Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
I am letting the Scriptures speak for themselves, none of these verses say what you are wanting them to say. There is no need to re-interpret them, they are pretty plain.
Nope, you're introducing irrelevant verses to avoid discussing the contextual meaning within the book of Matthew and making arguments based on a lack of understanding of the background involved.
Says the person who only provides their opinion as if that's the same as the Holy Word of God. Just allow the Scriptures to explain themselves, that's the issue, people don't like them so they come up with all these elaborates interpretations instead of just letting God speak. He does not need our help. These verses are very plain- heaven and earth means just that, Jesus did not come to destroy His law or prophets He came to fulfill Mat5:17 and what He fulfilled in this very passage if we keep reading is that He would magnify His laws Isa42:21 make His laws greater not smaller which we see Him doing exactly that. Mat5:19-30 Not a jot or tittle can pass until ALL is fulfilled Mat5:18 , never did He say until the Cross (and we are told not to add to His word) and the rest of the Bible shows God's people still keeps God's commandments Rev 14:12 Rev22:14 at the time of His return. He says this group of people are blessed and can enter into His kingdom. Rev22:14 Just let the Bible speak for itself, 90% is plain. The hard parts are explained as well through reconciling Scriptures. Isa28:10
I'm not presenting "opinions" I'm providing exegetical conclusions, based on studying the relevant historical and linguistic contexts. Your method of isolating verses to proof text your doctrine is far closer to treating your opinions as if they are the equivalent of God's word through your use of cherry picking and failure to engage in contextual exegesis.
You don't provide any Scripture to prove your context, just your own words which is not the same. That's the issue everyone thinks their words are the same as God's Word, but its not.
The context under discussion is Matthew, and I have mostly restricted my references to Matthew with a slight diversion into Luke. Just as earlier I made it clear that I was basing my argument on Galatians and Romans, which you couldn't stick with and kept trying to bring in other irrelevant proof texts. Through your method of proof texting, you make the Scriptures say what they don't in context and thereby impose your doctrine onto them through selective quotation.
I guess I wasn’t clear enough in my last post. What I posted is essentially Paul’s argument from chapter 3 to chapter 4. It relates to the intention of the law and the result of the law with regards to sin. I’m going to try to make it a little clearer.
this is not support for chopping up the law and arbitrarily saying what we continue to follow and what we don't. law written upon our hearts is an abstract reference for being led by the spirit over verbatim laws (2 Cor 3). I've tried to follow the logic, making a flow chart but can't figure out when one law is dropped and another kept. You'd (SDA) be more consistent if you just say it's the 10... but since others laws are included it seems to be a case-by-case basis, but there needs to be a measure that you use to determine which extends to the new covenant and which is stays in the old covenant.
Let’s look at 2Cor3:3
Luke 24:27 And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.
Jesus answers that within the same context. Verse 20 starts with the word for. That as you know means it is connected to the previous verse's context. They were breaking the least of these commandments and teaching men to do the same.
No the context is extremely clear.All Has not came to be. Jesus has not returned to gather the elect with His Angels as Matt 24 states.
Exactly, what Jesus condemned and told us clearly, doing this will not enter the Kingdom of Heaven
The law is mentioned three times. Once in respect to circumcision, once in respect to not fellowshipping with unbelievers. And once in respect to incorporating their ways. All of which is said in relation to how the Law does not make one righteous IF NOT through the Faith of Jesus Christ. If righteousness came by circumcision, not fellowshipping with unbelievers and not incorperating their ways, the Law, the Book of the Law then Christ died in vain.
Yes my friend. One who is of the least in Matt 5:19 will in no case enter into the Kingdom of Heaven as verse 20 states.
It is the Commandments and Statutes contained in the Book of the Law that are the Word that is in our hearts and mouths that we do it. The Judgements are not mentioned. Those things that dealt with when we sinned are not in our hearts according to Deut,30:10-14. And It is the Word of God that explains which commandments and statutes, not the SDA.
Then please clear it up for me. what is the list of laws a believer is to keep? Because I can't figure it out based on your rhetoric.
Let's start here.
It could literally be written out by God and people still wouldn't believe. And He literally did just that.
The "all" referred to in that point in Matt. has, which is clear if you understand the background and Matthew's purpose in writing. In the Sermon on the Mount Jesus was strengthening the Torah, which had been reduced to a manageable level by the Pharisees through their Halakah. But Matthew's writing is focused on the transition from a Jewish messiah to a global messiah, with the scope of what needs to be fulfilled in Matthew 5 being that mission. We know that the mission was accomplished because Jesus' marching orders change from :
