What people believe does not change the truth...

[VictorC]

You obviously have no legal experience, otherwise you would know the difference between a Covenant/contract and a statute. The Covenant of the Kingdom is the 10 Commandments as stated in Deut.4:13. The Statutes are the laws pertaining to the operation of the Kingdom of Heaven/Literal Israel AT THAT TIME. They are NOT obligations under the Covenant, they are obligations under the Statues or operating guidelines of the Nation of Israel.

Your unfamiliarity with the covenant conveyed to Israel is nothing less than incompetent. The Ten Commandments you read from comes from the book of the law, as you don't have access to the tables of stone. It was that book of the law that was as much a part of the covenant from Mount Sinai as the Ten Commandments:

Exodus 24
3 So Moses came and told the people all the words of the LORD and all the judgments. And all the people answered with one voice and said, “All the words which the LORD has said we will do.” 4 And Moses wrote all the words of the LORD. And he rose early in the morning, and built an altar at the foot of the mountain, and twelve pillars according to the twelve tribes of Israel. 5 Then he sent young men of the children of Israel, who offered burnt offerings and sacrificed peace offerings of oxen to the LORD. 6 And Moses took half the blood and put it in basins, and half the blood he sprinkled on the altar. 7 Then he took the Book of the Covenant and read in the hearing of the people. And they said, “All that the LORD has said we will do, and be obedient.” 8 And Moses took the blood, sprinkled it on the people, and said, “This is the blood of the covenant which the LORD has made with you according to all these words.”​

It was that book of the law that was the witness against Israel for their noncompliance, and not the tables of stone:

Deuteronomy 31
24 So it was, when Moses had completed writing the words of this law in a book, when they were finished, 25 that Moses commanded the Levites, who bore the ark of the covenant of the LORD, saying: 26 “Take this Book of the Law, and put it beside the ark of the covenant of the LORD your God, that it may be there as a witness against you; 27 for I know your rebellion and your stiff neck. If today, while I am yet alive with you, you have been rebellious against the LORD, then how much more after my death?​

Deuteronomy 28 lists the curses that came from noncompliance to the entire law conveyed in the book of the law "If you do not carefully observe all the words of this law that are written in this book".
The book of the law is the entire covenant, inclusive of the Ten Commandments.

Now, why don't you comply with the covenant you claim you're bound to?
Even Paul recognized the curse Moses conveyed with noncompliance with the covenant from Mount Sinai: "Cursed is everyone who does not continue in all things which are written in the book of the law, to do them". Paul understood the shortcomings of the soteriology you claim to abide by, just as Jesus did as recorded in Matthew 5:20. You simply don't know the law, and ignorance is not an excuse for noncompliance.

 

[Soon144k]

VictorC,
You are going to be SO disappointed and angry with God when you find out how misguided you are. But you even said it yourself by quoting Deut. 31:26, the Book of the Law (statutes) were place BESIDE the Ark of the Covenant. The 10 Commandments were INSIDE the Ark, and this is a huge difference. But it would to you no good for me to explain it to you as you will always find and excuse to disabuse yourself from the Covenant, as per Paul.

Let's move on to another subject.

 

[VictorC]

VictorC,
You are going to be SO disappointed and angry with God when you find out how misguided you are. But you even said it yourself by quoting Deut. 31:26, the Book of the Law (statutes) were place BESIDE the Ark of the Covenant. The 10 Commandments were INSIDE the Ark, and this is a huge difference. But it would to you no good for me to explain it to you as you will always find and excuse to disabuse yourself from the Covenant, as per Paul.

Let's move on to another subject.

I wasn't the one forced to discard whole books of the Bible as you have done, and I wasn't the one who discarded most of the law as you have done. You haven't even submitted to circumcision, which was the entrance requirement into the first covenant. The book of the law was the witness against those who make their boast in the law and then fail to abide by it, and that Standard imputes sin to those who remain in the law's jurisdiction.

