What have you understood about the charcater of The Ten Commandments?? (2)

[isleof]

Ahhh, Im right and your wrong!

 

[MoreCoffee]

We've witnessed you rejecting what God told Moses, what Moses testified to the congregation, what God told the congregation, what Jesus said describing the sabbath and God's adopted children - and this last round saw you rejecting what Paul wrote in his epistle to the Roman church.

You certainly don't have grounds to call our reliance on Scripture 'untenable', especially in light of your failure to identify any errors in our presentation.

That is because they were not errors. They are complete refusals to accept stated biblical principles with the intention of making me look as the one that is in the wrong. But the bible speaks for itself for all that would accept it.

Do you accept Romans as canonical scripture?

 

[isleof]

Do you accept Romans as canonical scripture?

Nope. Cause I dont even know what "canonical" means.

Mechanonical?

 

[from scratch]

How can the Ten Commandments deny God?

I can't connect your response to anything in the post you quoted?

17 For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.

I must ask is this true? And do you believe it?

 

[from scratch]

You are correct about one thing, I could not have said it better. I am under orders from my master, Jesus Christ.

Oh my could I get into trouble here.

 

[from scratch]

That is because they were not errors. They are complete refusals to accept stated biblical principles with the intention of making me look as the one that is in the wrong. But the bible speaks for itself for all that would accept it.

Please explain how "not according to..." means "the same as."

 

[Sophrosyne]

Not really. If you refute them, and they go into a rage? That's sin. But, what they do (think) is more than just sin.


Sin comes from the inborn impulse to do wrong which resides in our flesh. Now, creating a system of thinking to try to justify sin? Now, that is evil. There is a difference. Jesus died for our sins. He did not die for evil.


When we sin? We can simply name it to God, and we are forgiven. (1 Jn 1:9)

But, when someone lives by thinking evil? That requires more than just naming one's sin for forgiveness. It requires repentance. It requires that you go through the process of changing you system of thinking.

Repentance, means to change your thinking. To do so, requires learning and accepting knowledge and truth to push out and replace the system of evil.

We all at times have to resist the sin of justifying sins we do. I think that where the blindness comes in it is either indoctrination to make it so one can't see the truth when one is in a position not to be able to understand they are being fed lies.. or it is a choice to believe them. It is akin to being blinded vs wearing a blindfold. The result can be the same but one that is truly blind cannot remove a blindfold and see they have to be "healed" of the blindness (set free by the power of God). One that chooses to wear a blindfold has to continue to stumble till they fall to a point that they realize that the life of wearing a blindfold isn't the life they truly want to live. Even if they try to live without the blindfold they find themselves either putting it back on because the light is unbearable or in tears and squinting all the time till their eyes adjust to the light. It is those who want to endure the discomfort that will be able to shed the blindfold and walk into the light those who find comfort in the dark (blindfolded) will not want to take it off and can end up wandering around lost with others who in a sense are just like they are.

 

[Sophrosyne]

Oh my could I get into trouble here.

Big time... about the only answer would be.. "which Jesus Christ"?

 

[VictorC]

We've witnessed you rejecting what God told Moses, what Moses testified to the congregation, what God told the congregation, what Jesus said describing the sabbath and God's adopted children - and this last round saw you rejecting what Paul wrote in his epistle to the Roman church.

You certainly don't have grounds to call our reliance on Scripture 'untenable', especially in light of your failure to identify any errors in our presentation.

That is because they were not errors. They are complete refusals to accept stated biblical principles with the intention of making me look as the one that is in the wrong. But the bible speaks for itself for all that would accept it.

Your idea of 'biblical principles' is based on contradicting the Bible - hence, a claim that your posts are "not errors" is itself an error. I -and others participating- don't need to make you appear 'wrong'. You can't blame others for your own display of unbelief.

 

[VictorC]

I once read a humorous quip that stated liberalism is a mental disorder. There is a parallel. Liberals do to politics what some do to doctrine. They both can not see that what they think and believe is anti-reality.

Liberalism is a learning stage short of maturity: "If you're not a liberal when you're 25, you have no heart. If you're not a conservative by the time you're 35, you have no brain."

 

[VictorC]

Please explain how "not according to..." means "the same as."

The history behind Elder111's latest claim is a response to Paul plainly explaining "we have been delivered from the law, having died to what we were held by", with the 'we' defined as those who know the Law (the recipients who believed on God's redemption), and 'the law' defined as the Ten Commandments in the next verse.

Instead of accepting what Paul wrote, Elder111 want on a tangent basically saying "why would God blah blah blah". It is denial of reality in action.

 

[from scratch]

The history behind Elder111's latest claim is a response to Paul plainly explaining "we have been delivered from the law, having died to what we were held by", with the 'we' defined as those who know the Law (the recipients who believed on God's redemption), and 'the law' defined as the Ten Commandments in the next verse.

Instead of accepting what Paul wrote, Elder111 want on a tangent basically saying "why would God blah blah blah". It is denial of reality in action.

Yes sir! You got it right.

 

[from scratch]

Liberalism is a learning stage short of maturity: "If you're not a liberal when you're 25, you have no heart. If you're not a conservative by the time you're 35, you have no brain."

I've always had a brain. I was said to be an old man in high school by administration. They couldn't believe my insight.

 

[Elder 111]

Ahhh, Im right and your wrong!

Let's be absolutely honest, both of us can not be correct.

 

[Elder 111]

Do you accept Romans as canonical scripture?

There is no need for that question to be asked. I have quoted from it extensively. You have not be following.

 

[Elder 111]

I can't connect your response to anything in the post you quoted?

17 For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.

I must ask is this true? And do you believe it?

I believe all scripture.

 

[Elder 111]

Your idea of 'biblical principles' is based on contradicting the Bible - hence, a claim that your posts are "not errors" is itself an error. I -and others participating- don't need to make you appear 'wrong'. You can't blame others for your own display of unbelief.

Because you and whoever say so don't make it so. Jesus was a devil and was crucified. The test is not what you say but what God says.

 

[VictorC]

Jesus was a devil and was crucified.

Here's the latest, captured before it could be edited!
It's no wonder your posts don't garner acceptance here.

 

[GenemZ]

Here's the latest, captured before it could be edited!
It's no wonder your posts don't garner acceptance here.

He has become a medium for the spirit that teaches him..

Maybe its a lesson for him in not to take things out of context. Like he always has done with the Word..

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Originally Posted by genez

OK we get it.

The thoughts are intended to defile...
​

The RCC has a logical fallacy on the matter. They will confess that they sin in thought, but apparently that sin is not of the devil. And in that they are in conflict with 1 John 3:8 among other citings.

Any temptation thought of the tempter is evil in origination because of the tempter and is therefore both evil and defiling.

Telling sect members that they sin in thought is not appealing truth to the masses. Therefore a lot of sects pander to the masses and they also excuse the devils thoughts of temptation as not evil or defiling or sin. None of which are true. But it apparently makes the masses feel better about themselves.

Are you sure Catholism views it that way?


.