This IS the LOVE of God - that we KEEP His Commandments

ace of hearts · May 3, 2019

Ken Rank said:
Do you REALLY want to have this discussion? Are you teachable? Are you willing to listen to something you haven't considered before and prayerfully consider it? Because if you want to talk about the "new" covenant, I promise you, you will hear things you haven't heard before and they are correct. But, I also don't want to waste either or our time.

Blessings.
Ken

I was in your system for more than 40 years. You don't keep the law even if it is limited to the famous 10. No one can buy God through performance or even attempted performance. There's no attainment or maintainment concerning salvation through any of the law. Gal 3

GodsGrace101 · May 4, 2019

ace of hearts said:
Talking about the famous 10.
No. I don't keep the 4th commandment in any form. I don't apply the 7th day regulations to Sunday either. I don't keep the moral aspects of the famous 10 either, However I do live pretty much by LK 6:31 and JN 13:34, which keeps me from murdering, lying, stealing, fornication of all types, etc.

There's debate about the 4th commandment. I'm sure God is a merciful God and will consider our doubts.

As to Luke and doing unto others as they do unto you
and John loving each other as Jesus asked...

These are commandments.
God doesn't make requests, He does require that we follow Him.

I believe if a person follows Luke and John as you do, they will have all of the other 9 Commandments covered. By covered, I mean that love will make you naturally follow the commandments.

GodsGrace101 · May 4, 2019

ace of hearts said:
Briefly the Mosaic law covenant is a conditional bi-lateral covenant requiring performance of both parties while the New Covenant is a unilateral covenant not having anything to do with the performance of the recipient.

Correct.
But think of it this way....the above explains the basics of the two covenants...but it doesn't explain the difference.

We are still required to obey God's Moral Law even in the New Covenant. The difference is that in the Mosaic Covenant the Holy Spirit was not present IN man to help him keep the commandments...in the New Covenant Jesus sent the Holy Spirit to be our paraclete.
John 16:7

Also the New Covenant, or Testament, became effective after Jesus' death...and resurrection.
So to be a part of the N.C. we must be IN IT.
The only way to be in it is to be IN CHRIST..this is repeated many times in the N.T. How we are to be IN CHRIST.

One verse that explains this is by Jesus Himself:
John 15:6
"If anyone does not abide in Me, he is thrown away as a branch and dries up; and they gather them, and cast them into the fire and they are burned."

ace of hearts · May 4, 2019

GodsGrace101 said:
There's debate about the 4th commandment. I'm sure God is a merciful God and will consider our doubts.

As to Luke and doing unto others as they do unto you
and John loving each other as Jesus asked...

These are commandments.
God doesn't make requests, He does require that we follow Him.

I believe if a person follows Luke and John as you do, they will have all of the other 9 Commandments covered. By covered, I mean that love will make you naturally follow the commandments.

Where does the NT include a requirement to keep the covenant that no longer has jurisdiction?

Your concern seems to be about wicked behavior. One doesn't keep the law by incident (simply not violating it). Besides that Gal 5 says if you keep any of the law, you must keep all the law. The new testament Jesus testifies about isn't the covenant issued to Israel in the desert at Sinai. LK 22:20 That covenant is the one Jeremiah talks about in Jer 31:31-33. It isn't a continuation of the existing covenant.

ace of hearts · May 4, 2019

GodsGrace101 said:
Correct.
But think of it this way....the above explains the basics of the two covenants...but it doesn't explain the difference.

What do you mean it doesn't so? bi-lateral and unilateral aren't the same thing. I gave a brief definition of both showing function. The purposes of both covenants (testaments) are very different.

We are still required to obey God's Moral Law even in the New Covenant. The difference is that in the Mosaic Covenant the Holy Spirit was not present IN man to help him keep the commandments...in the New Covenant Jesus sent the Holy Spirit to be our paraclete.
John 16:7

So you follow the law to avoid sin. I follow the leading of the Holy Spirit to avoid sin. The holy Spirit doesn't lead one to the law or sin.

Gal 5:18 But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law.

By your post you don't believe this verse.

Even with the help of the Holy Spirit (Paraclete) no one keeps the law. You seem to think we will answer for and be judged for our sins that have been forgiven and tossed into the sea of forgetfulness against JN 5:24. Jesus is my only hope. If you think salvation depends on our good works (keeping the law) in any form Jesus isn't your Savior according to Gal 5:1-4. No I don't endorse wickedness as shown by my references to LK 6:31 and JN 13:34.

Also the New Covenant, or Testament, became effective after Jesus' death...and resurrection.
So to be a part of the N.C. we must be IN IT.
The only way to be in it is to be IN CHRIST..this is repeated many times in the N.T. How we are to be IN CHRIST.

So why are you promoting obligation to a covenant that has no jurisdiction? I don't get your divided house position. I do understand your problem with being a divided house. I was there once. You have been deceived by religious people.

One verse that explains this is by Jesus Himself:
John 15:6
"If anyone does not abide in Me, he is thrown away as a branch and dries up; and they gather them, and cast them into the fire and they are burned."

