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 (7/21/2008 4:01:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lapidoth quote: I'm big on this subject because all of Christendom is in the grip of the deception of trusting in works of the flesh (going to church, tithing, and other things, and procedures, etc.) for the confirmation of their salvation. Too many think lawkeeping (OT or NT) is how we justify ourselves (show ourselves to have been made righteous). It simply isn't true! Love, a changed character, is how we justify ourselves. Depending on our view points and whether we look at the whole picture or just the portion we zero in on, determines our "spin" on any subject. Don't you think we should zero in on the spin that Jesus and the Apostles put on things? They teach us the point of view and mindset we are to have. They make it very clear what that mindset is all about. And it's not about putting on appearances. It's about having a changed character that reveals itself in how we treat people (unconditionally), not how we worship externally. quote: ORIGINAL: Lapidoth I agree to trust in works is sin and ends in a big fat "zero" as spongie says. But, to reject works is just as wrong. It does not justify us, but it's evidence that we are justified. Nobody is rejecting works. The NT just makes it clear what works show us as having been justified in Christ and the works to which we should devote ourselves. And those works are the works born of character, the direct result of having the Spirit of love, patience, kindness, goodness, long-suffering, compassion, etc. inside of us. quote: ORIGINAL: Lapidoth James 1:22 But be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves. James 2:18 Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works. We argue that feeding orphans, widows, strangers, etc. is the acceptable works. But those very "works" are the "keeping of the law." We know that. But James singles out the Royal Law of Love. The noblest and most important of God's laws. It is that law that justifies a man. Here are highlights from James immediately following and in context of what you just quoted from James 1:22... "25...the man who looks intently into the perfect law that gives freedom, and continues to do this, not forgetting what he has heard, but doing it—he will be blessed in what he does. 27Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world. 1...don't show favoritism. 3If you show special attention to the man wearing fine clothes...but say to the poor man, "You stand there" or "Sit on the floor by my feet," 4have you not discriminated among yourselves and become judges with evil thoughts? 8If you really keep the royal law found in Scripture, "Love your neighbor as yourself," you are doing right. 9But if you show favoritism, you sin and are convicted by the law as lawbreakers. 12Speak and act as those who are going to be judged by the law that gives freedom, 13because judgment without mercy will be shown to anyone who has not been merciful. Mercy triumphs over judgment! 14What good is it, my brothers, if a man claims to have faith but has no deeds? ...15Suppose a brother or sister is without clothes and daily food. 16If one of you says to him, "Go, I wish you well; keep warm and well fed," but does nothing about his physical needs, what good is it? 17In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead. The message is clear. Are we left wondering what the deeds of faith are--the works that prove our faith? They are the works of unconditional compassion, love, and mercy acted out without favortism or conditions. Is there any doubt as to what the standard of judgement, what 'law' we are to measure ourselves against as believers to show ourselves approved by God? It's clear what spin we are to focus on and what mindset we are to align ourselves with. It's all about the Royal Law of Love. True religion, true worship (the 'in Spirit and in Truth' kind) is seen in unconditional love for others and has nothing to do with the time, place, and methods of external worship.

LoyalGypsy -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (7/21/2008 5:42:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lapidoth quote: If you love others you will experience God's blessing. That's the obedience God is looking for and richly rewards. Love is not a feeling. It's a determination not to neglect or hurt other people in the fulfillment of our own desires and needs. The defining characteristic of love is that it is completely unconditional and applies to those who mistreat us, and those who have no merit of their own to deserve it. If you do this, showing yourself to be a son of God, you will be blessed by God. Unbelievers "love others". It's not the loving others that gives God's blessings. Its obedience that gives God's blessings. Again, just depends on the argument we want to make and from what view point we use to prove our argument. But, I do know what you are saying. Greetings, quote: Its obedience that gives God's blessings. Lap, prehaps someone ought to tell Jesus He made a mistake!! [:D] LG