Paul mimics both Moses and Jesus in their testimonies, while you chose to make up your own soteriology that Jesus already stated isn't going to grant anyone entrance into the kingdom of Heaven; you have no grounds to reject what Paul and the other New Testament authors provided for us. If all you have to look forward to is wrath at the hands of an angry God, this is the time to find the solution. Your form of righteousness based on feigned dead works is not acceptable to a Holy God.

 

[Soon144k]

I wasn't the one forced to discard whole books of the Bible as you have done, and I wasn't the one who discarded most of the law as you have done. You haven't even submitted to circumcision, which was the entrance requirement into the first covenant. The book of the law was the witness against those who make their boast in the law and then fail to abide by it, and that Standard imputes sin to those who remain in the law's jurisdiction.

Paul mimics both Moses and Jesus in their testimonies, while you chose to make up your own soteriology that Jesus already stated isn't going to grant anyone entrance into the kingdom of Heaven; you have no grounds to reject what Paul and the other New Testament authors provided for us. If all you have to look forward to is wrath at the hands of an angry God, this is the time to find the solution. Your form of righteousness based on feigned dead works is not acceptable to a Holy God.

If the first Covenant is faulty, as you and Paul suggest, why didn't God just go directly to the 'new' covenant that you are so enamored with rather that start Israel out with a covenant that He must have know would not work? Both the Passover and the Day of Atonement are feasts that are pointers or types that would eventually be fulfilled by Jesus Christ (the Messiah), so why not just go directly to the covenant that counts rather than starting with a covenant that would do nothing but point out sin and death and do nothing to promote eternal life? Since the 'old' covenant (works of the law) was replaced by the 'new' covenant (righteousness by grace through faith) why not just start with that 'new' covenant and not have to deal with the hassle and heartache of trying to comply with the 'old' one?

 

[VictorC]

If the first Covenant is faulty, as you and Paul suggest, why didn't God just go directly to the 'new' covenant that you are so enamored with rather that start Israel out with a covenant that He must have know would not work? Both the Passover and the Day of Atonement are feasts that are pointers or types that would eventually be fulfilled by Jesus Christ (the Messiah), so why not just go directly to the covenant that counts rather than starting with a covenant that would do nothing but point out sin and death and do nothing to promote eternal life? Since the 'old' covenant (works of the law) was replaced by the 'new' covenant (righteousness by grace through faith) why not just start with that 'new' covenant and not have to deal with the hassle and heartache of trying to comply with the 'old' one?

The answers lie in the books of the Bible that you discarded. The questions you ask are perfectly reasonable, and the answers are not hard to find. Judging the Gospel before you learn it is what hampers the learning process.

 

[Soon144k]

The answers lie in the books of the Bible that you discarded. The questions you ask are perfectly reasonable, and the answers are not hard to find. Judging the Gospel before you learn it is what hampers the learning process.

I find it interesting that you immediately picked up on the underlying reason for the question. The only way to find an answer that fits your paradigm is to use the books of the New Testament that are questionable in their origin and authorship. Thank you for saying that the questions are reasonable, they are. The only difference that we have is in what we put our trust for the answers. You put your trust in the human agency of Paul as being a legitimate apostle of Jesus Christ, and I don't. I put my trust in the Son of God, Jesus Christ, His words and teachings, as they relate to the Old Testament prophecies concerning the Kingdom of Heaven and the Covenant.

I am certainly not saying that you are ignoring the words and teachings of Jesus Christ, because you are not. What you are doing, however, is placing the words and teachings of Paul on par with Jesus Christ because you believe that Paul was commissioned by that same Jesus Christ. This I cannot do. So where does that leave us?

When I was in financial services many years ago I had a partner that was a Mormon, and we had many interesting discussions about 'truth'. Of course he believed whole heartedly in the veracity of Joseph Smith as being a true prophet of God, making the book of Mormon the follow on testimony extending from the Bible. This is similar to what the SDA church says about EGW in fundamental #17. I carefully and gently pointed out to my friend that I was not as advanced in the truth as was he and that he would need to prove to me from the Bible the theology that Joseph Smith said was given to him by the angel Moroni. I told my friend that if he wanted to prove the validity of his own position that the Mormon church was correct he would have to begin on my level, which was that the Bible was the arbiter of truth for the Christian, and go on from there. In the several years we were partners and friends he was NEVER able to do this, not even to his own satisfaction.

