Where are the scriptures?

[Rach1370]

You still don't understand do you? Do you not know that after Christ's return, God's commandments and statutes is exactly what we will be following? Everyone will, not just those of Christ's elect that reign with Him. You know what? It'll be easier to do in that time when in our resurrected bodies. But for now, we are to strive... to be perfect, even though we never can be during this present world.

And you obviously don't know me at all, as to how I think or feel about others. I love all... peoples. I just don't always love what people do, myself included. Arguments and debates is not a reason to hate one's brother or sister. Even family have arguments, it doesn't mean they hate each other.

I well know that we can have no righteousness that can save us. We are only saved by God's unmerited favor (grace) through His Son, period. But you see, you've been trained that when someone merely mentions 'the law', you think it means someone is trying to supplant it with Christ's Salvation by Faith.

2 Tim 3:16-17
16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.
(KJV)

Do you think Apostle Paul was talking only about the New Testament Books with that? I assure you, he was not.

Try to make up your own Salvation plan, but it won't work. If you follow Jesus, then why don't you listen to Him, for what I testified to is what He was teaching. You may think to escape God's laws today, but you cannot. Go out and steal something and see if God's laws are no more in effect. Try it if you don't believe me.

And if you're going to quote our Lord Jesus there, it might help you if you go back into the Old Testament and read where He was quoting that from God's commandments.

I honestly don't know if you understand what I've been trying to say. I will attempt, one last time to communicate what I mean...
I am in no way advocating a Christian 'living it up' under the freedom of Christ. Christ Himself talked of many things that were good and those that were not. I suspect, as you say, that those things line up with some of the OT laws...in particular the 10 commandments.
These, I believe a Christian should strive to live by. Of course Christians should try and live by a moral code...so much of what Paul talks about it how a Christian should now live. Freedom in Christ gives us a freedom from a life of sin, not freedom to live one.
What I am saying is this: so many of the laws...what we would call the law of Moses, has been fulfilled by Jesus. So therefore running through a check list of all 516 laws (or whatever) on a daily basis to try and make sure you're keeping them, is foolishness. It is pure Pharisaical nonsense to feel a need to check off every little box...right down to the spice rack. To do this we become more worried about the letter than the spirit.

I truly am not 'making up my own salvation plan'. Why on earth would I do that when I know that only Christ's will work.
I'm sorry if you still disagree with me, but that is not my problem. I am following the Bible as I see the truth, and I am just as passionate in my belief that it is right as you are yours. Who ends up being correct in the end? Only God knows. I pray all the time that if I am mistaken God will show it to me, that the Holy Spirit will direct me in the right direction. So, in the end it comes down to faith. I believe I'm right because I trust God to show me if I'm wrong. I cannot listen to man when he tells me I'm wrong, as so many men are wrong. I can listen to them, weigh what they say with scripture, pray, so on. But ultimately it is God and His word, His Spirit who will show me right from wrong.

I think the point I'm trying to make here is this: I may heartily believe you are wrong, but I won't lay into you personally...accuse you of being in denial of the truth, of making your own salvation up (And, let's face it, both are blasphemous...as they imply I'm aware of the truth, but choosing to ignore it.) Because being sure in my belief and faith, does not give me leave to be mean. It gives me leave to stand firm, to encourage others towards the truth with love. If you are truly hoping to 'sway me to the truth' by feeling free to say these things to me, I would have to say that you were perhaps ignoring the spirit of the law...that being love, yeah?

 

[lawrance]

Do we there for through faith destroy the Law ? By no means; rather, we establish the Law. Romans 3 : 31
Duties of Christians Romans 12.
Jesus curse a fig tree. why ?
Union with Christ. John 15 : 1- 27 I am the true vine, and my father is the vine dresser. every branch in me that bears no fruit he will take away. etc

 

[RichardBurger]

Do we there for through faith destroy the Law ? By no means; rather, we establish the Law. Romans 3 : 31
Duties of Christians Romans 12.
Jesus curse a fig tree. why ?
Union with Christ. John 15 : 1- 27 I am the true vine, and my father is the vine dresser. every branch in me that bears no fruit he will take away. etc

I will reply to this because I have a view of the cursed fig tree.

