The law of Moses vs the law of Christ
- Thread starter robert derrick
- 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!
This passage is about the origin of prophecy, rather than it's interpretation.
Much love!
That's what I am saying. It is not talking about there being no private interpretations of Scripture, which there are plenty. Private interpretation literally means : own ideas or personal expounding.
But rather that we ought not preach our private interpretation as Scripture, even as the Scriptures themselves came not by private interpretation and will of man.
The Scriptures neither came not by the mind of Moses, nor by the minds of the prophets and the apostles; likewise no prophesying or preaching of Scripture should come from any minister's own mind.
When we do so, we make our minds the mind of Christ, rather than having His mind by believing Scripture only. We make our word into God's Word, and if believed and obeyed by them that hear, then we become Head and Christ: a false christ. A false apostle.
Especially when teaching commandment and law and rule of Christ. That is where Paul said many people don't know what they are talking about and making things worse than better. It is also the very door entered by serpent into the garden. He knew at least Eve had begun to believe her own mind or that of Adam, in that God commanded not to touch it.
Not touching the fruit was a personal rule put into place, no doubt as some kind of safety measure, or zero-tolerance policy, and it became a snare when speaking of what God actually says and commands vs what men only think about it...
Last edited:
The statement stands with or without the spiritual teaching applied with it. And we know it stands on it's own as a point of law of Christ, because it can be confirmed by other Scriptures that state drunkenness as sin, along with fornication, etc...
The full teaching is to be filled with the Spirit in the new life of Christ rather than be drunk with wine as with the old man of sin. I.e. it's not a verse of Scripture who's primary purpose is to forbid getting drunk, but it certainly begins as a statement of that fact.
Now, are you saying being drunk with wine is ok, when not being filled with the Spirit?
Last edited:
Well said!
Any thought in my mind can be verified against the Bible. It's so very important to know all that the Bible says.
Much love!
Ok. However, 'he is not a Jew' that is one outwardly only, but 'he is a Jew' that is one inwardly by the Spirit.
So, all circumcised of heart by the Spirit of Christ are Jews of God. And all the rest claiming to be Jews by circumcision of the flesh are called liars by God. (Rev 2:9,3:9)
Neither Jew nor Greek in Christ was literally referring to blood line and cultural background: the physical heritage, after which we neither know Christ anymore, nor any other in Christ. (2 Cor 5:16)
That is probably one of the most mature things any believer can say. You would literally put even your most cherished ideas, beliefs, and traditions, even from mother and father and friend, to be proved against Scripture.
You'll never be deceived by another, when you won't let yourself be deceived by your own mind.
We should always come to the Scriptures as a little child, ready to just read and take it as literally as possible, and say, not my mind, but thine be mine, O Lord.
Isaiah 66:1-2 KJV
1) Thus saith the LORD, The heaven is my throne, and the earth is my footstool: where is the house that ye build unto me? and where is the place of my rest?
2) For all those things hath mine hand made, and all those things have been, saith the LORD: but to this man will I look, even to him that is poor and of a contrite spirit, and trembleth at my word.
1) Thus saith the LORD, The heaven is my throne, and the earth is my footstool: where is the house that ye build unto me? and where is the place of my rest?
2) For all those things hath mine hand made, and all those things have been, saith the LORD: but to this man will I look, even to him that is poor and of a contrite spirit, and trembleth at my word.
He came to the Jews that were Jews indeed in the Old Covenant, and He also came to the Gentiles, that were Gentiles indeed, until any believed the new Covenant.
With the change of Covenant at the cross, then there are no more Jews uncircumcised of heart, and all flesh that abides in unbelief are gentiles before God. The time of the gentiles to be fulfilled and trampling the outer court are the nations without God, no matter what they may call themselves.
Jesus came to fulfill and confirm the promises to the fathers once and for all to His own Jews first. He will not be coming again to them that are not His own anymore. The only Jews He will be coming for is His body to receive in the resurrection of His church.
None. Neither with being an Israelite. Paul was all three: Kinsmen Jews, Israel after the flesh, and Hebrew of the Hebrews.
Jews were first so name in Scripture in 2 Kings 16 with the Syrian siege.
Those scattered from Judea were no more Jews, except they believe Jesus and are circumcised in heart.
"For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh."
No more Old Covenant, law of Moses, nor outward Jew and circumcision only.
Jesus prophesied the scattering of His own that were rejecting Him as Lord and Savior, and so national Israel after the flesh existed no more, nor Jews' after the flesh as a people peculiar to God. They are just a people among peoples, tribe among tribes, and nation among nations.
God's plan was rejected, when His Son was rejected. The crucifixion and death of God the Son was not just a blip in the history of the 'Jews'.
""For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly."
God's plan from the beginning of the Covenant with the people of Israel was to make them His special people: "Now therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people: for all the earth is mine: And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation. These are the words which thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel." (Ex 19)
God was prepared to do so at that very time, when He came down upon the mount to meet with them all, but the people refused (Ex 20)(Heb 12), and would only hear Moses, and therefore a Levitical priesthood and sacrifice was made of necessity, until the time of reformation (Heb 7), when God could convert man's soul and nature from within by His own Son, so that now He is able to accomplish His plan from the beginning through faith of Jesus, and we can approach Him personally in the mount Sion and hear Him in the heavenly Jerusalem, which heavenly places we now sit in, fulfilling the first promise to a whole people of God.
The Israelites refused to be His personally chosen holy nation and kingdom of priests from the beginning, and the Jews refused His only Son to confirm that promise. So now, the promise and plan is to all who believe and hear and obey His voice from the mount.
They were Jews before Babylon when the Syrian besieged Jerusalem. Pula uses Jew, Hebrew, and Israel freely intermixed.
FHII
Well-Known Member
- Apr 9, 2011
- 4,833
- 2,494
- 113
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- United States
You are STILL doing it! If you are going to preach the WORD, preach it as it says! But you have already admitted context isn't important and full scripture isn't important. The sad thing is that you could've STILL made your point by preaching it right. You still have a problem, but I can't even address that until you get this verse right.
Very timely that someone started a thread by misquoting or paraphrasing Matthew 4:4. Lord have mercy on me, but I am going to do the same to illustrate absurdity:
Matthew 4:4 KJV
But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread.
No context needed, right? No full scripture needed, right? I quoted the Bible word for word. It says that, but there is a huge problem, isn't there?
I know that people today insist on Jews still being the seed and people of promise to Abraham, and I also understand it is concretely mixed with their favorite prophecies of the last days, but still I don't know how they can see on any flesh of man, other than those in Christ, that are special with God.
It's pretty much a slap in the face to Jesus, that they demand He go back to the Jews one more last and completely final time, when He did so the first time, and they rejected Him and had Him crucified.
How can someone not understand a promise made to a people is finished, when they killed the Promiser???
"It is finished" No more Jew or Gentile with God, just His peculiar people and holy nation, and all other nations and peoples of the earth that walk and circumcise after the flesh are lost without Him.
"For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly." And so he that is circumcised outwardly is not a Jew. Simple fact of Scripture. When He came, they were, and when they rejected Him, they were not.
I see it more as a slap in God's face as if He would break His promises. He said He'd come back to save them, why should we think that not so?
Much love!
You are STILL doing it!
Instead of throwing a temper tantrum, try for the first time explaining my error and get the verse right for me. Obviously, I don't see it.
If not, then take your fit elsewhere, with your phantom 'address'.
Similar threads
