And that is what it comes down to...Phoneman777 said:
Defending behavior that put Jesus on the cross in the first place.
This is something I refuse to do!
Sabbath-Keeping
- Thread starter Trekson
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
- Status
Defending behavior that put Jesus on the cross in the first place.
This is something I refuse to do!
Phoneman777
Well-Known Member
- Jan 14, 2015
- 7,395
- 2,594
- 113
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- United States
Upp, you are the only one here who behaves himself like an emotionally out of control woman. Your excessive use of "!" really makes it hard for us to resist the urge to give you a proverbial "pimp backhand".UppsalaDragby said:
Neither are my posts... unless of course you are going to explain exactly what a "full lenght sermon" is and show me why it applies to me and not to you.The Barrd said:
I responded to both!
You sound like a defiant teenager! I haven't said that I have authority over you. I just post what the Bible says and hope that you acknowledge the authority of scripture.
I guess you don't..
Well you are quite welcome to prove that the use of exclamation marks supports your sexist remark!!!Phoneman777 said:
Who cares what you refuse to do? You set the level of the discussion here and then expect others to care what you do or do not do..The Barrd said:
Both you and Phoneman dishonestly twist whatever is said, and both of you just make empty claims without supporting what you say with scripture.
So why should anyone care what you say?
Or why don't we put it in Paul's words:
"Why not say--as we are being slanderously reported as saying and as some claim that we say--"Let us do evil that good may result"?
Their condemnation is deserved." (Rom 3:8)
Clearly, it is the same spirit at work today!
Don't get hysterical.UppsalaDragby said:
I acknowledge God's authority over me.
I just don't acknowledge you as any kind of authority on what the Bible has to say.
I have a Bible, too...and in mine, Jesus says "If you love me, keep my commandments."
I love Him.
Therefore, I will do my level best, with His help, to keep His commandments.
I do hope that is alright with you....but if it isn't, I will continue to do what I believe is right.
And I will pray for you.
You know, Upp ol' buddy, you are beginning to make this personal.UppsalaDragby said:
I guess that is what happens when you have no law....
Rom 14:4 Who art thou that judgest another man's servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth. Yea, he shall be holden up: for God is able to make him stand.UppsalaDragby said:
I'm not hysterical, I just don't appreciate people coming here complaining about twisting thing and then continue to distort other people views. That's all.The Barrd said:
And? Of course you should!
Does your Bible say this:
"And this is his command: to believe in the name of his Son, Jesus Christ, and to love one another as he commanded us."
"By calling this covenant "new," he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and aging will soon disappear." (Heb 8:13)
and this:
"Now that faith has come, we are no longer under the supervision of the law." (Gal 3:25)
and this:
"But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under law." (Gal 5:18)
and this:
"Now if the ministry that brought death, which was engraved in letters on stone, came with glory, so that the Israelites could not look steadily at the face of Moses because of its glory, fading though it was, will not the ministry of the Spirit be even more glorious? If the ministry that condemns men is glorious, how much more glorious is the ministry that brings righteousness! For what was glorious has no glory now in comparison with the surpassing glory. And if what was fading away came with glory, how much greater is the glory of that which lasts!" (2 Cor 3:7-11)
Because I don't see much evidence that you acknowledge these things.
The Old Covenant is obsolete for Christians. We have a New Covenant that deals with sin in a far superior way than the Old Covenant did.
Well good luck with that, but don't come here teaching things that contradict scripture.
"I do hope that is alright with you....but if it isn't, I will continue to do what I believe is right.
And I will pray for you."
That's nice, but I would rather you conduct yourself appropriately here.
Firstly, I'm not judging you, I am judging your doctrine first of all, and your behaviour secondly. You are doing something here that is forbidden by the same commandments you claim to be under! I am perfectly in my right to point that out to you.The Barrd said:
Secondly, we are supposed to judge each other within Christianity:
"What business is it of mine to judge those outsidethe church? Are you not to judge those inside? (1 Cor 5:12)
I haven't figured out how this quote thingie works yet...so I've put your words in blue, so that we can tell who is talking:UppsalaDragby said:
Does your Bible say this:
"And this is his command: to believe in the name of his Son, Jesus Christ, and to love one another as he commanded us."
"By calling this covenant "new," he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and aging will soon disappear." (Heb 8:13)
You left out the "meat" of that scripture.
Mine has quite a bit more to say on the subject:
Heb 8:7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.
Heb 8:8 For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:
Heb 8:9 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord.
Heb 8:10 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people:
Heb 8:11 And they shall not teach every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for all shall know me, from the least to the greatest.
Heb 8:12 For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more.
Of course, you recognize these verses as repeating the prophecy of Jeremiah 31, I hope.
Again, there are a few things you need to see here, that I think you've missed.
First, this covenant, like the first one, was made with the house of Israel and the house of Judah, just like the first one. So, if you reject the first one, because it was "for the Jews only", then you have no part of this one either.
I don't need to tell you that this covenant is "not according to" the first covenant...there are some differences. Do you know what these differences are?