So why are you ruled by a law that has no jurisdiction? I see the solution as living by LK 6:31 and JN 13:34 when it comes down to the letter. There is great liberty in Jesus Christ simply because there is no rule list to worry about. Following the leading of the Holy Spirit is awesome and extremely liberating.

GodsGrace101 · May 4, 2019

ace of hearts said:
Very true, and Jesus didn't abolish them. Jesus fulfilled them just like Mat 5:17-18 says He would. Jesus testified He did that in LK 24:44. I believe you don't understand what fulfil means in regard to a covenant/contract (they're the same thing when it comes to legal matters). A fulfilled contract is filed for historical purposes. It no longer has any other legal value because it is fulfilled/completed. Once fulfilled it has no jurisdiction. The famous 10 no longer have any jurisdiction over the believer in any respect including judgment. (Romans and Galatians) The Christian has already passed the judgment - JN 5:24. There's no condemnation for the Christian - Rom 8. The law lead us to Jesus and has completed its task and is now the unemployed school master - Gal 3:24-25.On what occasion? Where does Jesus require keeping the law and why?What kind of works or what were these works Paul was trying to convince them wouldn't save them?

If even the 10 have "no juristiction" why would Jesus say this:

John 5:28-29
28“Do not marvel at this; for an hour is coming, in which all who are in the tombs will hear His voice,
29and will come forth; those who did the good deeds to a resurrection of life, those who committed the evil deedsto a resurrection of judgment.

Now let's go back to
Mathew 5:17
17“Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill.

Please notice what it says:
Jesus said He did not come to abolish the Law.
Then Jesus said He came to fulfill the Law.

If FULFILL means what you say it means, there would be a contradiction in what JESUS stated.
If He fulfilled the law, by your standards, then he WOULD HAVE ABOLISHED the Law and He clearly says He did not come to abolish it.

So fulfill must mean something else. It means to complete, to uphold, to administer.

This might be helpful for you:

The translation of "to fulfill" is lekayem in Hebrew (le-KAI-yem), which means to uphold or establish, as well as to fulfill, complete or accomplish.2 David Bivin has pointed out that the phrase "fulfill the Law" is often used as an idiom to mean to properly interpret the Torah so that people can obey it as God really intends. The word "abolish" was likely either levatel, to nullify, or la'akor, to uproot, which meant to undermine the Torah by misinterpreting it.

For example, the law against adultery could be interpreted as specifically against cheating on one's spouse, but not about inappropriate contentography. When Jesus declared that lust also was a violation of the commandment, he was clarifying the true intent of that law, so in rabbinic parlance he was "fulfilling the Law."

In contrast, if a pastor told his congregation that watching x-rated videos was fine, he would be "abolishing the Law" - causing them to not live as God wants them to live. Here are a couple examples of this usage from around Jesus' time:

source: What Does It Mean to "Fulfill the Law"?

It would be good for you to read the above because you have a totally incorrect understanding of what it means to fulfill a law. Jesus cannot contradict Himself and say in the same sentence that He does not abolish and yet fulfills.

[QUOTGE]Jesus said in JN 5 -
39 Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.

IOW there is no life in the OT Scripture Jesus would have been referring to. The Pharisees thought they could obtain eternal life by keeping the law. When asked "What can I do to have eternal life," Jesus responded keep the commandments. Hold your water because the OT plainly says no one does. Isaiah says our righteousness is like filthy rags. You do know what filthy rags are and what was done with them, right?[/QUOTE]
John 5:39 states that the pharisees looked for eternal life in the O.T. and IT pointed to Jesus, and yet they wouldn't go to Him for salvation. You're correct in saying that they thought the law would save them. Just as today we say that we are not saved by works but by the grace of God through faith in Him.

It's these self-righteous works that God looks upon as filthy rags...God does NOT consider what a born again believer does for Him as filthy rags, but as what is our reasonable service to Him.
Romans 12:1

In the O.T. persons had difficulty keeping the law because, as I've stated, they didn't have the help of the Holy Spirit which now dwells within us.

Have you read Rom 3:20?

I'd be willing to bet that everyone on this thread has read Romans 3:20.

Please note what it says:
"Because by the WORKS OF THE LAW, no flesh will be justified in His sight".

The problem here is that you don't seem to understand the difference between the

WORKS OF THE LAW The Torah, 613 laws
WORKS OF FAITH Jesus Two Great Commandments.

Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.

Correct. Again it speaks about the DEEDS OF THE LAW. (same as WORKS OF THE LAW).

Do you believe it? If you do why is it you want to keep the law? If you're a Christian you already passed the judgment - JN 5:24. IOW you're righteous. Does it come by the law? No Rom 4. The righteousness God requires is His declaration based on Jesus accepted by faith (believing God will do what He said He would do). Salvation is a free gift. Wages for performance are death. Rom 6:23 When it comes to behavior, don't forget LK 6:31 and JN 13:34.