Bluethread -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (7/21/2008 5:57:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SpongeBlog quote: ORIGINAL: Bluethread In order understand that hope one must be clear on what one means by "God". I really didn't expect that to be a point of debate or misunderstanding. quote: Sorry, but I'm still not getting it. You'll probably have to walk me through it step by step and connect the dots for me. Then there is misunderstanding. quote: ORIGINAL: Bluethread First of all Adonai is infinite and everything else is finite. The Lord is one. This is the only commandment (statement of how things are and aught to be) that stands alone. Do you believe that this premise must be the case for Adonai and that is not dependant on any other commandment? For rational justification see tha pararaph below. It does not depend on man. It was the case before man's creation and it will continue to be the case for as long as man exists. If He is not infinite, there is something that is out of His control and we can not trust that we are safe from that. The converse is also true. If something is out of His control, then He is not infinite and He can not be trusted to keep His word, because extenuating circumstances can intervene. One step at a time. If there is agreement here, then we'll move on to the unity of "the godhead". This is on topic because it is, in my opinion, the foundation of Ha Torah(The Law) and understanding the foundation of Ha Torah helps us to understand what parts of it, if any, we should be following today.

Odeliya -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (7/21/2008 6:30:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lapidoth Unbelievers "love others". Of course, good point ! anything we do before we born again, from the Spirit profis us nothing. Most loving , caring people i know arent even christians. And if I have the gift of prophecy and comprehend all mysteries and all knowledge; if I have all faith so as to move mountains but do not have love, I am nothing. If I give away everything I own, and if I hand my body over so that I may boast but do not have love, I gain nothing quote: It's not the loving others that gives God's blessings. It obedience that gives God's blessings. Sure, but obedience to what? If we obey the external commands without love it profits us nothing! It is possible to do everything without love. There is no external we can possibly obey that quarantees we are saved or that we do it with love ( true Love that only comes from being born from the Spirit). Blue, i appreciate your kindness in listening to my plea on the previous page :)

SpongeBlog -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (7/21/2008 11:11:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Bluethread quote: ORIGINAL: Bluethread First of all Adonai is infinite and everything else is finite. The Lord is one. This is the only commandment (statement of how things are and aught to be) that stands alone. Do you believe that this premise must be the case for Adonai and that is not dependant on any other commandment? Yeah, I guess so. I can't think of any reason right off why I would object to this. What's next?

Bluethread -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (7/22/2008 3:06:08 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SpongeBlog quote: ORIGINAL: Bluethread quote: ORIGINAL: Bluethread First of all Adonai is infinite and everything else is finite. The Lord is one. This is the only commandment (statement of how things are and aught to be) that stands alone. Do you believe that this premise must be the case for Adonai and that is not dependant on any other commandment? Yeah, I guess so. I can't think of any reason right off why I would object to this. What's next? Therefore, everything that is Him is by definition right. Everything He says is true, for He has no need to lie. Also, everything He says is indicative of His character. His words indicate to us who He is. So, all we know of Adonai comes from Him, His Word. Therefore, when one talks about The Word, he is talking about Adonai, as He is revealed to us. I am not talking about the written word but that of which the written word is a darkened reflection. Let's not get caught up in the Torah/Logos debate yet. Suffice it to say, all we know of Adonai is from what He has chosen to reveal to us. So, The Word or revelation of Adonai in whatever form, if we were to understand it correctly and completely would be Adonai. Any objections so far?

