Murder is listed and spoken of as a sin opposed to a thou shalt not. It is spoken of as something a Christians does not engage themselves in.
Upvote
0
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.
Murder is listed and spoken of as a sin opposed to a thou shalt not. It is spoken of as something a Christians does not engage themselves in.Christ fulfilled the law, to include all parts of the old covenant. This means that we no longer have to fulfill these requirements ourselves solely based on their presence in old covenant text.
It is possible, as I've illustrated, that some instruction overlaps. For example, murder is stated to be forbidden in both the old and the new. But the reiteration of any instruction does not automatically bring the implicit reiteration of every other precept.
A Jew is from the tribe of Judah and therefore an Israeli whereas an Israeli is not necessarily a Jew. We do speak of all Israelis as Jews these days.So where did Judah come from? was he not the son of Israel? Why make it so hard?
You speak about God being the same. However His instruments are not always the same. You have even quoted that the covenant would change. Will you ever make up your mind?God gave two sets of Commandments? The Jews would be judged by one set and we by another? God is not the same yesterday today and forever? Jesus when He fulfilled the law caused a change in the Commandments? For you insist that it is not abolished so fulfill here would mean changed or replace in order to have an overlapping with another set. Why was the change made?
Murder is listed and spoken of as a sin opposed to a thou shalt not. It is spoken of as something a Christians does not engage themselves in.
Is there the repeat of the first 4 of the ten commandments in the new covenant? Please show us where they are.Christ fulfilled the law, to include all parts of the old covenant. This means that we no longer have to fulfill these requirements ourselves solely based on their presence in old covenant text.
It is possible, as I've illustrated, that some instruction overlaps. For example, murder is stated to be forbidden in both the old and the new. But the reiteration of any instruction does not automatically bring the implicit reiteration of every other precept.
Where does the bible say that the New testament was to replace the old? Was it really to replace or compliment? How is the following to be viewed if the Old is replaced?The point is that if one or more new testament command bears similarities to any old testament law, the remainder of the old testament laws cannot be inferred to follow just based on that.
The NC is not based on law or behavior. It is based on promises.The point is that if one or more new testament command bears similarities to any old testament law, the remainder of the old testament laws cannot be inferred to follow just based on that.
Is this really Elder asking a question like this?Is there the repeat of the first 4 of the ten commandments in the new covenant? Please show us where they are.
Jeremiah says replace. You do not have any passage saying the NC compliments the OC.Where does the bible say that the New testament was to replace the old? Was it really to replace or compliment? How is the following to be viewed if the Old is replaced?
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, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.
Is there the repeat of the first 4 of the ten commandments in the new covenant? Please show us where they are.
The NC is not based on law or behavior. It is based on promises.
Our opposition believes Jesus, James and Paul all preach obligation to the law. They simply will not accept the words of any of them.
Abstaining from sin is not obeisance to the law. One simply can not murder (do evil) and love (hate) at the same time.While I agree that the New Covenant is based on faith, Scripture says that it is those who obey our Lord that love Him. Therefore part of my faith is to obey Him. That doesn't mean obeying what was instructed to others.
Abstaining from sin is not obeisance to the law. One simply can not murder (do evil) and love (hate) at the same time.
I think the 10 commandments were more of a method to deter evil than to promote good. It is like they are outer boundaries than something to strive for they are something to not go past. One could consider God and his command to love as a point of light and there is sort of a boundary where outer darkness starts and the 10 commandments is like a line on the ground that says "do not pass". while those who aren't dwelling on the outer bounds where darkness prevails do not need to bother heeding lines because they are far from them already.It's true that there is a difference between maintaining a checklist of do's and don't's and doing the will of our Lord out of love through the guidance of His Spirit.
1 Cor. 8:1 Cor 8:4-6 teaches us that we have but one God.
The New Testament certainly condemns idolatry and 1 Tim 6:1 is good enough for me to honor the name of God.
There is no New Testament passage which mandates the legalistic observance of any day as holy, whereas there are plenty which say that nobody can be judged on the matters of sabbaths and that all days are free to be esteemed equal.
1 Cor. 8:
6 But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.
7 Howbeit there is not in every man that knowledge: for some with conscience of the idol unto this hour eat it as a thing offered unto an idol; and their conscience being weak is defiled.
Paul is saying that they believe that there is one God but it does not say that we should not serve another god does it?
I Tim. 6:
Let as many servants as are under the yoke count their own masters worthy of all honour, that the name of God and his doctrine be not blasphemed.
This is about being faithful to your master as a servant, as a good Christian should be. How is that the same as not using God's name in vain?
So in fact we as Christians are left without any pacific day to set aside to God. But at all cost it must not be Sabbath for that will be bondage?
So far you have not present a plain statement in regard to the first four commands of the 10C's in the NT. Do you really have any?
The issue is not worshipping on Saturday. The issue is requiring it for salvation.1 Cor. 8:
6 But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.
7 Howbeit there is not in every man that knowledge: for some with conscience of the idol unto this hour eat it as a thing offered unto an idol; and their conscience being weak is defiled.
Paul is saying that they believe that there is one God but it does not say that we should not serve another god does it?
I Tim. 6:
Let as many servants as are under the yoke count their own masters worthy of all honour, that the name of God and his doctrine be not blasphemed.
This is about being faithful to your master as a servant, as a good Christian should be. How is that the same as not using God's name in vain?
So in fact we as Christians are left without any pacific day to set aside to God. But at all cost it must not be Sabbath for that will be bondage?
So far you have not present a plain statement in regard to the first four commands of the 10C's in the NT. Do you really have any?
Exactly..... if it were not salvic then the debate would be over here.The issue is not worshipping on Saturday. The issue is requiring it for salvation.
Jesus Himself said that the Sabbath was made for man/all men. Mar 2:27. Or is it that you do not accept the text as saying so?You may not use those verses as evidence to not blaspheme God's name or to not serve other gods... I don't think that would be very loving to God, personally. I have my instructions from the New Testament teachers. If those instructions aren't good enough for you, that's on you alone. You already believe that you need to keep additional rules.
If a Christian wants to keep the Sabbath, they may. A man's personal devotion to God shouldn't be avoided at all costs. What should be avoided is trying to force Christians into this ritual, to try and instill ungodly guilt into Christians who go to work Friday night or Saturday, and to try to impose the law on men who are free of its bondage by the freeing blood of Christ.
If you want a pacific day to set aside for God, you have every right to have one, according to the New Testament. If I choose to see all days as equal, I have the same right. The stipulation that comes with that is we acknowledge each other's God-given freedom and do not judge one another for our choice in the matter.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?