If you Love Me - KEEP My Commandments

[Jan001]

Unfortunately very few has survived. It's all fragments in citations. Though I would all true Scripture is Nazarene ultimately. I actually once wrote a huge paper on proof that there were Torah keepers in the true Orthodox Church and that they believed it was required. I included most about the Nazarenes I had found. Unfortunately all my stuff got deleted and in the restoration of deleted partition data I haven't been able to find it as of yet. Seems it is gone but I'm still hoping. If I find it I'll post it. If I can't I'll have to dig it all up again and then rewrite it as similar as I can.

I am sorry that your research got deleted. So very frustrating!

I am thinking that the followers of the Way, the Nazarenes, and the Christians are all members of the same group led by the apostles and their successors; and it is at Antioch that the name "Christian" became the common or universal name for all these followers of Jesus Christ.

Jesus was from the city of Nazareth and so I think that all people living in Nazareth at the time of Jesus Christ's birth were called Nazarenes. The Jewish religious sects at the time of Jesus' birth according to the historical record of that time period were the Pharisees, Sadducees, Essenes, and Zealots. There is no mention at all of the Nazarenes as a particular religious Jewish sect.

There were men throughout OT history who took the Nazarite vow, but these were not the same people as the Nazarenes. These Nazarite men were not allowed to partake of wine or strong drink. There were no women Nazarites, but there were women Nazarenes.

Acts 11:26
"And when he had found him, he brought him unto Antioch. And it came to pass, that a whole year they assembled themselves with the church, and taught much people. And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch."

Still today, a follower of Jesus Christ is called a Christian.

 

[Jan001]

I don't recognize those records. I only recognize scripture. But hey, if you want to follow holy days go ahead. I'll worship God any day I choose.

I worship God privately every day. I also obey the command in Hebrews which states that we sin willfully by choosing to forsake the assembling of ourselves together in the formal worship of God which according to both Scripture and the historical record takes place on every first day (Sunday) of the week.

Hebrews 10:19-31
Therefore, brethren, having boldness to enter the Holiest by the blood of Jesus, 20 by a new and living way which He consecrated for us, through the veil, that is, His flesh, 21 and having a High Priest over the house of God, 22 let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water. 23 Let us hold fast the confession of our hope without wavering, for He who promised is faithful. 24 And let us consider one another in order to stir up love and good works, 25 not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as is the manner of some, but exhorting one another, and so much the more as you see the Day approaching. 26 For if we sin willfully after we have received the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, 27 but a certain fearful expectation of judgment, and fiery indignation which will devour the adversaries. 28 Anyone who has rejected Moses’ law dies without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. 29 Of how much worse punishment, do you suppose, will he be thought worthy who has trampled the Son of God underfoot, counted the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified a common thing, and insulted the Spirit of grace? 30 For we know Him who said, “Vengeance is Mine, I will repay,” says the Lord. And again, “The Lord will judge His people.” 31 It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.

 

[Jan001]

Catholics have no credibility when it comes to criticizing anyone. I don't recognize Catholic authority either.

I simply quoted Scripture and gave my understanding of it.

 

[Jan001]

There is not even one example of ANY Apostle having an "Apostolic successor" -- in the Bible - other than the Acts 1 case of Judas.

It takes only one successor to prove the point that the apostles/bishops/overseers had successors.

The apostles, the first bishops, ordained other bishops to be their successors. Timothy and Titus are two examples of successor bishops. None of the apostles' successors are called apostles by the original apostles except for Matthias who took Judas' place. Paul claims that he is an apostle appointed by God. Ephesians 1:1, 1 Timothy 1:1

I see no mention in the Scriptures of Paul being called an apostle by any of the other apostles. I do believe that Paul is writing the truth that God called him to be an apostle, but there were certain criteria which had to be met before it was possible for Matthias to be chosen to be an apostle by the other apostles and Paul does not meet any of them.