You do see that God's laws are still a part of this new covenant? Do you see where it says: "I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts." Now, when God says "My laws", what do you think He means? He's not referring to Mosaic law here...but the law He wrote Himself with His Own finger, on tables of stone. But He isn't going to write them on stone this time...but in our hearts.
But the most important difference of all is this:
"For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more."
This is a Covenant of Grace. This is why so many people think that "not under the law" means that there is no more law, but that is not true.
Our lives are no longer required as a penalty for breaking these basic laws, because that penalty has been paid for us at Calvary. This precious grace that we have was bought with a horrendous price, let us never, ever forget that.
Let's not even think to squander that price by declaring that there is no more law...
"But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under law." (Gal 5:18)
A great verse...but there's more:
Gal 5:19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,
Gal 5:20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,
Gal 5:21 Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.
Wow...Does this scripture teach us that there is no law?
I don't think so.
Those who do these things shall not inherit the Kingdom of God...
Do you wish to inherit the Kingdom of God?
Then don't do those things...
"Now if the ministry that brought death, which was engraved in letters on stone, came with glory, so that the Israelites could not look steadily at the face of Moses because of its glory, fading though it was, will not the ministry of the Spirit be even more glorious? If the ministry that condemns men is glorious, how much more glorious is the ministry that brings righteousness! For what was glorious has no glory now in comparison with the surpassing glory. And if what was fading away came with glory, how much greater is the glory of that which lasts!" (2 Cor 3:7-11)
How, exactly, does this new ministry bring righteousness? How is it more glorious?
The answers are simple.
This ministry puts the law directly into the believer's heart. Now, that is glorious.
But that's not all.
This ministry brings grace tor forgiveness!
What could be more glorious than that!
Phoneman777
Well-Known Member
- Jan 14, 2015
- 7,395
- 2,594
- 113
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- United States
Upp, the "dishonest twisting" that you accuse me of is merely the act of restating your beliefs as they are in such a way that demonstrates the absurdity of them. I simply cannot accept your idea that we aren't obligated to keep the Ten Commandments but we can't break them, as well as your idea that there was a time when sin existed in the world but not a law, based on my reading of Scripture that sin is the transgression of the law.UppsalaDragby said:
Phoneman777
Well-Known Member
- Jan 14, 2015
- 7,395
- 2,594
- 113
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- United States
Bro, an almost sure sign that you are hysterical is when two or more people have to tell you don't get hysterical.UppsalaDragby said:
BTW, you've already been shown that the Old Covenant is NOT the law, else we'd be able to substitute the words "the law" with "Old Covenant" in Romans 3:31 KJV. As soon as you are able to do so, and also prove that Jesus was wrong when He said the law would not pass away until all is fulfilled (Matthew 5:18 KJV), then I'll believe your idea that the law passed away with the Old Covenant.
If you go to page 26 on this thread and read post #770 then you can see how I do it. It might seem a bit tricky, but just experiment a little and I think you should get the hang of it.The Barrd said:
Faulty logic once again I'm afraid. Why do you think that the fact that both covenants were made with the house of Israel mean that we are still under the first one? That doesn't make sence, and it is not what Jeremiah 31 is saying at all. You might as well use the same argument that we are all bound by a covenant that requires us to keep all the 613 commandments in that covenant!
You even cite the verse that says that the first covenant was faulty, and yet you not only think we are under a covenant that scripture says is faulty, you think we are under a covenant that scripture says is obsolete. That's totally wrong.
Yes I do. The new covenant is based on better promises, is not a recycled form of legalism, is far superior in that it's mediator is Christ, does not have a ministry that brings death and condemantion, is not obsolete, is not powerless, is not written on stone, does not produce covetous desires, does not make transgression increase, is not fading but will last, was not made for lawbreakers, is not "weakened by the sinful nature, is not called the law of sin and death, is not based on a law that "made nothing perfect, does not bring wrath, and imparts life whereas the old covenant does not.
Nope. If they were then all 613 commandments would obviously apply. Every stroke of the pen, every "dot and title" all of it. What on earth do you think a covenant is? It is like a contract that you sign and bind yourself to ALL of its terms.
Sure I do, but what I don't do is inject words into that verse that are simply not there! Were does that verse say that it is rerring to the 10 commandments? God's commandments to Christians, if you did some reading in the book of Acts (you know, the NEW testaments) were characterised by living commandments, not things etched on stone. You err because you do not know the scriptures, nor the power of God. God is fully able to give commandments that are tailored to meet the people they are directed towards and the situation they are in.
Correct, he is NOT referring to the Mosaic law, which directy contradicts your claims since the 10 commandments were defined as being that particular covenant. If God is telling us that he is giving us a NEW covenant then obviously he is referring to the laws and commandments of THAT covenant, not the one he just explained was faulty.
Who is saying that there is no more law? What I am saying is that the Mosaic law no longer applies to us, which I have shown you time and time again. It has nothing to do with removing the penalty. If you remove the penalty from a law then it is no longer a law. The correct way to deal with this is to acknowledge what scripture says - we are no longer under the supervision of the Mosaic law.