Brother, why do you think I keep THE LAW?
I'm a Christian and am under Grace, not under the Law. This does not mean that I don't need to keep the Law of Faith...the Laws of Jesus, which, in effect, comprise all of the Moral Law, or the 10 commandments.

As to behavior, you posted Luke 6:31
I agree and would also direct you to
Mathew 5:3-10 The Beatitudes of Behavior

No religion that I know of teaches what I just wrote. They all teach fear (attempting to please God). If you're a Christian good behavior becomes a natural. I love Gal 5:18. It's like auto pilot on a plane. The Holy Spirit doesn't lead one to the law or sin. Why would you want to be under the curse of the law? verse 10.

There is much more that can be said on this issue. Don't believe me, sincerely ask God.

Maybe religions don't teach what you wrote because you're not correct?

You need to learn that the works of the law
are not the same as the works/deeds Jesus spoke of.

GodsGrace101 · May 4, 2019

ace of hearts said:
Where does the NT include a requirement to keep the covenant that no longer has jurisdiction?

Your concern seems to be about wicked behavior. One doesn't keep the law by incident (simply not violating it). Besides that Gal 5 says if you keep any of the law, you must keep all the law. The new testament Jesus testifies about isn't the covenant issued to Israel in the desert at Sinai. LK 22:20 That covenant is the one Jeremiah talks about in Jer 31:31-33. It isn't a continuation of the existing covenant.

In Jeremiah, God just says that He is moving the commandments from stone to the heart --- as in Ezekiel.

The Moral Commandments are still in existence..if you continue to state that they are not,,,please provide a verse that states this.

Jesus said:
Luke 6:46-49
46“Why do you call Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ and do not do what I say?
47“Everyone who comes to Me and hears My words and acts on them, I will show you whom he is like:
48he is like a man building a house, who dug deep and laid a foundation on the rock; and when a flood occurred, the torrent burst against that house and could not shake it, because it had been well built.
49“But the one who has heard and has not acted accordingly, is like a man who built a house on the ground without any foundation; and the torrent burst against it and immediately it collapsed, and the ruin of that house was great.”

Jesus said we are to do many things. In the verses just above Luke 6:46 He states those things.

GodsGrace101 · May 4, 2019

ace of hearts said:
What do you mean it doesn't so? bi-lateral and unilateral aren't the same thing. I gave a brief definition of both showing function. The purposes of both covenants (testaments) are very different.So you follow the law to avoid sin. I follow the leading of the Holy Spirit to avoid sin. The holy Spirit doesn't lead one to the law or sin.

Gal 5:18 But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law.

By your post you don't believe this verse.

Even with the help of the Holy Spirit (Paraclete) no one keeps the law. You seem to think we will answer for and be judged for our sins that have been forgiven and tossed into the sea of forgetfulness against JN 5:24. Jesus is my only hope. If you think salvation depends on our good works (keeping the law) in any form Jesus isn't your Savior according to Gal 5:1-4. No I don't endorse wickedness as shown by my references to LK 6:31 and JN 13:34.So why are you promoting obligation to a covenant that has no jurisdiction? I don't get your divided house position. I do understand your problem with being a divided house. I was there once. You have been deceived by religious people. So why are you ruled by a law that has no jurisdiction? I see the solution as living by LK 6:31 and JN 13:34 when it comes down to the letter. There is great liberty in Jesus Christ simply because there is no rule list to worry about. Following the leading of the Holy Spirit is awesome and extremely liberating.

I agree.
But you shouldn't be stating that the Moral Law has been done away with.
This is a very dangerous teaching, besides the fact that it's not true.
You keep asking me if I've read verses as if I started reading the bible yesterday...
Did YOU read John 14?

Works are not a bad thing.
Works OF THE LAW are a bad thing.

As to the Mosaic and New Covenants..you explained some differences between them, but you didn't mention about the Holy Spirit,,,which I did and which is the most important difference.

ace of hearts · May 4, 2019

GodsGrace101 said:
If even the 10 have "no juristiction" why would Jesus say this:

John 5:28-29
28“Do not marvel at this; for an hour is coming, in which all who are in the tombs will hear His voice,
29and will come forth; those who did the good deeds to a resurrection of life, those who committed the evil deedsto a resurrection of judgment.

Now let's go back to
Mathew 5:17
17“Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill.

Please notice what it says:
Jesus said He did not come to abolish the Law.
Then Jesus said He came to fulfill the Law.

If FULFILL means what you say it means, there would be a contradiction in what JESUS stated.
If He fulfilled the law, by your standards, then he WOULD HAVE ABOLISHED the Law and He clearly says He did not come to abolish it.

So fulfill must mean something else. It means to complete, to uphold, to administer.

This might be helpful for you:

The translation of "to fulfill" is lekayem in Hebrew (le-KAI-yem), which means to uphold or establish, as well as to fulfill, complete or accomplish.2 David Bivin has pointed out that the phrase "fulfill the Law" is often used as an idiom to mean to properly interpret the Torah so that people can obey it as God really intends. The word "abolish" was likely either levatel, to nullify, or la'akor, to uproot, which meant to undermine the Torah by misinterpreting it.

