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.
I'll point you in ths same direction to I John 3:23.Great question! I'd like to add to that. Paul says keeping the commandments of God is what matters, so is he talking about the Father's laws or Jesus' laws. This verse seems to be based off of what Solomon said in Ecclesiastes 12:13 Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man.
That's not my problem to answer. It's yours. You asked for a verse that said that David kept God's law and I gave you one.So what does keeping the law entail for you? By the verse you refernenced above I take that sinning is keeping the law. Did David violate the law? Is that keeping the law? Is what I'm getting at wrong? Do I practice sinning by following the leading of the Spirit? Since I've devoted so much of my life to the things of God, why hasn't God given me a desire to follow the law?
Isa 8:20Are you saying I'm deceived? Doesn't God love me? I've prophesied even concerning religious activity and had those thing come to pass exactly as I had said and to the letter. God has used me with a gift of knowledge about some one I've had no personal interaction with.
My personal testimony is that the Holy Spirit told me the covenant with the COI isn't my covenant. Therefore I'm not obligated to such.
Then why is Abraham such a part of establishing obligation to the law for the Christian? You know very well what is intended when Gen 26:5 is quoted in support of the sabbath and for obligation to the law by the Christian. Same goes for John 14:15 and the ignoring of 15:10.
There you go again saying something that I didn't say and than running with it. How do you plan on having a constructive conversation when all you do is this?What I read in your statement is that the Abraham argument for the law isn't valid, to which I agree.
For someone that doesn't keep the sabbath, I think it's amazing you can tell me how it was set up. 1st, the moon was even created until the 4th day. The 4th commandment points us back to creation and God says that He rested the 7th day. That would be the 7th day of creation, not the 7th day after the creation of the moon.Yes I fully understand that. NTL this is the way God set it up. The first day of the month is always the new moon sabbath with the weekly sabbath on the 7th day there after. Sorry that doesn't coinside with your understanding and practice. Convience is a marvelous thing and very desirable.
Really now. Isn't that being a bit dishonest? How do you get your groceries home? I wager that you always put them on (or in) your beast (vehicle the modern day beast of burden), then mount it and direct it home. Isn't what you said a way to circumvent the law? I think so. Its called legalism. What would you be doing if you didn't have these modern day contraptions? Do yo walk to church?
You don't have goods delivered to you? How laughable. Haven't you heard of the 9th commandment yet? Do you have a refrigerator? How about hot water. And speaking of water? So lets cut off your electirc, gas and water every sabbath. When that meter turns you're accepting goods on account which is doing business and causing more than one person to work for you which is a servant on the sabbath. This is strictly forbidden by the 10 Cs themselves. You again wilfully and knowingly sin every sabbath. What does the Bible say about such? I read there is no more sacrifice for sin. What do you read? Isn't that applied to those who are told about the sabbath and don't then observe it? Bites doesn't it?
So how does that hold up considering Gal 5:4? For your convience - 4Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.
I would provide commentary here but would only be reported by some one. You know by reading the forum and conversations past exactly what I think this means. What does fallen from grace mean to you?
No I follow the rules of English. The capitalization in the sentence give it a different meaning by the rules of English. That meaning is unsupportable by the sentence. Absolutely Jesus was saying that He is God. He however isn't making a claim to be the IAM THAT I AM in Ex 3:14. I'm not denying anything. I said that the Jews got that part right. Jesus is claiming to be God. They didn't get it that Jesus wasn't claiming to be the Father.Deut 6:4 is a major road block for them on this issue even though Gen 1:26 uses us and our even in Hebrew.
Further proof that you don't listen to anything that I say. When have I ever said I'm bias against the NC. Get it straight, I'm bias against your understanding of the NC.Is it that I'm biases against the SDA more than you're biased against the NC?
