RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread

RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Theology] >> Christian Doctrine

Message

SpongeBlog -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (10/16/2008 6:54:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Dan94 ...I guess I misunderstood some intentions. I guess I got my dander up, because I thought some were implying judgement in a legalistic sense on someone who might embrace a certain holiday or family tradition. I guess I still have scars from my encounter with the guy who tried to get me to drink goats milk (yuck) so that I too could have a better quality christian life. I mean if a person wanted to celebrate Christmas day because of some cherished family traditions (I know how it really got started) then no one ever has the right to use the bible as a law club in judgement against them. So I thought the communication in here was in some how related, even though I never saw it directly implied. So I'll bow out and say sorry for the misunderstanding. There is no misunderstanding. At least one person in this thread thinks anyone who does not obey the OT laws of worship (Sabbaths, festivals, etc.) will not be allowed in the New Jerusalem, but will have to dwell outside of the city gates during the millenium. Apparently, this is an accepted teaching of a particular sect of the literal law keeping camp. You are not misunderstanding anything. You have no reason to apologize.

SpongeBlog -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (10/16/2008 7:06:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mcleod Bluethread shame on you for thinking this;[sm=thumbsup.gif] quote: From where did you get these definitions? Is this what they mean to you? Are these generally accepted as complete definitions? The true test is will these defintions hold or will they be redefined as one progresses through a discussion? For example, I was under the impression that some here included the book called Genesis in "the Law". The majority of that book has no rules at all. the first law mention is in the first book. Remember what he told the couple in the garden. Do not eat of the tree. This is true. We can see the parallels between how Adam and Eve died when the commandment came and how we also died when 'the commandment' came in Paul's illustration in Romans 7. And do we really think Jesus was excluding Genesis when he said, "These are My words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things which are written about Me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled" (Luke 24:44) ? Genesis is where we are introduced to the 'seed' of Abraham, who we now know is Jesus himself.

Dan94 -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (10/16/2008 10:20:12 PM)
Thanks Spongeblog, If that's the case my simple reply and I mean simple is I'll wait until Jesus sorts all that out. He has the keys in His hand and as long as I can touch His coat as He walks by (He will be going in....right?...I mean He is the fulfillment of the law...I mean they do teach that...um right?) then I have to be satisfied. But are we not just as saved as them?...or is theirs a special..um higher salvation? Are they earning more of Gods favor because faith in the blood of Christ is not enough? What new doctrine is this? On second thought I do not need to know, If Jesus has added additional rules then I know He will let me know somehow. After all "He that began a good work in you will be faithful to complete it"

bob97 -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (10/17/2008 12:00:38 AM)
quote: But are we not just as saved as them?...or is theirs a special..um higher salvation? Wow...a person would really like to quote Gal 3:28 here but the way poor Paul has been getting beat up lately I'm almost afraid to. Bob

Dan94 -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (10/17/2008 5:31:58 AM)
Why is someone in this thread trying to kill Paul again? Because He made our path clearly understood? To tell you the truth, and I say this with all sincerity and heart. I"m willing to be like the Gentile woman who told Jesus she was willing to accept the crumbs from the table (as He ministered to His chosen people). What did He say back to Her?

LBolt -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (10/17/2008 10:00:51 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Dan94 Why is someone in this thread trying to kill Paul again? Because He made our path clearly understood? To tell you the truth, and I say this with all sincerity and heart. I"m willing to be like the Gentile woman who told Jesus she was willing to accept the crumbs from the table (as He ministered to His chosen people). What did He say back to Her? Here is a neat audio link by Pastor Mark Biltz of Puyallup, WA regarding the covenant comparisons. You'll here some similar comments that we've made in previous posts. He's even got some lessons on Paul...however I have not listened to them yet. http://www.elshaddaiministries.us/audio/hayesod/20070820h8.html There are some rich teachings on this site and I have enjoyed them thus far. If you or anyone has the time, I'd like to discuss it with you as time permits.