In not such a direct manner I have also now extended that challenge to those that believe that Paul is an apostle of Jesus Christ and was made so by direct confrontation. You have admitted that the only way that you can prove your position vis a vis the covenant is by using those books of the New Testament in which I no longer have trust. Therefore, and in the same vein as with my Mormon friend, you being more advanced in the truth than am I will need to convince me that your positions are correct using the testimony that I do trust in order to prove your case; that is, the testimony of Jesus Christ as given to us by His own eyewitnesses, Matthew, Peter (the gospel of Mark) and John (gospel and epistles), the book of Revelation, and the entirety of the Old Testament. This excludes Luke (a disciple of Paul), the letters of Peter (1st Peter author is not established, 2nd Peter was not written by Peter), James (the brother of Jesus, not the disciple), Hebrews (author unknown therefore unreliable), and Jude (also a brother of Jesus and not a disciple).

This does and can put a crimp in the theology that you espouse. Yet, if that theology is true you should be able to prove it from the unquestionably reliable sources I have listed. This may prove to be too much trouble and take too much time, and this I would completely understand. Yet as a tool to strengthen your own faith in what you believe this challenge could prove useful as an exercise in establishing the truth once and for all not only in your own life but in mine as well. If you can show me where Jesus taught what you and Paul say He did using only the sources I have listed then I will admit my error and come over to your way of believing, because that way of believing would be the truth.

 

[Joe67]

Before Sinai there was grace.

The entrance of Sinai necessitated an increase of grace.

Jesus of Nazareth is the reality/fullness of grace.

Each particular member of Jesus' Body (in his priesthood) receives his daily portion of that fullness to enable him for that day's service.

Gen 6:8-9
8 But Noah found grace in the eyes of the LORD.

9 These are the generations of Noah: Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations, and Noah walked with God. KJV

Gen 17:1-4
:1 And when Abram was ninety years old and nine, the LORD appeared to Abram, and said unto him, I am the Almighty God; walk before me, and be thou perfect.

2 And I will make my covenant between me and thee, and will multiply thee exceedingly.

3 And Abram fell on his face: and God talked with him, saying,

4 As for me, behold, my covenant is with thee, and thou shalt be a father of many nations. KJV

Gen 17:13
and my covenant shall be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant. KJV

1 John 4:2-3
2 Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God:

3 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world. KJV

Ex 6:2-4
2 And God spake unto Moses, and said unto him, I am the LORD:

3 And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of God Almighty, but by my name JEHOVAH was I not known to them.

4 And I have also established my covenant with them, to give them the land of Canaan, the land of their pilgrimage, wherein they were strangers. KJV

Deut 5:1-5
:1 And Moses called all Israel, and said unto them, Hear, O Israel, the statutes and judgments which I speak in your ears this day, that ye may learn them, and keep, and do them.

2 The LORD our God made a covenant with us in Horeb.

3 The LORD made not this covenant with our fathers, but with us, even us, who are all of us here alive this day.

4 The LORD talked with you face to face in the mount out of the midst of the fire,

5(I stood between the LORD and you at that time, to shew you the work of the LORD: for ye were afraid by reason of the fire, and went not up into the mount; KJV

Jer 31:31-32
31 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:

32 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD: KJV

John 1:14-18
14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.
15 John bare witness of him, and cried, saying, This was he of whom I spake, He that cometh after me is preferred before me: for he was before me.
16 And of his fulness have all we received, and grace for grace.
17 For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.
18 No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him. KJV

Gen 17:13
and my covenant shall be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant. KJV

1 John 4:2-3
2 Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God:

3 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world. KJV

Joe

 

[VictorC]

I find it interesting that you immediately picked up on the underlying reason for the question. The only way to find an answer that fits your paradigm is to use the books of the New Testament that are questionable in their origin and authorship. Thank you for saying that the questions are reasonable, they are.

