What exactly is the law?

[bugkiller]

Many. You are unawares?

how can you have an engaging discussion if you don't know?

Well post them.

bugkiller

 

[squint]

Well post them.

bugkiller

As a believer they should be in your heart.

 

[bugkiller]

As a believer they should be in your heart.

You are just messin with us. You have nothing to back up your remarks.

bugkiller

 

[daq]

Please explain.

bugkiller

One evening I sat down to eat ribs and found it in the sixth rib of Sefer Torat ha-'Elohiym. And when I had finished my portion for the evening I found that it had become bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh. However those that tell themselves Torah has been abolished do not generally eat this kind of meat.

 

[Habakk]

It seems the Scripture is being thrown out here. Why? Is a discussion about human nature needed? How and why is a man tempted? Paul says the law leads to this temptation. Why is this not acepted? Is the law lust?

bugkiller

This is a discussion thread as far as I know.

The law is about human nature, it's simply a set of rules to address the human nature and sinful state of man? The law is not magical in than it can create sin out of nothing.

Man sins becaus he is a sinner. Simple evangelical doctrine accepted by most evengelicals.

 

[squint]

You are just messin with us. You have nothing to back up your remarks.

bugkiller

Anyone with an interest can search Abraham's name and law and come up with numerous scriptures.

The 'covenants' themselves have been in place from the Garden. Those matters were passed through the guided lineage. There is zero question about this to any reader who has comprehension skills.

The covenants were amplified/reinforced after the flood. They were expanded dramatically with Abraham, detailed painstakingly by Paul in Galatians 4-5.

They are in fact wonderous matters. Just wonderous.

But they are also withheld from those who are not interested in Gods Words. Those who seek to eliminate them are slated by God to see exactly NOTHING.

Just the way it is.

s

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

God's will is perfectly just/righteous. Abraham obeyed God's will.

Perhaps that is why Abraham is where he is in this parable of Luke 16

Lazarus and the Rich Man - Here a little, there a little - Commentary

LUKE 16:22 So it was that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels to Abraham's bosom.
The rich man[OC/LAW] also died and was buried.
23 And being in torments in Hades, he lifted up his eyes and saw Abraham afar off, and Lazarus[NC/GRACE] in his bosom."

First, to prove that this language is symbolic and not meant to be taken literally, let's examine exactly what we are told by Yeshua. He says that first, Lazarus dies and is taken to the bosom of Abraham. Notice, there is no mention of his burial here. Then later the rich man dies, and he is buried (in Hades, according to verse 23).
So the time sequence given indicates that upon his death, Lazarus was taken immediately to Abraham's bosom, while afterward the rich man was buried in Hades when he died.

If this story is literal, then we have a contradiction in the Bible. Here, Lazarus is shown to have immediately received the promise of eternal life. Yet the author of Hebrews clearly tells us that Abraham, as well as all the other Old Testament saints, have not yet received the promises given to them by God:









.

 

[fhansen]

I don't think that is the question before us. How can a person be righteous and lie at the same time? Is Abraham's righteousness positional and not actual?

Presumably his righteousness would've been partial, as in not yet complete, not perfected, rather than positional. God is doing a work in us.

 

[bugkiller]

This is a discussion thread as far as I know.

The law is about human nature, it's simply a set of rules to address the human nature and sinful state of man? The law is not magical in than it can create sin out of nothing.

Man sins becaus he is a sinner. Simple evangelical doctrine accepted by most evengelicals.

So are you then saying that telling the truth is a natural thing for man? If it is why do we need to be told to tell the truth or the negative not to lie? Same goes for the rest of the commandments. Please make a case.

bugkiller

 

[bugkiller]

Anyone with an interest can search Abraham's name and law and come up with numerous scriptures.

The 'covenants' themselves have been in place from the Garden. Those matters were passed through the guided lineage. There is zero question about this to any reader who has comprehension skills.

The covenants were amplified/reinforced after the flood. They were expanded dramatically with Abraham, detailed painstakingly by Paul in Galatians 4-5.

They are in fact wonderous matters. Just wonderous.

But they are also withheld from those who are not interested in Gods Words. Those who seek to eliminate them are slated by God to see exactly NOTHING.

Just the way it is.

s

Like I said you are just messin with us.

bugkiller

 

[bugkiller]

Presumably his righteousness would've been partial, as in not yet complete, not perfected, rather than positional. God is doing a work in us.

There is a new concept - partial righteousness. How can one be kinda pregnant (rightoeus)?

bugkiller

 

[squint]

Like I said you are just messin with us.

bugkiller

Some believers do not have the faculty for factual discussions.

For them it is better to toss The Word aside because they won't understand it anyway.

