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.
You have the opportunity to prove it.You should not read a single passage out of CONTEXT of what is written. Prayerfully read the passage in context of the rest of the scriptures seeking God's guidence and tell me what you think the chapter and scriptures are saying?
So your claim circumcision isn't part of the law. There's no division of the law for the Jew. Circumcision is a command of the law.Now brother David. That is not true at all. Please show me where God's 10 commandments mention CIRCUMCISION. You mix up God's shadow laws from the MOSIAC book of the COVENANT *EXODUS 24:7 that pointed to JESUS and God's plan of salvation in the NEW COVENANT with GOD's eternal law that gives us the KNOWLDEGE of GOOD and EVIL; SIN AND RIGHEOUSNESS *ROMANS 3:20; ROMANS 7:7; 1 JOHN 3:4; PSALMS 119:172. As a result we have no knowledge of what sin is. If we do not have a knowledge of what sin is we have no need of a Saviour. If we have no need of a Saviour then we have no salvation. If we have no salvation then we are lost because we are still in our sins.
Can you see the error in your argument here brother? It denies the Word of God. As shown earlier. Only God's WORD is true and we should believe and follow it over the teachings and traditions of men that break the commandments of God. JESUS says those who knowingly do so are not following God.
You need to read my whole post. They're relative short compared to your. So it shouldn't be that hard.Actually I have mainly post NEW TESTAMENT passages but draw back to the OLD TESTAMENT scriptures to show the origin of what is in the NEW TESTAMENT. Many do not know what the NEW TESTAMENT scriptures mean because they do not know the OLD TESTAMENT scriptures they are referring to.
Everything that we have in the NEW TESTAMENT comes from the OLD TESTAMENT. In fact the bible of JESUS and the APOSTLES was the OLD TESTAMENT scriptures. CIRCUMCISION is not one of the 10 Commandments. It was a SHADOW law from the MOSAIC BOOK of the COVENANT *EXODUS 24:7.
You mix up your SHADOW laws from God's eternal LAW that give us the KNOWLEDGE GOOD and EVIL; SIN and RIGHTEOUSNESS *ROMANS 3:20; ROMANS 7:7; 1 JOHN 3:4; PSALMS 119:172. If you do not know what the OLD COVENANT is how can you know what the NEW COVENANT is that the OLD COVENANT points to?
Can you see your error here brother?
You're a real work of art. Do either one. Of course I'm referring to your CF blessings.Until you read it. "This IS the New Covenant... I will write MY LAW on their heart and mind" Jeremiah 31:31-33
BTW I love it that you have setup my perfect slam dunk on that point about 100 times by now on this section of the board. I wish I could send you a gift or something. It is very nice of you to keep doing that. God bless you.
CF blessings or real ones??
So many of your post are so close together this is difficult to believe especially when I recognize exact wording.Actually I am not C&P I am writing much on the fly. I doubt you read it though as you do not respond to the posts and scriptures that have only been provided in love as a help to you. Although my prayer is that you will prayerfully consider the scriptures provided.
So either the law is changed which you deny or Jesus is a sinner by Hebrews 7. You can't have both.Is 56:6-8 gentiles (not Jews) are specifically singled out for Sabbath keeping
Not true. They are gentiles. "Foreigners". And it does not matter where they live according to Isaiah 56.
“Also the foreigners who join themselves to the Lord,
To minister to Him, and to love the name of the Lord,
To be His servants, every one who keeps from profaning the Sabbath
And holds fast My covenant;
7 Even those I will bring to My holy mountain
And make them joyful in My house of prayer.
Their burnt offerings and their sacrifices will be acceptable on My altar;
For My house will be called a house of prayer for all the nations.”
Ex 12:48 does NOT say "anyone who keeps from profaning the Sabbath is a Jew". And we all know it.
Ex 12
48 But if a stranger sojourns with you, and celebrates the Passover to the Lord, let all his males be circumcised, and then let him come near to celebrate it; and he shall be like a native of the land. But no uncircumcised person may eat of it.
Nothing at all there about the weekly Sabbath - the Sabbath commandment. As we all can see clearly.
So it is gentiles .. foreigners "all nations" in Isaiah 56 -- not circumcised passover-keeping Jews.
And it is foreigners - "god fearers" in Acts 14 - gentiles that are worshiping in the Synagogue "Sabbath after Sabbath" and asking for MORE Gospel preaching "NEXT Sabbath" when the "entire town" shows up... still gentiles.
Thus it is that gentiles show up in Acts 17:1-4 and in Acts 18:4-6 Sabbath after Sabbath in the synagogue for Gospel preaching.
The text you reference only speaks about Passover and circumcision ... nothing at all in it about gentiles in all nations and the weekly Sabbath.
By contrast - the texts I point to - do reference gentiles in all nations and the weekly Sabbath. and we see them not only in Isaiah 56 but also in the NT - in Acts 13, Acts 17, Acts 18 -- Sabbath after Sabbath... gentiles, not Jews
Isaiah 56 does not say the foreigner lives in Israel. Those gentiles keeping Sabbath in Acts 13, Acts 17, Acts 18 were not in Israel, were not circumcised, were not Jews.
You are conflating two different things.
1. The liturgy of worship - before the cross vs after (no matter if the one worshiping is a Jew or gentile)
2. the requirement of a gentile worshiper to ALSO become a circumcised Jew IF they want to also observe the Passover.