Acts 1:20
20 “For it is written in the Book of Psalms:
‘Let his dwelling place be desolate, And let no one live in it’;
and, 'another take his office.'
21 “Therefore, of these men who have accompanied us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, 22 beginning from the baptism of John to that day when He was taken up from us, one of these must become a witness with us of His resurrection.” 23 And they proposed two: Joseph called Barsabas, who was surnamed Justus, and Matthias. 24 And they prayed and said, “You, O Lord, who know the hearts of all, show which of these two You have chosen 25 to take part in this ministry and apostleship from which Judas by transgression fell, that he might go to his own place.” 26 And they cast their lots, and the lot fell on Matthias. And he was numbered with the eleven apostles.

 

[Jan001]

No doubt Hebrews statement about there remains a Sabbath rest for God's people is referring in context to the Millennial Reign of Christ, the Seven Thousandth Year Sabbath.

It is my understanding that the Sabbath rest mentioned in Hebrews is the heavenly everlasting "rest" of the righteous which begins after the judgment described in Matthew 25:31-46.

 

[Poster0]

. I also obey the command in Hebrews which states that we sin willfully by choosing to forsake the assembling of ourselves together .

That's not what Hebrews is saying. Anyway, thanks for your response, have a nice day.

 

[Poster0]

Hebrews 10:24-25, in my opinion, is exhorting love and walking in the spirit together, its most likely the same thing that Galatians 5 is teaching us, however debates and disagreements can hinder us in that. That's why we should not be debating things like which day of the week we should be attending church, or things like Sabbath keeping. We have been given liberty from Moses law, and so it seems that its ok to not be concerned with holydays, and there is no need for us to be in disagreement over it. If its good that we assemble together, and consider each other to stir up love and good works, then lets not forsake our assembly here, but look for ways to edify each other in love. Paul teaches us that debate is not good for us, and that we should not be arguing over the law, or anything else.

Galatians 5:
13 You, my brothers and sisters, were called to be free. But do not use your freedom to indulge the flesh[a]; rather, serve one another humbly in love. 14 For the entire law is fulfilled in keeping this one command: “Love your neighbor as yourself.” 15 If you bite and devour each other, watch out or you will be destroyed by each other.

16 So I say, walk by the Spirit, and you will not gratify the desires of the flesh. 17 For the flesh desires what is contrary to the Spirit, and the Spirit what is contrary to the flesh. They are in conflict with each other, so that you are not to do whatever[c] you want. 18 But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law.

 

[True Science]

[deleted]

 

[True Science]

[deleted]

 

[Poster0]

ITs difficult living in this world. Its more difficult to walk in faith when we are divided. Who is right? Catholic? Anglican? Eastern Orthodox? Seventh day Adventist? Baptist? Pentecostal? Are any of these disagreements between us really necessary? Perhaps we need more liberty instead of disagreement. I wish I had all the answers but I don't, but it seems that no one has all the answers either, and so I/We must take it one day at a time, and press forward, looking toward heaven, hoping in Gods mercy, and praying for His daily strength and wisdom to guide us. I know nothing else.

 

[True Science]

[deleted]

 

[BobRyan]

ITs difficult living in this world. Its more difficult to walk in faith when we are divided. Who is right? Catholic? Anglican? Eastern Orthodox? Seventh day Adventist? Baptist? Pentecostal? Are any of these disagreements between us really necessary?

If not necessary - then the Christian Jews died for nothing in separation from the Jews.
If not necessary - then the Protesting Catholics died for nothing in separation from the Catholics
If not necessary - then Christ was ill advised in Mark 7:6-13 to say "in vain do they worship me" when in fact 'it makes no difference'

Perhaps we need more liberty instead of disagreement.

so then in Mark 7 -- the Jews should have asked that Christ focus on liberty instead.

And in Acts 20 - Paul was ill advised to suggest that error coming in to the church was going to be a bad thing.

In 1Tim 1 - Paul tells Timothy to stay on at Ephesus precisely because false doctrine was creeping in.