Luke 13:6-9 (The Parable of the Barren Fig Tree)
6 He also spoke this parable: "A certain man had a fig tree planted in his vineyard, and he came seeking fruit on it and found none.
7 Then he said to the keeper of his vineyard, 'Look, for three years I have come seeking fruit on this fig tree and find none. Cut it down; why does it use up the ground?'
8 But he answered and said to him, 'Sir, let it alone this year also, until I dig around it and fertilize it.
9 And if it bears fruit, well. But if not, after that you can cut it down.'"
NKJV

The three years are the years that Jesus ministered to the Jews.

The fig tree is the nation of Israel (the Jews).

The keepers of the vineyard are the 12 Apostles.

From Acts 1 until Acts 7 (or perhaps 70 AD) the Jewish nation could have repented and accepted Jesus as their savior. He would have returned for His second coming and set up His kingdom rule from Jerusalem and all Gentile nations would be blessed through Israel. Read Luke 13:6-9 and realize that Jesus told this story as an indication of what would happen if Israel (the fig tree) rejected Jesus. The Jews had a time period in which they could have repented. (Acts 2:37-38)

 

[veteran]

I honestly don't know if you understand what I've been trying to say. I will attempt, one last time to communicate what I mean...
I am in no way advocating a Christian 'living it up' under the freedom of Christ. Christ Himself talked of many things that were good and those that were not. I suspect, as you say, that those things line up with some of the OT laws...in particular the 10 commandments.
These, I believe a Christian should strive to live by. Of course Christians should try and live by a moral code...so much of what Paul talks about it how a Christian should now live. Freedom in Christ gives us a freedom from a life of sin, not freedom to live one.
What I am saying is this: so many of the laws...what we would call the law of Moses, has been fulfilled by Jesus. So therefore running through a check list of all 516 laws (or whatever) on a daily basis to try and make sure you're keeping them, is foolishness. It is pure Pharisaical nonsense to feel a need to check off every little box...right down to the spice rack. To do this we become more worried about the letter than the spirit.

I truly am not 'making up my own salvation plan'. Why on earth would I do that when I know that only Christ's will work.
I'm sorry if you still disagree with me, but that is not my problem. I am following the Bible as I see the truth, and I am just as passionate in my belief that it is right as you are yours. Who ends up being correct in the end? Only God knows. I pray all the time that if I am mistaken God will show it to me, that the Holy Spirit will direct me in the right direction. So, in the end it comes down to faith. I believe I'm right because I trust God to show me if I'm wrong. I cannot listen to man when he tells me I'm wrong, as so many men are wrong. I can listen to them, weigh what they say with scripture, pray, so on. But ultimately it is God and His word, His Spirit who will show me right from wrong.

I think the point I'm trying to make here is this: I may heartily believe you are wrong, but I won't lay into you personally...accuse you of being in denial of the truth, of making your own salvation up (And, let's face it, both are blasphemous...as they imply I'm aware of the truth, but choosing to ignore it.) Because being sure in my belief and faith, does not give me leave to be mean. It gives me leave to stand firm, to encourage others towards the truth with love. If you are truly hoping to 'sway me to the truth' by feeling free to say these things to me, I would have to say that you were perhaps ignoring the spirit of the law...that being love, yeah?

I love you too. But that doesn't mean your beyond rebuke.

Notice what's being said in the following about The New Covenant, the same New Covenant that we Gentiles have believed through Christ Jesus...

Heb 8:6-13
6 But now hath He obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also He is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.
7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.
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:
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.
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:
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.
12 For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more.
13 In that He saith, A new covenant, He hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.
(KJV)

Does that show God's laws are no more? Absolutely not, it shows God's promise that He would put His laws in the minds and hearts of His people per The New Covenant.

How is that done? By The Holy Spirit Comforter working in those who believe on Jesus Christ. That's what Paul's teaching of walking by The Spirit means.

And you know what, The Holy Spirit no doubt can cover a lot more than simply 516 laws.

Is that for Israelites only? No, because it is about The New Covenant through Jesus Christ. But the 'grace only' Churches would have us Gentiles think none of that Book of Hebrews applies to us!! Even the Ten Commandments are against the idea of 'grace only' dispensationalism.