Dan94 -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (10/17/2008 5:42:55 PM)
LBolt, Thanks for the link, I went to the site and I'm absolutely in agreement with their belief statement. I do not have time right now to listen to the audio but will make an effort later. The belief statement on the site is in line with the teachings I have received from a dear Jewish brother who is a Messianic Rabbi. I heard Jesus called Yeshua for the first time at one of his meetings. I do not attend his church, he holds services on Saturday and Sunday. His web site www.jewishjesus.org is where you can find out more about his out reaches. I attended a Passover supper with him and found it deeply moving. He also teaches about his rich Jewish heritage and gets the Christian community and Jewish community (but a lot of Jewish people resent him around here) involved in celebrating different festivals. Sukkot (the feast of Booths) is coming up tomorrow the 18th and he plans to have it outside in a booth (weather permitting). I still help support him financially when I can, but support him daily in my prayers. Any way I do not want to get off subject so I'll end it here. May God bless

Bluethread -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (10/17/2008 6:04:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mcleod Bluethread shame on you for thinking this;[sm=thumbsup.gif] quote: From where did you get these definitions? Is this what they mean to you? Are these generally accepted as complete definitions? The true test is will these defintions hold or will they be redefined as one progresses through a discussion? For example, I was under the impression that some here included the book called Genesis in "the Law". The majority of that book has no rules at all. the first law mention is in the first book. Remember what he told the couple in the garden. Do not eat of the tree. Why do you say shame on me and then give me a thumbs up? What is shameful about asking for a clear defintion? This is precisely the problem with presumed definitions. They may not be as well understood as we think. We then spend several posts making arguements based on the connotations we think are obvious without first getting agreement on the terms. Now, to the point. I said the majority of the book, not all of the book. Why do we define the history of the Creator's people by "a bunch of rules" that make up only a part of that history? So,I hope you see, the phrase "The Law" is not adequate to identify the Word of the Creator as complied by Moses. That being the case, what words should we use?

Bluethread -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (10/17/2008 6:23:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SpongeBlog There is no misunderstanding. At least one person in this thread thinks anyone who does not obey the OT laws of worship (Sabbaths, festivals, etc.) will not be allowed in the New Jerusalem, but will have to dwell outside of the city gates during the millenium. Apparently, this is an accepted teaching of a particular sect of the literal law keeping camp. You are not misunderstanding anything. You have no reason to apologize. This is where missunderstandings start. I am not familiar with this "particular sect of the literal law keeping camp" you speak of. However, it might be best if we were to express our own beliefs and let others speak for themselves.

Bluethread -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (10/17/2008 6:41:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: bob97 quote: But are we not just as saved as them?...or is theirs a special..um higher salvation? Wow...a person would really like to quote Gal 3:28 here but the way poor Paul has been getting beat up lately I'm almost afraid to. Bob No need to worry about me. I do not believe I have been beating up on Paul. For me, this is not about salvation or about being Jew or gentile, male or female. What it is about is how should we then live. Is there benefit in continuing to follow the directions given to those who lived in the time of Moses?

SpongeBlog -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (10/18/2008 11:50:46 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Bluethread quote: ORIGINAL: SpongeBlog There is no misunderstanding. At least one person in this thread thinks anyone who does not obey the OT laws of worship (Sabbaths, festivals, etc.) will not be allowed in the New Jerusalem, but will have to dwell outside of the city gates during the millenium. Apparently, this is an accepted teaching of a particular sect of the literal law keeping camp. You are not misunderstanding anything. You have no reason to apologize. This is where missunderstandings start. I am not familiar with this "particular sect of the literal law keeping camp" you speak of. LBolt, care to fill him in?

SpongeBlog -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (10/18/2008 12:06:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Dan94 LBolt, Thanks for the link, I went to the site and I'm absolutely in agreement with their belief statement.... You're probably not as in agreement as it first appears: "We believe in the continuity of God's covenants with the physical people of Israel according to Jeremiah 31:35-36 and parallel passages." "We believe that the entire Bible is a revelation of the righteousness of God and the description of the lifestyle of the redeemed community. (Matthew 5:17-19; II Timothy 3:16-17)" The parts I've put in italics are two of the hot buttons of the literalist's argument.