That scripture says nothing whatsoever about law. You need to read what it says, not what you want it to say. Gal 5 teaches us that there are fruits that identify whether or not we are on course - i.e. following the law of Christ. If we follow the spirit then we will bear good fruit, if we follow the flesh then our fruit will be bad. It says nothing about the 10 commandments, and I would challenge you to show me one verse that indicates that being under the 10 commandments produces good fruit. As it is, scripture says the exact opposite, just as the historical account of the gospel also shows us.
Have I said they would? Again with the misrepresentation.
What things are you claiming I am doing? Have I ever said we should do these things? Or produce these fruits? What I am saying is that putting oneself under the 10 commandments does not prevent us from bearing bad fruit, whereas following the Spirit does - according to scripture!
Sure it does, but what it puts in our hearts is the law of Christ - a law that teaches us to show compassion towards each other and to have faith in God. That is what grace is all about.
You haven't restated my beliefs at all. You have distorted them in the same way that those who opposed Paul distorted his message. Paul's claim that we are no longer under the Mosiac law was met with slander. They were claiming that he was promoting sin - JUST AS YOU ARE DOING HERE!!Phoneman777 said:
So if you think you are "restating my beliefs" then do what I have asked you to do all along - use quotes!!
I have explained it to you over and over again. The fact that our conduct should be morally consistent with the commandments is not equivalent to saying that we are under them. To be under the 10 commandments means that we are under a law, and a law has consequences. Now, if you can show me where scripture tells us that we are under the 10 commandments without the consequences that the Mosaic law stipulates then just point it out to me.
Otherwise, stop confusing laws and commandments with morality! They are related, but they are not the same thing.
Furthermore, scripture teaches us that legalism, whether one thinks it is a salvation issue or not, is the wrong way to go. Read Galatians carefully! These people obviously knew that salvation was through faith in Christ, but nevertheless were slipping back in to legalism. Our focus should not be on laws - they DON'T make us any more righteous than anyone else! And clearly, Paul indicated that "observing special days and months and seasons and years" which might seem innocent enough to us, was a distortion of the gospel! And what he said was pretty scary: "I fear for you, that somehow I have wasted my efforts on you". And even MORE scary:
"Even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned!"
Now as much as we disagree Phoneman, I don't want you or anyone else to be eternally condemned. But this dogma that you are spreading is a false gospel.
Yeah sure, two totally unbiased people who act as cheerleaders for each other..Phoneman777 said:
Who are you trying to kid??? I like to emphasize things that I feel are important. You can interpret that as being hysterical if you want. Who cares?
Really, I find it very easy to do. Just watch:
Do we, then, nullify the Old Covenant by this faith? Not at all! Rather, we uphold the Old Covenant.
So what's the problem?
And besides, I am not saying that the Old Covenant IS the law, but that it contains a set of laws, of which the 10 commandments are an integral part.
What do these verses tell you:
"And he wrote on the tablets the words of the covenant--the Ten Commandments." (Exodus 34:28)
"He declared to you his covenant, the Ten Commandments, which he commanded you to follow and then wrote them on two stone tablets." (Deut 4:13)
Oh boy.. I have told you over and over again. I have never said that the law has passed away, but that it is obsolete for those who believe. I even gave you a scripture that explains exactly how it works. So how long are you going to keep this up? Stop distorting my words and keep the law you claim that you keep!
Yeah sure, two totally unbiased people who act as cheerleaders for each other..
Who are you trying to kid??? I like to emphasize things that I feel are important. You can interpret that as being hysterical if you want. Who cares?
I just want to let you know here....the Phoneman and I have never met, never spoken, do not know each other, and are not "acting as cheerleaders for each other." We happen to share a common belief...i.e., the story of Lazarus and the rich man is a parable.
Now, if we continue to find common ground, we may become friends, but at this point in time, we are two strangers who happen to agree on one thing, and that's all we are.
The fact is that two complete strangers are telling you that you are acting hysterical.
Now, I don't know....but I think that if two separate strangers were to say such a thing to me, I'd back off a bit, and think about it.
Is it something about the way I am presenting myself? Am I, perhaps, overdoing it a bit?
Maybe...just perhaps...it isn't Phoneman, or me.
Maybe...just perhaps...it is you.
Who are you trying to kid??? I like to emphasize things that I feel are important. You can interpret that as being hysterical if you want. Who cares?
I just want to let you know here....the Phoneman and I have never met, never spoken, do not know each other, and are not "acting as cheerleaders for each other." We happen to share a common belief...i.e., the story of Lazarus and the rich man is a parable.
Now, if we continue to find common ground, we may become friends, but at this point in time, we are two strangers who happen to agree on one thing, and that's all we are.
The fact is that two complete strangers are telling you that you are acting hysterical.
Now, I don't know....but I think that if two separate strangers were to say such a thing to me, I'd back off a bit, and think about it.
Is it something about the way I am presenting myself? Am I, perhaps, overdoing it a bit?
Maybe...just perhaps...it isn't Phoneman, or me.
Maybe...just perhaps...it is you.
- Status
