Why is this not being taught in Church?

[topher694]

Churches have done a disservice to Christians by teaching the wrong thing.
it is not easy to undo what they have done. but keep asking questions

Acts 21:20 James said there are thousand who are zealous for the Law

The Law nullifies grace. therefore you cannot follow the Law and be saved by grace.


this is for Jews
When you study the first 4 Gospels Jew, believers, are based from Peter's confession.

16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.
but they did not turn from the Law

This is for Christians
Paul teaches The body of Christ, The cross the power of God to salvation and saved by grace through faith

please read my last 3 post and if you still have questions ask

Paul:
1st Cor.: 12:13 For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.
27 Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular.
1 Corinthians 1:18
For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.
Ephesians 2:8
For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:

I know it is very confusing. I'll do my best to clear it up.

I do not teach Christians the wrong thing.

You know I've found that people who are deliberately and repeatedly vague about their own accusations often do so to promote heretical views in a way that skirts the rules and/or they do so from a place of considerable pride & error.

 

[HARK!]

The Law nullifies grace. therefore you cannot follow the Law and be saved by grace

Romans 3:31 Do we then nullify the Law through faith? May it never be! On the contrary, we establish the Law

 

[rhern]

I do not teach Christians the wrong thing.

You know I've found that people who are deliberately and repeatedly vague about their own accusations often do so to promote heretical views in a way that skirts the rules and/or they do so from a place of considerable pride & error.

Sir, you can believe or deny passages from the KJV
I do not want to offend anyone.
I was gracious enough to try to answer your questions. I didn't know I was being baited. I had this feeling but if you were truly looking for answer I would go out of my way to answer your questions.
Many if not most common American Churches put their blinders on and refuse to study every word of the Bible. All denominational Preachers trained and are taught their denominational beliefs.
Why are their so many denominations.
I'm sure you will probably say your denomination is the right one and so says every other denomination.
Which is the true Church. I dare you to tell me.

If you can show me which scripture verse that I used is in error, please show me.

after all this I am still willing to discuss the Word of God with you and anyone else who is interested.

 

[Guojing]

The sign nailed to the cross said "King of the Jews" Our Lord and Savior.

Zechariah 14:9 And the Lord shall be king over all the earth: in that day shall there be one Lord, and his name one.

Acts 3:25 Ye are the children of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made with our fathers, saying unto Abraham, And in thy seed shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed.

Ephsians 2:11 Wherefore remember, that ye being in time past Gentiles in the flesh, who are called Uncircumcision by that which is called the Circumcision in the flesh made by hands;
12 That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world:

Romans 15:
8 Now I say that Jesus Christ was a minister of the circumcision for the truth of God, to confirm the promises made unto the fathers:

Matthew 10:5-6
5 These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not:
6 But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

There are many churches out there who love to preach from the 4 Gospels, as instructions to their congregation.

It will be hard to continue doing so, if they mention these verses to their congregation too.

 

[rhern]

Romans 3:31 Do we then nullify the Law through faith? May it never be! On the contrary, we establish the Law

Romans 7:4 King James Version (KJV)
Therefore, my brethren, you also were made to die to the Law through the body of Christ, so that you might be joined to another, to Him who was raised from the dead, in order that we might bear fruit for God. For while we were in the flesh, the sinful passions, which were aroused by the Law, were at work in the members of our body to bear fruit for death.

Galatians 2:21 King James Version (KJV)
21 I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain.

 

[topher694]

Sir, you can believe or deny passages from the KJV
I do not want to offend anyone.
I was gracious enough to try to answer your questions. I didn't know I was being baited. I had this feeling but if you were truly looking for answer I would go out of my way to answer your questions.
Many if not most common American Churches put their blinders on and refuse to study every word of the Bible. All denominational Preachers trained and are taught their denominational beliefs.
Why are their so many denominations.
I'm sure you will probably say your denomination is the right one and so says every other denomination.
Which is the true Church. I dare you to tell me.

If you can show me which scripture verse that I used is in error, please show me.

after all this I am still willing to discuss the Word of God with you and anyone else who is interested.