What does this have to do with anything. You said "Convince me..." I said "I can't" Why the rant on what you "think" is going on in my denomination, instead of focusing on the most important part of my entire reponse which was "Thy way O Lord, is in the sanctuary..." Let's talk about that hmmm? What way of the Lord is in the sanctuary?I've been invesitgating and talking about SDA doctrine for 11 or more years now. I run into things like the SDA saying verbs are nouns. I most frequently have the problem with unsupportable statements on investigation. I'm frequen told I don't understand a word and can't obviously use a dictionary. I'm told I don't understand word usage. Manipulation is often tried. Many who are SDA refuse to identify themselves as such on this forum. Personally I take that as a form of lying for the explicit purpose of deception. This practice is common and taught in your church denomination. It has even been discussed and admitted to in the SDA section of the forum. Don't the SDA take the 9th seriously?
John 15:10 is exactly what it is. Jesus had commandment from His Father. I'm amazed at how you can tell other people not to assume that everytime the word "commandment" is used that it applies to the 10 commandments, but you turn around and do the EXACT same thing when it's convenient for you. I'm also amazed at how you completely, ignored my question about the ark of the covenant, which John saw in heaven. Why? Why? Why? You do realize we can squash all of this if you'd just answer that question?Please explain John 15:10. You can start with sentence structure. You can even give a direct word for word translation if you want.
I'll point you in ths same direction to I John 3:23.
Yes I see a lovely proof text. So where is the discussion on how David die this? I see evidence that David loved God and mostly kept the law. I consider more than one single verse. So since David sinned on many occasions and repented means he kept the law. If a general direction is keeping the law then most people do, even the non religious. So how does that reflect a relationship with God? Incidence isn't obedience, ever. Some here say I follow the law just because I don't murder, lie, steal or commit adultery. I don't think so. I guess that is why some are deceived. Only outside appearances count. The flesh isn't redeemed. The soul can be though.That's not my problem to answer. It's yours. You asked for a verse that said that David kept God's law and I gave you one.
Great verse! Now who is they in your verse? It isn't them that have familar spirits in the preceding verse either. It is those that say go to use those that do. Have I don't this? Where. Yes I understand that you're saying there is no light in me. And so it is nothing more than another verse used out of context for me.Isa 8:20
Please tell me what the major issue is here on the forum and why the very first thing an SDA approaches a non SDA Christian with is the sabbath? The sabbath is the issue with using Gen 26:5 and John 14:15. John 14:15 is to prove that a Christian hates God because they don't observe the sabbath. If you love Me keep My commandments really is said to be If you love Me keep the sabbath. What is the first thing that someone is asked after leaving or not attending the SDA church? What happened to some dear friends here who were involved up to their ears upon leaving the SDA church? Yeah it sounds like I'm condeming, doesn't it? I'm just trying to make a point about what really does happen and what the truth is.I think it's hillarious how you start talking about the law, but than go straight to the sabbath commandment as if it's the only one that's part of the law.
OK redeem yourself and tell me what you mean by "Abraham kept the law of God but we don't what law that was, but we do know it wasn't the 10 commandments." Are you saying that others outside the SDA church are saying this? If so please show what law and commandments Abraham obeyed. It will be a very tall order to prove that Abraham kept something that didn't happen to exist until 430 years later. But I'm interested to see a rebuttal - no a refutation.There you go again saying something that I didn't say and than running with it. How do you plan on having a constructive conversation when all you do is this?
And the sabbath wasn't even apart of the creation process. Ah yes and God didn't return to creating did He? What does the word shabath mean? A Jewish version of the Scripture says abstained in Gen 2 and in Hosea 2 it is translated as cease - a defining word of the hebrew shabath.For someone that doesn't keep the sabbath, I think it's amazing you can tell me how it was set up. 1st, the moon was even created until the 4th day. The 4th commandment points us back to creation and God says that He rested the 7th day. That would be the 7th day of creation, not the 7th day after the creation of the moon.
Trying to compare a non-living piece of machine to an animal is laughable. Secondly, thinking that it's a sin to use electricity, again, laughable. These arguements make the sabbath a burden. We live in a different society. My church is not within walking distance. It'd be more work to walk to church, not to mention more dangerous, than to drive. Using this line of thought is foolish. Totally. Sorry, nothing "bites" here except for your attempts to prove that I don't really "keep" the sabbath.