Those questions deserve answers, and it is the answers that you are avoiding. What hasn't dawned on you during this entire discourse is that you don't have any answers - in concluding that you need to abide by the law, you instead determine that you aren't going to.

This is similar to what the SDA church says about EGW in fundamental #17.

You're behind the times, as Adventism's claim of Ellen White's authority is codified in Fundamental Belief #18 now. She contradicted Biblical narratives and appealed to a soteriology of works in feigned compliance to a truncated hybrid covenant that is nowhere described in Scripture, and this is the reason Ellen White has fallen into disrepute.

This excludes Luke (a disciple of Paul), the letters of Peter (1st Peter author is not established, 2nd Peter was not written by Peter), James (the brother of Jesus, not the disciple), Hebrews (author unknown therefore unreliable), and Jude (also a brother of Jesus and not a disciple).

You are reliant on argumentum ad hominem for your entire approach. In the case of the epistle to the Hebrews, the author denied that approach because instead of pronouncing dogmas in the way Paul did, he draws heavily on the law, Psalms, and prophets to show you what they give toward a conclusion. To discard Hebrews is to deny the testimony of Moses, David, and Jeremiah. This is likely a reason that the authorship of Hebrews is unknown; the epistle forces one to regard the content rather than the authorship, which you aren't willing to do - just as you have discarded the testimony of the sources from the witnesses that you listed as acceptable. It isn't the witness that has been questioned, but the message itself. This conversation has shown you contradicting Jesus in Matthew's account, contradicting Daniel, and refusing to submit to the covenant Moses conveyed to the children of Israel until the promise he documented to Abraham would be fulfilled.

 

[Soon144k]

Joe,
Excellent texts on the Covenant.

The meaning of the word translated 'grace' from the Greek word khane(Strongs 2580) in Gen. 6:8 is 'graciousness, subjective for kindness or favor'. This is not the same type of grace that is spoken of by Paul in the New Testament. This word comes from another word, Strongs 2603-chanan, a primitive root (compare 2583); properly, to bend or stoop in kindness to an inferior; to favor, bestow; causatively to implore (i.e. move to favor by petition):--beseech, X fair, (be, find, shew) favour(-able), be (deal, give, grant (gracious(-ly), intreat, (be) merciful, have (shew) mercy (on, upon), have pity upon, pray, make supplication, X very.

Notice that the word grace is not an option in either of these translations, but words such as 'kindness', 'favor', 'mercy' are. So when you say grace is found in the Old Testament you are correct, it's just not the grace we commonly think of when we contemplate Christian theology. It is very important to choose the correct usage in order to find the correct meaning for the text. It is not consistent with truth to assume that a usage found in one place means the same as one found in another.

In this case the translators of the KJV had an agenda based on their theological understanding of the New Testament usage of grace and may have applied this usage to their translation of 'khane' in the OT. This is why we must not just assume that the translators got it right every time, and we must take responsibility to check on these translations for their accuracy and intent, whenever there is a question about the word and usage.

 

[Joe67]

Soon,

Here is a lesson in living active faith and grace.

Gen 18:1-5
1 And the LORD appeared unto him in the plains of Mamre: and he sat in the tent door in the heat of the day;

2 And he lift up his eyes and looked, and, lo, three men stood by him: and when he saw them, he ran to meet them from the tent door, and bowed himself toward the ground,

3 And said, My Lord, if now I have found favour in thy sight, pass not away, I pray thee, from thy servant:

4 Let a little water, I pray you, be fetched, and wash your feet, and rest yourselves under the tree:

5 And I will fetch a morsel of bread, and comfort ye your hearts; after that ye shall pass on: for therefore are ye come to your servant. And they said, So do, as thou hast said. KJV

Joe

 

[Soon144k]

Soon,

Here is a lesson in living active faith and grace.