No one is denying anything. Posting a vague or general statement followed by some scripture explains nothing. Already you have been asked 8 times what you mean by this. I am not alone here.

I don't know if there is error or not. I was just speaking from experience when someone makes generalized accusations followed by quoting a bunch of scripture then avoids directly answering questions about it.

I and others still have little or no idea what you are trying to say. Just say it.

 

[HARK!]

(CLV) Ro 7:1
Or are you |ignorant, brethren (for I am speaking to those who |know law), that the law is lording it over a man for as much time as he is living?

Romans 7:4 King James Version (KJV)
Therefore, my brethren, you also were made to die to the Law through the body of Christ, so that you might be joined to another, to Him who was raised from the dead, in order that we might bear fruit for God. For while we were in the flesh, the sinful passions, which were aroused by the Law, were at work in the members of our body to bear fruit for death.

(CLV) Ro 7:12
So that the law, indeed, is holy, and the precept holy and just and good.

(CLV) Ro 7:16
Now if what I am not willing, this I am doing, I am conceding that the law is ideal.

(CLV) Ro 7:22
For I am gratified with the law of God as to the man within,

Galatians 2:21 King James Version (KJV)
21 I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain.

I remember this story. Peter, (who Yahshua gave the keys to the kingdom of heaven) James (brother of Yahshua and leader of the church) and even Barnabas were at odds with Paul. They asked him to pay for 4 men who were taking the Nazorean Vow (this is very expensive) to prove that he didn't reject the law.

 

[Guojing]

No one is denying anything. Posting a vague or general statement followed by some scripture explains nothing. Already you have been asked 8 times what you mean by this. I am not alone here.

I don't know if there is error or not. I was just speaking from experience when someone makes generalized accusations followed by quoting a bunch of scripture then avoids directly answering questions about it.

I and others still have little or no idea what you are trying to say. Just say it.

I think he is basically asking why is there a group of former Gentiles, who are now believers, known as the "red letter Christians".

 

[Aussie Pete]

The sign nailed to the cross said "King of the Jews" Our Lord and Savior.

Zechariah 14:9 And the Lord shall be king over all the earth: in that day shall there be one Lord, and his name one.

Acts 3:25 Ye are the children of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made with our fathers, saying unto Abraham, And in thy seed shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed.

Ephsians 2:11 Wherefore remember, that ye being in time past Gentiles in the flesh, who are called Uncircumcision by that which is called the Circumcision in the flesh made by hands;
12 That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world:

Romans 15:
8 Now I say that Jesus Christ was a minister of the circumcision for the truth of God, to confirm the promises made unto the fathers:

Matthew 10:5-6
5 These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not:
6 But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

Pontius Pilate named Lord Jesus King of the Jews. I don't know if there is any spiritual significance in that. Also, the last commission for the twelve was to go into all the world. So I do not get your point.

 

[RDKirk]

There are many churches out there who love to preach from the 4 Gospels, as instructions to their congregation.

It will be hard to continue doing so, if they mention these verses to their congregation too.

If you know what point rhern is making and agree with it, please explain it.

 

[RDKirk]

I think he is basically asking why is there a group of former Gentiles, who are now believers, known as the "red letter Christians".

Well, if that's what he means, he certainly has not said that.


"Red letter Christians" are typically attempting to subvert or ignore most of the New Testament for various reasons. The are outside the normal pale of Christians, so his first accusation is unwarranted.

 

[renniks]

If you know what point rhern is making and agree with it, please explain it.

I think the point is that many Churches still try to teach keeping the law in some way, shape or form. But I could be wrong.

 

[RDKirk]

I think the point is that many Churches still try to teach keeping the law in some way, shape or form. But I could be wrong.

We shouldn't have to discuss what point a correspondent might be making in a thread he started.

 

[Chris V++]

.

 

[lismore]

The sign nailed to the cross said "King of the Jews" Our Lord and Savior.

The morbid hand of replacement theology I would imagine. Supposedly when you read 'King of the Jews' it doesn't actually mean that.