In Gal 1:6-9 Paul would have been foolish to say "if WE (Apostles) or an Angel from heaven should bring to you another teaching, another gospel, other than what has been established - let him be accursed".

Titus 2:7
"in all things show yourself to be an example of good deeds, with purity in doctrine, dignified,"

What does Christ say - is the "cost" of error in Mark 7:6-13???

 

[BobRyan]

Unfortunately they are necessary or else they wouldn't be. Could you find agreement with anyone who rejected the Bible, a part of it, or that Jesus' story was literal historical fact?

I can always find agreement with some part of what someone says even though I might differ with them on a great many other things. The question is - how important are the differences?

 

[True Science]

[deleted]

 

[BobRyan]

Gen 26:5 "5 because Abraham obeyed Me and kept My charge, My commandments, My statutes and My laws.”

Because the Gospel does not conflict with the LAW of God "written on the mind and heart"

Hence two simple easy questions that resolve the entire debate.

Today at 11:09 AM #383

(Which of course - must be avoided)

The two easy questions - the ones that resolve the entire debate -- desperately avoided by those wanting a change from what the Bible speaks of in those two examples.

 

[Poster0]

Unfortunately they are necessary or else they wouldn't be. Could you find agreement with anyone who rejected the Bible, a part of it, or that Jesus' story was literal historical fact?

The only reason these disagreements exist is because we will not accept the liberty that we have been given.

 

[Poster0]

If not necessary - then the Christian Jews died for nothing in separation from the Jews.
If not necessary - then the Protesting Catholics died for nothing in separation from the Catholics
If not necessary - then Christ was ill advised in Mark 7:6-13 to say "in vain do they worship me" when in fact 'it makes no difference'



so then in Mark 7 -- the Jews should have asked that Christ focus on liberty instead.

And in Acts 20 - Paul was ill advised to suggest that error coming in to the church was going to be a bad thing.

In 1Tim 1 - Paul tells Timothy to stay on at Ephesus precisely because false doctrine was creeping in.

In Gal 1:6-9 Paul would have been foolish to say "if WE (Apostles) or an Angel from heaven should bring to you another teaching, another gospel, other than what has been established - let him be accursed".

Titus 2:7
"in all things show yourself to be an example of good deeds, with purity in doctrine, dignified,"

What does Christ say - is the "cost" of error in Mark 7:6-13???

Is accepting our God given liberty what you would call vain worship?

 

[Poster0]

Don't take my words wrong. When I asked whether these disagreements were actually necessary, I wasn't saying that we should just blindly accept anything. I was instead suggesting that we should let go of the things that divide us, and not follow them anymore. I was suggesting that we embrace this liberty that we have been given. However, that is not going to happen while we hold onto Moses law, or even traditions that our Church holds, i.e, traditions that are not recorded in the scriptures.

 

[Poster0]

The truth is that Catholics have many things that are unnecessary, and so do other similar Churches. They have actually complicated liberty.

As far as other Churches go, such as Seventh day Adventists, they don't need Moses law. We have been taught, by the apostles, what God wants us to live like, and so we don't need Moses law.

 

[BobRyan]

As far as other Churches go, such as Seventh day Adventists, they don't need Moses law. We have been taught, by the apostles, what God wants us to live like, and so we don't need Moses law.

1. In your view - is this how Christ said "we don't need Moses' Law"

Mark 7

7 Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.
8 For laying aside the Commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do.
9 And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.
10 For Moses said, Honour thy father and thy mother; and, Whoso curseth father or mother, let him die the death:
11 But ye say, If a man shall say to his father or mother, It is Corban, that is to say, a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; he shall be free.
12 And ye suffer him no more to do ought for his father or his mother;
13 Making the Word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.

2. In your view is this how Paul says "all scripture is given by inspiration from Moses and is not to be used for doctrine"??

"All scripture is given by inspiration from GOD and IS to be used for doctrine" 2Tim 3:16

3. In your view were D.L. Moody and C.H. Spurgeon and Pope John Paul II, and Matthew Henry - all Seventh-day Adventists?