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.
Yes, This was after the death of Jesus after His blood ratified the covenant. It Is Finished, nothing could be changed to His covenant. Which is why decades later the Sabbath is still the Sabbath day Acts 16:13 Acts 18:4 Acts 13:42-44 in NT teachings.The new covenant did not begin until after Jesus' death.
They could not know from Jesus before his resurrection of the beginning of the new covenant.Yes, This was after the death of Jesus. It Is Finished, nothing could be changed to His covenant. Which is why decades later the Sabbath is still a day Acts 16:3 Acts 18:4 Acts 13:42-44 in NT teachings.
No, Jesus taught what the New Covenant was about before He died as He is our example to follow 1 John 2:6 and after He rose, not once mentioned any change to any of His holy commandments. He did not leave it up to us to add what we want to it. Jesus made that clear, which is why every Sabbath was kept decades after His cross by His apostles.They could not know of its beginning until Jesus' resurrection.
In the new covenant, he who loves God and neighbor as self has fulfilled the law (Ro 13:8, Mt 22:37-40).
I believe Ro 13:8-9, Mt 22:37-40.No, Jesus taught what the New Covenant was about
I believe it too; I just do not believe that the summary deletes the details. For example, like we can worship others gods and still fulfill love to God or steal from our neighbor and this fulfill love to our neighbor etc. etc. etc. hence 1 John 5:2-3 but I am happy to agree to disagree and all gets sorted out soon enough.I believe Ro 13:8, Mt 22:37-40.
Sorry that you don't.
Not the God I worship!I believe it too; I just do not believe that the summary deletes the details. For example, like we can worship others gods and still fulfill love to God
So those details aren't deleted. 1 John 5:2-3 That I will agree withNot the God I worship!
I believe Ro 13:8-9, Mt 22:37-40.
He who loves has fulfilled the law.
"Whatever commandment there may" be is summed up in one rule: love of God and neighbor as self (Ro 13:8-9, Mt 22:37-40).
In the new covenant, he who loves God and neighbor as self has fulfilled the law (Ro 13:8, Mt 22:37-40).
That explains a lot. . .yours is a sub-Christian notion of love of God.
For example, your frequently used "the sabbath was made for man, not man for sabbath, therefore the Son of man is lord of the sabbath".And context was demonstrated but we are all free to our own opinions
If you are implying some SDA's "the world will end soon" scenario, then no, it will not happen, again. As it did not happen in the 19th century.and Truth gets sorted out soon enough.
None of which negates Ro 13:8, Mt 22:37-40.
Are these enough? Though not sure what you mean by "negating", the specific purpose of Torah was fulfilled and is not for today.Neither do any of your proof texts negate any part of the Torah.
Are these enough? Though not sure what you mean by "negating", the specific purpose of Torah was fulfilled and is not for today.
It has been said, ‘Anyone who divorces his wife must give her a certificate of divorce.’ But I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, makes her the victim of adultery, and anyone who marries a divorced woman commits adultery.
Mt 5:31
You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’ But I tell you, do not resist an evil person.
Mt 5:38
You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be children of your Father in heaven
Mt 5:45
"For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John."
Mt 11:13
"For he himself is our peace, who has made the two groups one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, by setting aside in his flesh the law with its commands (ἐντολῶν) and regulations (δόγμασιν)."
Eph 2:15
"Before the coming of this faith, we were held in custody under the law...
So the law was our guardian until Christ came...
Now that this faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian."
Gal 3:23-25
It is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm, then, and do not let yourselves be burdened again by a yoke of slavery.
Gal 5:1
"But now, by dying to what once bound us, we have been released from the law so that we serve in the new way
of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code."
R 7:6
"So, my brothers, you also died to the law through the body of Christ, that you might belong to another"
R 7:4
OK, too many opinions to react to without exhaustion.No, the Torah was filled to the full, (pleroo), and that is precisely what the Master then proceeds to do in the passage: fill up the true meanings, understanding, and interpretations of those things which follow in the passage. One may see that it is about interpretation and not about overthrowing anything in the Torah, and this may be seen even in the things which you have quoted because the statements commence with "You have heard that it was said by those of old time", or "It has been said", just as in your quotes. It is not about the Torah being wrong but about some of the faulty interpretations of the Elders, Pharisees, Scribes, and rulers of the people, etc., etc. Your own quotes from the passage prove that to be true.
Yep, he is filling up the Torah and making it honorable with the true understandings and interpretations: and just because he makes known that an eye for an eye, tooth for tooth, was misapplied by those of old time does not mean that commandment is now done away with: it is simply not expounded here because it will be expounded elsewhere in his Testimony. If you truly desire to understand that one you will need to rightly divide between physical things and spiritual things. Love your enemy is speaking of the physical, literal physical people, for we are to love our neighbor as ourselves, but nowhere are we commanded to love Satan and his angels: that enemy is spiritual. Thus they had misapplied the commandment in this case.
That doesn't say it was therefore abolished: what it means is that the Torah was not even fully operational until Meshiah came and expounded it according to the true understandings and interpretations as you have shown in your quotes from Matthew 5 above.
Moreover you and I already had a lengthy discussion on this here:
The Sabbath is the 'Lords Day', not Sunday.
