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.
Acting as if there is no Law. That would an accurate description.Sin is lawlessness (1John 3:4) is not a reference to the law of Moses. Below is a commentary on the verse it is informative and scholarly.
1 John 3:4
As so often, the Apostle emphasises his statement by giving the opposite case, and not the simple opposite, but an expansion of it. Instead of saying ‘every one that hath not this hope’ he says every one that doeth sin. The Authorised Version not only obscures this antithesis by changing ‘every man’ to ‘whosoever’, but also the contrast between ‘doing righteousness’ (1Jn 2:29) and ‘doing sin’ by changing from ‘do’ to ‘commit’. This contrast is all the more marked in the Greek because both words have the article; ‘doeth the righteousness’, ‘doeth the sin’.
transgresseth also the law] This is very unfortunate, destroying the parallelism: Every man that doeth sin, doeth also lawlessness. It is imperative to have the same verb in both clauses and also in 1Jn 2:29: to do sin is to do lawlessness, and this is the opposite of to do righteousness. The one marks the children of God, the other the children of the devil. ‘Lawlessness’ both in English and Greek (ἀνομία) means not the privation of law, but the disregard of it: not the having no law, but the acting as if one had none. This was precisely the case with some of the Gnostic teachers: they declared that their superior enlightenment placed them above the moral law; they were neither the better for keeping it nor the worse for breaking it. Sin and lawlessness, says the Apostle, are convertible terms: they are merely different aspects of the same state. And it is in its aspect of disregard of God’s law that sin is seen to be quite irreconcilable with being a child of God and having fellowship with God. See on 1Jn 5:17.
Note that throughout these verses (3–15) Saint John uses the strong expression, ‘Every man that’ and not simply ‘He that.’ It has been suggested that “in each case where this characteristic form of language occurs there is apparently a reference to some who had questioned the application of a general principle in particular cases” (Westcott): comp. 1Jn 2:23; 1Jn 2:29, 1Jn 4:7, 1Jn 5:1; 1Jn 5:4; 1Jn 5:18; 2Jn 1:9.
So, if it's not in the newspaper, it didn't happen. Good to know.Haven't seen those in Holland. The newspapers only report on people healed in churches. If that happens and the Glory of God is manifest there I go visit them.
It was living out God's Judaism that incited the pharissees to want him dead. The rabinical teachings and the OT were that at odds with each other. The fact that so many of us calling ourselves Christians don't know that and many even oppose that understanding actually speaks volumes of how far from God's faith we are. I truly believe that if Jesus stepped into most of our churches we too would crucify Him.He does understand... it just isn't an easy concept to convey when we have 2000 years of looking at a certain people through a particular lens. He is saying that Judaism WITHOUT rabbinic/Pharisaical influence is pure... it is what was given at Sinai, it is simply God's people walking according to God's instructions. Once man begins to chime in and pass decrees and create fences around commandments, SOME things are still in order and some things are not. Yeshua stood against the things that were not, he was NOT against all things within Judaism. If you think that, respectfully, you're wrong. We can show him doing things that appear in the Talmud and not in the bible.
It was living out God's Judaism that incited the pharissees to want him dead. The rabinical teachings and the OT were that at odds with each other. The fact that so many of us calling ourselves Christians don't know that and many even oppose that understanding actually speaks volumes of how far from God's faith we are. I truly believe that if Jesus stepped into most of our churches we too would crucify Him.
The holy scriptures are explicit the law of Moses is in fact annulled (Heb 7:18) but the promises to Abraham are not (Gal 3:14,15).[Jesus] accomplished all that the Law required. That is what fulfilling means. In no other literary context would you accept "fulfilling" to mean "nullifying."
...
The Law gave maximum punishments for offences, i.e., "an eye for an eye." Yeshua was merely pointing out their hypocrisy. After all, the law says that BOTH the man and woman were to be stoned. Where was the man she was with?
Acting as if there is no Law. That would an accurate description.
It was living out God's Judaism that incited the pharissees to want him dead. The rabinical teachings and the OT were that at odds with each other. The fact that so many of us calling ourselves Christians don't know that and many even oppose that understanding actually speaks volumes of how far from God's faith we are. I truly believe that if Jesus stepped into most of our churches we too would crucify Him.
