An attempt to eliminate God.

[listed]

Unconditional!!!! Saved regatdless, that was not said but the tenants of the presentation promotes the idea. All you have to do is believe and you have heaven. Once saved always saved.
All of these ideas are at the center of the rejection of God Holy Ten commandment law. With the removal of thou should do or thou should not do as in the Ten commandments leaves us with nothing to do and still be saved. Does that mark biblical accuracy? Is that what the bible teaches. It just goes to show that when the idea that the law is abolished is closely examine it can not stand.

You need to review Romans 10:9-10, if you have ever read it.

 

[listed]

Originally Posted by Elder 111

Jesus does not share your claim. Mat 7:
21Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. ("Listed" would be interested in this part)

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.
​

Did you not suggest that it was the law of Jesus and not the Father that we are called to?

What are you trying to say here? Given your theology I am not quite sure.

 

[listed]

Keep on deliberately misrepresenting by insisting on using "abolish" and you show us exactly how well you comprehend what we are saying.

Personally I believe his idea of abolish is more inline with annihilation.

 

[listed]

Please permit me to answer your question with a question. Did salvation come through the Israelites or the Gentles? We need to stop this folly of separation when it comes to the truth of God!

What exactly does that have to do with salvation except you believe one becomes a Jew against Scripture?

 

[listed]

Both! Gal 3:29 And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.
And I am happy to be.

Answer the question Elder. Do not try to claim to be members of both (leaving your options open) by saying you are heir through Abraham. You clearly promote salvation through the Jews (Israel) and not through the promise of Abraham. The Scripture says through, from, by the Jews. This technically would mean through the House of Judah.

 

[listed]

Originally Posted by Elder 111

The bible does not say that the covenant was changed because of the law. NEVER!!!
Heb 8: 8 For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:
The bible says that the fault was with the Jews. They did not keep they part of the covenant. Can we not see that?????
​

Why? Because the law that say we should have no other God is obsolete? Because the law that says we should not kill is obsolete. Or because for one as shown in Heb 7, that Christ is the new High priest which was not of the tribe of Levi? Which is of the law of the priesthood and not the ten commandments.

If jots and tittles of the law did not change God is a mere sinner just like us. Matt 5 does not allow for part of the law to change and part to remain.

 

[listed]

So excuse me please. Is not obeying God doing His will? To worship God only as in the first commandments is not doing His will??? Come on speak up!!

Your version of doing God's will does not include the NC.

 

[Elder 111]

Here is where your refusal to acknowledge the difference between "abolished" and "fulfilled" hurts you. If something was abolished, your point may hold water. But if fulfilled, it still exists in full, but no longer need be fulfilled. It hasn't been abandoned or abolished. It has been fulfilled and is a fantastic testimony to the work of the Savior.

So is it your contention that Jesus fulfilled the requirements ten commandments so we need not consider them as applying to us?

 

[Elder 111]

Abraham's seed and "Israel" or "Judah" aren't entirely synonymous.

So where did Judah come from? was he not the son of Israel? Why make it so hard?

 

[Elder 111]

The point is that two sets of laws may have overlaps.

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?

 

[Elder 111]

Originally Posted by Elder 111

Unconditional!!!! Saved regatdless, that was not said but the tenants of the presentation promotes the idea. All you have to do is believe and you have heaven. Once saved always saved.
All of these ideas are at the center of the rejection of God Holy Ten commandment law. With the removal of thou should do or thou should not do as in the Ten commandments leaves us with nothing to do and still be saved. Does that mark biblical accuracy? Is that what the bible teaches. It just goes to show that when the idea that the law is abolished is closely examine it can not stand.
​

You need to review Romans 10:9-10, if you have ever read it.

9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
10 For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.

Now answer the questions.

 

[Elder 111]

It is interesting that posts 279-281 has been mainly passed. Interesting indeed.

 

[listed]

Originally Posted by Elder 111

Unconditional!!!! Saved regatdless, that was not said but the tenants of the presentation promotes the idea. All you have to do is believe and you have heaven. Once saved always saved.
All of these ideas are at the center of the rejection of God Holy Ten commandment law. With the removal of thou should do or thou should not do as in the Ten commandments leaves us with nothing to do and still be saved. Does that mark biblical accuracy? Is that what the bible teaches. It just goes to show that when the idea that the law is abolished is closely examine it can not stand.
​

9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
10 For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.

Now answer the questions.

I really do not know what you are after. There were righteous individuals prior to the law. Yet you say 1 must be told what to do. Really just does not make any sense. For instance would you steal from your self? We know without doubt people lie to themselves.

 

[listed]

It is interesting that posts 279-281 has been mainly passed. Interesting indeed.

Go complain somewhere else.

 

[Sophrosyne]

Go complain somewhere else.

I often ignore some of his stuff.... like a late night commercial played over and over again

 

[VictorC]

It is interesting that posts 279-281 has been mainly passed. Interesting indeed.

You ignored my response, reminding you of your error refuted at least two years ago.

 

[listed]

You ignored my response, reminding you of your error refuted at least two years ago.

Maybe he should give an old saying some thought - what goes around comes around. Like is mentioned here often he ignores what is posted and to him directly.

 

[BornAgainBrian]

So is it your contention that Jesus fulfilled the requirements ten commandments so we need not consider them as applying to us?

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.

 

[Sophrosyne]

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.

Actually if one obeys the commandment to love their neighbor then even HATING their neighbor is forbidden and that certainly includes murdering others.

 

[BornAgainBrian]

Actually if one obeys the commandment to love their neighbor then even HATING their neighbor is forbidden and that certainly includes murdering others.

I think that's a fair inclusion!