For example, the law against adultery could be interpreted as specifically against cheating on one's spouse, but not about inappropriate contentography. When Jesus declared that lust also was a violation of the commandment, he was clarifying the true intent of that law, so in rabbinic parlance he was "fulfilling the Law."

In contrast, if a pastor told his congregation that watching x-rated videos was fine, he would be "abolishing the Law" - causing them to not live as God wants them to live. Here are a couple examples of this usage from around Jesus' time:

source: What Does It Mean to "Fulfill the Law"?

It would be good for you to read the above because you have a totally incorrect understanding of what it means to fulfill a law. Jesus cannot contradict Himself and say in the same sentence that He does not abolish and yet fulfills.

[QUOTGE]Jesus said in JN 5 -
39 Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.

IOW there is no life in the OT Scripture Jesus would have been referring to. The Pharisees thought they could obtain eternal life by keeping the law. When asked "What can I do to have eternal life," Jesus responded keep the commandments. Hold your water because the OT plainly says no one does. Isaiah says our righteousness is like filthy rags. You do know what filthy rags are and what was done with them, right?

John 5:39 states that the pharisees looked for eternal life in the O.T. and IT pointed to Jesus, and yet they wouldn't go to Him for salvation. You're correct in saying that they thought the law would save them. Just as today we say that we are not saved by works but by the grace of God through faith in Him.

It's these self-righteous works that God looks upon as filthy rags...God does NOT consider what a born again believer does for Him as filthy rags, but as what is our reasonable service to Him.
Romans 12:1

In the O.T. persons had difficulty keeping the law because, as I've stated, they didn't have the help of the Holy Spirit which now dwells within us.

I'd be willing to bet that everyone on this thread has read Romans 3:20.

Please note what it says:
"Because by the WORKS OF THE LAW, no flesh will be justified in His sight".

The problem here is that you don't seem to understand the difference between the

WORKS OF THE LAW The Torah, 613 laws
WORKS OF FAITH Jesus Two Great Commandments.

Correct. Again it speaks about the DEEDS OF THE LAW. (same as WORKS OF THE LAW).

Brother, why do you think I keep THE LAW?
I'm a Christian and am under Grace, not under the Law. This does not mean that I don't need to keep the Law of Faith...the Laws of Jesus, which, in effect, comprise all of the Moral Law, or the 10 commandments.

As to behavior, you posted Luke 6:31
I agree and would also direct you to
Mathew 5:3-10 The Beatitudes of Behavior

Maybe religions don't teach what you wrote because you're not correct?

You need to learn that the works of the law
are not the same as the works/deeds Jesus spoke of.

Click to expand...

Please explain your concept against this complete sentence -

Jer 31:31 Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:

32 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the Lord:

33 But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the Lord, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.

And this testimony of Jesus -

LK 22:20 Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you.

Then also consider -

LK 16:16 The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it.

JN 1:17 For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.

17 And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect.
Gal 3:

18 For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise: but God gave it to Abraham by promise.

19 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.

1 Tim 1:5 Now the end of the commandment is charity out of a pure heart, and of a good conscience, and of faith unfeigned:

6 From which some having swerved have turned aside unto vain jangling;

7 Desiring to be teachers of the law; understanding neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm.

8 But we know that the law is good, if a man use it lawfully;

9 Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,

10 For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;

11 According to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, which was committed to my trust.

Now you still want to argue the law is required for the Christian, why?

Mat 5:17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

Heb 7:12 For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law.

Do you believe the Scripture or what you've been taught? Is the Scripture inspired by God or not? The last 2 verses prove beyond doubt for those who believe the Scripture the law is no more or the Scripture isn't a reliable testimony to base anything on. I've provided plenty Scripture to establish the truth. I must quote one more though. It has your required word "abolished" in it.

Eph 2:15 Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;

After you comment on each of the above passages, I have more to support the truth.

I'd really like to overlook your closing remarks. I think it would be proper for me to say you need to read what the Scripture says instead of bringing your theology to the Scripture for support. Jesus plainly told the Pharisees -

JN 5:39 Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.

GodsGrace101 · May 4, 2019

ace of hearts said:
Please explain your concept against this complete sentence -

Jer 31:31 Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:

32 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the Lord:

33 But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the Lord, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.

And this testimony of Jesus -

LK 22:20 Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you.

Then also consider -

LK 16:16 The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it.

JN 1:17 For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.

17 And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect.
Gal 3:

18 For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise: but God gave it to Abraham by promise.

19 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.

1 Tim 1:5 Now the end of the commandment is charity out of a pure heart, and of a good conscience, and of faith unfeigned:

6 From which some having swerved have turned aside unto vain jangling;

7 Desiring to be teachers of the law; understanding neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm.

8 But we know that the law is good, if a man use it lawfully;

9 Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,

10 For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;

11 According to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, which was committed to my trust.

Now you still want to argue the law is required for the Christian, why?