Jeremiah's words are "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." To the people of the old covenant these words are a promise of a new covenant and not a reaffirmation of the old covenant which is weak and beggarly (Gal 4:19). The faithful are redeemed under the new covenant in Christ (Gal 4:4,5). Thus the law that is in their inward parts and written in their hearts is the law of God in Christ Jesus. That law is to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and to love one another as he has loved us (1John 3:22,23).So in Jeremiah 31:33-34 we are not talking about God's Torah, we are talking about something else? This in light of Ezekiel 11:19?
There is law, the law of God expressed in his commandments: And this is his commandment, That we should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, as he gave us commandment. And he that keepeth his commandments dwelleth in him, and he in him. And hereby we know that he abideth in us, by the Spirit which he hath given us.Acting as if there is no Law. That would an accurate description.
OopsBe careful of the teachers you choose. One poster in this thread gave a YRL from the United Church of God web site and that group is a continuation of Herbert W Armstrong's erroneous teachings. That is not to say that everything said and written by those in error is of necessity in error but it is wise to be careful about the sources of a teaching as well as the content of the teaching.
Every time Jesus corrected them. He was not attacking their or His own religion He was attacking their living of it. When He healed the lame guy on the Sabbath, He was not breaking Sabbath, He was fulfilling it. Torah says to rest on Sabbath, however, it also says if you see your neighbor needs help and it's the Sabbath you are to help him. Of course the leaders of the Saducees and Pharisees knew this, but they were more concerned about the Rabbinical laws of just "no work whatever", even though Torah does say we are to help our neighbor in need even if on Sabbath.What scripture do you have for all of that? This is the most interesting thread I have participated in in quite a while.
Every time Jesus corrected them. He was not attacking their or His own religion He was attacking their living of it. When He healed the lame guy on the Sabbath, He was not breaking Sabbath, He was fulfilling it. Torah says to rest on Sabbath, however, it also says if you see your neighbor needs help and it's the Sabbath you are to help him. Of course the leaders of the Saducees and Pharisees knew this, but they were more concerned about the Rabbinical laws of just "no work whatever", even though Torah does say we are to help our neighbor in need even if on Sabbath.
God's glory only comes when there's unity.
http://www.nikirkvoice.org/newman.htm
Hey look what she says:
The enmity between Jew and Gentile was not the commandments, but came because of mutual dislike of each other’s customs.
The Lord Jesus Christ rebuked the Pharisees for both their teachings which he called "the commandments of men" and for their practises observing that The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat: All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not. For they 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. But all their works they do for to be seen of men: they make broad their phylacteries, and enlarge the borders of their garments, And love the uppermost rooms at feasts, and the chief seats in the synagogues, And greetings in the markets, and to be called of men, Rabbi, Rabbi. (Matthew 23:2-7 KJV)Every time Jesus corrected them. He was not attacking their or His own religion He was attacking their living of it. When He healed the lame guy on the Sabbath, He was not breaking Sabbath, He was fulfilling it. Torah says to rest on Sabbath, however, it also says if you see your neighbor needs help and it's the Sabbath you are to help him. Of course the leaders of the Saducees and Pharisees knew this, but they were more concerned about the Rabbinical laws of just "no work whatever", even though Torah does say we are to help our neighbor in need even if on Sabbath.
"Christian" was not a term of endearment though. They did not call themselves that, they were called that by those making fun of them. Much like in the 60's the term "Jesus Freak" was coined by I think some radio personality who was making fun of Christians. It was an insult.The disciples were first called Christians in Antioch (Acts 11:26) not so long after saint Stephen was murdered at the instigation of the Sanhedrin (Acts 6:12-15; 7:54-60). The Jewish authorities could hardly have created a worse example and so they gained a bad reputation for themselves.
I am careful. Thank you.Be careful of the teachers you choose. One poster in this thread gave a URL from the United Church of God web site and that group is a continuation of Herbert W Armstrong's erroneous teachings. That is not to say that everything said and written by those in error is of necessity in error but it is wise to be careful about the sources of a teaching as well as the content of the teaching.
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?