Gen 18:1-5
1 And the LORD appeared unto him in the plains of Mamre: and he sat in the tent door in the heat of the day;

2 And he lift up his eyes and looked, and, lo, three men stood by him: and when he saw them, he ran to meet them from the tent door, and bowed himself toward the ground,

3 And said, My Lord, if now I have found favour in thy sight, pass not away, I pray thee, from thy servant:

4 Let a little water, I pray you, be fetched, and wash your feet, and rest yourselves under the tree:

5 And I will fetch a morsel of bread, and comfort ye your hearts; after that ye shall pass on: for therefore are ye come to your servant. And they said, So do, as thou hast said. KJV

Joe

This story demonstrates 'graciousness' as in 'extending favor' NOT grace as we see it in the writings of Paul. This falls under the heading of courtesy, which is an oriental concept in dealing with guests. You seem to be trying very hard to 'prove' that Paul's type of 'grace' existed in the Old Testament, and it just does not. You are confusing 'grace' with 'graciousness'.

 

[Soon144k]

Those questions deserve answers, and it is the answers that you are avoiding. What hasn't dawned on you during this entire discourse is that you don't have any answers - in concluding that you need to abide by the law, you instead determine that you aren't going to.

You're behind the times, as Adventism's claim of Ellen White's authority is codified in Fundamental Belief #18 now. She contradicted Biblical narratives and appealed to a soteriology of works in feigned compliance to a truncated hybrid covenant that is nowhere described in Scripture, and this is the reason Ellen White has fallen into disrepute.

You are reliant on argumentum ad hominem for your entire approach. In the case of the epistle to the Hebrews, the author denied that approach because instead of pronouncing dogmas in the way Paul did, he draws heavily on the law, Psalms, and prophets to show you what they give toward a conclusion. To discard Hebrews is to deny the testimony of Moses, David, and Jeremiah. This is likely a reason that the authorship of Hebrews is unknown; the epistle forces one to regard the content rather than the authorship, which you aren't willing to do - just as you have discarded the testimony of the sources from the witnesses that you listed as acceptable. It isn't the witness that has been questioned, but the message itself. This conversation has shown you contradicting Jesus in Matthew's account, contradicting Daniel, and refusing to submit to the covenant Moses conveyed to the children of Israel until the promise he documented to Abraham would be fulfilled.

As to the book of Hebrews-we are in concurrence that Paul did not write Hebrews; for me this is evident because in the 13 chapters the High Priest is mentioned 16 times. Paul does not write about the role of the High Priest in any of his epistles, and one wouldn't expect him to do so anywhere else. There are other problems with Hebrews outside of this that have nothing to do with Moses, David and Jeremiah. Just one example is where the writer of Hebrews contends that Jesus Christ was MADE (ch.2:9) a little lower than the angels, citing Ps. 8:4-6. But the author is saying that the 'man' in Psalms is not 'mankind' but actually Jesus Christ, and this is in your own words "a leap of faith", and a completely incorrect interpretation. If the author is wrong in this what else is he wrong about. If Hebrews is, as you suggest, the very words of God, then why would God have allowed this obvious error?

We also apparently agree on the status of EGW vis a vis the SDA church, as being at the very least an embarrassment and at worse a full fledged false prophet. I personally believe the latter because of Rev.2:19-23.

You complain that I dismiss witnesses that I don't, and don't accept witnesses that I should. Your statement that "It isn't the witness that has been questioned, but the message itself" is not my approach. My approach is "If the message is questionable then so is the messenger". This goes directly to method, and I fear you and I will never agree on that. You accept the 'whole' as valid even though there are problems (see Hebrews example above). I accept ONLY those witnesses that PROVE themselves valid by comparing them to the words and teachings of Jesus Christ. You obviously don't approve of this approach, having made up your mind by establishing your paradigm in the totality of the Bible as Sola Scriptura. Yet you will not show me where this approach is based in anything but the tradition of of the Roman Catholic Church, where the idea of independent thought is anathema to the 'good order' of Christian dogma. Your idea is "that what the majority of SDA/Christians believe must be correct because we have believed this way for hundreds, if not thousands of years" flies in the face of what Jesus said in Matt 24:4 about it being our responsibility to 'not be deceived'. What looks like 'truth' to you looks like deception to me. One of us will be proven correct. I pray that it will not be 'too late' by the time we figure this one out.