Therefore, a believer on Christ Jesus, HOW do they know how to follow Him? Just by whatever idea pops into their head? By creating their 'own' sense of righteousness? Some Churches today even have a problem with not properly identifying the working of The Holy Spirit, claiming laughing out loud and other things of confusion are of The Holy Spirit. That's confusion, not following Christ Jesus. And that IS exactly about some creating their OWN brand of salvation. The LORD and His Apostles warned many times against that crooked thinking.

I'm forced yet again to warn folks about a planned infiltration in the Churches today by Christ's enemies that push "Social Religion" instead of "Revealed Religion" from The Bible. The idea of social religion is what is allowing just about anything to become part of the Church.

 

[RichardBurger]

I love you too. But that doesn't mean your beyond rebuke.

Notice what's being said in the following about The New Covenant, the same New Covenant that we Gentiles have believed through Christ Jesus...

Heb 8:6-13
6 But now hath He obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also He is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.
7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.
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:
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.
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:
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.
12 For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more.
13 In that He saith, A new covenant, He hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.
(KJV)

Does that show God's laws are no more? Absolutely not, it shows God's promise that He would put His laws in the minds and hearts of His people per The New Covenant.

How is that done? By The Holy Spirit Comforter working in those who believe on Jesus Christ. That's what Paul's teaching of walking by The Spirit means.

And you know what, The Holy Spirit no doubt can cover a lot more than simply 516 laws.

Is that for Israelites only? No, because it is about The New Covenant through Jesus Christ. But the 'grace only' Churches would have us Gentiles think none of that Book of Hebrews applies to us!! Even the Ten Commandments are against the idea of 'grace only' dispensationalism.

Therefore, a believer on Christ Jesus, HOW do they know how to follow Him? Just by whatever idea pops into their head? By creating their 'own' sense of righteousness? Some Churches today even have a problem with not properly identifying the working of The Holy Spirit, claiming laughing out loud and other things of confusion are of The Holy Spirit. That's confusion, not following Christ Jesus. And that IS exactly about some creating their OWN brand of salvation. The LORD and His Apostles warned many times against that crooked thinking.

I'm forced yet again to warn folks about a planned infiltration in the Churches today by Christ's enemies that push "Social Religion" instead of "Revealed Religion" from The Bible. The idea of social religion is what is allowing just about anything to become part of the Church.

I got a laugh out of this statement by verteran; "But that doesn't mean your beyond rebuke" What an ego to think that he is the one that can rebuke others. Is that an ego or what?

 

[Rach1370]

I love you too. But that doesn't mean your beyond rebuke.

Notice what's being said in the following about The New Covenant, the same New Covenant that we Gentiles have believed through Christ Jesus...

Heb 8:6-13
6 But now hath He obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also He is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.
7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.
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:
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.
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:
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.
12 For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more.
13 In that He saith, A new covenant, He hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.
(KJV)

Does that show God's laws are no more? Absolutely not, it shows God's promise that He would put His laws in the minds and hearts of His people per The New Covenant.

How is that done? By The Holy Spirit Comforter working in those who believe on Jesus Christ. That's what Paul's teaching of walking by The Spirit means.

And you know what, The Holy Spirit no doubt can cover a lot more than simply 516 laws.

Is that for Israelites only? No, because it is about The New Covenant through Jesus Christ. But the 'grace only' Churches would have us Gentiles think none of that Book of Hebrews applies to us!! Even the Ten Commandments are against the idea of 'grace only' dispensationalism.

Therefore, a believer on Christ Jesus, HOW do they know how to follow Him? Just by whatever idea pops into their head? By creating their 'own' sense of righteousness? Some Churches today even have a problem with not properly identifying the working of The Holy Spirit, claiming laughing out loud and other things of confusion are of The Holy Spirit. That's confusion, not following Christ Jesus. And that IS exactly about some creating their OWN brand of salvation. The LORD and His Apostles warned many times against that crooked thinking.

I'm forced yet again to warn folks about a planned infiltration in the Churches today by Christ's enemies that push "Social Religion" instead of "Revealed Religion" from The Bible. The idea of social religion is what is allowing just about anything to become part of the Church.