If one isn't justified by the law why keep it? If one can't be condemed by the law wherein is its value? So if one violates the law is there a penalty? IOW one is just by the keeping of the law - no? If not then how is one justified or why can anyone be seperated form God by not keeping the law?I'm not justififed by the works of the law, so I'm cool. Again, don't get mad because you can't figure out a way to trap me. Keeping the law has nothing to do with justification. So again, I'm pro law and grace. You just don't understand a thing about the law (10c's) which would be remedied if you'd study the sanctuary.
Stryder the original language doesn't support you position either. I provided you opportunity to prove you point form the Greek and you didn't. Why? Your statement is avoidance and denial. I also side with Jesus Christ.First, scripture wasn't written according to the rules of English. Second Jesus says "I Am". You say "He wasn't saying "I Am" like that. Sorry bud but I've got to side with Christ.
To that I have no problem. I also have no bias against the OC. I do have it in proper persepctive though. The OC and no part of it has sway over the NC. We have a NEW ciovenant and not a REnewed covenant. The old one didn't become new by moving from stone tablets to soft tablets of our heart. Movement changes nothing.Further proof that you don't listen to anything that I say. When have I ever said I'm bias against the NC. Get it straight, I'm bias against your understanding of the NC.
I would love to make stronger statements, however the rules, administration and many of the participants here won't allow it. So sorry, but that is life. You seem to insist that one can't know anything except by being a part of it. Sorry to inform you that isn't the case. I agree that you can't refute the truth.What does this have to do with anything. You said "Convince me..." I said "I can't" Why the rant on what you "think" is going on in my denomination, instead of focusing on the most important part of my entire reponse which was "Thy way O Lord, is in the sanctuary..." Let's talk about that hmmm? What way of the Lord is in the sanctuary?
Tell you what when you explain John 15:10 I'll take a look at and deal with your ark of the covenant in heaven. The only thing I see is that John saw the ark of his testament. I don't see the ark of the covenant - meaning the Ark containing stone tablets and Aarons rod.John 15:10 is exactly what it is. Jesus had commandment from His Father. I'm amazed at how you can tell other people not to assume that everytime the word "commandment" is used that it applies to the 10 commandments, but you turn around and do the EXACT same thing when it's convenient for you. I'm also amazed at how you completely, ignored my question about the ark of the covenant, which John saw in heaven. Why? Why? Why? You do realize we can squash all of this if you'd just answer that question?
OK so where is it? And while you're at it what about the rest of the verse?Love one another? Hmmm, for some strange odd reason I think about the OC commandment to love one another. Hmm, go figure.
I think it's funny that everything I present is a "proof-text". WhateverYes I see a lovely proof text. So where is the discussion on how David die this? I see evidence that David loved God and mostly kept the law. I consider more than one single verse. So since David sinned on many occasions and repented means he kept the law. If a general direction is keeping the law then most people do, even the non religious. So how does that reflect a relationship with God? Incidence isn't obedience, ever. Some here say I follow the law just because I don't murder, lie, steal or commit adultery. I don't think so. I guess that is why some are deceived. Only outside appearances count. The flesh isn't redeemed. The soul can be though.
Take it how you want to buddy.Great verse! Now who is they in your verse? It isn't them that have familar spirits in the preceding verse either. It is those that say go to use those that do. Have I don't this? Where. Yes I understand that you're saying there is no light in me. And so it is nothing more than another verse used out of context for me.
You're confused.Please tell me what the major issue is here on the forum and why the very first thing an SDA approaches a non SDA Christian with is the sabbath? The sabbath is the issue with using Gen 26:5 and John 14:15. John 14:15 is to prove that a Christian hates God because they don't observe the sabbath.
Incorrect. It's exactly what it is. If you love Me, keep my commandments. The problem is that too many people aren't keeping the sabbath, so instead of just doing what they're asked to do, they say "We just don't have to keep it"If you love Me keep My commandments really is said to be If you love Me keep the sabbath.