 

[VictorC]

As to the book of Hebrews-we are in concurrence that Paul did not write Hebrews; for me this is evident because in the 13 chapters the High Priest is mentioned 16 times. Paul does not write about the role of the High Priest in any of his epistles, and one wouldn't expect him to do so anywhere else. There are other problems with Hebrews outside of this that have nothing to do with Moses, David and Jeremiah. Just one example is where the writer of Hebrews contends that Jesus Christ was MADE (ch.2:9) a little lower than the angels, citing Ps. 8:4-6. But the author is saying that the 'man' in Psalms is not 'mankind' but actually Jesus Christ, and this is in your own words "a leap of faith", and a completely incorrect interpretation. If the author is wrong in this what else is he wrong about. If Hebrews is, as you suggest, the very words of God, then why would God have allowed this obvious error?

We also apparently agree on the status of EGW vis a vis the SDA church, as being at the very least an embarrassment and at worse a full fledged false prophet. I personally believe the latter because of Rev.2:19-23.

You complain that I dismiss witnesses that I don't, and don't accept witnesses that I should. Your statement that "It isn't the witness that has been questioned, but the message itself" is not my approach. My approach is "If the message is questionable then so is the messenger". This goes directly to method, and I fear you and I will never agree on that. You accept the 'whole' as valid even though there are problems (see Hebrews example above). I accept ONLY those witnesses that PROVE themselves valid by comparing them to the words and teachings of Jesus Christ. You obviously don't approve of this approach, having made up your mind by establishing your paradigm in the totality of the Bible as Sola Scriptura. Yet you will not show me where this approach is based in anything but the tradition of of the Roman Catholic Church, where the idea of independent thought is anathema to the 'good order' of Christian dogma. Your idea is "that what the majority of SDA/Christians believe must be correct because we have believed this way for hundreds, if not thousands of years" flies in the face of what Jesus said in Matt 24:4 about it being our responsibility to 'not be deceived'. What looks like 'truth' to you looks like deception to me. One of us will be proven correct. I pray that it will not be 'too late' by the time we figure this one out.

Soon, The message that you have rejected from each and every book discussed has left you with nothing to appeal to as an authority. The "made" aspect of Christ is addressed in Hebrews 10:5, annulling your interpretation of the author's message. Another tangent revealing your ignorance of Roman Catholic theology isn't one I'm interested in following, either. Where you were left was with the requirement to comply with the covenant you claim is going to earn you eternal life, and you have since rejected that as well as any and all covenants established by God in various dispensations. There is no point discussing this further with an individual who has no means to earn eternal life, and you simply have no answers - just criticism to all who have presented the Gospel of God's redemption. The endless tangents have devolved to non-discussion, and is not the designed purpose of a discussion forum.

 

[Soon144k]

Soon, The message that you have rejected from each and every book discussed has left you with nothing to appeal to as an authority. The "made" aspect of Christ is addressed in Hebrews 10:5, annulling your interpretation of the author's message. Another tangent revealing your ignorance of Roman Catholic theology isn't one I'm interested in following, either. Where you were left was with the requirement to comply with the covenant you claim is going to earn you eternal life, and you have since rejected that as well as any and all covenants established by God in various dispensations. There is no point discussing this further with an individual who has no means to earn eternal life, and you simply have no answers - just criticism to all who have presented the Gospel of God's redemption. The endless tangents have devolved to non-discussion, and is not the designed purpose of a discussion forum.

