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, 20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, 21 Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.

24 And they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts. Just as Abraham did, and Caleb, and Joshua, and Gideon, and Zacharias and every example of Faithful man in the Bible.

The idea that you really believe God was only interested in the loose skin surrounding the penis is fascinating to me. It's hard to believe you don't know God any better than that, given what is actually written.



Again, because "many", who come in Christ's Name, don't Glorify God as God, they don't believe HE knows the end from the beginning, or that the entire concept of "Time" itself, was created by God. Consider the following Scriptures Inspired by God "Before" the NT.

Psalms 119: 4 The LORD hath sworn, and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek.

Psalms 45: 6 Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: the sceptre of thy kingdom is a right sceptre. 7 Thou lovest righteousness, and hatest wickedness: therefore God, thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.

Psalms 78: 67 Moreover he refused the tabernacle of Joseph, and chose not the tribe of Ephraim: 68 But chose the tribe of Judah, the mount Zion which he loved.

Psalms 62: 6 He only is my rock and my salvation: he is my defence; I shall not be moved. 7 In God is my salvation and my glory: the rock of my strength, and my refuge, is in God.

Now Consider the words of Zacharias.

Luke 1: 67 And his father Zacharias was filled with the Holy Ghost, and prophesied, saying, 68 Blessed be the Lord God of Israel; for he hath visited and redeemed his people, 69 And hath raised up an horn of salvation for us in the house of his servant David; (From Judah, not from Levi) 70 As he spake by the mouth of his holy prophets, which have been since the world began:

And again, from Simeon.

Luke 2: 30 For mine eyes have seen thy salvation, 31 Which thou hast prepared before the face of all people; 32 A light to lighten the Gentiles, and the glory of thy people Israel.

And Anna,

37 And she was a widow of about fourscore and four years, which departed not from the temple, but served God with fastings and prayers night and day. 38 And she coming in that instant gave thanks likewise unto the Lord, and spake of him to all them that looked for redemption in Jerusalem.

Luke 24: 25 Then he said unto them, O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken: 26 Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory? 27 And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.

Your preaching that no one knew of the coming change of the Priesthood "Order of Aaron" to be changed to the eternal Priesthood "After the Order of Melchizedek" until the NT was written is foolishness. There were many faithful men who understood the New Covenant God promised, and that it was the "Change in the Priesthood". The Pharisees didn't know, because they didn't Glorify God, "As God", and created their own doctrines, commandments and traditions of men, as Jesus tells us. This world's religions can't "see" Him, "Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him:", for the very same reason. But they don't know it for the reasons Paul gave.

There can be not doubt that Zacharias, Simeon, Anna and the Wise men "DID" know Him and had a faith in Him which exceeded the faith of even some of His Disciples, even as the Gentile women whose daughter was made whole. Shall I omit these truths from my understanding just to justify or support some random religious sect or philosophy of this world God placed me in? There was a time that I did, but not anymore, by the Grace and Mercy of God.

Paul spoke about the law, but he never called it the "Pharisees' Law." Don't add to what he said and then say that people who disagree with you haven't read scripture. You misquoted Phil 3:5. Paul said he was a Pharisee, but he didn't say it was a law of the Pharisees. Jesus also said that the Pharisees were sitting in Moses's place and told people to listen to them (Matt 23:1-2). So, if not the law of Moses, what did Jesus ask them to listen to?

What persecutes the church through the Mosaic law is what you are doing: accusing others of breaking God's law. Gal 1:13–14 said that Paul was an expert on the Mosaic law, just like the Pharisees. Jesus agreed with this idea in Luke 11:52. Don't twist the verses by putting them together in the wrong way with Matthew 15:7 and John 7:19 and 19:7, and then say that we never talk about the Bible.

If you can easily misquote the verses above, how can we trust that you won't misquote the verses about other practices, like circumcision? In fact, you misquoted them as well. I won't repeat what other people have said about circumcision, so it's easier on the readers.

You also got Luke 2:30, 37, and 24:25 wrong. These verses talk about being saved through Christ, but you explain them in terms of the change of priesthood, which is not the point of the texts. Don't add anything to these verses to make your idea of the "Pharisee's law" sound better.

That wasn't the death Paul...

What you say here doesn't fit with what you said in post #517 ("and according to Paul, Sin still brings death. Where there is no Law, there is no Sin. So the Law is still here,")

What you say doesn't justify Jesus in Matthew 12:4, doesn't say David didn't break the law, and doesn't say the priests didn't break the law in Matthew 12:5. Again, we're not talking about mercy. Jesus said they broke the law and the commandment.

What Jesus did during those 40 days did not keep what Lev 23:3 says to do. This is written very clearly in the Bible, which you openly alter, just like you did to others.

 

[Cornelius8L]

He did Cornelious. He didn't forbid even one of those men from stoning her. This is true, but you can't accept it. He didn't judge even one of those sinful men and you don't say a single peep about it. Everyone one of those men were guilty of sins way worse than hers, even in trying to trick a man who was only telling them the truth. Where is your judgment of them, since you are so eager to Judge the Woman? They judged themselves and knew full well that God never intended for sinners such as themselves, to carry out a punishment against others. Especially since the whole debacle was designed to trick Jesus. "Where are thine accusers" Jesus said, doeth no man accuse you? No Lord, no man. But you still do.

But you don't "see" any of these truths. You only see justification for your own disobedience.



But they didn't testify against her. Not God and not Jesus. Why is that? Because God and Jesus are hypocrites and liars? Breakers of their own Laws? Respecter of persons? To believe you, I would have to believe these things. I am always astounded at how easily you guys take the Pharisees word, how you make your judgments about people based entirely on what these children of the devil say. What do you know about this woman other than what these known liars and murderers told you? Absolutely nothing about her. You only know her accusers made a judgement against her they themselves were not willing to stand by.