I agree about the Holy Spirit, that God laws are now written on our hearts, but consider the end of those verses and what it all means:

[6] But as it is, Christ has obtained a ministry that is as much more excellent than the old as the covenant he mediates is better, since it is enacted on better promises. [7] For if that first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no occasion to look for a second.
[8] For he finds fault with them when he says:
“Behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord,
when I will establish a new covenant with the house of Israel
and with the house of Judah,
[9] not like the covenant that I made with their fathers
on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt.
For they did not continue in my covenant,
and so I showed no concern for them, declares the Lord.
[10] For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel
after those days, declares the Lord:
I will put my laws into their minds,
and write them on their hearts,
and I will be their God,
and they shall be my people.
[11] And they shall not teach, each one his neighbor
and each one his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’
for they shall all know me,
from the least of them to the greatest.
[12] For I will be merciful toward their iniquities,
and I will remember their sins no more.”
[13] In speaking of a new covenant, he makes the first one obsolete. And what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away. (Hebrews 8:6-13 ESV)

No where does it talk of holding on to some of the old Laws, of the old covenant. It's all about the new one. Yes, with the Holy Spirit within the converted person, we should be lead to know what is good and pleasing to God; what is sin against Him. As far as the 10 commandments go, again, I wouldn't say we need a check list...in fact I think that if we follow the first two wholly, we follow all....Love God, have no idols. Even within the new covenant, these have not changed...Jesus clearly taught them.

I cannot understand why, when Jesus and the NT talks so much about the "New Covenant", we would not take into account of the other things they talk of, taking them as the guidelines for this new covenant. Sure, some of them line up with old covenant rules...like 'have no other Gods'...that's just not gonna change!

Look, I appreciate that brothers and sisters in Christ have the right to rebuke others should they stray from the truth. The problem, however, is that I do not think I am. I think that perhaps you are, which would lead me to rebuke you....can you see how that could go around and around? Where do we stop? Where does it go from rebuking biblically, to finger pointing, to argument, to having nothing to do with the truth any more and only about being right?? I do not want to go there...I don't think we're ever going to agree, so perhaps we should just drop it?

Besides, it all suddenly just struck me as silly. You say some of the old laws must be followed, but you don't say which ones...so how can I know what you're talking about. I say that I follow what Jesus says in the NT, but you can't know what I'm really talking about or which ones I'm referring to...whether they echo the old laws or not, so you can't really know If I am sinning. It's a pointless argument, with pointless accusations.

How about we leave it at this: I love Jesus. I pray that the Holy Spirit will lead and reveal truth to me, even if it's not what I believe now. But until He does that, I will continue to follow the scripture as best I can...after all, until and if God shows me differently, I am following the truth as I know it, as He has led me to see it. Because I do read scripture and pray. I do not blunder along on my own...I have always been aware that I need God to guide me to understanding. Really, that is all you can ask of me, and I will do the same and ask it of you.

 

[Groundzero]

I got a laugh out of this statement by verteran; "But that doesn't mean your beyond rebuke" What an ego to think that he is the one that can rebuke others. Is that an ego or what?

Hang on a moment. I think that veteran has an excellent point. Just because you LOVE someone, doesn't mean you DON'T rebuke them. In fact, that is the sign of a good friend, one who can take hold of you when you have strayed and give you a knock on the ears! That said, there must be sufficient base for the reproof, or else it really is a drag. If there is base, why get offended? Take it and become a better person!


It has been well said, "A good pupil can learn from the worst teacher, but a bad pupil cannot even learn from the best teacher."



Pro. 27:6 Faithful are the wounds of a friend; but the kisses of an enemy are deceitful.

 

[FHII]

Hang on a moment. I think that veteran has an excellent point. Just because you LOVE someone, doesn't mean you DON'T rebuke them. In fact, that is the sign of a good friend, one who can take hold of you when you have strayed and give you a knock on the ears! That said, there must be sufficient base for the reproof, or else it really is a drag. If there is base, why get offended? Take it and become a better person!

It has been well said, "A good pupil can learn from the worst teacher, but a bad pupil cannot even learn from the best teacher."


Pro. 27:6 Faithful are the wounds of a friend; but the kisses of an enemy are deceitful.

I haven't been following this thread in quite some time, so forgive me if I'm out of line.... But Jesus said in Rev 3 "Them that I love I rebuke and chasten". Paul's whole letters of I Cor and Galatians were rebukes. In Titus 1: 3 he approves of rebuking so they may be sound in the faith. 1 Timothy 5 says rebuke someone who sins before ALL, that others may fear. If Veteran's rebuke is uncalled for, fine.... But he's not out of line by suggesting anyone is rebukable. Even David was rebuked at least once by God and THROUGH a priest! Moses was rebuked by God a few times and once even his wife had to expose it! Moses was rebuked by God through his own wife!