Dan94 -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (10/18/2008 6:27:41 PM)
I found the web site of El Shaddai Ministries very heart touching, as I personally believe God has a special plan and purpose for the Jewish Nation and people, I believe there are volumes of scripture to point to that very fact. I have a heart that is wide open to learn of a deeper richness in the faithfulness of God. Even if it makes me feel convicted I count it all blessings in Christ. One of their teachings on how the Jews dare not offer a blemished sacrifice for a sin offering, cut me to the quick. I was able to draw a parallel to New Testament teachings in confessing sin. If you make an inward confession or out ward confession of sin before God and it is shallow, incomplete or holding something back and lacking a heart of change. Then it's to me like the Jewish people (or any people) offering up a sacrifice that is blind, lame, with spot or wrinkles. God will not accept an impure sacrifice for sin or accept a hollow confession, for we all know He is Holy. God will not accept a confession of an outward show when there is no real conviction, a conviction brought about by flesh or "oops I got caught" attitude. Now a conviction brought about by the Holy Spirit who knows our heart, God will not reject. So what point am I trying to make in these elementary statements which I'm sure we all embrace. For me when it comes to something like the seventh day Sabbath of rest, I have kept my heart open. We all need to be in tune with convictions brought about by the Holy Spirit. In my 14 years (which I'm sure is nothing to some) of being a Christian I have been convicted, corrected and humbled by the Holy Spirit for many things, way too many to list here, nor would it be practical. But I have never been convicted by the Holy Spirit for working, walking, jogging, lighting a fire or watching a N.Y. Giants game (go Giants!) on a Saturday or Sunday. I say this because I know that this is a big issue with the law crowd and entire denominations that tend to separate us and divide us around core teachings regarding the Sabbath. I'm against anything that divides the loving heart of Gods people that is not an out right, clearly defined sin. Jesus prayed we would be One in Him, that does not mean we are to give way to preacher's that tickle the ear to gather converts or preachers that tend to divide us on something clearly settled at the cross of Calvary. The Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath (Luke 6:5)(Matthew 12:6) "I tell you that one greater than the temple is here" I could go on as I know we all could. In addition to all that, would not Paul Clearly define in his mission to us Gentiles specific regulations, rules and procedure's for the Sabbath? Paul did not send himself God sent Paul, would not God give clear instructions for Paul to pass along to a people who knew nothing of the Sabbath laws? If a man is sent of God his convictions outward and inward will prove it. We all need to be on our guard in these last days against false teachers who teach division amongst brother and sisters IN Christ. Would not the Holy Spirit bring conviction on something vital to salvation? In short I can not come to agreement with those who want to extend their personal convictions onto us. In regards to this I stand with Gods statement through Paul in Colossians 2:16-23, the short version, Therefor do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day. I have the utmost respect for any man Jew or Gentile who wants to set aside any day according to their traditions or convictions. What offense I take is when they sit in judgement, contrary to the common ground of many God loving churches pastors and people. Who find freedom in Christ to worship on any day and find their true rest in the work Jesus accomplished on the cross. I do not argue over the root meaning of words, if we stay attached to the Root of the true Vine, then the true Spirit of the word which is sharper then any two edge sword will cut and convict. I glorify the Father in Christ Jesus that He has sent another Comforter who sends the true conviction of sin into our hearts individually to accomplish it's intended purpose to turn us from our own ways. Maybe this has all been stated before in this 186 page forum but it is my hearts conviction so I do not apologize for saying it again.

LBolt -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (10/19/2008 12:11:39 AM)
In reading the scriptures, Yah doesn't give alot of "rules" on how to keep Sabbath. We are to honor it, convocate on it, do good, see Yahusha's statement. I spend time with family, if the Browns play on Saturday I'll watch it. If I have to attend National Guard that weekend I do so and am not convicted. If I'm able to get off "Praise Yah" if not "Praise Yah." However, God's word is God's word. The Sabbath is the seventh day. Gen. 2:1-3, Exodus 20:1-6, Exodus 31:17, Heb. 4. As loving as the various church may be, I know because I attended some, God's word is the standard and plumbline that we will be held accountable and it is not open to be interpreted by my own or anyone else's private interpretation. This may sound hard but it's the truth. This is the paradighm shift the church must make. God's Torah. We've taught in error for years...let's return to the ancient paths our Heavenly Father laid out for us. Must go know...Shalom!