Mat 5:17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

Heb 7:12 For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law.

Do you believe the Scripture or what you've been taught? Is the Scripture inspired by God or not? The last 2 verses prove beyond doubt for those who believe the Scripture the law is no more or the Scripture isn't a reliable testimony to base anything on. I've provided plenty Scripture to establish the truth. I must quote one more though. It has your required word "abolished" in it.

Eph 2:15 Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;

After you comment on each of the above passages, I have more to support the truth.

I'd really like to overlook your closing remarks. I think it would be proper for me to say you need to read what the Scripture says instead of bringing your theology to the Scripture for support. Jesus plainly told the Pharisees -

JN 5:39 Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.

You want me to comment on 20 verses?

Have you commented on the ones I've posted to YOU?

I'll say this: No covenant ever abolished the previous one. It only made it better, or added to it, or completed it somehow, or slightly changed it somehow.

Are YOU bringing your theology to the scriptures?
You sound like you're listening to some preacher and just repeating what he says. HOW do you know I'm bringing my theology to the scriptures? Did you ever consider that maybe YOU are?

Ephesians 2:15 is an important verse, which you apparently do not understand. Here's an exegesis of it:

Paul is telling the Gentiles that through Jesus Christ they have been made close to God since before they were heathens. Verse 11, verse 13

Verse 14 Jesus Himself has made peace between the Jews and the Gentiles....they are now one family...no longer separated.

Verse 15 With the death of Jesus He ended the bad feelings between the Jews and the Gentiles [the Jews looked down on the Gentiles] and what caused this?
The Jewish Laws from the Torah favored the Jews and excluded the Gentiles,,,but Jesus died TO ANNUL THE WHOLE SYSTEM OF JEWISH LAWS. Jesus made of the two one body, one group of people...and thus Jesus created peace between the two groups.

Now YOU tell ME what the following means:

John 14:21-24
21“He who has My commandments and keeps them is the one who loves Me; and he who loves Me will be loved by My Father, and I will love him and will disclose Myself to him.”
22Judas (not Iscariot) said to Him, “Lord, what then has happened that You are going to disclose Yourself to us and not to the world?”
23Jesus answered and said to him, “If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word; and My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make Our abode with him.
24“He who does not love Me does not keep My words; and the word which you hear is not Mine, but the Father’s who sent Me.

Please tell us WHAT commandments Jesus wants us to keep.

What does Jesus mean by "keeping His word"?

ace of hearts · May 4, 2019

GodsGrace101 said:
I agree.
But you shouldn't be stating that the Moral Law has been done away with.
This is a very dangerous teaching, besides the fact that it's not true.
You keep asking me if I've read verses as if I started reading the bible yesterday...
Did YOU read John 14?

Yes I've read JN 14. Are you trying to say the law given to Israel at Sinai was done by Jesus? It does say keep My commandments in verse 15. So look at the words you underlined and tell me the difference. I like the next chapter, especially verse 10 also.

If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father's commandments, and abide in his love.

Is Jesus talking about his words and commandments here? Are those words and commandments different from chapter 14? The verse is a comparative statement contrasting the commandments of Jesus and the commandments of God the Father.

Works are not a bad thing.
Works OF THE LAW are a bad thing.

You're calling works and works of the law the same thing. I haven't said works of the law are a bad thing. You did. I didn't say works are a bad thing either. There are good works according to James. Look in chapter 2 of his letter and see what he says about works and the law. He says if you break one part of the law you're guilty of violating all the law.

As to the Mosaic and New Covenants..you explained some differences between them, but you didn't mention about the Holy Spirit,,,which I did and which is the most important difference.

Do you want to talk about the law (covenant made with Israel) or God's law (moral). Do you think of the famous 10 as an invention of sin? Sin was before the law. Rom 5:13 and Gal 3:19. The later states why the law was added. No one can quote me as saying the moral law was done away with. Can one murder and be in compliance with the word of Jesus in -

JN 13:34 A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another.

The covenant made with Israel at Sinai is different as Jer 31:31-33 shows. If you read that passage closely you will see two different sets of laws. Does that mean murder isn't a sin/transgression? No. Remember Cain? Paul a renowned scholar and natural born Jew says the law came 430 years after Abraham. Is he presenting false testimony? Is the Scripture inspired by God? Was Paul a chosen vessel by God? Does Gal 3:19 say the law had its time of jurisdiction? Did Jesus come?

ace of hearts · May 4, 2019

GodsGrace101 said:
You want me to comment on 20 verses?

What I really want is for you to consider those verses and match them to your opinion.

What I'm really doing here is responding to your beliefs (opinions). I believe you present them as based on Scripture. If so how do you reconcile the Scripture I've posted with your beliefs? I believe Scripture agrees with itself. This gives you a headache because OT and NT are different covenants. I've shown you with James, if you violate any of the law you violate all the law. Jam 2. I've shown you if you keep any of the law you must keep all the law. Gal 5. You claim to follow Jesus, yet you base your beliefs and practice on the law, not the words of Jesus - JN 13:34. Who or what are you really following?