Why, even a Jacka... Ummmm... A donkey rebuked a man of God once!

 

[Groundzero]

I haven't been following this thread in quite some time, so forgive me if I'm out of line.... But Jesus said in Rev 3 "Them that I love I rebuke and chasten". Paul's whole letters of I Cor and Galatians were rebukes. In Titus 1: 3 he approves of rebuking so they may be sound in the faith. 1 Timothy 5 says rebuke someone who sins before ALL, that others may fear. If Veteran's rebuke is uncalled for, fine.... But he's not out of line by suggesting anyone is rebukable. Even David was rebuked at least once by God and THROUGH a priest! Moses was rebuked by God a few times and once even his wife had to expose it! Moses was rebuked by God through his own wife!

Why, even a Jacka... Ummmm... A donkey rebuked a man of God once!

Right on spot.

 

[Rach1370]

I think Veteran is attempting to 'rebuke' me because he thinks my doctrine leaves a lot to be desired. Don't have an issue with rebuking in general...I think it can be an important tool of love within a church, keeping everyone fixed firmly on the truth of scripture.
The problem here is that it appears to be a "I'm right", "no, I am". Kind of an issue. Which brings certain theological issues to the surface for me. In the end, doesn't it all come down to human perspective? Now, I know without doubt that everything in scripture contains a truth...what God was trying to impart to us. But how many times do we come across differing human perspectives on the same topics? How then are we to determine what THE truth is? I would say by prayer, by studying all scripture, and by making sure all opinions honour and love Jesus. I would also say by the leading of the Holy Spirit.
Veteran says I am wrong...but as I honestly feel I am reading scripture correctly, how do I accept a man's word that I am wrong? Wouldn't that be putting my faith and belief in Veteran's interpretation of scripture, over and beyond what I feel God has led me to? And I'm not talking some weird and wacky cult belief here (oh yeah, God told me...!). I just believe that Jesus brought us a new covenant, and as such we are not to live by the old one. Truly, the NT says as such so many times, I do wonder at why Veteran feels the need to 'rebuke' such an idea.
What say you fellow brothers and sisters? Am I wrong...do I need to actively consider this rebuke? I am not, in any way, above such a need, I just honestly thought it was not my error....this time!!

 

[Groundzero]

If you love perfectly, it is impossible to commit any of the sins you listed. The point is that trying to follow an external law by not committing sinful behavior does not change the heart......it only clarifies the symptoms of an unredeemed heart. Submitting to Christ's justification and sanctification teaches us to love perfectly, which gets to the root of the problem. No longer are we trying not to sin - we are now saved from sinning because we approach all people and God and creation from the starting point of love. We will only graduate from God's school of love when we reach Heaven, but we can make isolated, perfect acts of love on Earth, while we practice our sanctification.

Alcoholism works the same way.....if an alcoholic tries to quit alcohol by denying drink.......he will be drinking again in no time. If, instead, he deals with the underlying issue, and chooses a new behavior to soothe himself when unpleasant feelings arise, he will be more likely to abstain.

Loving perfectly might be possible in the ideal, but does it actually happen? NO! We are living in a world of two kingdoms, and as long as there are two kingdoms we will NEVER be able to have peace. Jesus showed love, uncomprehendable love, when he died on the cross, but I can assure you that according to Scripture, if you kill or lie or such and don't repent, you ARE STILL DOOMED!

 

[Groundzero]

I think Veteran is attempting to 'rebuke' me because he thinks my doctrine leaves a lot to be desired. Don't have an issue with rebuking in general...I think it can be an important tool of love within a church, keeping everyone fixed firmly on the truth of scripture.
The problem here is that it appears to be a "I'm right", "no, I am". Kind of an issue. Which brings certain theological issues to the surface for me. In the end, doesn't it all come down to human perspective? Now, I know without doubt that everything in scripture contains a truth...what God was trying to impart to us. But how many times do we come across differing human perspectives on the same topics? How then are we to determine what THE truth is? I would say by prayer, by studying all scripture, and by making sure all opinions honour and love Jesus. I would also say by the leading of the Holy Spirit.
Veteran says I am wrong...but as I honestly feel I am reading scripture correctly, how do I accept a man's word that I am wrong? Wouldn't that be putting my faith and belief in Veteran's interpretation of scripture, over and beyond what I feel God has led me to? And I'm not talking some weird and wacky cult belief here (oh yeah, God told me...!). I just believe that Jesus brought us a new covenant, and as such we are not to live by the old one. Truly, the NT says as such so many times, I do wonder at why Veteran feels the need to 'rebuke' such an idea.
What say you fellow brothers and sisters? Am I wrong...do I need to actively consider this rebuke? I am not, in any way, above such a need, I just honestly thought it was not my error....this time!!

