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.
For rule followers (carnal people), yes. It is even more impossible to follow the (carnal) rules. The Christian is lead by the Spirit - Gal 5:18. Religious people and religious Christians try to follow carnal rules and fail. This makes them very manipulable by religious leaders who control them with condemnation.On the one hand you say the NC is a higher standard (I agree) but on the other hand you say Sinai is bondage and gone. ALL of those you say are now stricter are based on Sinai...you imply they are mutually exclusive which makes no sense at all...
The New Covenant isn't the Old Covenant. Heb 8:6, 9:15, 10:9, LK 22:20I know what it says...do you? You seem to keep needing to throw the baby out with the bathwater. You want to separate what is the same and put together that which is separate! Physical vs spiritual.
"But, as he who was born according to the flesh then persecuted him who was born according to the Spirit, even so it is now."
This is a first for me to see someone suggesting another is circumcised as a basis to support an argument.Was that your only take-away from what I posted?
I'm saying that Paul is addressing something specific that was happening at that time. It wasn't just circumcision - look back at v 8-10. Circumcision, on its own, isn't bondage (I'm willing to guess that you are circumcised and most likely don't feel oppressed because of it). It was the teaching that it was necessary to follow all these physical and symbolic outward practices that was oppressive (and demeaning to the work Jesus had accomplished).
These (festivals) are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ. —Colossians 2:17
Also - the text in Galatians states that the Judaizers were trying to isolate the Gentiles. That's what abusers do - they isolate their victims from the supportive community. That, to me, seems to be the greater issue that Paul is writing about (who they can trust/not trust). The Judaizers were undermining all that had been revealed to the Gentile Galatians. They were pulling them back (or attempting to) into a ritualistic outward religion as mentioned in Galatians 4:3:
Galatians 4:3 ~So also, when we were children, we were enslaved under the basic principles of the world.
Interesting that you would refer one to a SDA professor concerning your faith Anglicanism.Maybe you should learn more about Anglicans as well, then, if my posts surprise you (coupled with my identity as an Anglican).
Here's a great place to do that, if ever you're interested: About Us | Official Site for N.T. Wright Courses Online
Or by reading this book:
Makes two of us.I did not see you explaining why Paul compared the Sinai Covenant to "bondage" in the post.
I did not see where you acknowledged the fact that Paul said there are "two covenants", in Galatians 4:24-31.
Did I miss it?
.
Ask the Apostles.I'm just keeping these two quotes together - because that's an excellent point and I want to carry it forward.
So explain to us specifically HOW the Sinai covenant brings bondage and oppression - because aren't we to be "enslaved to Christ" so we won't be "enslaved to sin" (Eph 6:6; 1 Peter 2:16; Col 3:24)?
Telling people we don’t need to obey God is teaching disobedience. It’s really quite simple.Okay - I WAS misunderstanding you, then.
@klutedavid is NOT teaching disobedience to God. He's correct. No one is under those rules any longer. All of this has passed away (along with the Temple/Levitical priesthood):
I am not bound by the health laws of Moses.
I am not bound by the civil law of Moses.
I am not bound by the priesthood of Aaron.
I do not recognize the authority of the seat of Moses in my Christian life.
I am not bound by any holy days, or festivals.
I do not make offerings.
I do not sacrifice.
I disregard the new moon celebration.
I do not build altars.
I will never attend the temple or partake of a temple service.
That doesn't mean one is keeping the law because they don't murder.Agreed. However, murder is against the law... ;-)
Teaching people they're not obligated to the law isn't teaching lawlessness or wickedness.Teaching people to disobey any of God’s commandments is promoting lawlessness.
There are plenty of people living lawless lives that don’t promote murder.
How do you read and understand Jer 31:31-33?Lawnessness =/= breaking the civil law.
It's been inferred in this thread that the entire Old Testament - along with the ten commandments - are NOT necessary, that they've been tossed out along with the Old Covenant as "null and void" (I believe is the accusation that's being made) as part of the covenant made at Sinai.
So is sorcery, afflicting orphans, taking bribes, e.t.c. Do you teach people to disobey those laws?Agreed. However, murder is against the law... ;-)
No it's not cryptic at all. Yes you think I'm only here tio argue and cause trouble with your response of "Clearly." You're requiring me to agree with you to avoid trouble (not rock your boat). So yes you're saying one must say yes to love.No one - especially me - is suggesting that it's love to say yes and hate to say no. What's the IC? And what are you talking about when you say that you "can't accept what's going on and being taught"? This is such a cryptic post.
You don't understand the law. Even the Jews themselves said it was a curse in Nehemiah.I'm well familiar with those passages - now, in your own words - please explain to me what's changed about the instruction. What was burdensome and oppressive about the commandments given at Mt Sinai? What's "the ministry of death"? In your words - not just quoting me Scripture. What brings freedom in the New Covenant? That seems to be where we're hung up.
No! This isn't a commandment required in the NT. Matter of fact the NT shows the covenant given to Israel has been set aside and replaced with a new unprecedented covenant base on promises. This new covenant is a unilateral covenant opposes to a by-lateral covenant.Yes or no:
Do you teach people to keep the Sabbath, as commanded by God in Exodus 20:8-10?
No because that covenant has no jurisdiction.So the answer is NO, you do not teach obedience to God’s commandment to keep the Sabbath holy.
This means you teach people to disobey God. Teaching disobedience to God = teaching lawlessness. The Apostles did not teach disobedience/lawlessness, and Acts 15:21 witnesses that the grafted-in Gentiles kept the Sabbath.
I didn't.Interesting that you would refer one to a SDA professor concerning your faith Anglicanism.
King David and Solomon said otherwise.You don't understand the law. Even the Jews themselves said it was a curse in Nehemiah.
OK I took a closer look. The site did say Scotland. My mistake I'm more familiar with Andrews in connection with the SDA church. Totally forgot Scotland. My apologies.I didn't.
About N.T. Wright (I have NO idea where you got the info that he's affiliated with the SDA):
Nicholas Thomas Wright FRSE is an English New Testament scholar, Pauline theologian, and retired Anglican bishop. Between 2003 and 2010, he was the Bishop of Durham. He then became Research Professor of New Testament and Early Christianity at St Mary's College in the University of St Andrews in Scotland.
I'm well familiar with those passages - now, in your own words - please explain to me what's changed about the instruction. What was burdensome and oppressive about the commandments given at Mt Sinai? What's "the ministry of death"? In your words - not just quoting me Scripture. What brings freedom in the New Covenant? That seems to be where we're hung up.
Absolutely not! Why would I spend time here, if I expected to only be agreed with? This is probably the LAST place to achieve that.You're requiring me to agree with you to avoid trouble (not rock your boat)
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?