 

[topher694]

I think the point is that many Churches still try to teach keeping the law in some way, shape or form. But I could be wrong.

Well if that's the point your trying to make, then I'll say this: There is a difference between keeping the law and learning from it. I don't know of many churches that are trying to keep the law as it was, but using it as a tool to help learn is a good thing. That being said what is right and wrong doesn't change. The moral law still applies and always will.

 

[mkgal1]

If you can show me which scripture verse that I used is in error, please show me.

Scripture is never in error. The trouble in this thread is that you've never given your interpretation of these shared passages (nor made it clear how or why you're using them). It's your ambiguity that's the problem - not Scripture.

 

[renniks]

Well if that's the point your trying to make, then I'll say this: There is a difference between keeping the law and learning from it. I don't know of many churches that are trying to keep the law as it was, but using it as a tool to help learn is a good thing. That being said what is right and wrong doesn't change. The moral law still applies and always will.

Yes, but it's important to know that even the moral law doesn't save.

 

[Monna]

Pontus Pilate wrote: "This is Jesus, King of the Jews" and refused to change it to appease the Jewish religious rulers. Several things can be said about it.
1. It was a political statement in answer to the people who had demanded his execution:

a) THEY said "We have no King but Caesar" while at the same time looking for a Messiah who would expel the Romans - they were a very duplicitous bunch.
b) He was recomfirming the reality of the day - that Rome could do what it liked with anyone claiming to be a king - especially within a nation as notoriously rebellious as the Jews​

2. It was a snide political statement aimed at Herod - who was a puppet King over part of the Roman Empire, part of the area claimed by the Jews to be their land. It could be seen as a reminder to Herod that he (Herod) should not think he had any inherent right to be King.
3. More prophetically, and unknown to Pilate himself, the sign was a statement reminding the Jews, that their concept of a king (like Saul, David, Solomon, etc.) was hereby CRUCIFIED .... abolished. The Jews had rejected God as their King in the time of Samuel, (1 Sam 8:7-8) and demanded a king "like the kings in neighbouring nations" in spite of the very constituion of their land since Moses time was that God alone would be their king. "Jehovah will reign for ever and ever" (Ex 15:18); "Thus the Lord became King in Jeshurun [that is the upright people, Israel]" (Deut 33:5); "But the Lord is the true God; he is the living God, the eternal King." (Jer. 10:10) See also Psalm 44:4, Psalm 99:1-4).

But the irony here was that it was if God, in granting their wish to have a human king like the neighbouring nations, was saying “They refuse to have Me as their heavenly King, and they want a man as a king ruling on earth? Very well. I shall become a man, an Israelite by birth, of the line of the kings, and I will be their king on earth.” (Greenhow, 1971. "What's the Difference?" pg 94) Jesus had more right to the throne than Herod - that's why his grandfather had tried to kill him when he was an infant.​

And today, Israel is a republic, not a monarchy! God is still not recognised as the highest authority in the land.
4. Gregory Boyd argues, The Crucifixion of the Warrior God, that the old concept of God as a tyrantically, warrior king figure, as displayed in the OT, was being crucified - replaced by the loving, self-sacrificing servant King. Here is the Spiritual significance of what Pilate wrote, Aussi Pete: Jesus, the Messiah, Immanuel (God with us), the Son of God, the promised king (see Jer 10:10 as above) is crucified for the salvation of the entire world - to ALL who believe in Him - not just the Jews or even some of them. (John 3:16 ++++)
5. If we put the emphasis on the word Jews - "King of the Jews" - this idea is also crucified, for Jesus Christ becomes the King of all creation - whether in heaven or on earth. (Daniel 7:14; Matt. 28:18; John 17:2; Eph. 2:20-22) - And this means all people everywhere - not just the Jews.

God used Nebuchadnezer, and every other foreign king, to do His will. And the hand of God is in the determination by Pilate not to change what he has written.

https://www.adlibris.com/se/bok/the-crucifixion-of-the-warrior-god-9781506420752

 

[topher694]

Yes, but it's important to know that even the moral law doesn't save.

Sure, if you want to have a discussion about a completely different topic.