Have you commented on the ones I've posted to YOU?

At least some like Mat 5:17-18, JN 14 which come immediately to mind. Please indicate any you feel I've not responded about. I think you only see a Scripture swap and nothing to do with concepts. If you don't offer commentary on any passages you post, why should I offer commentary on them. Excellent example is your JN 14:21-24 quote.

I'll say this: No covenant ever abolished the previous one. It only made it better, or added to it, or completed it somehow, or slightly changed it somehow.

The only covenant ever rescinded is the one given to Israel at Sinai per Scripture I've already quoted for your convenience.

Are YOU bringing your theology to the scriptures?

Please show me. I've shown you where your theology doesn't agree with Scripture with Scripture you at least seem refuse to consider.

You sound like you're listening to some preacher and just repeating what he says. HOW do you know I'm bringing my theology to the scriptures? Did you ever consider that maybe YOU are?

I've quoted you Scripture that disproves your theology. I'm open to that if you can prove it with Scripture and not ignoring any Scripture. Where there seems to be a discrepancy between your passages and the passages I presented explain it.

For instance the Gospels say the law was and you say it is. I'll even help you some. I like these sites -

biblegateway.com
eliyah.com
biblehub.com

All my Scripture quotes are c&p from the first site. Prevents typos.
The second is Strong's concordance online.
The last has so many resources I don't know where to start. I use the interlinear the most.

For you information I don't derive my theology from any of those sites. I also have hard copies of Bible study aides. My religious library used to exceed that of many of my former pastors. I've sold most of it and most of the rest is in storage at the moment.

Ephesians 2:15 is an important verse, which you apparently do not understand. Here's an exegesis of it:

Paul is telling the Gentiles that through Jesus Christ they have been made close to God since before they were heathens. Verse 11, verse 13

Verse 14 Jesus Himself has made peace between the Jews and the Gentiles....they are now one family...no longer separated.

Verse 15 With the death of Jesus He ended the bad feelings between the Jews and the Gentiles [the Jews looked down on the Gentiles] and what caused this?
The Jewish Laws from the Torah favored the Jews and excluded the Gentiles,,,but Jesus died TO ANNUL THE WHOLE SYSTEM OF JEWISH LAWS. Jesus made of the two one body, one group of people...and thus Jesus created peace between the two groups.

What are you calling Jewish laws? Are they something other than the covenant law given to Israel. If so why would God do this? Does God respect the law of men? Did Jesus die to deliver us from the law of men? Does that law even matter? What is Paul's reference here? Is it the Scripture or something else? If it's something else what is it? What are those ordinances?

Now YOU tell ME what the following means:

John 14:21-24
21“He who has My commandments and keeps them is the one who loves Me; and he who loves Me will be loved by My Father, and I will love him and will disclose Myself to him.”
22Judas (not Iscariot) said to Him, “Lord, what then has happened that You are going to disclose Yourself to us and not to the world?”
23Jesus answered and said to him, “If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word; and My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make Our abode with him.
24“He who does not love Me does not keep My words; and the word which you hear is not Mine, but the Father’s who sent Me.

Please tell us WHAT commandments Jesus wants us to keep.

What does Jesus mean by "keeping His word"?

Sure, no problem. First what are the commandments of Jesus? Are the the famous 10? based on what? JN 1:17 says the famous 10 didn't come by Jesus. We have a failure there to prove the famous 10 are the commandments of Jesus. Next up is JN 15:10 where Jesus issues a comparative statement between His commandments and those of His Father. So I think we have another failure to prove the famous 10 are the commandments of Jesus.

I'd like to ask why Jesus said you have heard it said... followed with but I say... Four of which are directly from the famous 10. Why is Jesus contradicting Himself if you believe the famous 10 are given by Him?

Now how does your underlined vary from the commandments of Jesus? I don't see it doing so.

GodsGrace101 · May 5, 2019

ace of hearts said:
Yes I've read JN 14. Are you trying to say the law given to Israel at Sinai was done by Jesus? It does say keep My commandments in verse 15. So look at the words you underlined and tell me the difference. I like the next chapter, especially verse 10 also.

If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father's commandments, and abide in his love

God Father gave the law at Sinai.
I don't know what words I've underlined since you don't show them. You should post my entire reply to you.

Is Jesus talking about his words and commandments here? Are those words and commandments different from chapter 14? The verse is a comparative statement contrasting the commandments of Jesus and the commandments of God the Father.You're calling works and works of the law the same thing. I haven't said works of the law are a bad thing. You did. I didn't say works are a bad thing either. There are good works according to James. Look in chapter 2 of his letter and see what he says about works and the law. He says if you break one part of the law you're guilty of violating all the law.