Absolutely Astonishing.


Don't tell me. You are now going to preach that Jesus added to God's Laws. No doubt you will use Matt. 5 in your attempt to once again, accuse Jesus of rejecting the Law and Prophets, and creating His own Laws. Another ancient deception.

Matt. 5: 20 For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.

21 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment:

22 But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.

The deceiver would have us believe the "Them of old time" was God and His Prophets. And that Jesus is contradicting them. But HE isn't, at least not the Jesus of the Bible.

Lev. 19: 17 Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thine heart: thou shalt in any wise rebuke thy neighbour, and not suffer sin upon him. 18 Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: I am the LORD.

So the TRUTH is, that Jesus is talking about the Scribes and Pharisees who, according to the Law and Prophets, were partial in the Law. They taught "Some" of God's Law but omitted much of it. Jesus didn't teach this. HE teaches as it is written " Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.

I'm not making this stuff up, you can read for yourself.

Mal. 2: 8 But ye are departed out of the way; ye have caused many to stumble at the law; ye have corrupted the covenant of Levi, saith the LORD of hosts. 9 Therefore have I also made you contemptible and base before all the people, according as ye have not kept my ways, but have been partial in the law.

Jesus also teaches you this, but "many" don't believe Him.

"Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.

So Cornelius8L, who taught you Jesus "ADDED" the Law about being Angry with his brother without a cause?

1 John 3: 10 In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother.

11 For this is the message that ye heard from the beginning, that we should love one another.

12 Not as Cain, who was of that wicked one, and slew his brother. And wherefore slew he him? Because his own works were evil, and his brother's righteous.

It is a horrible, insidious falsehood promoted by this world's religions, that Jesus broke His Father's Commandments, that Jesus "Triumphed over God" on the Cross", that God never taught men to Love their brothers, or that Jesus "Went about to establish Him Own Righteousness" and refused to Submit to the Righteousness of God. And yet, this is the very foundation of this world's religions. I hope you might consider, and then "Come out of her".

I was actually wondering why the post is so long. Then I realized that you chose a sentence of mine out of context just to disapprove with me. An action you say those "Religious philosophy of men" would take based on what you said about them.

Lev 20:10 says that the adulteress should be stoned. Don't use your long post-added-words reasoning to change what the Bible says. You talk about obeying the OT law, but you didn't accept Lev 20:10 in the given event.

We are talking about what the Bible says Jesus did. Don't put your own ideas in places where the Bible doesn't say anything. Also, when you quote Leviticus 19:17–18, it would be helpful if you could find the part that says, “anyone who says to his brother, ‘Raca,’ will be subject to the Sanhedrin. But anyone who says, ‘You fool!’ will be subject to the fire of hell.”

Of course it is flawed to a person who believes so many awful untruths about Jesus. But Zacharias was "righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless.", and he did know Jesus, even better than most in my experience.

As your accusation against Zacharias, let's look at what the Scriptures actually teach.

18 And Zacharias said unto the angel, Whereby shall I know this? for I am an old man, and my wife well stricken in years.

19 And the angel answering said unto him, I am Gabriel, that stand in the presence of God; and am sent to speak unto thee, and to shew thee these glad tidings.

20 And, behold, thou shalt be dumb, and not able to speak, until the day that these things shall be performed, because thou believest not my words, which shall be fulfilled in their season.

Yes, Zacharias was weak in the faith in his old age. But he asked for a sign, and God gave Him one. You can bet when John was born, Zacharias Praised God and HIS Faith was much stronger.

Isn't this why God Chastises His Sons?

Heb. 12: 6 For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth. 7 If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not? 8 But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bastards, and not sons.

Clearly Zacharias was a child of God, my brother in Christ. Should you be so quick to judge him, or those who understand him.

Yes, we understand the Scriptures differently. There is a reason.

Again, you're just mixing up the ideas of Zechariah and a Pharisee when it comes to waiting for Christ to cause confusion. First of all, has it ever been written that Zecharias met Jesus as an adult? Even though John the Baptist acknowledged Jesus, did he not later doubt Jesus (Matthew 11:3)? Then, shall I ask in this post a random question that has nothing to do with circumcision (we touched earlier): What is the difference between John the Baptist and a Pharisee when it comes to doubting?

 

[Cornelius8L]

James 1: 21 Wherefore lay apart all filthiness and superfluity of naughtiness, and receive with meekness the engrafted word, which is able to save your souls. 22 But be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves.

Yes, most people hear God's Word, but they don't believe Him.



But Jesus said "But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you.

Of course, at first God's Word doesn't make sense, certainly for a person who has been influenced by this worlds religious philosophies for years.

But I still say, place your faith in Him.

1 Pet. 5: 6 Humble yourselves therefore under the mighty hand of God, that he may exalt you in due time:

7 Casting all your care upon him; for he careth for you.

8 Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour:

If you are already rejecting God's Judgments, you don't have to worry about satan any more.

9 Whom resist stedfast in the faith, knowing that the same afflictions are accomplished in your brethren that are in the world.

10 But the God of all grace, who hath called us unto his eternal glory by Christ Jesus, after that ye have suffered a while, make you perfect, stablish, strengthen, settle you.




We are not told to "Test ourselves", rather, examine ourselves. God Tests and Chastises those He Loves. We are told to "Prove all things" and "Test the spirits".

I have provided you with a lot of Scriptures to study and discern. You promote a lot of this world's religious philosophies that The Bible exposes as false. Like Jesus added to God's Laws, or that God didn't teach men not to hate their brother without a cause. And many more such things you promote. There is a spirit which inspires these falsehoods, but it isn't Holy spirit.