Odeliya -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (10/20/2008 10:57:52 AM)
quote: Sponge: At least one person in this thread thinks anyone who does not obey the OT laws of worship (Sabbaths, festivals, etc.) will not be allowed in the New Jerusalem, but will have to dwell outside of the city gates during the millenium. Apparently, this is an accepted teaching of a particular sect of the literal law keeping camp. Odel :I had no idea. Never heard of that. Blue: I am not familiar with this "particular sect of the literal law keeping camp" you speak of. Sponge: You are asleep at the wheel again, kids. LBolt, care to fill them in? [sm=aside.gif]Yeah, right! He got National Guard. He is busy man right now, let him do the job. Plus I know that all the minor leg work will eventually be pushed on the lowest in rank -private in the military or intern or youngest sibling. I know, I have experience being all three! Private is Turai which is usually just shortened to letter tet But widely used slang for private is Tohen, means basically "working his donkey off trying to please the commandment.." So I went and did it before you asked. post in sabbath quote: LBolt : Let me clarify a point. We aren't condemning anyone. When reference is made to not being able to enter into the city of New Jerusalem, we aren't talking about not being saved, we are talking about not being allowed to enter the gates into the New Jerusalem. That reserved only for those who love God and keep His commandments. The weeping and gnashing of teeth in Revelation 22 are those who missed that opportunity. The Bible speaks of those who are great in the Kingdom of God and those who are least in the Kingdom. See Matt. 5:17-21 Therefore, we aren't saying that you aren't saved rather you'll miss out on the opportunity to enter the City's gates. [:D]L, is there a special clause for natural born Jews ? You saw the contract, what does it say? Where do we go? Come on,you know I am more jewish then a divorce attorney,and i am sitting outside of the gate with those nasty, dirty dog gentiles? I should be able to get preferrencial treatment ! check the small print.

LBolt -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (10/20/2008 11:18:15 AM)
Odeezal, LOL! I smile and laugh when I read your posts![:D]-LOL You are the only exception my dear LOL!! Yahusha is the door!! You have the door. What's need is a proper understanding and clarification of the instructions of the Master. We all need it. I very well could be wrong...I could be right...I rather obey even though I don't thoroughly know. Spongie you have to fight your own battle on this one...I waiting to see how you repond to my last post in the Sabbath thread. You've got some real explaining to do my friend. [&:] Gotta go.

SpongeBlog -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (10/20/2008 11:37:16 AM)
I'm at work right now and can't take a lot of time to cut and paste scriptures (I make up any time I spend on line). Brother Bolt, I had the feeling you wouldn't respond to my invitation to fill in Blue (why he is oblivious to your position, I don't know. You've made it clear). Why do you still not want to explain yourself? I'm glad Odie dug it up so I wouldn't have to (thank you). I've had so much of my direct and pointed challenges to the law keeping argument just languish on the vine here in the threads. What up with that? I'll be back to the Sabbath thread in time. I'm at work now. I'll give you the heads up so you can prepare yourself, Bolt: God told Ezekiel that the vision of the Temple was his instructions to them on what to do after they returned from their captivity. Why did they not obey the vision? Their disobedience caused the vision to not be fulfilled. See you in the Sabbath thread (Oh, and you left the part about old men dying in the kingdom languishing in that thread. How do you explain that?).

mcleod -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (10/20/2008 1:16:25 PM)
Odeliya, You little rascal[sm=gradsmile.gif] you are you used a phrase Paul used. quote: is there a special clause for natural born Jews ? You saw the contract, what does it say? Where do we go? Come on,you know I am more jewish then a divorce attorney,and i am sitting outside of the gate with those nasty, dirty dog gentiles? I should be able to get preferrencial treatment ! check the small print. Yet he used in the context of Christians Jews. You know where he says; "watch for them dogs those people who do evil, those mutilators of the flesh. For it we who are the circumcision, who worship by the Spirit of God, who in glory in Christ Jesus, and who put no convidence in the flesh---though I myself have reason for such things.