Jesus is God. God's commandments are Jesus' commandments. You think there's a difference?
You HAVE said that works of the Law are a bad thing.
You've said this more than once...In post no. 145 and 149, for instance. Here's some of what you've said:

Even with the help of the Holy Spirit (Paraclete) no one keeps the law. You seem to think we will answer for and be judged for our sins that have been forgiven and tossed into the sea of forgetfulness against JN 5:24. Jesus is my only hope. If you think salvation depends on our good works (keeping the law) in any form Jesus isn't your Savior according to Gal 5:1-4. No I don't endorse wickedness as shown by my references to LK 6:31 and JN 13:34.
John 15:6
"If anyone does not abide in Me,he is thrown away as a branch and dries up; and they gather them, and cast them into the fire and they are burned."
Click to expand...
So why are you ruled by a law that has no jurisdiction? I see the solution as living by LK 6:31 and JN 13:34 when it comes down to the letter. There is great liberty in Jesus Christ simply because there is no rule list to worry about. Following the leading of the Holy Spirit is awesome and extremely liberating.

We WILL be judged after death,,,Jesus said so Himself. See John 5:28-29...Those that have done good works will be saved and those that have done evil will be lost.

You clearly ask me why I'm following a law that has no juristiction. I've explained to you the difference between works and works of the Law...so it's confusing why you ask this.

Do you want to talk about the law (covenant made with Israel) or God's law (moral). Do you think of the famous 10 as an invention of sin? Sin was before the law. Rom 5:13 and Gal 3:19. The later states why the law was added. No one can quote me as saying the moral law was done away with. Can one murder and be in compliance with the word of Jesus in -

So you agree that we are to follow the Moral Law?

JN 13:34 A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another.

Agreed. No problem here. We are to do this.
It's a commandment from God.

The covenant made with Israel at Sinai is different as Jer 31:31-33 shows. If you read that passage closely you will see two different sets of laws. Does that mean murder isn't a sin/transgression? No. Remember Cain? Paul a renowned scholar and natural born Jew says the law came 430 years after Abraham. Is he presenting false testimony? Is the Scripture inspired by God? Was Paul a chosen vessel by God? Does Gal 3:19 say the law had its time of jurisdiction? Did Jesus come?

What are the two different sets of law?

GodsGrace101 · May 5, 2019

ace of hearts said:
What I really want is for you to consider those verses and match them to your opinion.

What I'm really doing here is responding to your beliefs (opinions). I believe you present them as based on Scripture. If so how do you reconcile the Scripture I've posted with your beliefs? I believe Scripture agrees with itself. This gives you a headache because OT and NT are different covenants. I've shown you with James, if you violate any of the law you violate all the law. Jam 2. I've shown you if you keep any of the law you must keep all the law. Gal 5. You claim to follow Jesus, yet you base your beliefs and practice on the law, not the words of Jesus - JN 13:34. Who or what are you really following? At least some like Mat 5:17-18, JN 14 which come immediately to mind. Please indicate any you feel I've not responded about. I think you only see a Scripture swap and nothing to do with concepts. If you don't offer commentary on any passages you post, why should I offer commentary on them. Excellent example is your JN 14:21-24 quote.The only covenant ever rescinded is the one given to Israel at Sinai per Scripture I've already quoted for your convenience.Please show me. I've shown you where your theology doesn't agree with Scripture with Scripture you at least seem refuse to consider.I've quoted you Scripture that disproves your theology. I'm open to that if you can prove it with Scripture and not ignoring any Scripture. Where there seems to be a discrepancy between your passages and the passages I presented explain it.

For instance the Gospels say the law was and you say it is. I'll even help you some. I like these sites -

biblegateway.com
eliyah.com
biblehub.com

All my Scripture quotes are c&p from the first site. Prevents typos.
The second is Strong's concordance online.
The last has so many resources I don't know where to start. I use the interlinear the most.

For you information I don't derive my theology from any of those sites. I also have hard copies of Bible study aides. My religious library used to exceed that of many of my former pastors. I've sold most of it and most of the rest is in storage at the moment.What are you calling Jewish laws? Are they something other than the covenant law given to Israel. If so why would God do this? Does God respect the law of men? Did Jesus die to deliver us from the law of men? Does that law even matter? What is Paul's reference here? Is it the Scripture or something else? If it's something else what is it? What are those ordinances?Sure, no problem. First what are the commandments of Jesus? Are the the famous 10? based on what? JN 1:17 says the famous 10 didn't come by Jesus. We have a failure there to prove the famous 10 are the commandments of Jesus. Next up is JN 15:10 where Jesus issues a comparative statement between His commandments and those of His Father. So I think we have another failure to prove the famous 10 are the commandments of Jesus.

I'd like to ask why Jesus said you have heard it said... followed with but I say... Four of which are directly from the famous 10. Why is Jesus contradicting Himself if you believe the famous 10 are given by Him?

Now how does your underlined vary from the commandments of Jesus? I don't see it doing so.

First of all, I don't have a headache.
You ask interesting questions above and I'd be happy to go over everything with you...problem is this carpet bombing system you use takes up too much of my time.

If you post each idea separately, I'd be happy to go over scripture with you.

For instance you ask how I could reconcile my belief with scripture...
WHAT BELIEF?
WHAT SCRIPTURE?

ace of hearts · May 5, 2019

GodsGrace101 said:
You want me to comment on 20 verses?