My authority is the one you so blithely reject as insufficient for the purpose of revealing how salvation actually works, that is the words of Jesus Christ alone. For all my faults of logic and reason you gainsay the very thing that you CLAIM as your motto: "Jesus-that's my final answer". You don't really mean this, because if you did you would be forced by that same logic and reason that you believe so well eludes me to recognize that the gospel of the god that Paul espouses is actually a substitute for the true Gospel of the Kingdom of Heaven as taught by Jesus Christ Himself, and is a different gospel by Paul's own admission than the one taught to the true apostles of Jesus Christ that recorded His very words against which you find such blasphemous fault.

The answers that I have given you and others are incomprehensible to you because as Jesus put it so well to Pilate "Only those that are OF the truth hear My voice" (John 18:37). God spoke this very thing to Daniel as recorded in Daniel 12:10:

Many shall purify themselves and make themselves white and be refined, but the wicked shall act wickedly. And none of the wicked shall understand, but those who are wise shall understand. Dan. 12:10.

It is only those that abide in the words and teachings of Jesus Christ and who are sanctified by those words of truth that make themselves white and become refined, and yes become righteous and are called the Wise. It is those that reject the words of Jesus Christ and him alone and rely on the words of pretenders to the Throne of God such as Paul an Ellen White (and others) that act wickedly; and because they continue to act wickedly they will not understand; these are called Foolish.

Those that become righteous are the only ones that are born into the family of God and the Kingdom of Heaven by the same Mother that gave birth to Jesus Christ (Rev.12:5, John 3:5), and become offspring of God:

Then the dragon became furious with the woman and went off to make war on the rest of her offspring, on those who keep the commandments of God and hold to the testimony of Jesus. Rev.12:17.

THAT is how salvation works according to Jesus Christ. That is what I KNOW to be true, and in which I have NO faith, only the compete trust in knowing that this is the truth. Of course, you are welcome to believe anything you want, even if it is a lie.

 

[VictorC]

My authority is the one you so blithely reject as insufficient for the purpose of revealing how salvation actually works, that is the words of Jesus Christ alone.

Matthew's account is the only Gospel that authenticates Galatians, which was written by Paul. Peter is the only direct witness who endorses Paul's epistles as Scripture. Jesus is the One who has nullified your soteriology as one that has no hope, and it was in Matthew's account wherein the Great Commission demonstrated that Jesus doesn't regard Moses to retain jurisdiction anymore, and John confirms this as well as documenting that the commandments of God are not from the first covenant.

John 15
22 "If I had not come and spoken to them, they would have no sin, but now they have no excuse for their sin.
23 "He who hates Me hates My Father also.
24 "If I had not done among them the works which no one else did, they would have no sin; but now they have seen and also hated both Me and My Father.
25 "But this happened that the word might be fulfilled which is written in their law, `They hated Me without a cause.'​

Jesus shows that the covenant mediated by Moses is about to vanish when He distances Himself from it (while quoting Psalm 69:4 written during its tenure), and you show that you do not know what the commandments of God are each time you appeal to John's epistle of the Apocalypse, Revelation.

So yes, I have no regard for your self-proclaimed authority, as you continue to reject Scripture.

It is only those that abide in the words and teachings of Jesus Christ and who are sanctified by those words of truth that make themselves white and become refined, and yes become righteous and are called the Wise. It is those that reject the words of Jesus Christ and him alone and rely on the words of pretenders to the Throne of God such as Paul an Ellen White (and others) that act wickedly; and because they continue to act wickedly they will not understand; these are called Foolish.

Don't you perceive that you have joined the very group you condemn?
You rejected Jesus when you determined to return to Moses. And yet you have despised the law of Moses, and those who did died at the hands of 2 or more witnesses during the tenure of that covenant. The only reason you haven't met this fate at the hands of your own tribe is because that law doesn't retain jurisdiction.

What fate do you expect at the Hands of the Living God, when you despise the new covenant mediated in the Blood of Jesus Christ?

Those that become righteous are the only ones that are born into the family of God and the Kingdom of Heaven by the same Mother that gave birth to Jesus Christ (Rev.12:5, John 3:5), and become offspring of God:

Then the dragon became furious with the woman and went off to make war on the rest of her offspring, on those who keep the commandments of God and hold to the testimony of Jesus. Rev.12:17.