mcleod -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (10/20/2008 1:19:42 PM)
So according to Paul you ain't with them dogs anymore! Odeliya. Rejoice in the matter that what you thought you were doing wrong. Turns out you might be in the right camp or tribe after all.[;)]

LBolt -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (10/20/2008 3:25:31 PM)
Sponge, What I stated in my statement about those who accept Yahusha as Messiah and kept the Torah will be given the right to enter in to New Jerusalem is very plain. It doesn't need a explanation. The Torah...was it the mind of Moses or the mind of God? Did Yahusha not follow or fulfill Torah? Did he not preach and use the word of God? If He's the "Living Word" and the words that Moshe taught testify or speak of Messiah then why do we have a problem with doing God's word when they have spiritual implications? Why, can't we make a 1 day change to obey what He says? Or if you want to keep Sunday do so but honor God's word by keeping His Sabbath holy? If we see how Moshiach fulfills the Passover and we are told that "as often we eat this bread and drink this cup we do shew forth the Lord's death til He comes...", why should we not do it? What is wrong with the 10 Commandments (including the 4th Commandment)? What is wrong with God's word that we should not obey it? If God and His word are one (echad) and Jesus doesn't change why do we change it or claim He changed it by fulfilling it thereby laying it aside? Why I am here?-----[:D]-LOL Look if I'm in error, Blue, Lapidoth, Sponge, Odie...whoever in blogland...please correct me and show me and I'll rescind and preach otherwise.

Bluethread -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (10/20/2008 4:39:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LBolt Sponge, What I stated in my statement about those who accept Yahusha as Messiah and kept the Torah will be given the right to enter in to New Jerusalem is very plain. It doesn't need a explanation. The Torah...was it the mind of Moses or the mind of God? Did Yahusha not follow or fulfill Torah? Did he not preach and use the word of God? If He's the "Living Word" and the words that Moshe taught testify or speak of Messiah then why do we have a problem with doing God's word when they have spiritual implications? Why, can't we make a 1 day change to obey what He says? Or if you want to keep Sunday do so but honor God's word by keeping His Sabbath holy? If we see how Moshiach fulfills the Passover and we are told that "as often we eat this bread and drink this cup we do shew forth the Lord's death til He comes...", why should we not do it? What is wrong with the 10 Commandments (including the 4th Commandment)? What is wrong with God's word that we should not obey it? If God and His word are one (echad) and Jesus doesn't change why do we change it or claim He changed it by fulfilling it thereby laying it aside? Why I am here?-----[:D]-LOL Look if I'm in error, Blue, Lapidoth, Sponge, Odie...whoever in blogland...please correct me and show me and I'll rescind and preach otherwise. Your logic is good. However, your points regarding honoring the first day of the week or the "sacriments" are not on the table at this time. It appears the argument is that one is "free" to do whatever whenever as long as it is done "in the Spirit".

