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.
The point is, Jesus did invoke what he termed one of the higher points of the law, and it isn't written down as sola scripture law in itself is it.No friend, he was dealing with Pharisees of the law and they would not have left him so quickly without confrontation, unless Jesus had the dirt on them, by pointing the technicalities of the law. This reveals that those Pharisees were shady characters and they knew that Jesus knew and they put their tails between their legs and fled in a hurry, before they would be incriminated.
Jesus gave that scenario, whilst confirming the importance of Holy Writ to the living.
It is my constitutional document which I regard authority above all human capacities and priestly offices,
except that of the heavenly Chief Priest Jesus Christ who is the author of my constitutional document.
The Holy writ of the law God desires the believer to follow is written in the mind and placed on the heart of every born again believer under the core terms of the New Covenant.
Heb10:16&17
Jesus held to the idea that scripture, not church office-holder, is the ultimate authority for the believer, so why don't you?
I'm not concerned as to what individual denominations proclaim.It is written in a controlled manner, so that people who behave like Pharisees within religious institutions are bound by the constitutional document, so that no priest or bishop can subvert his office and subjugate the congregation under his own name and authority. The Romans have raised up such people throughout the past, who have subverted their office of head bishop and in so doing would have been a law onto themselves, least Protestants used Holy Write, our constitutional document to declare what a head bishop can and cannot do in that regard. The 100 point Thesis was a beginning to use scripture, like Jesus used in front of the Pharisees to correct those who use their own authority to persecute the congregation.
Scripture, believe it or not is our constitutional document that protects us from those who abuse the power of their priestly office, just like those Pharisees to were wanting to stone the woman.
Oh But i do hold to the Idea that scripture is the Authority..
The point is, Jesus did invoke what he termed one of the higher points of the law, and it isn't written down as sola scripture law in itself is it.
Sola scripture law states the woman should be stoned to death.
I will leave you to carry on your discussion of barrister, defender and prosecutor
Jesus got the woman off on a higher point of the law, not a technicality.Clearly if the Pharisees who were so set and ready to stone the woman, would have just pushed Jesus right out of the way and carried on, thinking they were obeying the law and therefore serving God and his commonwealth, right?
Instead, they abandoned any contentions and fled the scene, before they were implicated by the same law, that they referred to in stoning the woman.
Jesus got the woman off, on a technicality of the law, because those who were trying to enforce it, believed in their hearts from a legal point of view, that they were in no position to carry on, right?
So, Jesus did act as the woman's Barrister and he also pointed to the Holy Writ and used his Holy fingers to write the law on the ground, for those people he created from the dust of the ground, how ironic right?
So if your eye caused you to sin in thought, word or deed, would you pluck it out and throw it away?Read this.......
At this, they picked up stones to stone him, but Jesus hid himself, slipping away from the temple grounds.
Do, you know why these Pharisees did so and from where this was carried over from?
It carried from those Pharisees who wanted to stone the woman and fled, because they could not defend their actions by the law. In the following versus nothing was stopping them in stoning Jesus, yet in previous versus they fled the scene, hmm......
Would they have fled the scene so easily, if Jesus didn't use the law of Moses against them?
I don't think so, so this leaves no doubt that Jesus regarded the Holy Writ as the authority to refer to and as a man to be obedient to.
If in Revelation of Jesus, Jesus tells us to read and listen to what is written, do you think we should or shouldn't?
This is what Jesus says.....
Whoever has my commands/teachings and keeps them is the one who loves me. The one who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I too will love them and show myself to them."
If you are a citizen of a country and you want to know your rights to defend yourself, just like the woman the Pharisees wanted to stone, would you not refer to the authority of your countries constitutional document?
As Christians we ought to revere Scripture and uphold it as the Law and the Prophets and to defend the weak who are being prayed upon by religious heads who are leading many to destruction, especially in these troubling times. Are we to lean on men in priestly offices, or look to understand our constitutional document, the Holy Writ?
After all Jesus said, knock and the door will be opened and ask and an answer will be given.
What did Jesus instruct Abraham to say to the rich man?
Go and rely on the Law (Moses) and the Prophets, that is the Holy Writ.
Jesus got the woman off on a higher point of the law, not a technicality.
The only person who knew of the Pharisees sins was Jesus. For they were careful to clean the outside of the cup. It was the inside that was the problem.The technicality was that Jesus had dirt on those Pharisees and they knew that he knew, small world. Yet further down, we see it carry over to other Pharisees wanting to stone Jesus. So the technicality was that those particular Pharisees could not stone the woman, because their sins were known and would be revealed, if they continued. Yet in versus afterwards we see the other Pharisee wanting to take revenge on Jesus for the situation that he put their Pharisee friends in.
We see a tit for tat and a legal ploy as a revenge, where it is Jesus who flees this time around. So we can now understand it was a legal tug of war between God and man, legal wrestling that is.
You left out a word. Let me help: Ultimate authority
So if your eye caused you to sin in thought, word or deed, would you pluck it out and throw it away?
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?