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.
So the Jews turned to a dictionary in our time to define God's law? I could have pulled Webster's definition and posted it. You don't think Jewish Rabbi's defined it very well for me? Maybe I should refer them to an English dictionary to define what is spiritual to them.
Very simply put, they trust God.Explain?
Well, Christ actually said that if we are even angry at our brother we are already guilty of murder.Isn't it included with the commands that Christ said in the new testament? Given not as part of a covenant, but rather as a direction?
Yes it was, thus a new and better covenant with better promises was made. God himself lives in all believers. The relationship changed based on the blood of Christ.I think that was a central issue/problem of Israel.
Since it is God who made the covenants, I hardly think one can be 'stuck' on them. You seem a bit flippant about them, all the while preaching the old covenant.You are too stuck on covenants and a specific law to understand what law means.
Christ was born under the law, had authority over it, and redeemed us from it. He is who we are joined to after dying to the law (Romans 6 & 7).Therefore you are left in the nonsensical position of saying that Christ didn't really mean it when He directed people to follow the law.
Paul's the one who said we had to die to it and be joined with Christ. He's the one who said to 'cast off the bondwoman and her son' in reference to the law. He's the one who said we are 'not under the law, but under grace'. And on and on...Or that Paul didn't really mean it when he commended the law and directed people to follow it.
Or that other authors of the new testament didn't tell people to follow the law.
It just sounds like you want to define the law God gave to Israel apart from Scripture. I'm not going to do that.What is the idea of law. The idea should exist independently of any verses. What is your idea of law.
This is what I meant by abstraction.
JM
Is faith just trust? I have a hard time talking about Angels or other beings as we don't have anything written by them or about them.Very simply put, they trust God.
If it is distracting for you, we can ignore what Christ said for now.. and just focus on what Paul and all the other writer's said. They also said not to kill.Well, Christ actually said that if we are even angry at our brother we are already guilty of murder.
Did he command 'Thou shalt not kill' in another place? I don't recall.
When have I ever taught the old covenant? You aren't listening to me because you can't understand me because you won't think about what the words I am saying mean. That is why I am asking for your definitinos of things because then I can try to talk using those.Since it is God who made the covenants, I hardly think one can be 'stuck' on them. You seem a bit flippant about them, all the while preaching the old covenant.
I guess we will have to get to Christ later then. I just like including Him because He is sort of central. We can address the writer's after His death fisrt (and then show that He also taught the same thing).Christ was born under the law, had authority over it, and redeemed us from it. He is who we are joined to after dying to the law (Romans 6 & 7).
Oh, I agree. And if you think about what the law means, it all make sense. Otherwise you have to ignore parts of what he says like you do or the trad adventists.Paul's the one who said we had to die to it and be joined with Christ. He's the one who said to 'cast off the bondwoman and her son' in reference to the law. He's the one who said we are 'not under the law, but under grace'. And on and on...
No, I am saying that there is no diasgreement between Paul's statements. The issue comes down to yours (and Trad adventsts) definitions of the law, the covenant, and a lot of other stuff. None of you are thinking abstractly, and so you ignore one set of statements or another.How is it that you attribute Paul to saying Christians are to go back under the law again, the 'yoke of bondage'? You can't do this without redefining or dividing Israel's law.
It just sounds like you want to define the law God gave to Israel apart from Scripture. I'm not going to do that.
Or are you just wanting to talk about man-made laws, like Chinese law, or maybe Pakistani law? Laws in general, not law as it relates to God and spirituality?
Trust is a good and simple definition. Why would you want to make it difficult?Is faith just trust? I have a hard time talking about Angels or other beings as we don't have anything written by them or about them.
And? Of course they also said it.If it is distracting for you, we can ignore what Christ said for now.. and just focus on what Paul and all the other writer's said. They also said not to kill.
Are you under the 10 commandments?When have I ever taught the old covenant? You aren't listening to me because you can't understand me because you won't think about what the words I am saying mean. That is why I am asking for your definitinos of things because then I can try to talk using those.
There's that condescension coming out...I guess we will have to get to Christ later then. I just like including Him because He is sort of central. We can address the writer's after His death fisrt (and then show that He also taught the same thing).
You're entitled to your opinion. What references to the law did Paul make that you feel I'm ignoring?Oh, I agree. And if you think about what the law means, it all make sense. Otherwise you have to ignore parts of what he says like you do or the trad adventists.
Give an example.No, I am saying that there is no diasgreement between Paul's statements. The issue comes down to yours (and Trad adventsts) definitions of the law, the covenant, and a lot of other stuff. None of you are thinking abstractly, and so you ignore one set of statements or another.
Can you provide ANY evidence that God continued to rest every 7th day thereafter (which would be day 14, 21, 28, 35, etc.). Can you demonstrate that he rested ANY day other than the day (SINGULAR) AFTER he had MADE EVERYTHING???Back to the origonal thread Gen.2: 2,3 It says God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it . And what day did Our Saavior keep and remember he was without sin so what are you going to keep There is a way that seems right to a man ,but leads to eternal damnation. I think I will keep the day Jesus kept.
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?