Bluethread -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (10/20/2008 5:49:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Odeliya [sm=aside.gif]Yeah, right! He got National Guard. He is busy man right now, let him do the job. Plus I know that all the minor leg work will eventually be pushed on the lowest in rank -private in the military or intern or youngest sibling. I know, I have experience being all three! Private is Turai which is usually just shortened to letter tet But widely used slang for private is Tohen, means basically "working his donkey off trying to please the commandment.." So I went and did it before you asked . If you do not like people using concepts that the general public might find confusing, why do you support this use of the word "camp"? That use would appear to be a tool for lumping individuals into groups so they can be dispatched with simplistic generalizations. It seem interesting to me that a biblical principle of the camp or tribe be introduced only to be used in a fashion that the Scriptures do not appear to support. I am willing to refrain from introducing biblical phrases and concepts that I may not fully understand or misuse, if that offends some. However, let's be evenhanded. What languages are acceptable and which dictionary are we to use? quote: L, is there a special clause for natural born Jews ? You saw the contract, what does it say? Where do we go? Come on,you know I am more jewish then a divorce attorney,and i am sitting outside of the gate with those nasty, dirty dog gentiles? I should be able to get preferrencial treatment ! check the small print. You appear to be combining two different yet related topics here. First, we see in the "born agian" passage that being born of the line of Abraham is not sufficient for salvation. In this regard, Paul tells us there is a slight advantage in that the children of Israel have closer proximity to the Scriptures. Wouldn't you admit that this is indeed an advantage to one who wishes to be saved? The other issue is blessings here on earth. I hope it can be understood that there is a difference in how the Creator treats each of us. I submit that those who do those things that the Creator says bring blessing are better off than they would have been had they not done so. One example of this, in the future since this appears to be the context of the discussion at this time, is the observance of Sukkot. In Zech 14 we are told that after the great battle if "Eygpt" does not send a representative to the feast the Nile will dry up and if the other nations do not send representatives they will exprience drought. So, we see in the Kingdom there will be difference in how people are treated.

SpongeBlog -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (10/21/2008 12:01:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LBolt Sponge, What I stated in my statement about those who accept Yahusha as Messiah and kept the Torah will be given the right to enter in to New Jerusalem is very plain. It doesn't need a explanation. Yes, you've made it clear in a couple of posts. For some reason Blue's Clueless (pun intended for those with kids) as to this belief. All I was asking is that you fill him in on it as you have for the rest of us who have read it in your posts. quote: ORIGINAL: LBolt The Torah...was it the mind of Moses or the mind of God? It was in the mind of God, delivered by the Holy Spirit (or angels), and ultimately subject to interpretation by Rabbi Moses and other appointed officials (Exd. 18 ?) through history. Apparently the law of divorce is a rabbinical law. So, the accurate answer is both the mind of God and Moses. Acts 15 is another example of rabbinical authority in action. They made a judgement and the Holy Spirit put his blessing on it. quote: ORIGINAL: LBolt Did Yahusha not follow or fulfill Torah? He followed Torah, although it seems he had no problem subjecting himself to the uncleanness of lepers, etc. I'm not suggesting for a nano-second that he broke the law. That matter is a whole subject of it's own. Jesus was 'born under the law' and was obligated to keep it--which he did. And it's absolutely essential to our salvation that it be true that he never sinned by breaking the law. I accept that as fact. But to use that as a reason why we also should do that exactly as he did ignores so much we now know was accomplished with his death and ressurrection. And, yes, he definately fulfilled Torah. I've been saying this all along. The supreme example is his sacrifice on the cross being the complete and eternal fulfillment of the law's requirement for blood for the atonement of sin. I am no longer bound to the law in that regard because it stands eternally kept/ fulfilled/ met by Christ himself on my behalf. This seems to be the stumbling block for you folks. I'm amazed that you don't embrace this concept of fulfilling the law. And as my example shows, that law no longer has authority over me because it's requirement is no longer an outstanding and continuing debt hanging over me (the breaking of which is punishable by death). Christ didn't abolish it. His work continually meets the laws requirement for blood. No further action required on my part. This is so simple to understand, isn't it? Why do I need to continue to offer blood if the requirement for blood is continually met already??? Same for the law's requirement to rest, and congregate, be circumcised, etc... I'm surprised that you don't at least agree with me on this concept of fulfillment but then argue that we are to still continue with the literal for other purposes, which you have to some degree. But the precedents laid down for us in Christ's sacrifice and circumcision by the Holy Spirit show us that the literal gets laid aside. In the examples I've given those two things do not continue as a literal obligation alongside the fulfillment that we have secured in the abiding Holy Spirit. quote: ORIGINAL: LBolt Did he not preach and use the word of God? If He's the "Living Word" and the words that Moshe taught testify or speak of Messiah then why do we have a problem with doing God's word when they have spiritual implications? I can list many OT laws that had spiritual implications and which Jesus would have openly defended during his time on earth, but which are now made obsolete with his later work on the cross. Why this denial that God's words spoken then are no longer being spoken today because of Christ's work? I'm amazed at your refusal to acknowledge this. You can't ignore the change that occurred after the resurrection of Christ. Real change, my friend. Not business as usual. quote: ORIGINAL: LBolt Why, can't we make a 1 day change to obey what He says? Or if you want to keep Sunday do so but honor God's word by keeping His Sabbath holy? If we see how Moshiach fulfills the Passover and we are told that "as often we eat this bread and drink this cup we do shew forth the Lord's death til He comes...", why should we not do it? We are doing that Passover, just not in strict accordance with the OT time table. quote: ORIGINAL: LBolt What is wrong with the 10 Commandments (including the 4th Commandment)? What is wrong with God's word that we should not obey it? Nothing is wrong witht the commandments of God. Some continue unchanged while some are now obsolete/ optional. It's that simple. quote: ORIGINAL: LBolt If God and His word are one (echad) and Jesus doesn't change why do we change it or claim He changed it by fulfilling it thereby laying it aside? How do you not understand that it is his purpose and his promise to fulfill that purpose that do not change (Heb. 6?). We see plainly he has changed how he ultimately fulfills that purpose. What the law could not do God accomplished later through Christ and the ministry of the abiding Holy Spirit that came as a direct result of Christ's acceptable work, not as a result of the ministry of the law. God changed the modus operandus (forgive me if I'm misusing that term) to accomplish what he wanted to do all along from eternity past, and that is raise up a 'people for himself that are eager to do good' (paraphrase--Titus 3?). You see I don't have time to nail these passages down, but I will if you want me too. The law is totally incapable at fulfilling this purpose. God's new, but original, way was via the abiding Holy Spirit and death of the flesh. The thing the law could not do in a man. For all the change you say can't happen even Hebrews (9?) says the law has changed. And that it must change now that there is a new priesthood. I'm amazed you can't acknowledge these black and white facts in our Bibles. quote: ORIGINAL: LBolt Why I am here?-----[:D]-LOL You're here to refute with facts my POV so that all 3 people who read this thread (lol!) can come to the truth. One of us has the truth. This is where we lay it out for others to discern the truth for themselves.

Bluethread -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (10/21/2008 4:06:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SpongeBlog Jesus was 'born under the law' and was obligated to keep it--which he did. And it's absolutely essential to our salvation that it be true that he never sinned by breaking the law. I accept that as fact. But to use that as a reason why we also should do that exactly as he did ignores so much we now know was accomplished with his death and ressurrection. Flag on the field: "we" in last sentence is undefined. If it refers to people of a certain "camp", there needs to be an identification of that "camp" and your credentials for representing them. If it is intended to include those with which you are discussing, then it is a falacious generalization. This is because the italicised portion which is defined in the following paragraph has not been accepted by both parties. quote: And, yes, he definately fulfilled Torah. I've been saying this all along. The supreme example is his sacrifice on the cross being the complete and eternal fulfillment of the law's requirement for blood for the atonement of sin. I am no longer bound to the law in that regard because it stands eternally kept/ fulfilled/ met by Christ himself on my behalf. This seems to be the stumbling block for you folks. Time out: "you folks" is undefined. There appears to be great diversity of opinion among those who post, so to group people together as "you folks" is a falacious generalization. quote: I'm amazed that you don't embrace this concept of fulfilling the law. Clarification: So, we can be clear on what a personal attack is, the sentence above is an example of that. It is not directed toward and belief or assertion, but denegrates the hearer for not embracing the concept posited. quote: And as my example shows, that law no longer has authority over me because it's requirement is no longer an outstanding and continuing debt hanging over me (the breaking of which is punishable by death). Christ didn't abolish it. His work continually meets the laws requirement for blood. No further action required on my part. This is so simple to understand, isn't it? Why do I need to continue to offer blood if the requirement for blood is continually met already??? Same for the law's requirement to rest, and congregate, be circumcised, etc... Fallacy: Presumed concensus The point is dependant on acceptance of the concept posited above. Since the hearer is denegrated for not accepting that concept, there must not be concensus here. One must obtain accepance of the founding concept before one can move on to others on which it is based. quote: I can list many OT laws that had spiritual implications and which Jesus would have openly defended during his time on earth, but which are now made obsolete with his later work on the cross. Why this denial that God's words spoken then are no longer being spoken today because of Christ's work? I'm amazed at your refusal to acknowledge this. You can't ignore the change that occurred after the resurrection of Christ. Real change, my friend. Not business as usual. Falacy: Asserting one has proof does not count as proof. One must submit ones evidence for examination. Falacy: One's emotional response to anothers rejection of a concept provides no justification for that concept. Falacy: One can not require others to accept ones views. One can point out the strengths of one's points and inquire as to any objections, but concensus must be granted not coerced. quote: quote: ORIGINAL: LBolt Why, can't we make a 1 day change to obey what He says? Or if you want to keep Sunday do so but honor God's word by keeping His Sabbath holy? If we see how Moshiach fulfills the Passover and we are told that "as often we eat this bread and drink this cup we do shew forth the Lord's death til He comes...", why should we not do it? We are doing that Passover, just not in strict accordance with the OT time table. Falacy: redefining terms without explanation. One need to provide proof of fact or concensus before one can redefine a term. quote: quote: ORIGINAL: LBolt What is wrong with the 10 Commandments (including the 4th Commandment)? What is wrong with God's word that we should not obey it? Nothing is wrong witht the commandments of God. Some continue unchanged while some are now obsolete/ optional. It's that simple. Falacy: conclusion doesn't follow. When there are two options (unchanged and obsolete) one must differentiate between the two. Therefore, the concept is not simple. quote: quote: ORIGINAL: LBolt If God and His word are one (echad) and Jesus doesn't change why do we change it or claim He changed it by fulfilling it thereby laying it aside? How do you not understand that it is his purpose and his promise to fulfill that purpose that do not change (Heb. 6?). We see plainly he has changed how he ultimately fulfills that purpose. What the law could not do God accomplished later through Christ and the ministry of the abiding Holy Spirit that came as a direct result of Christ's acceptable work, not as a result of the ministry of the law. God changed the modus operandus (forgive me if I'm misusing that term) to accomplish what he wanted to do all along from eternity past, and that is raise up a 'people for himself that are eager to do good' (paraphrase--Titus 3?). You see I don't have time to nail these passages down, but I will if you want me too. The law is totally incapable at fulfilling this purpose. God's new, but original, way was via the abiding Holy Spirit and death of the flesh. The thing the law could not do in a man. For all the change you say can't happen even Hebrews (9?) says the law has changed. And that it must change now that there is a new priesthood. I'm amazed you can't acknowledge these black and white facts in our Bibles. Falacy: Several personal attacks Falacy: Time limits the necessity to present evidence. The argument can be made at a slower pace to accommodate the proper presentation of ones argument. quote: quote: ORIGINAL: LBolt Why I am here?-----[:D]-LOL You're here to refute with facts my POV so that all 3 people who read this thread (lol!) can come to the truth. One of us has the truth. This is where we lay it out for others to discern the truth for themselves. Falacy: false dichotomy It is possible that all parties can be in error.

Odeliya -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (10/21/2008 4:32:22 PM)
quote: I purposely did not answer this because it appeared to be an attempt to thwart the conversation down on a bunny rabbit trail and using accusations of "using Hebrew to prove one's spiritual superiority" to dismiss the information presented. Sorry if this is not your intent but past experiences lead me to believe otherwise, unfortunately. By no means! Actually I already expressed my confidence about purity of BT�s intentions. I don�t see the point of doing what he is doing though, with that usage of bilingual terms. quote: You are the only exception my dear LOL!! Yahusha is the door!! You have the door. I just lobbied my way thru. Learn, you bums. That�s how you do it. I got the door, L precious? great news, can I start selling entrance tickets?I am as poor as a church rat these days..

Page: << < prev 182 183 184 [185] 186 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5 ANSI