You have no clue what you're talking about outside of this little bubble you live in, in regards to your experience. I'm not going to argue this with you because again, it'd be fruitless.What is the first thing that someone is asked after leaving or not attending the SDA church? What happened to some dear friends here who were involved up to their ears upon leaving the SDA church? Yeah it sounds like I'm condeming, doesn't it? I'm just trying to make a point about what really does happen and what the truth is.
First, I don't need to "redeem" myself of anything. You've already proven my point. Scripture shows God saying that Abraham kept His law. You however say it can't be the ten commandments, but simultaneously you don't know what law it was that he kept. The eternal nature of the law of God is seen in the sanctuary. Which is why I keep telling you to look it up. You, of course, keep ignoring it though. I don't think you actually want to look it up.OK redeem yourself and tell me what you mean by "Abraham kept the law of God but we don't what law that was, but we do know it wasn't the 10 commandments." Are you saying that others outside the SDA church are saying this? If so please show what law and commandments Abraham obeyed. It will be a very tall order to prove that Abraham kept something that didn't happen to exist until 430 years later. But I'm interested to see a rebuttal - no a refutation.
I read that it is not wrong to do good on the sabbath. Our society runs in a much different fashion than it did during those days. You ask about the spirit of the law than completely disregard it with the remainder of your statement. You don't understand the sabbath, nor do you wish to, which is why you keep going back to these stale arguements.What ever happened to the spirit of the law? Gets thrown out for the love of convience, huh? What is it that animals did? Aren machines wonderful? We only have to feed them when they work. We don't even need to put them in the stable (read garage, barn, shed, carport, etc.). Wonder what would happen if we were to take away those machines from society? I read beast of burden (cattle in Exodus and Deuteronomy it is ox, ass or any cattle). What do you read?
Now who said using electricity was a sin? Not me. If you get your electricity from a passive solar pannel, I will take my statement back. I wager that you get your electricity from the power company. Some one attends those machines on the sabbath for you. They deliver it through a passive means and don't knock on your door. Ah modern conviences are wonderful. Still doesn't change the fact that you require someone to work for you on the sabbath. Still doesn't change the fact that you're legally doing business on the sabbath. I read that you man and maid servants are to rest on the sabbath. What do you read?
You are hillarious. You're the one saying I'm not keeping the sabbath because I use a car and electricity on the sabbath. You're right, that idea that you're trying to push on me is legalism. And that is what the Pharisees were doing. Telling people they could only walk so far, or not carry a "load". Jesus walked all over the place, and commanded the man He healed to pick up His bed. I guess you think Jesus wasn't keeping the sabbath either.I guess I'd have to say that even the 10 Cs don't apply in our day by your understanding. Yet there is a big fuss about keeping them. Isn't that strange to you? It sure is me. This is exactly what the scribes and Pharisees did. It is called legalism and blasphemes God's name.
Your understanding of Justification is off. You're justified when you come to Christ. But you can't live in disobedience. Your logic here if faulty because you think you have to keep the law of the new covenant. If what you're saying here is true than it's just as applicable to the new covenant law.If one isn't justified by the law why keep it? If one can't be condemed by the law wherein is its value? So if one violates the law is there a penalty? IOW one is just by the keeping of the law - no? If not then how is one justified or why can anyone be seperated form God by not keeping the law?
Again, your understanding of the OC is off. God didn't say He'd give us a new law. He said He'd put His law in the hearts of His people. Interestingly enough, God said the new covenant was for the house of Israel and Judah. You like to ignore that though. You also ignore that John saw the ark of the covenant in the heavenly sanctuary. What was that all about?Stryder the original language doesn't support you position either. I provided you opportunity to prove you point form the Greek and you didn't. Why? Your statement is avoidance and denial. I also side with Jesus Christ. To that I have no problem. I also have no bias against the OC. I do have it in proper persepctive though. The OC and no part of it has sway over the NC. We have a NEW ciovenant and not a REnewed covenant. The old one didn't become new by moving from stone tablets to soft tablets of our heart. Movement changes nothing.