SpongeBlog -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (7/22/2008 8:48:15 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Bluethread Therefore, everything that is Him is by definition right. Everything He says is true, for He has no need to lie. Also, everything He says is indicative of His character. His words indicate to us who He is. So, all we know of Adonai comes from Him, His Word. Therefore, when one talks about The Word, he is talking about Adonai, as He is revealed to us. I am not talking about the written word but that of which the written word is a darkened reflection. Let's not get caught up in the Torah/Logos debate yet. Suffice it to say, all we know of Adonai is from what He has chosen to reveal to us. So, The Word or revelation of Adonai in whatever form, if we were to understand it correctly and completely would be Adonai. Any objections so far? Yes. I can see already I will not agree with the final conclusion that can be drawn from these generalized and lofty assessments of God and His Word. They seem like safe and reasonable and noble statements all by themselves until you consider the implications they have on us. You're trying to oversimplify and box in God's very complex relationship with a very unstable and changing creation. There are Bible examples to prove that the conclusion these statements are leading to is false. But finish your thought process before we examine those. I sense that you want to nail me down to submitting to every single word out of the mouth of God that he's ever spoken in his supreme authority as the perfect and infinite power over all the universe, (which He most certainly is). But I can't do that any more than my 24 year old son still has to go to bed at 8:00 in the evening just because I commanded him to do that when he was 3. But I am confident that the hard and fast rules I subjected him to as a child have helped him to govern his own life as an adult. He probably shows he has the impression of those rules written into his heart, his very being. It would be ridiculous for him to follow my rules to the letter (which I am no longer speaking) to form the principles and guidelines for living that my rules were only intended to lead him to. It wasn't about going to bed at 8:00. It was about learning the value of rest. Now that he knows that, he's free to make his own judgements about how to fulfill the underlying goal of my command to go to bed at 8:00. The word I spoke that endures to this day is not the letter of my command, it's the message my words represented that were not unveiled to him until he was old enough to understand it and walk in it. The parallels are so obvious between my illustration and what God is accomplishing with us, beginning with the old covenant law, that I don't need to explain it. But go ahead and continue with where you are going. I want you to finish your thought process before we examine it. Is it okay with you that other people chime in on this particular discussion as well? It's okay with me if it's okay with you.

mcleod -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (7/22/2008 11:37:50 AM)
You know Spong you just mention the first ten in your statement . Yet Blue would like for you to not forget the other one's in the rest of the books. After awhile, this as I read it has become a salvation issue. As it has become with SDA over one law which is the Sabbath Day. The one's who have missed that law are doomed to eternal punishment in their eyes.(oh wait wrong, no more around) They may say that they don't, yet within the same sentence. State they believe a person that is a follower of RCC, is a hereitic. I know this has even brought the words of blessing in this thread. Which I didn't know Kenneth Copeland was posting on this thread. I heard a very knowledge person. Who today and has for the past eight years had ALS. Which he stated that when he learned he had gotten the diesease. People would e-mail him or even come to his face and tell him. That he must be in great sin in his life for this to happen. That if he would have faith that he would be healed of it. I got to thinking about here we go putting limits on what God thinks and does. Remember the story of the fellow who received a spit ball of mud from Jesus. The question was ask of Jesus who did the sin for his person to be blind. Which Jesus answered them that it wasn't any sin in his family tree but that the work of God might displayed in the person life. Just as I wrote last week we can become very arrogant that we are keepers of the law. Which is not what God is looking for. But People who cry out "Jesus, Son of David have mercy on me".

Lapidoth -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (7/22/2008 11:39:32 AM)
quote: He probably shows he has the impression of those rules written into his heart, his very being. It would be ridiculous for him to follow my rules to the letter (which I am no longer speaking) to form the principles and guidelines for living that my rules were only intended to lead him to. It wasn't about going to bed at 8:00. It was about learning the value of rest. Now that he knows that, he's free to make his own judgements about how to fulfill the underlying goal of my command to go to bed at 8:00. The word I spoke that endures to this day is not the letter of my command, it's the message my words represented that were not unveiled to him until he was old enough to understand it and walk in it. The parallels are so obvious between my illustration and what God is accomplishing with us, beginning with the old covenant law, that I don't need to explain it. What a wonderful way to explain why we should keep the Sabbath.

mcleod -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (7/22/2008 11:50:09 AM)
Lapitoh did you miss what Spong was writing about? quote: What a wonderful way to explain why we should keep the Sabbath. So Spong wants his son to keep the curfew of 8:00 pm still?[;)]

Lapidoth -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (7/22/2008 11:53:43 AM)
No, I didn't miss it. I was expounding on it. You guys just miss what we say. I just did a lengthy post expounding, but it timed out and got lost. So, guess that wisdom wasn't for today. LOL.