Before the coming of this faith, we were held in custody under the law, locked up until the faith that was to come would be revealed. So the law was our guardian until Christ came that we might be justified by faith. Now that this faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian. NIV Πρὸ τοῦ...www.christianforums.com
See also this thread:
Commencement of the Renewal of the Covenant
Exodus 23:20-23 OG LXX [20] και ιδου εγω αποστελλω τον αγγελον μου προ προσωπου σου ινα φυλαξη σε εν τη οδω οπως εισαγαγη σε εις την γην ην ητοιμασα σοι [21] προσεχε σεαυτω και εισακουε αυτου και μη απειθει αυτω ου γαρ μη υποστειληται σε το γαρ ονομα μου εστιν επ αυτω [22a] εαν ακοη ακουσητε της...www.christianforums.com
Yep, one new man, as hinted at in reply #8.
We've been over this too: get a better translation or learn Greek.
The typical way to make up ones own new gospel is to quote-mine for single text statements, strip them of their contexts and logos-reasoning, and paste them into walls of scripture. It is meaningless to do such a thing and it takes way more effort to refute such error than it does for the copy-and-paster to post the wall of error. Every point must be individually addressed according to its context: if you are not going to do that in your scripture walls, which would not likely even be possible in some cases because of the word count limit on the boards here, which is huge, (18,000, I think), then I have no compulsion to take it all apart and try to explain it, especially seeing that there is already so much we have discussed previously which you apparently entirely ignored.
The Administering (Ministration) of Condemnation
There are many topics of discussion which may branch off from this passage. This thread will be an attempt to address and discuss several of the most important, which are multiple, but not necessarily every facet of every branch of every possible discussion. Suffice to say, at this point based...www.christianforums.com
The new covenant did not begin until after Jesus' death.
1. You think that if Torah was fulfilled, its abolishing - no, it is not.
Even though Torah has ended, it was not because of being violently destroyed or something like that. It simply grew old, obsolete. Its not in effect for the new creation.
“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them."
Mt 5:17
2. You think that Torah was not fully operational until Messiah - it was, it was actually its purpose, to be given until Messiah
So the law was our guardian until Christ came...
Gal 3:23
3. You think that Christianity is some kind of "true understanding of Torah" - its not, Christianity is much more than that
"But now, by dying to what once bound us, we have been released from the law so that we serve in the new way
of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code."
R 7:6
So the law was our guardian until Christ came...
Gal 3:23
Nothing substantial here to react to.Many of those who hold your position teach this very thing about this passage.
Am I not to believe them when they say that is what they believe?
Pleroo: to cram to the full, to fill up, check the lexicons, otherwise we must agree to disagree.
I see nothing in this quote to prove your position or to disprove mine.According to the Master this is how one may enter into the new creation:
Mark 9:43-49 KJV
43 And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched:
44 Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched. [Isa 66:24]
45 And if thy foot offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter halt into life, than having two feet to be cast into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched:
46 Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched. [Isa 66:24]
47 And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out: it is better for thee to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye, than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire:
48 Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched. [Isa 66:24]
49 For every one shall be salted with fire, and every sacrifice shall be salted with salt. [Lev 2:13]
A lot of opinions.This has been explained from the Testimony before on multiple occasions, but for some reason no one ever seems to want to believe it. The problem for the non-believers is that they are not willing to understand and do what he says and are not willing to believe that the passages which he quotes still have any relevance because their pastors, preachers, and priests have taught them that they are now void. He quotes from both Isaiah 66:24 and from Leviticus 2:13, yes, Leviticus, the so-called "ceremonial law". Moreover, in addition to these difficulties, not many ever study the Septuagint. In the Septuagint the Isaiah passage is not dead bodies but rather limbs of the body, as if lopped or chopped off, just as the context within the Mark passage above is speaking about.
Isaiah 66:24 OG LXX
24 και εξελευσονται και οψονται τα κωλα [G2966 κωλον] των ανθρωπων των παραβεβηκοτων εν εμοι ο γαρ σκωληξ αυτων ου τελευτησει και το πυρ αυτων ου σβεσθησεται και εσονται εις ορασιν παση σαρκι
Mickelson's Enhanced Strong's Dictionaries of the Greek and Hebrew Testaments
G2966 κῶλον kolon (kō'-lon) n.
a limb of the body (as if lopped).
[from the base of G2849]
KJV: carcase
Root(s): G2849
Carcases or carcasses is a little misleading in modern English: it's body parts or limbs of the body, as if having been chopped off, and this is exactly the context in which the Master himself uses and expounds the passage.
And what does Leviticus 2:13 say? The statement from Mark 9:49, and every sacrifice shall be salted with salt, is only commanded in Lev 2:13, and nowhere else in the Torah: so the Master is teaching about salting your sacrifices from the so-called "ceremonial law".
Moreover we know from his own Testimony, (if one truly believes his words, and I surely do), that the heavens and the earth shall pass away, but his words shall not pass away, Mat 24:35, Mrk 13:31, Luk 21:33. Therefore Leviticus 2:13, now having been fully expounded by the Master in his Testimony, is fully operational and relevant because it is not talking about slaughtering literal-physical animals, draining their blood, butchering their dead carcasses, and cooking their flesh to the satisfaction of the belly.
Another opinion.Again, we've already been over this: get a better translation or learn Greek.
Another opinion.I do not believe you understand that passage or the statement which you have removed from that passage and quoted here
Paul frequently uses generalization when talking to churches composed of both Jews and Gentiles.I also surely have a difficult time believing you were ever bound by the Torah, or that you somehow died to it.
Another opinion.the typical way for the mainstream preachers is to make up a nice sounding new way after doing some scripture quote-mining and proclaim that to be "of the Spirit", and with that the delusion is complete.
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?