Because I love you, I tried to point these things out, because this world religions will never teach you these truths.

I knew you would become offended, but I would rather risk my life as a friend, than watch you promote falsehoods about God, and not at least try to actually discuss the Scriptures.

God's word doesn't return void, so I know it will benefit someone, even as the studies benefited me.

Thanks for the opportunity to share.

I thought you would understand that "test" and "examine" mean the same thing in my context about reading the scripture. Btw, thank you for showing love. I don't think my earlier replies to you showed that I was offended until you made offensive accusations, which you wouldn't do if you were showing love, even though we were supposed to be having a constructive conversation.

 

[HIM]

But as a follow-up, I'd be interested in understanding the idea about common versus unclean.

Is it that something like chicken is clean, but can become common by mishandling? But it would not actually become unclean?

That which is clean could become common (impure, defiled) by touching that which was unclean.

Lev 5:3 or should touch of the uncleanness of a man, of any of his uncleanness -- what ever touching he should be defiled, and he be unaware of it, but after this he should know even he should have trespassed.

As to answer your question no. Peter seen a difference in what he saw in the vision. He seen common animals and unclean ones. The common animals where made so by mingling in with the unclean ones. If there was not a difference he would have not noted one.

And let's not forget God never mentions cleansing the unclean. He only mentions the common being cleansed.

Couple that with the fact that the vision wasn't even about animals but about people.

 

[HIM]

From Strong's:

clean, pure, unstained, either literally or ceremonially or spiritually; guiltless, innocent, upright.

So why can Paul not be saying "all things indeed are clean"?

Because the subject was not unclean animals. The subject in Romans 14 was on man made rules and opinions not the Word of God. The context is set in verse 1. And the fact that it is not about God's Word is established in verse 2. Because nowhere had God said that we should only eat vegetables. And Paul continues to say in context that nothing is common of itself. He never mentions unclean animals being clean in verse 14.

.
Rom 14:1 Now receive the one who is weak in the faith, and do not have disputes over differing opinions.
Rom 14:2 One person believes in eating everything, but the weak person eats only vegetables.
Rom 14:14 I know and am persuaded in the Lord Jesus, that nothing common by itself; except to any one reckoning to be common, to that one it is common.

Either way, surely this does not change the fact that, just as Jesus overturns the kosher laws in Mark 7 (nothing that goes into a man defiles him), Paul is here declaring that all foods are now OK.

Nowhere in Mark 7 did Jesus declare kosher laws changed. Stop assuming.

 

[Leaf473]

That which is clean could become common (impure, defiled) by touching that which was unclean.

Lev 5:3 or should touch of the uncleanness of a man, of any of his uncleanness -- what ever touching he should be defiled, and he be unaware of it, but after this he should know even he should have trespassed.

As to answer your question no. Peter seen a difference in what he saw in the vision. He seen common animals and unclean ones. The common animals where made so by mingling in with the unclean ones. If there was not a difference he would have not noted one.

And let's not forget God never mentions cleansing the unclean. He only mentions the common being cleansed.

Couple that with the fact that the vision wasn't even about animals but about people.

Hi HIM, thanks for getting back to me

But I'm not following what you're saying here. Using chicken, a clean food, as an example,

That which is clean could become common (impure, defiled) by touching that which was unclean.

That sounds like chicken could become common by mishandling; for example, by touching something unclean.

As to answer your question no.

But chicken could never be made common? Please explain, if you wish

to know wisdom and instruction;
to discern the words of understanding
Proverbs 1

 

[Studyman]

So we don't agree that the texts of the OT and NT contradict each other. Paul wrote a lot of letters to get rid of these customary practices, and now you want to bring them back.

Not true at all. A complete fabrication. This philosophy is founded on this world's religious doctrine that the Pharisees were obeying and promoting God's Laws, and that Paul was teaching against them. But this is a lie according to the Scriptures I showed you for our review and discussion. Many of which you pretty much refused to even acknowledge.

I posted Jesus' Words in which HE told you the Pharisees had created their own commandments. But you don't believe them. I posted the Scriptures which show the Jews went about to establish their own righteousness, and refused to submit to the Righteousness of God, but you don't believe these Scriptures either. I showed you the scriptures where the Jesus of the Bible said the Pharisees reject God's commandments in order to walk in their own religious traditions. "Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition." But you don't believe that either.

Instead, you continue to promote the falsehood that the Jews were trying to place God's Laws on the necks of people. When the scriptures clearly teach they were not. Paul was trying to get rid of the "customary practices" and doctrines of men that the children of the devil in his time were promoting, "Not giving heed to Jewish fables, and commandments of men, that turn from the truth.",

If you were to "Come to the Light" and accept the Christ's Truth, that the Jews "customary practices" were not following or preaching God's instruction or laws at all, you would see scriptures differently.

This Truth about the Bible would set you free from the deception that has lodged itself in your heart.

What the NT shows is how things changed from how they were done in the OT.

That is your religion. Based on the foundation of several falsehoods you are promoting. Like Jesus broke God's Commandments. And that God wasn't wise enough to instruct men in the Law and Prophets not to hate their brother in their heart, that Jesus Himself said was the entire Law and Prophets. Or that Jesus had to come and correct God, humiliate and Spoil God, make a show of God openly, and triumph over God on the Cross, to save us from God's Laws that are against us, that men preach the Pharisees were placing on the necks of the people.

I have posted a lot of scriptures for our examination and discussion which "Prove" or "Test" these religious theories you have been convinced of and are now promoting.

But you seem only interested in justifying your own philosophy. I am hoping you might consider the warnings of the Jesus of the Bible, and HIS Prophets and Disciples about this very thing, and to pause for just a moment as ask yourself who convinced these warnings of being deceived were not for you.

Also, when the NT talked about HS, it talked about the Spirit that searches the deep things of God (1 Cor 2:10), not some random commercial stuff you used to see in your youth.

I am simply responding to your posts. I'm 64 years old and know that the same religious doctrines you are promoting, were also promoted by this world's religions 50 years ago. And 50 years before that. They also claimed the HS as their inspiration. It was Jesus who relied on the Inspired Words of His Father in the OT that said " It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God..

This is not some random commercial stuff, but Words from the Holy Christ. But many really don't believe these Words. If you were honest with yourself and God you would admit this as well.

I am advocating to address each doctrine in Faith and Discern them. "Did God teach in His Law to Love your brother in your heart", or is the religious doctrine you are promoting, that God didn't teach men not to be angry with our brother in our heart, so Jesus had to come and "add" to God's Law, thus breaking God's Law in Duet. 4:2."

In discerning and exposing just this one lie, or darkness you have adopted as truth, and preserved in your heart, look what is revealed. The "Them of Old Time" was not God and the Prophets as you were convinced of. But the Shepherds who led God's People astray. It wasn't God's LAWS that caused Israel to fall, but the rebellion against God in their heart. It wasn't God's Law that was inadequate to the point Jesus had to change them or add to them, as you are preaching. But the Priests who taught "some" of God's Word, while omitting the rest. I'm not making this stuff up. I am just studying apart from the religious influence of the religions of this world.

Mal. 2: 7 For the priest's lips should keep knowledge, and they should seek the law at his mouth: for he is the messenger of the LORD of hosts. 8 But ye are departed out of the way; ye have caused many to stumble at the law; ye have corrupted the covenant of Levi, saith the LORD of hosts. 9 Therefore have I also made you contemptible and base before all the people, according as ye have not kept my ways, but have been partial in the law.

NT also said that all spirits should be tested

OT teaches the same thing.

Jer. 23: 16 Thus saith the LORD of hosts, Hearken not unto the words of the prophets that prophesy unto you: they make you vain: they speak a vision of their own heart, and not out of the mouth of the LORD. 17 They say still unto them that despise me, The LORD hath said, Ye shall have peace; and they say unto every one that walketh after the imagination of his own heart, No evil shall come upon you.

Is. 8:20 To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.


You come clean about the promotion of the popular falsehood that Jesus "added to His Father's Laws" regarding being angry with your brother without a cause, thus breaking God's Commandment in Duet 4, or at least engage in an honest, unbiased review and examination of the actual Scriptures, then we can proceed on to the rest of your religious theories.

But if you are going to just continue promoting a religion founded on falsehoods, even after the Word of God has exposed them as falsehoods, then why are we even having a conversation?

 

[expos4ever]

I posted the Greek meanings for the word "End", and I considered which meaning the Author had intended to use. Not Just purpose or termination, which are opposite in definition.

Obviously untrue. Here is the definition from Strong's once more:

to bring to an end, complete, fulfill

This definition obviously allows for an interpretation where the word carries both the sense of "purpose" and the sense of "ending"

Even apart from the Greek, you have to know that the concepts of "ending" and "purpose" are not opposite - in fact they can, and often do go together. If I get on a plane to fly to Paris, the purpose of my trip comes to an end when I land in Paris.

It seems that your position requires you to denude the word "telos" of any sense of "ending"; otherwise you would be forced to deal with the clear implication of an end to the Law here:

For Christ is the end (telos) of the Law for righteousness to everyone who believes

Lest anyone be misled, the word "telos" can indeed carry a strong sense of "ending" as here in Matthew 11:1

When Jesus had finished [a]giving instructions to His twelve disciples, He went on from there to teach and [b]preach in their cities.

I agree that telos need not necessarily carry a sense of "ending". But, I will again point out the strong irony of you asserting that I ignore context: the entirety of Chapter 9 is a re-telling of the story of Israel. This means when we get to 10:4, which in the story constitutes the arrival of Christ, the logic of the ongoing narrative that bleeds over from Romans 9 tells us that we are to expect to find out where the story goes next.

And we get our answer: Christ arrives as the "telos", the goal that the story is aiming at. And when the goal is reached, the story ends. Essentially Paul is saying the Law was given to get the story to its goal - Christ. Now that the goal has been achieved, the Law, quite logically, retires. Do player keep playing after the winning goal has been scored?

But other meanings as well, like "result" and "the point aimed at", all of which have different meanings depending on the Context the word "end" was used. Given they can't all be used, as they all differ in meaning, I was seeking to understand the context Paul was using. Since you have pre-determined Jesus was a Breaker of God's Laws, and that Jesus came to "destroy" God's Laws, you can only accept one definition of the word "End". In this instance, to preserve your religious philosophy in this matter, you can only accept "Terminate".

You, of course, have precisely zero evidence that I am "pre-determining" anything. Look: presumably, like me, your purpose here is to convince people that your interpretation of Biblical texts is, in fact, the correct one. Fine, that is an honorable goal. However, when other readers see you making baseless claims, such as the one that I have come to this discussion with a predetermined view, it casts doubt on the credibility of rest of your arguments. So I suggest you just stick to discussing the texts, and cease with the speculation as to the inner workings of my mind.

Now then, it is a mis-representation of my position to say that I am saying that Jesus was a "breaker of God's laws" and came to "destroy" God's laws. Other readers will know that this is not what I'm saying. I am saying that Jesus is declaring the retirement of a Torah that has fulfilled its mission and does so by symbolically breaking the Law. This is all in a context where the law has achieved its honorable goal and can now be retired. You are misrepresenting me as suggesting that Jesus came to destroy Torah. Instead, I am saying He came to announce it retirement after a job well done.

 

[expos4ever]

Rom. 2: 13(For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.

Paul taught this to the Body of Christ over 14 years after Jesus ascended to His Father and my Father. So your preaching that Jesus destroyed God's Laws, or that HE was the "Termination" of God's Laws over 14 years before his letters to the Romans, is a falsehood and Paul's words here prove that God's Laws were still here, and not destroyed or "terminated", as you and "many" who come in Christ's Name, would have us believe.

Paul is, rather obviously, looking forward to a future judgment. Even if Paul believes that the law has been set aside at the time that he penned Romans, he can easily believe that those who live during the time of its applicability will indeed be judged in terms of the law.

Rom. 3: 31 Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.

Again, this was Paul, teaching the Body of Christ, the Church of God, both Jew and Gentile over 14 years since Jesus supposedly terminated God's Laws, nailing them to His Cross. And yet Paul is teaching that God's Church "Establish" God's Laws, not reject or ignore them as you promote.

While I agree that on its surface this text does assert the continued applicability of the law of Moses, we also have this from the same letter:

But now we have been released from the Law, having died to that by which we were bound, so that we serve in newness of the Spirit and not in oldness of the letter.

Not to mention that declaration in Eph 2 that the Law has come to an end:

by abolishing in His flesh the hostility, which is the Law composed of commandments expressed in ordinances, so that in Himself He might make the two one new person, in this way establishing peace;

I have dealt with the painfully awkward attempts make "the Law" here mean something other than the Law of Moses in other posts. More than happy to revisit.

But let's forget about Eph 2 for the moment and focus on the statement in Romans 7 that we have been released from the letter of the Law. Obviously, there appears to be a contradiction with a claim that that same law has been established in the sense you believe it has been established, a sense where we are to continue to obey it. You cannot have it both ways.

Romans 3: Paul starts with a treatment of how both Jew and Gentile are sinners even though the Jew was entrusted with "the actual words of God". Next we get this critical transition:

But now apart from the Law the righteousness of God has been revealed,....

Paul is telling us about an unfolding story, and pointing out where we are in that story. And where are we? We are at the point where Jesus enters the story and justification by faith is made clear (as opposed to justification by the Law).

This leads to the obvious question - was the Law a mistake?

Do we then nullify the Law through faith?

Answer: no, we "establish" the Law in the very specific sense that we affirm its fundamental goodness and proper role in the evolving redemption narrative even though the Law has fulfilled its role and can be retired.

This, I suggest, is a plausible way to understand Romans 3:31.

 

[Studyman]

Continue from my previous post #605,

Paul spoke about the law, but he never called it the "Pharisees' Law." Don't add to what he said and then say that people who disagree with you haven't read scripture. You misquoted Phil 3:5. Paul said he was a Pharisee, but he didn't say it was a law of the Pharisees. Jesus also said that the Pharisees were sitting in Moses's place and told people to listen to them (Matt 23:1-2). So, if not the law of Moses, what did Jesus ask them to listen to?

I'm hoping you will set aside your pride for just a minute and listen to what the Scriptures actually say.

Phil. 3: 5 Circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews; as touching the law, a Pharisee; 6 Concerning zeal, persecuting the church; touching the righteousness which is in the law, blameless.

Gal. 1: 13 For ye have heard of my conversation in time past in the Jews' religion, how that beyond measure I persecuted the church of God, and wasted it: 14 And profited in the Jews' religion above many my equals in mine own nation, being more exceedingly zealous of the traditions of my fathers.

Acts 7: 51 Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye. 52 Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted? and they have slain them which shewed before of the coming of the Just One; of whom ye have been now the betrayers and murderers: 53 Who have received the law by the disposition of angels, and have not kept it. (Stephen was speaking directly to Paul when he was a member of the Jews Religion)

Matt. 15: 7 Ye hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying, 8 This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. 9 But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

John 7: 19 Did not Moses give you the law, and yet none of you keepeth the law? Why go ye about to kill me?

All these Scriptures teach the same exact same thing. The Pharisees religion had a Law, but it wasn't God's Law.

The problem is your entire religious philosophy is founding on the falsehood that the Pharisees were following and Promoting God's Laws. My point is that according to Jesus and the Holy scriptures this is not true. I didn't "mis-quote" Paul at all.

And Jesus confirms this in Matt. 23.

Matt. 23:1 Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples, 2 Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat: (They had the Oracles of God, they just didn't believe them, as Paul also tells you)

3 All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not.

4 For they (Pharisees and Scribes, not God as this world's religions promote) bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men's shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers.

So when the Pharisees and Scribes are reading Moses, listen and "do" what Moses says. Just don't "do" what the Pharisees preach to do. "for they bind heavy burdens", etc.) Like Jesus tells us, if we could believe Him.

Mark 7: 8 For laying aside the commandment of God, (They "SAID" they promoted, but did NOT) ye hold the tradition of men, (Jews religion, Laws and Commandments of the Pharisees) as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do. 9 And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.

So you have your religion and your religious philosophy, which Preaches the Pharisees were walking and promoting to walk in God's Laws. But I have the Words of the Christ, and HIS disciples which clearly teach that they were not. Who should I listen to? God? Or the "other voice" in the garden God placed me in? I will defer to Peter's wisdom.

Acts 5: 29 Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men.

32 And we are his witnesses of these things; and so is also the Holy Ghost, whom God hath given to them that obey him.

This is why Zacharias knew the Christ when HE came, but the Pharisees didn't. This is why I ask men to understand the difference between them.

Of Zacharias, the HS of God inspired this to be written.

Luke 1: 5 There was in the days of Herod, the king of Judaea, a certain priest named Zacharias, of the course of Abia: and his wife was of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elisabeth. 6 And they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless.

Of the Pharisees the HS of God inspired this to be written.

Acts 7: 51 Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye.

52 Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted? and they have slain them which shewed before of the coming of the Just One; of whom ye have been now the betrayers and murderers: 53 Who have received the law by the disposition of angels, and have not kept it.

Your unbelief in what is written, doesn't make what is written Void. But your unbelief is very common.

 

[expos4ever]

Exactly. You believe that the Messiah nailed the Torah to the stake and that in so doing he triumphed over demonic principalities and powers. Thus you confess by default that the Torah is a product of demonic principalities and powers, while instead, both Stephen and Paul say that the Torah was given through the instrumentality of angels,

The logic here is obviously flawed. There is nothing in anything I have posted, either directly or indirectly, that would justify your attribution of such an absurd position. The fact that the ending of the Torah is causally connected to the defeat of these powers and principalities in no way requires that I believe that the Torah "is a product of demonic principalities and powers". And readers will know this,

Moreover now you also add that you believe God dealt a blow against the power of evil at Golgotha by having His own Son nail His own Torah to the stake, thus confessing that you also believe the Torah is something evil, given by evil and demonic principalities and powers. And of course you do not see any problem with your argument: for that is what you actually believe, and that is king, regardless of how offensive it may be to the Father and His Son.

Readers will see you provide no supporting argument. A careful reader will ask "exactly why does it follow that expos is saying that the Torah is evil from the fact that it was "nailed to the cross"?

By your reasoning, we would conclude that Jesus is evil since He, too, was nailed to the cross.

And the strong delusion is complete for refusing the love of the truth.

If you are going to accuse me of being deluded, you will need to do better than the patently absurd argument that I am suggesting the Torah is evil. I guarantee you can produce no evidence that I have said anything of the kind. I have, in fact, made statements to the effect that Torah makes Israel more sinful. But that does not necessarily mean that it is evil. Why not you may ask. Well. I am prepared to make the case that God used the Torah to make Israel more sinful because this was a necessary, albeit unhappy, part of the larger plan leading to the cross. In fact, I have stated this position already, I believe, in this thread.

 

[Studyman]

Continue from my previous post #605,

What persecutes the church through the Mosaic law is what you are doing: accusing others of breaking God's law.

Again, you are simply telling falsehood about me, in order to justify your own statements. It was you who said "I love to eat swine's flesh, I did so last night".

God's Law says "And the swine, though he divide the hoof, and be clovenfooted, yet he cheweth not the cud; he is unclean to you. 46 This is the law of the beasts, and of the fowl, and of every living creature that moveth in the waters, and of every creature that creepeth upon the earth: 47 To make a difference between the unclean and the clean, and between the beast that may be eaten and the beast that may not be eaten.

So, I didn't accuse you of breaking God's Law at all. You gleefully boasted about breaking God's Law. I simply addressed it. And God's Truth is, His "Law of the Beasts" was given to His People long before Moses. So your representation of God's Laws regarding the difference between what animals are created for food, and what animals are created for another purpose, being a "Mosaic Law", is a popular doctrine of this world to be sure, but it is another false doctrine according to the Scriptures.

Gen. 7: 1 And the LORD said unto Noah, Come thou and all thy house into the ark; for thee have I seen righteous before me in this generation. 2 Of every clean beast thou shalt take to thee by sevens, the male and his female: and of beasts that are not clean by two, the male and his female. 3 Of fowls also of the air by sevens, the male and the female; to keep seed alive upon the face of all the earth.

I don't care what you eat. As Paul said, "Let each man be convinced in his own mind". What I was curious about, is the foundation of the religious philosophy that would promote such a mindset towards the Judgments of God.

It seems I am finding out.

Gal 1:13–14 said that Paul was an expert on the Mosaic law, just like the Pharisees.

What does Paul say about when he was a Pharisee.

Rom. 10: 1 Brethren, my heart's desire and prayer to God for Israel is, that they might be saved. 2 For I bear them record that they have a zeal of God, but not according to knowledge. 3 For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God.

So your religious philosophy, Saul, who helped to stone Stephen, an innocent good standing member of God's Church, to death, were experts on the Mosaic law, just like the Pharisees.

But when I read the actual scriptures, "For I bear them record that they have a zeal of God, but "not" according to knowledge"

So once again, I am tasked with making a choice between this world's religious philosophy you are promoting, or the Holy Scriptures Inspired by God which teach the exact opposite.

This is why I don't go anywhere near the man-made religious shrines of worship scattered on every street corner of this land. Men are actually convinced of these doctrines, and the scriptures themselves have no impact or influence on them at all. Jesus warns of this very thing.

Matt. 16: 11 How is it that ye do not understand that I spake it not to you concerning bread, that ye should beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees?

12 Then understood they how that he bade them not beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.

A doctrine you are preaching comes from the "Experts on the Mosiac Law". And who was Jesus in your religion? Was HE not an "Expert in Mosiac Law"?

I don't believe you have really looked into the religion you have adopted very closely. I hope for your sake that you do.

Jesus agreed with this idea in Luke 11:52. Don't twist the verses by putting them together in the wrong way with Matthew 15:7 and John 7:19 and 19:7, and then say that we never talk about the Bible.

Of course, If I believe "Every Word" Jesus spoke about the Pharisees, your religious theory is exposed as from man and not God. The only way your religious philosophy "The Pharisees were "Experts on Mosaic Law", can stand, is if I ignore the Scriptures you are pointing to.

But I'm not here to help you justify your religion, rather to examine scriptures for the purpose of doctrine. So let's post all the Scriptures you referenced. They can't hurt my Faith, only yours.

Luke 11: 52 Woe unto you, lawyers! for ye have taken away the key of knowledge: ye entered not in yourselves, and them that were entering in ye hindered.

Matt. 15: 7 Ye hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying, 8 This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. 9 But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

John 7: 19 Did not Moses give you the law, and yet none of you keepeth the law? Why go ye about to kill me?

John 19: 7 The Jews answered him, We have a law, and by our law he ought to die, because he made himself the Son of God.

But why stop here.

Matt. 23: 15 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves.

16 Woe unto you, "ye blind guides," (That you preach to the world are "Experts on the Mosiac Law") which say, Whosoever shall swear by the temple, it is nothing; but whosoever shall swear by the gold of the temple, he is a debtor! 17 Ye fools and blind: for whether is greater, the gold, or the temple that sanctifieth the gold?

37 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!

And my personal favorite.

John 8: 44 Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.

Will you consider the Truth of the Christ Himself and stop promoting the insidious falsehood that the Pharisees were "Experts on Mosiac Law"? It's been my experience that men's religious philosophies are more important to them than God's Truth. Do I don't hold out must hope that you will. But it's good for others reading along to see how powerful this world's religious influence is.

If you can easily misquote the verses above, how can we trust that you won't misquote the verses about other practices, like circumcision? In fact, you misquoted them as well. I won't repeat what other people have said about circumcision, so it's easier on the readers.

It seems that if you are going to accuse me of "miss-quoting" a scripture. You should be honest enough to point out where and how.

 

[Studyman]

You also got Luke 2:30, 37, and 24:25 wrong. These verses talk about being saved through Christ, but you explain them in terms of the change of priesthood, which is not the point of the texts. Don't add anything to these verses to make your idea of the "Pharisee's law" sound better.

It is astonishing how much of God's own Words you must flush in order to justify the religion you are promoting.

Jer. 23: 16 Thus saith the LORD of hosts, Hearken not unto the words of the prophets that prophesy unto you: they make you vain: they speak a vision of their own heart, and not out of the mouth of the LORD.

Jer. 14: 14 Then the LORD said unto me, The prophets prophesy lies in my name: I sent them not, neither have I commanded them, neither spake unto them: they prophesy unto you a false vision and divination, and a thing of nought, and the deceit of their heart.

Is. 29: 13 Wherefore the Lord said, Forasmuch as this people draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips do honour me, but have removed their heart far from me, and their fear toward me is taught by the precept of men:

Matt. 15: 7 Ye hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying, 8 This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. 9 But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

Jer. 23: 20 The anger of the LORD shall not return, until he have executed, and till he have performed the thoughts of his heart: in the latter days ye shall consider it perfectly. 21 I have not sent these prophets, yet they ran: I have not spoken to them, yet they prophesied. 22 But if they had stood in my counsel, and had caused my people to hear my words, then they should have turned them from their evil way, and from the evil of their doings.

Acts 7: 51 Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye. 52 Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted? and they have slain them which shewed before of the coming of the Just One; of whom ye have been now the betrayers and murderers: 53 Who have received the law by the disposition of angels, and have not kept it.

Matt. 23: 33 Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell? 34 Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city:

I simply refuse to reject or ignore God's Word just because a certain religious sect you have adopted, doesn't believe in them. But you are free to believe as you please. If you want to preach that the children of the devil, who turned God's Temple in a den of thieves, were "Experts on the Mosaic Law", and that they promoted God Commandments and not their own, you are free to do so.

But i am also free to love my brothers by exposing this world's religious philosophy being promoted, as false.

What you say here doesn't fit with what you said in post #517 ("and according to Paul, Sin still brings death. Where there is no Law, there is no Sin. So the Law is still here,")

That wasn't the death Paul was speaking to. He was speaking to the Death which comes from serving another god, or submitting oneself to obeying some random religion or religious tradition or philosophy of man. The death that comes from Sin. You can read it for yourself.

Rom. 6:15 What then? shall we sin, because we are not under the law, but under grace? God forbid. 16 Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?

It might not fit into the religious philosophy you have adopted, but you provide no evidence that it doesn't fit with the Scriptures.

What you say doesn't justify Jesus in Matthew 12:4, doesn't say David didn't break the law, and doesn't say the priests didn't break the law in Matthew 12:5. Again, we're not talking about mercy. Jesus said they broke the law and the commandment.

We look at these scriptures differently. You are trying to justify disobedience to God. That is your agenda, your purpose for this discussion. I am not interested in justifying disobedience to God and either was Jesus when this event was taking place. I am simply seeking the Truth of God.

I laid my case out in detail regarding the Priest's Duty in David's struggle. If you don't agree with the case I made, then man up, and show me where my understanding is in error, and lets have a conversation about it. Not just by telling me I'm wrong because you say I'm wrong, or some random preacher you have adopted tells me I'm wrong, but show me in the Scriptures.

In my understanding, a Priest has many duties, one being the duty of making judgments among God's People. If you want me to show your where the Priesthood Law exists, let me know. When they brought a suffering, crippled man to Jesus on the Sabbath, even for the purpose of tricking Him, Jesus had to make a judgment. This is a man in bad shape. Jesus knew His Father and the purpose of His Father's Commandments HE walked in. Was it God's intent in the Sabbath Law to make a cripple suffer until after the sun went down? You and the Pharisees have judged God in His law that it was. But not Jesus and I.

There is no Law of God against helping a brother in Christ on God's Sabbaths. Nor was there a Law of God against feeding an anointed servant of God, even if it means giving bread that was only made for Priests.