Lapidoth -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (7/22/2008 11:55:09 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mcleod Lapitoh did you miss what Spong was writing about? quote: What a wonderful way to explain why we should keep the Sabbath. So Spong wants his son to keep the curfew of 8:00 pm still?[;)] Before the curfew was 8 pm because he was "told" to do it. Now, the principle is to go to bed early because of the prinicple instilled {written on the heart}

SpongeBlog -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (7/22/2008 12:00:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lapidoth quote: He probably shows he has the impression of those rules written into his heart, his very being. It would be ridiculous for him to follow my rules to the letter (which I am no longer speaking) to form the principles and guidelines for living that my rules were only intended to lead him to. It wasn't about going to bed at 8:00. It was about learning the value of rest. Now that he knows that, he's free to make his own judgements about how to fulfill the underlying goal of my command to go to bed at 8:00. The word I spoke that endures to this day is not the letter of my command, it's the message my words represented that were not unveiled to him until he was old enough to understand it and walk in it. The parallels are so obvious between my illustration and what God is accomplishing with us, beginning with the old covenant law, that I don't need to explain it. What a wonderful way to explain why we should keep the Sabbath. So you finally acknowledge it wasn't all about the specific day--the letter of the law--afterall? (Are we making progress here?) Keep going Carl. God has an even more important message than that hidden in our childhood command to rest on the Sabbath. One that makes both the literal rest and the day we do it on almost meaningless in comparison (although I'm of the opinion that that hidden meaning makes the rest and the day completely meaningless). edit That hidden meaning is almost completely veiled in the law itself and is only visible with the illumination of the Holy Spirit in the New Covenant, but we get a glimpse of it in Isaiah 58.

Lapidoth -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (7/22/2008 12:31:44 PM)
The post I lost was partly acknowledging that I am in more agreement with Sponge than I will ever admit. LOL. Yet, on the Sabbath; you are still wrong that it doesn't matter. The Sabbath is STILL on the Sabbath day. Saturday to us. If anyone wants to go to church on Sunday, I don't care. I do wonder if they observed the Sabbath or not before. Of course, I know the answer. Been there done that. The Sabbath is not irrelevant; the argument is. The fourth commandment has not changed. We might be making progress if you weren't on a "mission" to disprove God's Word. Sure, I realize you think; anit-Law, but what is that actually? If it's not God's Word, then what is it? And again, if it's a matter of salvation; then we've all missed it. But it doesn't go away at salvation. Sabbath is still Sabbath. What was in Genesis, is still here today. As Jesus talked about, "In the beginning --- the two become one." Same book, so same principles. "In the beginning ----------- Sabbath."

Bluethread -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (7/22/2008 1:53:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SpongeBlog quote: ORIGINAL: Bluethread The Word or revelation of Adonai in whatever form, if we were to understand it correctly and completely would be Adonai. Any objections so far? Yes. I can see already I will not agree with the final conclusion that can be drawn from these generalized and lofty assessments of God and His Word. They seem like safe and reasonable and noble statements all by themselves until you consider the implications they have on us. You're trying to oversimplify and box in God's very complex relationship with a very unstable and changing creation. There are Bible examples to prove that the conclusion these statements are leading to is false. But finish your thought process before we examine those. But go ahead and continue with where you are going. I want you to finish your thought process before we examine it. Is it okay with you that other people chime in on this particular discussion as well? It's okay with me if it's okay with you. The discusion can go in many directions from here. As I have said, I am not talking about the written word yet. At this point, one could make an argument for Deism, the Karan, greek mythology, or any of a number of beliefs with an overriding single cause to the universe. It appears you are not very comfortable in the passenger seat. If you wish to be helpful please help me see deer that might be waiting to dart in front of the vehicle at this moment. We'll worry about making a wrong turn and ending up in Dallas instead of LA when that turn comes up. Others can go for the ride, but I can not promise to pay attention to everyone on the bus. I'm focused on keeping the vehicle on the road, wherever that leads, one navagator is more than enough. So, what do you think about this next block. Is it logically safe to proceed to the conclusion that the written Scriptures are a mere representation of Adonai and The Word is Adonai Himself, as the Apostle John tells us in the beginning of his account of the incarnation?

LoyalGypsy -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (7/22/2008 7:18:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mcleod Which I didn't know Kenneth Copeland was posting on this thread. Where? LG

SpongeBlog -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (7/22/2008 11:10:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Bluethread ...So, what do you think about this next block. Is it logically safe to proceed to the conclusion that the written Scriptures are a mere representation of Adonai and The Word is Adonai Himself, as the Apostle John tells us in the beginning of his account of the incarnation? Apart from any attached explanation of what this really means to you and what conclusions (right or wrong) you draw from it, I will (with much trepidation) say 'yes' so this discussion can continue. ("...Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil: for thou art with me; thy rod and thy staff they comfort me...")

LoyalGypsy -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (7/23/2008 9:07:16 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lapidoth The post I lost was partly acknowledging that I am in more agreement with Sponge than I will ever admit. LOL. Yet, on the Sabbath; you are still wrong that it doesn't matter. The Sabbath is STILL on the Sabbath day. Saturday to us. If anyone wants to go to church on Sunday, I don't care. I do wonder if they observed the Sabbath or not before. Of course, I know the answer. Been there done that. The Sabbath is not irrelevant; the argument is. The fourth commandment has not changed. We might be making progress if you weren't on a "mission" to disprove God's Word. Sure, I realize you think; anit-Law, but what is that actually? If it's not God's Word, then what is it? And again, if it's a matter of salvation; then we've all missed it. But it doesn't go away at salvation. Sabbath is still Sabbath. What was in Genesis, is still here today. As Jesus talked about, "In the beginning --- the two become one." Same book, so same principles. "In the beginning ----------- Sabbath." Hey Lap, Have you heard this as of yet? The Public Broadcasting System (PBS), probably the most liberal network in America, will present a program this fall that says the Old Testament is a bunch of made-up stories that never happened. "The Bible's Buried Secrets" says the Bible is not true. It is scheduled to air on November 18. The Bible's Buried Secrets [sm=icon_smile_yikes.gif] [:D] LG

SpongeBlog -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (7/23/2008 9:51:32 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lapidoth ...on the Sabbath; you are still wrong that it doesn't matter. The Sabbath is STILL on the Sabbath day. Saturday to us. I see you are referring to both the day and the rest itself. Because it is important to know exactly what a person is talking about when they make reference to the Sabbath. But it's clear you mean both, and that they should stay connected. Remember, I'm not Catholic. I have no argument with that. I just don't think either has any significance for us today. I'm not here to defend a Sunday Sabbath. I'm here to say it's a big nothing like circumcision. What is it about the Sabbath rest on the Sabbath day that makes it different than the old covenant requirement for circumcision? Paul says circumcision is meaningless as a sign of obedience in a man and counts for nothing because it is merely outward and external. You can do it, or you can not do it, doesn't matter. No blessings or curses attached to it anymnore. He explains how it is the inward circumcision that is the true measure of our relationship and obedience to God. Why is the 'sign' law of the Sabbath different than the 'sign' law of circumcision that it must continue as an external sign as proof of one's relationship to God? What's the consequence on our relationship with God if we do not keep an old covenant Sabbath? quote: ORIGINAL: Lapidoth If anyone wants to go to church on Sunday, I don't care. But why? Congregating was clearly commanded to be done on the Sabbath, too. Why can that requirement be loosened, but not the other stipulations of the Sabbath? quote: ORIGINAL: Lapidoth The Sabbath is not irrelevant; the argument is. The fourth commandment has not changed. ...If it's not God's Word, then what is it? The argument that it is 'God's Word' is meaningless. Unless it was really true that none of God's Word was now fulfilled in a newer way, which we know and agree isn't true at all. quote: ORIGINAL: Lapidoth ...Sabbath is still Sabbath. What was in Genesis, is still here today. As Jesus talked about, "In the beginning --- the two become one." Same book, so same principles. "In the beginning ----------- Sabbath." This is such shallow reasoning when you consider all (that we both agree on) that has so drastically changed between the old and the new covenants. It just isn't a good argument all by itself for the continuance of a literal Sabbath rest on a specific day.

GrahamCracker -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (7/23/2008 10:15:50 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lapidoth Yet, on the Sabbath; you are still wrong that it doesn't matter. The Sabbath is STILL on the Sabbath day. Saturday to us. Indeed it is, but we are no longer obligated to observe it by refraining from work or being compelled to worship on that day. quote: If anyone wants to go to church on Sunday, I don't care. I do wonder if they observed the Sabbath or not before. Of course, I know the answer. Been there done that. I attend Sunday morning worship whenever I can. Generally, I have to work on Sundays. I do attend Sunday evening. I don't do it out of any particular obligation. It happens to be when church meets. quote: Sure, I realize you think; anit-Law, but what is that actually? If it's not God's Word, then what is it? This issue is not "Is it God's word?" but rather "Is the Law still in force?" for Christians. quote: And again, if it's a matter of salvation; then we've all missed it. But it doesn't go away at salvation. Sabbath is still Sabbath. What was in Genesis, is still here today. As Jesus talked about, "In the beginning --- the two become one." Same book, so same principles. "In the beginning ----------- Sabbath." Is there any particular verse in Genesis that you believe obligates either Christians or mankind to observe the Saturday Sabbath by refraining from work?

Odeliya -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (7/23/2008 10:41:27 AM)
quote: McLeod: Just as I wrote last week we can become very arrogant that we are keepers of the law. Which is not what God is looking for. But People who cry out "Jesus, Son of David have mercy on me". I want to comment on this. It is indeed a problem , I guess with human nature. Once we try to please God thru obeying the Law we often fall into a huge pitfall of legalism, it’s just the way people's sick human nature works. we once had to take a friend that was suppose to leave the country next day on sightseeing ride, even I always knew you don’t go thru religious neighborhood on Sabbath, never! But we did, and when going from Galilee thru Arab part of Jerusalem- No reaction, just kids were yelling something maybe... At the exit, the border patrol soldiers did look at us weird (my br. has little Israeli flag stiker on the back window) Going thru Jewish orthodox parts , the story was radically different- stones, broken glass on the road, it was obvious they were throwing them all day. Speeding thru and sucessfully getting out – I look ar Shmueli (my brother),and he was so quiet. Arabs were not a problem, but Jews throw stones at their own brothers. Dad said that never, ever do that again. Strict observers can’t turn on lights,cant cook food, so the sit outside and let their kids spit and throw stones at “infidels” that don’t observe the Sabbath.This is how they show their vengeance to those who is not strict and thus fully devote their day to God. Of course, I am not generalizing, only some are like that. I am trying to convey the point – people are so easily self -deceived. You cant cook- but you can buy stoves that turn themselves on automatically on sab.You cant work – but you can hire Arabs to do work. While doing all that, including throwing stones - they are convinced they Please Adonai. Trust me on this. Idiots.

LoyalGypsy -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (7/23/2008 12:46:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GrahamCracker quote: Sure, I realize you think; anit-Law, but what is that actually? If it's not God's Word, then what is it? This issue is not "Is it God's word?" but rather "Is the Law still in force?" for Christians. Greetings Hey Graham…. let me give ya an O on the real heads up in the going ons here…and in light of the post..just before this one To Start Gods word was as not hidden from them in the OT as many here seek to impart, and that is reiterated by Jesus in the contexts of Luke 11: Then the Lord said to him, "Now you Pharisees make the outside of the cup and dish clean, but your inward part is full of greed and wickedness. 40 Foolish ones! Did not He who made the outside make the inside also? .....41 But rather give alms of such things as you have; then indeed all things are clean to you. 42 But woe to you Pharisees! For you tithe mint and rue and all manner of herbs, and pass by justice and the love of God. These you ought to have done, without leaving the others undone. These you ought to have done, =justice and the love of God without leaving the others undone = tithing of the mint and rue and all manner of herbs, IMHO…The HS had no place with those stupid people (speaking in general!!!). ....Because there was no sacrifice for that!!...[;)] ....The HS reveals things that are written of Christ (John 20)… and since all those things have been revealed…. then there is no excuse The word justice in verse 42 is judgment 2920 , 2090 = 3) and Judgment is in this context…. an a) Opinion or decision given concerning “anything” right or wrong .............1) esp. concerning justice and injustice, Therefore... as we can see in the contexts of Luke 11:42 Jesus decision was not opinioned... “Jesus said”… 1) esp. concerning justice and injustice, right or wrong AND is what “should be DONE”, was done without…….. the love 26..."of God" ..... !![;)] However there are those here who suggest that by agape ….there is no need to adhere to sound teaching concerning justice and injustice, right or wrong especially when the Lord in Luke 11:42 says otherwise. Otherwise the Law would have been destroyed. ...So in that light ....here are those here who "are actually saying" under whatever pretense an idiot is.... is that God therefore justifies us by agape... rather than by Faith, (which was pointed out by Lap) (IMO)...which is just another from of a misinterpretation in legalism. Because… By Jesus saying that it is God who made BOTH “the outside” and the “inside”; in that context concerning the outside; Jesus mentioned the tithe; (and all that was associated with it in part above)… …….Right there and then would have been the perfect opportunity for Jesus to debunk outward expressions that God had made….but He does not debunk it by His saying that God “also made the inside”…. Therefore …that meaning is that both belong to God; which is later explained by Paul in Romans 11. …….then ….Jesus gave the reason that neglecting justice "and" the love of God, =2 parts…. ; made that outward expression, (which they should have not left undone!!!)...worthless, therefore rendering the outward expression as unbelief also explained by Paul in Romans 11 In that alone and by Jesus “own words”…what was spoken in the word contexts of Luke 11:39-42 is both OT and Gospel truth; and has not changed into the NC… ….and that is quite contrary to those views imposed under the pretense of making progress… the progress in question is seeking agreement … under the pretense that it is the given character of the indwelling of the HS ….but these agreements blatantly debunk the blessing of God; and whether we like it or not; the blessing is bound to the very same Law …. [:(] And the overall redundancies of rising up the circumcision in the flesh to that of the Spirit, where in both testaments in their own right are a requirement; Paul reiterates this perfectly in the NT account in Romans 11:28 Concerning the gospel they are enemies for your sake, but concerning the election they are beloved for the sake of the fathers. 29 For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable. IMHO To say the least their views express … …. A very confused prophetic understanding of the OT calling; to even offer up any substance worthy of conversation in the character of the HS...[;)] LG

GrahamCracker -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (7/23/2008 1:16:31 PM)
Gypsy: quote: However there are those here who suggest that by agape ….there is no need to adhere to sound teaching concerning justice and injustice, right or wrong especially when the Lord in Luke 11:42 says otherwise. Otherwise the Law would have been destroyed. ...So in that light ....here are those here who "are actually saying" under whatever pretense an idiot is.... is that God therefore justifies us by agape... rather than by Faith, (which was pointed out by Lap) (IMO)...which is just another from of a misinterpretation in legalism Frankly, I have no idea who those people are and I have never recognized any argument of that sort. If they said such a thing, it is possible that their posts were so incoherent that I could not understand them. Sometimes, I do not respond to your words because they are lengthy and I cannot understand them. quote: In that alone and by Jesus “own words”…what was spoken in the word contexts of Luke 11:39-42 is both OT and Gospel truth; and has not changed into the NC… I guess it would depend on what you think Jesus was rebuking them for. Jesus continued to support the Old Covenant and rebuked the Pharisees et al because the Pharisees failed to keep it while it was still in force. The Old Covenant was still in force during Jesus lifetime. quote: And the overall redundancies of rising up the circumcision in the flesh to that of the Spirit, where in both testaments in their own right are a requirement; Paul reiterates this perfectly in the NT account in Romans 11:28 Concerning the gospel they are enemies for your sake, but concerning the election they are beloved for the sake of the fathers. 29 For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable. Circumcision of the flesh, as I see it, is a symbol for cicumcision of the heart and spirit. The outward forms (circumcision of the flesh and Law keeping) were fulfilled in us by the work of Jesus on the Christ so that we are no longer obligated to perform them. quote: IMHO To say the least their views express … …. A very confused prophetic understanding of the OT calling; to even offer up any substance worthy of conversation in the character of the HS... Not sure what you're getting at, addressing my argument or theirs. I suppose you are familiar with Hebrews 8-10? The author quotes the OT prophet Jeremiah.

Bluethread -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (7/23/2008 2:06:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SpongeBlog quote: ORIGINAL: Bluethread ...So, what do you think about this next block. Is it logically safe to proceed to the conclusion that the written Scriptures are a mere representation of Adonai and The Word is Adonai Himself, as the Apostle John tells us in the beginning of his account of the incarnation? Apart from any attached explanation of what this really means to you and what conclusions (right or wrong) you draw from it, I will (with much trepidation) say 'yes' so this discussion can continue. ("...Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil: for thou art with me; thy rod and thy staff they comfort me...") To recap, we agree that there is an infinite creator that communicates with His creation and that communication, if complete and understood properly, would give us a clear understanding of His chararter. John refers to this as The Word. Now, to avoid future misunderstandings relationed to definitions and connotations, let's take a quick look at the Torah/Logos issue. The earliest manuscripts of John's account of the incarnation of Yeshua use the word Logos to refer to Adonai/Yeshua. Whether that constitutes a "triunity" or merely multiple manifastations of the same "person" is for discussion on another thread and should not effect our discussion here, but must be mentioned so it does no confuse the discussion later on. More to the point, the original language used by John when he wrote His account is also a matter of debate, greek, hebrew or aramaic. We need not get into a long discussion of this either, but we must address the differences in terms and definitions in the different languages. Logos is a greek term that is akin to the Roman Fates or what some Atheists would refer to as "The invisible hand". That is an impersonal force that keeps the universe in balance. Torah, though used to refer to the first five books of Judeo/Christian Scriptures, is a hebrew term that refers to the character of Adonai. The common use of the term comes from its repeated use in differentiating one portion of the Scriptures from the other. This is due to concensus in Judaism, if not all of the Judeo/Christian sects, that the character of Adonai is represented in the Pentatuch. The veracity of all other Scriptures have been and continue to be sources of contention between the various sects. Now, whether one believes John wrote the original account in greek or not, it appears that He meant to communicate the concept that is more accurately connoted in the term Ha Torah, as defined above. This is the concept we have just agreed is the accurate representation of Adonai. That is a personal infinite deity. Can we agree that this is what John wishes to convey when he uses the term The Word? I am not asking you to assent to any of the other connotations that may be attached to the term Ha Torah at this time. I am just making sure that, when we use the term Ha Torah or The Word, we are refering to the perfect representation of Adonai's character. To that end, I propose we add the word "written" or "revealed" in this discussion, when we wish to use these terms to refer to that part of Adonai's character that we may quote. Do you have any problems with these definitons/connotations and this verbage?

GrahamCracker -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (7/23/2008 2:49:32 PM)
Bluethread said: quote: Now, whether one believes John wrote the original account in greek or not, it appears that He meant to communicate the concept that is more accurately connoted in the term Ha Torah, as defined above. This is the concept we have just agreed is the accurate representation of Adonai. That is a personal infinite deity. Can we agree that this is what John wishes to convey when he uses the term The Word? I don't think so. The Greek equivalent of Torah is not Logos. The Greek equivalent of Torah is Nomos, Strong's 3551. From Zodhiates Hebrew Greek Key Study Bible, Lexical Aids to the New Testament, page 1858 gives this definition as one of the meanings of Nomos: "...(2) Most frequently, the divine law given by Moes, whether moral; ceremonial, or judicial..." While it is true that Logos can refer to the Torah specifically, it's application is much broader than that as in the term Word of God, i.e. Logos of God. I'm saying that Logos does not function as a proper Greek translation of Torah, but it can function as a synonym.

Page: << < prev 161 162 [163] 164 165 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5 ANSI