Details matter.
Animal sacrifices needed before the cross -- no matter if one was Jew or gentile.
Gentiles needed to be circumcised if they wanted to go to the temple and keep Passover -- no matter if it was before the cross or after.
But none of those gentiles in Acts 13, `17, 18 worshiping in the synagogues every Sabbath are Jews - rather they are called "God fearing gentiles" -- they keep Sabbath but they are not circumcised Jews.
Bible details matter. Nice try though.
On the contrary - "god fearing gentiles"
"God-fearers (Greek: φοβούμενος τὸν Θεόν, Phoboumenos ton Theon) or God-worshipers (Greek: θεοσεβής, Theosebes) were a numerous class of gentile sympathizers to Hellenistic Judaism, which observed certain Jewish religious rites and traditions without becoming full converts to Judaism."
Full converts were not called gentiles and could enter the temple.
Ex 12
48 But if a stranger sojourns with you, and celebrates the Passover to the Lord, let all his males be circumcised, and then let him come near to celebrate it; and he shall be like a native of the land. But no uncircumcised person may eat of it
A Jew could not become a priest either - they had to be Levites and in fact descendant from Aaron.
I'm a fan of that site. If you check the interlinear, you'll see I posted truth.made another post with more detailed info
Why is the day of worship controversial?
It's in several versions you can compare them here if you like. www.biblehub.com
If it's a new covenant not according to the previous covenant containing the famous 10, indeed they're dismissed as Gal 3 says the school teacher is no longer employed.I guess it really doesn't matter if one calls it a new covenant or a better covenant as long as the 10 are not dismissed, is really the point. Better covenant makes more sense to me ... because that makes the big 10 part still standing from the "original" covenant. The entire OT covenant was not completely made irrelevant ... or not needed .... it was the ceremonial/sacrificial part that was made irrelevant or not needed because of Jesus.
God Bless.
I'm a fan of that site. If you check the interlinear, you'll see I posted truth.If it's a new covenant not according to the previous covenant containing the famous 10, indeed they're dismissed as Gal 3 says the school teacher is no longer employed.
So either the law is changed which you deny or Jesus is a sinner by Hebrews 7. You can't have both.
You need to read my whole post. They're relative short compared to your. So it shouldn't be that hard.
Is Joshua 8:32 God's Word and true?
You have the opportunity to prove it.
You use this against us and refuse to admit your own guilt. I'm still waiting for your discussion and testimony concerning Ex 20:8-11.
So your claim circumcision isn't part of the law. There's no division of the law for the Jew. Circumcision is a command of the law.
There's no such command in the NT.
then it is a different agreement but it references the same law in both cases.If it's a new covenant not according to the previous covenant
I'm a fan of that site. If you check the interlinear, you'll see I posted truth.If it's a new covenant not according to the previous covenant containing the famous 10, indeed they're dismissed as Gal 3 says the school teacher is no longer employed.
Why are you attempting to foist this off on me? Do you have me saying that anywhere? Do you have me promoting that anywhere? Please quote it with reference. The law was given only to Israel. See Deut 5:1-3.well ... ok then .... guess hey ... we can murder, covet, lie, steal, commit adultery as much as we want and hey as long as we believe Jesus is ... no problem? ;o)
I have a passage I want you to explain -Why do we have many NT verses where Jesus says if you love me keep my commandments?
Maybe you could explain this passage too -Why do we have this?
Matthew 5
The Fulfillment of the Law
17Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets. I have not come to abolish them, but to fulfill them. 18For I tell you truly, until heaven and earth pass away, not a single jot, not a stroke of a pen, will disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.
19So then, whoever breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do likewise will be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever practices and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20For I tell you that unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.
I see. Then it must be the law that changed.[/quote]Hint: Hebrews 7 does not say Jesus is a sinner.
Then since Jesus isn't a priest according to the law and He is our Priest, how can the law be a factor in our relationship with God? There is no Levitical priesthood today. If there are tell us so we can also go to them.Hebrews 7 makes the case that Jesus is not a priest like the Levitical priest.. but rather is a priest according to the order of Melchizedek who was not a descendant of Aaron, or Levi or Jacob or Isaac nor even a descendant of Abraham -- yet "still" a priest. And Melchizedek is a "type" of Christ in that no data is recorded about his beginning or end of life (as the type) - just as God the Son has no beginning and no end in real life.
But no jot or titles of the law can change. Remember Mat 5?Hebrews 7 says that the law regarding priesthood is changed -- it does not say "it is ok to take God's name in vain now that Christ is high priest" -- as we all know.
If keeping the famous 10 are what matters, how can Paul say we are now delivered from the law by referencing the 10th commandment?In fact "what matters is KEEPING the Commandments of God" 1 Cor 7:19 where the commandments of God are found in that LAW in which the 5th commandment "is the first commandment with a promise" Eph 6:2. No wonder then Paul's teaching is "do we then make void the LAW of God by our faith? God forbid! In fact we ESTABLISH the LAW" Rom 3:31
The question or statement was presented by Sara about the famous 10 being the law of Moses. So I presented Joshua 8:32 in which the Law of Moses is written on stone. Do you have something saying anything besides the famous 10 were written on stone? I want to see it.Absolutely as is the rest of the chapter that provides context to the scripture. Already addressed your only repeating yourself now brother. Do you have anything else to add or did you wish to respond to and address the previous post to you on this topic?
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?