I call it mobile home theology.

s

 

[fhansen]

There is a new concept - partial righteousness. How can one be kinda pregnant (rightoeus)?

bugkiller

Didn't say anything about pregnancy. Man is righteous to the extent He loves God with his whole heart, soul, mind, and strength and his neighbor as himself. He's unrighteousness to the extent he doesn't. As with knowledge of God, all the virtues, such as faith and love, can be increased, or grown in. In fact, to the degree we know God, we truly love Him, we can't help it!

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Anyone with an interest can search Abraham's name and law and come up with numerous scriptures.

The 'covenants' themselves have been in place from the Garden. Those matters were passed through the guided lineage. There is zero question about this to any reader who has comprehension skills.

Just the way it is.

s

Abraham's name is also mentioned in the rich man/lazarus parable of Luke 16.
Perhaps you and others missed this previous post of mine on that:

http://www.christianforums.com/t7721490/#post62357996

LUKE 16:22 So it was that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels to Abraham's bosom.
The rich man[OC/LAW] also died and was buried.
23 And being in torments in Hades, he lifted up his eyes and saw Abraham afar off, and Lazarus[NC/GRACE] in his bosom."









.

 

[squint]

Abraham's name is also mentioned in the rich man/lazarus parable of Luke 16.
Perhaps you and others missed this previous post of mine on that:

http://www.christianforums.com/t7721490/#post62357996

LUKE 16:22 So it was that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels to Abraham's bosom.
The rich man[OC/LAW] also died and was buried.
23 And being in torments in Hades, he lifted up his eyes and saw Abraham afar off, and Lazarus[NC/GRACE] in his bosom."
.

No, I haven't missed it and have commented on it many times. I would suggest that the rich man was not the past Jewish hierarchy nor could that have been the case at the time. The dissection you like is, no offense to you, nearly worthless.

The fun part though is that it can be shown as such in numerous ways and guess what? People will still believe it regardless.

Good on them.

s

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

No, I haven't missed it and have commented on it many times. I would suggest that the rich man was not the past Jewish hierarchy nor could that have been the case at the time. The dissection you like is, no offense to you, nearly worthless.

The fun part though is that it can be shown as such in numerous ways and guess what? People will still believe it regardless.

Good on them.

s

I would say that is exactly what that parable is symbolizing

Lazarus and the Rich Man - Here a little, there a little - Commentary

The fact that the rich man has five brothers is a vital clue to his true symbolic identity.
Judah, the progenitor of the Jews, was the son of Jacob through Leah (Gen. 29:35). He had five full-blooded brothers: Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Issachar, and Zebulun (Gen. 35:23).

While the significance of this seemingly pointless detail has been neglected by scholars throughout the centuries, you can be certain that it did not escape the notice of the Pharisees and scribes to which Yeshua was speaking. They thoroughly knew their history and were extremely proud of their heritage. Yeshua wanted those self-righteous Pharisees to know exactly who he was referring to with this parable.
This detail cements the identity of the rich man as the House of Judah, the Jews!







.

 

[squint]

I would say that is exactly what that parable is symbolizing

Well of course you do.

good on you.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Originally Posted by squint

No, I haven't missed it and have commented on it many times. I would suggest that the rich man was not the past Jewish hierarchy nor could that have been the case at the time. The dissection you like is, no offense to you, nearly worthless.

​

Originally Posted by LittleLambofJesus

I would say that is exactly what that parable is symbolizing
​

Well of course you do.

good on you.

So would the Jews, IF they would read the NT





.

 

[squint]

So would the Jews, IF they would read the NT

.

Why would they? To pick up our substitutes? Which ones? Take yer pick of multiple thousands of alternatives.

In many ways they are much better off NOT to. After all even we consider that we are worshipping and dealing with the same God. There is no question in my mind that is the case.

s

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Why would they? To pick up our substitutes? Which ones? Take yer pick of multiple thousands of alternatives.

In many ways they are much better off NOT to. After all even we consider that we are worshipping and dealing with the same God. There is no question in my mind that is the case.

s

Not according to this Jewish Scholar:

New Testament - My Jewish Learning

It is daunting to think of the number of books a Jew "must" read in order to achieve Jewish literacy. With trepidation I suggest yet another volume to add to that list: the New Testament (NT).

Jews can read the NT to see both the strong Jewish values and the strong anti-Jewish values there. Virtually every page of the NT addresses Judaism either implicitly or explicitly. Jews who want to read a "Jewish book" will find much of interest there.

Martin I. Lockshin, Ph.D., is a professor at the Centre for Jewish Studies at York University in Toronto. He received rabbinic ordination after studying at the yeshiva founded by Rav Kook in Jerusalem.