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.
Jews around Jesus did not believe in Jesus, although Moses prophesied about Him. The context was not evolution or the age of the earth, in those things Jews probably believed as you do.So give me your "interpretation" of John 5: 44-47.
So your excuse is that because the Pharisees rejected Jesus you will too?Jews around Jesus did not believe in Jesus, although Moses prophesied about Him.
Yeah. Riiight. How did your interpretation materially differ from mine? The Pharisees rejected Jesus because they didn't believe Moses' prophecies so how does that not apply to you as Moses wrote the book of Genesis in which the creation story is told?You are making no sense.
The context was not evolution or creation story. Jews most probably believed in that as you do. The context was unbelief in what Moses wrote about Jesus.Yeah. Riiight. How did your interpretation materially differ from mine? The Pharisees rejected Jesus because they didn't believe Moses' prophecies so how does that not apply to you as Moses wrote the book of Genesis in which the creation story is told?
No it isn't. If the Jews had taken Moses, and the rest of the OT, literally they would have accepted Jesus.The context was not evolution or creation story. Jews most probably believed in that as you do. The context was unbelief in what Moses wrote about Jesus.
Christians can believe in Jesus and not taking Genesis literally, so this alone debunks your interpretation.
The context of the text is not about evolution at all. Its about believing what Moses wrote about Jesus. The Jews Jesus was talking to did not know about evolution. Such interpretation is nonsensical.No it isn't. If the Jews had taken Moses, and the rest of the OT, literally they would have accepted Jesus.
Once again, Jesus refutes your assertions. I can see why you deny this, but your denial does not make your assertions true. I've had other evolutionists deny this too.
Really? How many people does the Bible say were saved at the time of the flood? 8. In Revelation it tells us the world will wonder after the beast.The context of the text is not about evolution at all. Its about believing what Moses wrote about Jesus. The Jews Jesus was talking to did not know about evolution. Such interpretation is nonsensical.
There are many millions of Christians who both believe in Jesus and accept evolution. This alone debunks your interpretation that this is what is impossible. Therefore, its about something else.
This conversation has no point, you are just trying to force your SDA ideology into biblical places that are about something else. You do not care about the proper context enough.Really? How many people does the Bible say were saved at the time of the flood? 8. In Revelation it tells us the world will wonder after the beast.
Revelation 13: 1 And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy.
2 And the beast which I saw was like unto a leopard, and his feet were as the feet of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion: and the dragon gave him his power, and his seat, and great authority.
3 And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the beast.
What do my beliefs have to do with anything? I am simply quoting scripture not applying it to anyone or anything.This conversation has no point, you are just trying to force your SDA ideology into biblical places that are about something else. You do not care about the proper context enough.
If you just quote random verses without any relation to this conversation, do not click on "reply".What do my beliefs have to do with anything? I am simply quoting scripture not applying it to anyone or anything.
Interesting.If you just quote random verses without any relation to this conversation, do not click on "reply".
So you're God and know the motives of people who lived centuries before all of us?The thing is the Lord actually declared that the law and prophets are actually the golden rule ( Matthew 7:12). The Lord said that His great commandments are on which the law & prophets depend ( Matthew 22:36-40). Jesus Christ told the rich young man the same commandments ( Matthew 19:16-19) that St. Paul preached to us ( Romans 13:8-10.
The Apostles held council and gave St. Paul etc. the basic instructions per Acts 15:22-31. There is no emphasis on the Saturday sabbath in any of this although it seems to be permitted. The Messianic Jewish community was severely weakened when St. James was martyred ( Acts 12:1-5).
When reading the most ancient, few surviving church accounts, Sunday ( per Matthew 28:9) is clearly the “Lord’s Day”. In Acts 20:7-11, the pattern of Sunday worship was developing. Compare the scripture to this quote from the Didache manual from about 100 AD:
14:1 And on the Lord's own day gather yourselves together and break bread and give thanks, first confessing your transgressions, that your sacrifice may be pure.
Didache. The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles (translation J. B. Lightfoot).
Didache. The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles (translation J. B. Lightfoot). On Early Christian Writings.www.earlychristianwritings.com
The ancient church communities did not recklessly, or in hostility, spitefully etc. discontinue the Saturday sabbath. Nonetheless the old sabbath was discontinued from early on in most places.
Save me your phony self righteousness; I wasn’t posting with any sort of hostile intent. I posted with scripture and history happening together. You can respectfully disagree but you must be bankrupt for substance.So you're God and know the motives of people who lived centuries before all of us?
He didn't make it greater. He made it clear it was impossible to keep. That's why we ALL need his sacrifice. Every. Single. One.Jesus made the commandments greater not lesser teaching by not only breaking them literally but applying to our thoughts and feelings where sin starts teaching not to break the least of these (Ten Commandments) or teach others to break the least of these commandments and in doing so one is in fear of sin and judgement.
I disagree.Actually you're taking you're beliefs from the same people who had Jesus crucified. Why?
It's a legit question as you gave a list negative of motives and said the church didn't do the change for those motives.Save me your phony self righteousness; I wasn’t posting with any sort of hostile intent. I posted with scripture and history happening together. You can respectfully disagree but you must be bankrupt for substance.
Have a nice day.
So Jesus teaching to not break the least of these commandments means that we can break them freely. Hmmm, I believe Jesus means what He says and I think it's important not to insert our own ideas into His plain teachings. Jesus came to save us from sin, not in sin Mat 1:21 and if we stumble along the way we have a High Priest who is willing to forgive us when we confess and repent which means a change in heart and direction 1 John 1:9 , but Jesus does not want us living in perpetual sin being a slave to sin- we are either a slave to sin or a slave to Christ they leads us on very different paths Romans 6:16 Jesus would not give us a commandment without giving us the power to keep. Through Him all things are possible evening obeying Him exactly how He asks.He didn't make it greater. He made it clear it was impossible to keep. That's why we ALL need his sacrifice. Every. Single. One.
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?