Alright, I've just spent 15 minutes reading and I've formed two conclusions. One, richardburger is stating that Jesus and the 12 didn't abolish the law, but Paul did. I read nowhere in Scripture of that. I couldn't be bothered even messing this such warped thinking when it has already been sufficiently answered. Two, the disagreement between rach and veteran was over this statement Rach made: Theology teaches that in light of Christ's fulfilment of the Law that it no longer applies to anyone. This is the short reply: I think you should consider what veteran has said. I'm not going to say any more as this topic has gotten way too in-depth for me. The Scriptures declare that there is One God whose name is Jesus who died for us in order to save us from our sins and either we follow him or we don't. It's that simple. I could not be bothered getting into a discussion over Law and Grace (while we're on the topic, what about all those people who never even heard of the Law? What about them? I'd say that they have a conscience!), much less a heated argument.

 

[Rach1370]

Alright, I've just spent 15 minutes reading and I've formed two conclusions. One, richardburger is stating that Jesus and the 12 didn't abolish the law, but Paul did. I read nowhere in Scripture of that. I couldn't be bothered even messing this such warped thinking when it has already been sufficiently answered. Two, the disagreement between rach and veteran was over this statement Rach made: Theology teaches that in light of Christ's fulfilment of the Law that it no longer applies to anyone. This is the short reply: I think you should consider what veteran has said. I'm not going to say any more as this topic has gotten way too in-depth for me. The Scriptures declare that there is One God whose name is Jesus who died for us in order to save us from our sins and either we follow him or we don't. It's that simple. I could not be bothered getting into a discussion over Law and Grace (while we're on the topic, what about all those people who never even heard of the Law? What about them? I'd say that they have a conscience!), much less a heated argument.

Hey Groundzero, thanks for your reply. I can understand you not wanting to get into it!!
The funny thing is that Veteran and I agree on many things. I have never said that Christians are 'lawless', that we are free to behave as we choose under the blood of Christ. Clearly Jesus gives us many "do's" and "don'ts", Paul as well. My only claim is that the Mosaic Law was finished, completed perfectly by Jesus. And as such, we no longer need to worry about what we eat, how we dress (no tassels needed!!), what day we need to worship on or how long our sideburns need to be!!
I don't mind Veteran disagreeing with me, I just wish he'd stop saying that I was making up my own salvation plan. I love Jesus, I am in awe of what He did for me on that cross...there is no way I'd do such a stupid thing!
Oh well, we can't agree with everyone, huh??

 

[RichardBurger]

Ok. Here is me stepping away from this conversation. I have no idea if you are deliberately ignoring my point, or if you are just not getting it. Either way there is zero point me repeating myself for what would be the 20th time. So I won't. But I am perhaps getting the feeling that as a kid you were one of those who did the "I know you are, but what am I?" kind of arguments. Oh well, enjoy your assumptions Richard...but I'll happily go on my way believing what I do...ta.

You just can't stop it can you. What purpose does your remarks above have. What do they accomplish except to foster anger.

I come on this forum with an OP. subject and others say they don't believe it. That is fine with me but that is not all they say. I have always said that others can believe as they wish but I will post what I think the scriptures say along with the scriptures I think support it. --- When I do that I am at fault, a devil, an un-learned man, my belief is all wrong. If I defend myself from the remarks made about me I am again wrong in doing it. Perhaps I should just roll over and play dead. Don't hold your breath!

You say you wish to discuss but you don't. You just can't seem to stop with the comments about ME. You did it again in your remarks above.

I post an OP and right away there are those that run to their pet scriptures and say they trump mine. Why can't the discussion be about the scriptures in the OP?