In the letter of a single Law, separated from all others, perhaps a fool could make the case that is was against God to help the poor cripple, or the hungry Lord's Anointed. But when "Every Word of God" is considered in making a Judgement, as Jesus and the Priest of God in David's time did, there was no transgression. In fact, if Jesus would have used God's Law to cause the crippled man more suffering, then HE would have been guilty. Or if the Priest had told David, "sorry I know you are hungry and I have fresh bread, but God's Law says you must starve, and your servants with you", he would also have been guilty because that isn't what God's Law was for.

But since you are here for the sole purpose of justifying disobedience to God, you can't see this, and even if you could, you wouldn't accept it. Because these truths cannot be used to further your mission, which is self-justification.

WE all naturally defend ourselves. But in the case of God's Kingdom, we are told to "Deny ourselves". I hope in the confinement of your own home, when no one is looking, you might consider these things and take them to heart, and stop accusing Jesus of rebelling against God, or going about to establish His Own Righteousness. It's not only a lie about HIM, but it's demeaning and disrespectful as well.

What Jesus did during those 40 days did not keep what Lev 23:3 says to do. This is written very clearly in the Bible, which you openly alter, just like you did to others.

So let me get this right. You are preaching to the world that Moses and Jesus, both Priests of God, fasting "40 DAYS AND NIGHTS" in the Spirit of God, was breaking God's Laws.

In your religion, Did God give His Priest's the Same Laws HE gave the People?

 

[expos4ever]

Will you consider the Truth of the Christ Himself and stop promoting the insidious falsehood that the Pharisees were "Experts on Mosiac Law"?

I thought it was common knowledge that the Pharisees were, in fact, quite dedicated to the Law and indeed experts in it. From wikipedia:

One of the factors that distinguished the Pharisees from other groups prior to the destruction of the Temple was their belief that all Jews had to observe the purity laws (which applied to the Temple service) outside the Temple. The major difference, however, was the continued adherence of the Pharisees to the laws and traditions of the Jewish people in the face of assimilation. As Josephus noted, the Pharisees were considered the most expert and accurate expositors of Jewish law

Plus I am quite sure a well-respected "conservative" theologian, NT Wright, has argued that the Pharisees were indeed very zealous about keeping the Law and knew it well.

Of course, we all know that the Pharisees added on the Law and were vigorously criticized for it by Jesus.

But, of course, one can be an expert in the Law and yet take things to far and start distorting it.

What is your evidence that the Pharisees were not "experts in the Law"? Is it only the sayings of Jesus where He condemns the way they applied the Law? Again, it seems entirely plausible to me that one can be both an "expert" in the Law and let one's zeal allow one to be carried away and start adding thing to it.

 

[AbbaLove]

Here is the difference, between us it appears.

It's not unusual for many Messianic Jews to observe/honor the dietary laws and the major Feasts Of The Lord. Never forget that gentile Believers in Christ have been grafted into the cultivated Jewish Olive Tree ...

17 But if some of the branches were broken off, and you, although a wild olive shoot, were grafted in among the others and now share in the nourishing root[b] of the olive tree, 18 do not be arrogant toward the branches. If you are, remember it is not you who support the root, but the root that supports you. 19 Then you will say, “Branches were broken off so that I might be grafted in.” 20 That is true. They were broken off because of their unbelief, but you stand fast through faith. So do not become proud, but fear. 21 For if God did not spare the natural branches, neither will he spare you. 22 Note then the kindness and the severity of God: severity toward those who have fallen, but God's kindness to you, provided you continue in his kindness. Otherwise you too will be cut off. 23 And even they, if they do not continue in their unbelief, will be grafted in, for God has the power to graft them in again. 24 For if you were cut from what is by nature a wild olive tree, and grafted, contrary to nature, into a cultivated olive tree, how much more will these, the natural branches, be grafted back into their own olive tree.​

In the New Jerusalem animal sacrifices will again take place in the New Temple. Once again its the remnant of Jews (not the gentile nations) that are again God's chosen people ...

Animal sacrifices will occur again during the millennial kingdom ... the earthly 1,000 year kingdom (Zechariah 14:8-21 and Revelation 20:4-6). The millennial Temple is described in Ezekiel 40-48. At the beginning and in the middle of these verses we are informed that there will again be animal sacrifices (Ezekiel 40:39; 45:15).​

​

26 “To the one who is victorious and does My Will to the end, I will give authority over the nations 27 that one 'will rule them with an iron scepter and will dash them to pieces like pottery'—just as I have received authority from my Father. (Rev. 2:26-27). Today's modern worldly Christian church with it's misrepresentation of His Word is possibly as repulsive to the Lord as was Judaism at the time of Christ Jesus.​

 

[Lulav]

We have not one but two witnesses telling us that the Torah was given through the instrumentality of angels, both Stephen in Acts 7:53, and Paul in Galatians 3:19. So then, even in the Apostolic Writings, the scripture teaches us that the Torah was given through the instrumentality of angels, (the one who loves the Father and His Word will come to see this in the Torah also).

Acts 7:53 You deliberately disobeyed God’s law, even though you received it from the hands of angels.”

Galatians 3:19 Why, then, was the law given? It was given alongside the promise to show people their sins. But the law was designed to last only until the coming of the child who was promised. God gave his law through angels to Moses, who was the mediator between God and the people.



Exodus 24:12

Now the Lord said to Moses, “Come up to Me on the mountain and remain there, and I will give you the stone tablets with the law and the commandment which I have written for their instruction.”

Deuteronomy 10:4

He wrote on the tablets, like the former writing, the Ten Commandments which the Lord had spoken to you on the mountain from the midst of the fire on the day of the assembly; and the Lord gave them to me.