THAT is how salvation works according to Jesus Christ. That is what I KNOW to be true, and in which I have NO faith, only the compete trust in knowing that this is the truth. Of course, you are welcome to believe anything you want, even if it is a lie.

It no longer does you any good to call attention to John's Gospel or epistles, as you have shown you disdain his accounts. The same is true of Matthew, Peter, the author of Hebrews, Paul, Jeremiah, Isaiah, Moses, and David.

The only reason you elude the topic of circumcision and burnt offerings that you are bound to is simply because you aren't compliant with the law. It is clear that you have the same contempt for the law that you show for the Gospel, and the reason Paul curses those with another rendition of the Gospel in Galatians 1:8-9 than the one we (plural) delivered to you is for the simple reason there is no other Gospel.

 

[Joe67]

John 17:20
20 Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word;KJV

Joe

 

[Laodicean]

"Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch." Matthew 15:14.

 

[Soon144k]

John 17:20
20 Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word;KJV

Joe

That is exactly my point about the eyewitness disciples of Jesus, and is why I trust their word over any pretender apostle of prophet that claims authority from Jesus Christ. Thanks for the reminder of this text.

 

[Joe67]

Soon,

Here are some witnesses concerning the relationship of Saul/Paul and the apostles and believers at Jerusalem and Antioch. He was emotionally close to the people that he was given to serve. Paul served as a witness, a servant, as he testified concerning God the Father and His Son, our Lord Jesus Christ.

Concerning the Gentile author of the human language in the Acts of the Apostles, it is good to remember that the Lord called Cyrus his servant, and at the word of Cyrus, the Lord authorized the restoration of the sanctuary after 70 years of captivity.

Let us not despise the spirit of Jesus and reject Rahab, Ruth, Nebuchadnezzar, Job, Jael and the other Gentiles who were brought into the praise and service of the Lord. The Lord told Abraham that he was the God of all people.

Acts 4:36-37
36 And Joses, who by the apostles was surnamed Barnabas, (which is, being interpreted, The son of consolation,) a Levite, and of the country of Cyprus,

37 Having land, sold it, and brought the money, and laid it at the apostles' feet. KJV

Acts 9:26-30
26 And when Saul was come to Jerusalem, he assayed to join himself to the disciples: but they were all afraid of him, and believed not that he was a disciple.

27 But Barnabas took him, and brought him to the apostles, and declared unto them how he had seen the Lord in the way, and that he had spoken to him, and how he had preached boldly at Damascus in the name of Jesus.

28 And he was with them coming in and going out at Jerusalem.

29 And he spake boldly in the name of the Lord Jesus, and disputed against the Grecians: but they went about to slay him.

30 Which when the brethren knew, they brought him down to Caesarea, and sent him forth to Tarsus. KJV

Acts 11:25-27
25 Then departed Barnabas to Tarsus, for to seek Saul:

26 And when he had found him, he brought him unto Antioch. And it came to pass, that a whole year they assembled themselves with the church, and taught much people. And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch.

27 And in these days came prophets from Jerusalem unto Antioch. KJV

Acts 11:29-30
29 Then the disciples, every man according to his ability, determined to send relief unto the brethren which dwelt in Judaea:

30 Which also they did, and sent it to the elders by the hands of Barnabas and Saul.KJV

Acts 13:2
2 As they ministered to the Lord, and fasted, the Holy Ghost said, Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them. KJV

Acts 15:8-12
8 And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us;
9 And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.
10 Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?
11 But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they.
12 Then all the multitude kept silence, and gave audience to Barnabas and Paul, declaring what miracles and wonders God had wrought among the Gentiles by them. KJV

Joe

 

[Kira Light]

"Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch." Matthew 15:14.

These types of verses are a favorite of every little christian cult. Just spam one with no explanation and claim victory. The smaller and more strange your cult is the better. Narrow is the way. The narrower your path the more correct you must be!