Have you never read that verse? Why does it matter what version it's from? I can tell you that's not the NIV version. Psalms 77:13OK what version did you get this quote from - Thy way O Lord, is in the sanctuary...?
Tell you what when you explain John 15:10 I'll take a look at and deal with your ark of the covenant in heaven. The only thing I see is that John saw the ark of his testament. I don't see the ark of the covenant - meaning the Ark containing stone tablets and Aarons rod.
OK so where is it? And while you're at it what about the rest of the verse?
I suppose one can look at it like that...tho I myself do notYou'd be better served looking that up yourself. You talk about how the new covenant isn't a "renewed" covenant, but if you ask me, alot of the rules there are from the OC, which would make it a renewed one. There's no getting around that.
Law to love God and your neighbor is first established in the OC
I take this as not addressing John 15:10 and going on to something else.
I think that is only because of your definition and use of the word commandments. You tend to think of it as only appllying to the law.
I've been know to ask and make statements about I John 3:23 which usually get by passed. Would you care to discuss that verse?
Which commandments are Jesus referring to at this point in the Sermon on the Mount? I didn't see anything quoted from the law at this point. Which commandments is He referring after the this statement? Jesus says very clearly you have heard it said by them of old time and quotes commandments then says But I say unto you... Now I ask what is Jesus teaching? The law and commandments? Hardly! Also consider this once more as if you ever have - The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it. Does that cut Jesus out?
Yes Jesus did. Now what does fulfill mean? And didn't Jesus do it as testified in Lk 24:44? - And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning Me.
All things considered I think this speaks of Paul. First John the Baptist left no written testiomony about anything as Moses did. John the Baptist led no one out of bondage, but the Apostle Paul surely does if one will only listen. Jesus wasn't quite like His brethern in that Jesus was also God and had no earthly father.
And the glory of Jesus out shines Moses and the law. II Cor 3.
Please explain Romans 10:4.I refer you back to LK 16:16 quoted above
.
Bottom line is I demonstrated from Scripture that Jesus did no such thing as you prepose.
I suppose one can look at it like that...tho I myself do not
How do the Jews look at it?Unfortunately, how one decides to look at it is not nearly as imporatant as how it's suppose to be looked at.
The covenant was changed because the people screwed up, as Hebrews tells us. Thus it went from the people putting the law into their hearts, to God doing it.
You'd be better served looking that up yourself. You talk about how the new covenant isn't a "renewed" covenant, but if you ask me, alot of the rules there are from the OC, which would make it a renewed one. There's no getting around that.
Law to love God and your neighbor is first established in the OC
So I ask you to explain your verse and show what it means. What I see is a text that proves David did something. So I also asked you to explain what it means to keep the law. There is none that did according to Psalms and my buddy Paul. So what exactly does it mean to keep the law?I think it's funny that everything I present is a "proof-text". Whatever
Be nice Stryder. I asked you who the they are in the verse. Can you identify them? Or will you state the purpose of your use? I get this response only from the SDA folks. It seems to be one of the hallmarks. It usually is used to condemn one to hell.Take it how you want to buddy.
Really now. I'd love you to show me the case where either of those verses are used in some other way. It is 100% my experience.And I've chatted with SDA folks from the time I was 19. That's about 41 years.You're confused.
Why or how is someone obligated to a law that doesn't apply to them? We aren't under the jurisdiction of the OC or the 10 Cs, not that there is a difference. We have the NC which doesn't include the 7th day sabbath or the other Jewish required holy days.Incorrect. It's exactly what it is. If you love Me, keep my commandments. The problem is that too many people aren't keeping the sabbath, so instead of just doing what they're asked to do, they say "We just don't have to keep it"
So explain it to me. Saying I have no clue helps no one and isn't discussion. This type of argument just side steps anything fruitful. It give the idea that you have no ability to defend what your saying. If you think that making a statement means that one accepts without question, please remember you're not speaking to the chior here at CF. Fortunately CF isn't your church.You have no clue what you're talking about outside of this little bubble you live in, in regards to your experience. I'm not going to argue this with you because again, it'd be fruitless.
I can accept that Scripture shows and proves that Abraham kept God's law. This however isn't proof that Abraham kept the 10 Cs (specifically the sabbath) as is commonly argued by you folks. Even Doc Sam B agrees (well now agreed since he passed away last year) with my point. I do notice that you didn't include commandments in your statement. Why?First, I don't need to "redeem" myself of anything. You've already proven my point. Scripture shows God saying that Abraham kept His law. You however say it can't be the ten commandments, but simultaneously you don't know what law it was that he kept. The eternal nature of the law of God is seen in the sanctuary. Which is why I keep telling you to look it up. You, of course, keep ignoring it though. I don't think you actually want to look it up.
I see says the blind man. A changing society changes the law. What does my buddy Paul say? Gal 4:21Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law? It isn't very fair to show that Jesus changed the law and then say keep it. I refer you to LK 16:16 where it shows that Jesus or any one else in the NC didn't promote the law as an obligation. Do I need to quote it agian?I read that it is not wrong to do good on the sabbath. Our society runs in a much different fashion than it did during those days. You ask about the spirit of the law than completely disregard it with the remainder of your statement. You don't understand the sabbath, nor do you wish to, which is why you keep going back to these stale arguements.
So tell me Stryder what is the real difference in saddling and mounting your ass and ride it to church than doing the same with a vehicle? I find none except a legal argument that the Scripture doesn' say vehicle.You are hillarious. You're the one saying I'm not keeping the sabbath because I use a car and electricity on the sabbath. You're right, that idea that you're trying to push on me is legalism. And that is what the Pharisees were doing. Telling people they could only walk so far, or not carry a "load". Jesus walked all over the place, and commanded the man He healed to pick up His bed. I guess you think Jesus wasn't keeping the sabbath either.
How can one be disobedient to something that does apply or have jurisdiction? I Tim 1:8-10 - 8But we know that the law is good, if a man use it lawfully;9Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,10For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;Your understanding of Justification is off. You're justified when you come to Christ. But you can't live in disobedience. Your logic here if faulty because you think you have to keep the law of the new covenant. If what you're saying here is true than it's just as applicable to the new covenant law.
No, no Jeremiah says cut a new stone with the word make. Hes says new as in chadash (khä·däsh' ), not renewed (khä·dash' ). This is evidenced better with the greek quote found in Hebrews 8. The word uses is kainos (new) and not neos (renew). Much harder to make a mistake about what is being said.Again, your understanding of the OC is off. God didn't say He'd give us a new law. He said He'd put His law in the hearts of His people. Interestingly enough, God said the new covenant was for the house of Israel and Judah. You like to ignore that though. You also ignore that John saw the ark of the covenant in the heavenly sanctuary. What was that all about?
Yes it makes a difference when I check out what you're saying. My King James uses the word God and not Lord. Yes it does make a difference it chatting with you. And yes I have read it several times. I just didn't remember to make the substitution of words.Have you never read that verse? Why does it matter what version it's from? I can tell you that's not the NIV version. Psalms 77:13
OK so you won't explain it. No problem.I already told you that there's nothing to explain from John 15:10. I'm not even sure what you're looking for. What I did say was that it's funny how you say that commandment doesn't always refer to the ten commandments. As such, why is it that you think Jesus is talking about the ten here. Jesus gave the disciples plenty of commandments. The long and short of it, is that Jesus was saying, Obey Me. It's that simple. And the Ark of the Testament is the ark of the covenant. The Lord told Moses to put the "Testament" into the ark. I get the feeling that you won't look into this though.
We've been down this road already. God said that David kept His law. He also said that Abraham kept His law. Your understanding of what it means to keep the law is what's in error. That said, you see no scripture to back up anything that you don't want to see. Again, if Jesus has His own laws, and the Father has His own laws, who is suppose to follow what? If you think the Disicples were given new laws, state them. Show them. I don't need to "explain" John 15:10 to you. It speaks for itself.
This whole thread is unnecessary. Didn't Jesus say "Before Abraham was I AM"? Oh, but wait, there's an explanation for that right? Jesus wasn't really saying that He was the I Am of the Old Testament right? The people were just about to stone Him for saying that because claiming to be "I Am" was against the law right? Please. You're so desperate to justify not keeping the law of God that you'll twist the very words of God to suit your own understanding.
Again, God the Father doesn't have His own set of laws which are contrary to some set of laws that Jesus has. Take note that John says "...and the ark of his (God) covenant was seen". So yeah, your problems just keep mounting up since you think the law of God was done away with, because that verse right there says otherwise, without any if, and's, or buts to it.
well, here's the record!!!
Matthew 5:17-19(NKJV)
17Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill.
18For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled.
19Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
see, you don't take time out to see what He said.
He came to fulfill. fulfill what? remember what He said to john the baptist?
Matthew 3:15(NKJV)
15But Jesus answered and said to him, Permit it to be so now, for thus it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness. Then he allowed Him.
here again, Jesus is talking about fulfilling. and in the instance with john the baptist, He was fulfilling this verse:
Deuteronomy 18:15(NKJV)
15The Lord your God will raise up for you a Prophet like me from your midst, from your brethren. Him you shall hear,
He not only set the example for the christian, He also fulfilled the prophesy of moses, by rising out of the water!
now, in matthew 5, Jesus is fufilling isaiah 42! He's expanding on the spiritual implications of the law, magnifying like most versions put it.
Isaiah 42:21(NKJV)
21 The Lord is well pleased for His righteousness sake; He will exalt the law and make it honorable.
Isaiah 42:21(KJV)
21The LORD is well pleased for his righteousness sake; he will magnify the law, and make it honourable.
Isaiah 42:21(ESV)
21 The Lord was pleased, for his righteousness sake, to magnify his law and make it glorious.
here's the word for exalt/magnify from strong's:
H1431
גָּדַל
gâdal
gaw-dal'
A primitive root; properly to twist (compare H1434), that is, to be (causatively make) large (in various senses, as in body, mind, estate or honor, also in pride):advance, boast, bring up, exceed, excellent, be (-come, do, give, make, wax), great (-er, come to . . estate, + things), grow (up), increase, lift up, magnify (-ifical), be much set by, nourish (up), pass, promote, proudly [spoken], tower.
the bible is clear that Jesus did not come to do away with the law of God, rather, it shows that He had things to do concerning the law that He had to fulfill, not just living by the law, but adding to the teaching of the law.
so, for you to say that Jesus did not teach commandments, you could be no more wrong than you are with your reasoning.
bottom line is you can't answer this question:
how can Jesus speak of teaching commandments (mat 5:19) and not teach them Himself? (again, defies logic!)
Old habits are sometimes hard to get rid ofIf it was renewed, that how come James said no Moses for the church in Acts 15? Would not what is written on the heart internally, have to also be acted out externally?
Old habits are sometimes hard to get rid of
2 Corin 3:14 But was calloused the minds of them.
For until the today, the same covering upon the reading of the Old Covenant/Testament is remaining, no being up-covered.
That In Christ it is being-taken-away
Revelation 1:1 An uncovering/apo-kaluyiV <602> of Jesus Christ which gives to him, the God, to show to the bond-servants of Him which-things is binding to be becoming in swiftness
and He signifies it, commissioning thru the Messenger of Him, to the bondservants of Him, John.
So you wish to deny Scripture. OK. Just don't expect me to do the same.You'd be better served looking that up yourself. You talk about how the new covenant isn't a "renewed" covenant, but if you ask me, alot of the rules there are from the OC, which would make it a renewed one. There's no getting around that.
Law to love God and your neighbor is first established in the OC
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?