What I really want is for you to consider those verses and match them to your opinion.

ace of hearts · May 5, 2019

GodsGrace101 said:
You want me to comment on 20 verses?

What I'm really doing here is responding to your beliefs (opinions). I believe you present them as based on Scripture. If so how do you reconcile the Scripture I've posted with your beliefs? I believe Scripture agrees with itself.

We obviously have a problem with the others theology.

This gives you a headache because OT and NT are different covenants. Please notice I didn't say you have a headache. I'm indicating there's a problem you can't solve. I also provided a reason this is a problem.

ace of hearts · May 5, 2019

GodsGrace101 said:
Have you commented on the ones I've posted to YOU?

Yes. At least some like Mat 5:17-18, JN 14 which come immediately to mind. Please indicate any you feel I've not responded about. I think you only see a Scripture swap and nothing to do with concepts. If you don't offer commentary on any passages you post, why should I offer commentary on them. Excellent example is your JN 14:21-24 quote.

I'll say this: No covenant ever abolished the previous one. It only made it better, or added to it, or completed it somehow, or slightly changed it somehow.

The only covenant ever rescinded is the one given to Israel at Sinai per Scripture I've already quoted for your convenience.

ace of hearts · May 5, 2019

GodsGrace101 said:
Are YOU bringing your theology to the scriptures?

Please show me. I've shown you where your theology doesn't agree with Scripture with Scripture you at least seem refuse to consider.

You sound like you're listening to some preacher and just repeating what he says.

Rest assured I've quit listening to some preacher(s). Interpret that any way you want.

HOW do you know I'm bringing my theology to the scriptures?

I've quoted you Scripture that disproves your theology. I'm open to that if you can prove it with Scripture and not ignoring any Scripture. Where there seems to be a discrepancy between your passages and the passages I presented explain it.

For instance the Gospels say the law was. You say it is.

I'll even help you to present your ideas and refute mine with the following sites I like -

biblegateway.com
eliyah.com
biblehub.com

All my Scripture quotes are c&p from the first site. Prevents typos.
The second is Strong's concordance online.
The last has so many resources I don't know where to start. I use the interlinear the most.

Did you ever consider that maybe YOU are?

I'm giving you every opportunity to prove that is so.

ace of hearts · May 5, 2019

GodsGrace101 said:
Ephesians 2:15 is an important verse, which you apparently do not understand. Here's an exegesis of it:

Paul is telling the Gentiles that through Jesus Christ they have been made close to God since before they were heathens. Verse 11, verse 13

Are you arguing Replacement Theology here? I'm participating in another thread on that.

Verse 14 Jesus Himself has made peace between the Jews and the Gentiles....they are now one family...no longer separated.

Verse 15 With the death of Jesus He ended the bad feelings between the Jews and the Gentiles [the Jews looked down on the Gentiles] and what caused this?
The Jewish Laws from the Torah favored the Jews and excluded the Gentiles,,,but Jesus died TO ANNUL THE WHOLE SYSTEM OF JEWISH LAWS. Jesus made of the two one body, one group of people...and thus Jesus created peace between the two groups.

This exegesis as you call it is lacking the important word you've brought up "abolished." So what you've presented is more like eisegesis.

The real problem is your idea about fulfilled.

What are you calling Jewish laws? You did say Torah. Are they something other than the covenant law given to Israel. If so why would God do this? Does God respect the law of men? Did Jesus die to deliver us from the law of men? Does that law even matter? What is Paul's reference here? Is it the Scripture or something else? If it's something else what is it? What are those ordinances?

ace of hearts · May 5, 2019

GodsGrace101 said:
Now YOU tell ME what the following means:

John 14:21-24
21“He who has My commandments and keeps them is the one who loves Me; and he who loves Me will be loved by My Father, and I will love him and will disclose Myself to him.”
22Judas (not Iscariot) said to Him, “Lord, what then has happened that You are going to disclose Yourself to us and not to the world?”
23Jesus answered and said to him, “If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word; and My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make Our abode with him.
24“He who does not love Me does not keep My words; and the word which you hear is not Mine, but the Father’s who sent Me.

Please tell us WHAT commandments Jesus wants us to keep.

What does Jesus mean by "keeping His word"?

Sure, no problem. First what are the commandments of Jesus? Are the the famous 10? based on what? JN 1:17 says the famous 10 didn't come by Jesus. We have a failure there to prove the famous 10 are the commandments of Jesus. Next up is JN 15:10 where Jesus issues a comparative statement between His commandments and those of His Father. So I think we have another failure to prove the famous 10 are the commandments of Jesus.

I'd like to ask why Jesus said you have heard it said... followed with but I say... Four of which are directly from the famous 10. Why is Jesus contradicting Himself if you believe the famous 10 are given by Him?

Now how does your underlined vary from the commandments of Jesus? I don't see it doing so.

This IS the LOVE of God - that we KEEP His Commandments

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads