Search results

Our salvation is from sin (Matthew 1:21) and sin is the transgression of God's law (1 John 3:4), so while we do not earn our salvation as the result of having first obey it, living in obedience to it through faith in Jesus is intrinsically the content of the gift of him saving us from not living...

In Romans 7:22-23, Paul delighted in obeying the Law of God, but contrasted that with the law of sin that held him captive. I would be absurd to interpret those those verses as saying that Paul delighted in stirring up sinful passions in order to bear fruit unto death and that he delighted in...

Roughly 80% of the men is use were circumcised as newborns in a hospital, so does @Jack want to argue that Paul was arguing against circumcision for any reason that that Christ is therefore of no value to roughly 80% of the men in the US?

Paul never stopped identifying as a Pharisee (Acts 23:6) likewise, there were Pharisees who were among the believers (Acts 15:5), so someone does not need to cease to be a Pharisee in order to become a follower of Christ, and Pharisees as a Torah observant branch of Judaism. In Romans 7:25-8:2...

Galatians 5:3-4 says that the the position that we need to obey works of the law in order to become justified is the way to be served from Christ, which is not a position that I have ever supported, but you don't care about truth. If you can twist a verse to make it appear to be speaking...

That is of course not what Galatians 5:3-4 says. There is a huge difference between me saying that a man who wants to eat of the Passover lamb should become circumcised in obedience to what God has commanded in Genesis 12:48 and the position that men are required to become circumcised in order...

Thank you for confirming what I said.

You are again ignoring the issue that Paul was not speaking against obeying God, but was only speaking against becoming circumcised for incorrect reasons. I have never suggest that we need to obey either the Torah or works of the law in order to become justified, so you are blatantly...

I have advised men to become circumcised for the purposes for which God commanded it and not for the purposes for which God has not commanded it. I have no problem with Paul, just with your misunderstanding of him.

There is a huge difference between affirming circumcision for the purposes for which God commanded it, such as if a Gentile wanted to eat of the Passover lamb (Genesis 12:48) and speaking against circumcision for the purposes for which God did not command it, such as in order to become saved.

I've read it, but I am not a mind reader.

Indeed I do.

It is important to keep the Law of God by the Spirit, though it is also important to correctly understand what Paul meant by the letter. 2 Corinthians 3:6 who has made us sufficient to be ministers of a new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit. For the letter kills, but the Spirit...

Why did you quote that passage?

There is the issue of whether Galatians 5:2 is speaking against becoming circumcised for any reason or whether it was only speaking against incorrect reasons. If it is for any reason, then Paul causes Christ to be of no value to Timothy when he had him circumcised right after the Jerusalem...

Colossians 2:16 leaves room for two possible scenarios: 1.) The Colossians were not celebrating God's holy days, they were being judged by Jews because they were not, and Paul was encouraging them not to let anyone judge them for not keeping them. 2.) The Colossians were celebrating God's holy...

God has given instructions for how to have a relationship with Him, so it is contradictory to think that what matters is having a relationship with Him and not following those instructions.

In Jeremiah 31:33, the New Covenant involves God putting the Torah in our minds and writing it on our hearts. In Psalms 19:7, the Torah is perfect, in Psalms 119:45, it is of liberty, and in Psalms 119:1-3, it blesses those who obey it, so when James 1:25 speaks about the perfect law of liberty...

You said that it was under Jesus was sent that we found out that we are to call out to the Father in his name. While Jesus taught to do the Father's will, he was far from the only one who did that, and he did not change the way to do His will. For example, Jesus was virtually in complete...

God is referred to as Father in Isaiah 63-64. Jesus was not an innovator.