 

[Groundzero]

Hey Groundzero, thanks for your reply. I can understand you not wanting to get into it!!
The funny thing is that Veteran and I agree on many things. I have never said that Christians are 'lawless', that we are free to behave as we choose under the blood of Christ. Clearly Jesus gives us many "do's" and "don'ts", Paul as well. My only claim is that the Mosaic Law was finished, completed perfectly by Jesus. And as such, we no longer need to worry about what we eat, how we dress (no tassels needed!!), what day we need to worship on or how long our sideburns need to be!!
I don't mind Veteran disagreeing with me, I just wish he'd stop saying that I was making up my own salvation plan. I love Jesus, I am in awe of what He did for me on that cross...there is no way I'd do such a stupid thing!
Oh well, we can't agree with everyone, huh??

I realised that! lol. Your sentence was phrased a little bit tricky. True to what you stated. I believe that there is somewhere that refers to all those laws, and how you can keep it if you want, but it is the heart that really matters.

 

[Rach1370]

I realised that! lol. Your sentence was phrased a little bit tricky. True to what you stated. I believe that there is somewhere that refers to all those laws, and how you can keep it if you want, but it is the heart that really matters.

I think that it's so easy to get caught up in "what I need to be doing to follow what Jesus taught", that we forget that it's not so much 'need', but 'want'. We have salvation through Jesus...so we don't need to follow the 'rules' to get something we already have. But having received grace, we should definately want to follow Jesus, just out of plain thankfulness! Our new hearts should push us to it...a response to salvation, not a prerequisite for it!
It's a wonderful thing really. any time I strive to bend my sinful nature to something Jesus affirms, I do it out of love, of gratefulness, of awe...not because I fear that the most precious gift of all will be taken from me. God is great!!

 

[Groundzero]

You just can't stop it can you. What purpose does your remarks above have. What do they accomplish except to foster anger.

I come on this forum with an OP. subject and others say they don't believe it. That is fine with me but that is not all they say. I have always said that others can believe as they wish but I will post what I think the scriptures say along with the scriptures I think support it. --- When I do that I am at fault, a devil, an un-learned man, my belief is all wrong. If I defend myself from the remarks made about me I am again wrong in doing it. Perhaps I should just roll over and play dead. Don't hold your breath!

You say you wish to discuss but you don't. You just can't seem to stop with the comments about ME. You did it again in your remarks above.

I post an OP and right away there are those that run to their pet scriptures and say they trump mine. Why can't the discussion be about the scriptures in the OP?

Why don't you stop getting defensive, and consider what is being said? Perhaps then you will learn more! Don't get me wrong, I do the exact same thing at times. You can't always be right. Accept it and move on. If there are Scriptural contradictions in your doctrine, guess who's going to be wrong? You! So suck it up and move on. Stop trying to mold the Bible to your opinions. We should be conforming to the Bible, not vice versa.

 

[veteran]

I agree about the Holy Spirit, that God laws are now written on our hearts, but consider the end of those verses and what it all means:

[6] But as it is, Christ has obtained a ministry that is as much more excellent than the old as the covenant he mediates is better, since it is enacted on better promises. [7] For if that first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no occasion to look for a second.
[8] For he finds fault with them when he says:
“Behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord,
when I will establish a new covenant with the house of Israel
and with the house of Judah,
[9] not like the covenant that I made with their fathers
on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt.
For they did not continue in my covenant,
and so I showed no concern for them, declares the Lord.
[10] For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel
after those days, declares the Lord:
I will put my laws into their minds,
and write them on their hearts,
and I will be their God,
and they shall be my people.
[11] And they shall not teach, each one his neighbor
and each one his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’
for they shall all know me,
from the least of them to the greatest.
[12] For I will be merciful toward their iniquities,
and I will remember their sins no more.”
[13] In speaking of a new covenant, he makes the first one obsolete. And what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away. (Hebrews 8:6-13 ESV)

No where does it talk of holding on to some of the old Laws, of the old covenant. It's all about the new one. Yes, with the Holy Spirit within the converted person, we should be lead to know what is good and pleasing to God; what is sin against Him. As far as the 10 commandments go, again, I wouldn't say we need a check list...in fact I think that if we follow the first two wholly, we follow all....Love God, have no idols. Even within the new covenant, these have not changed...Jesus clearly taught them.

I cannot understand why, when Jesus and the NT talks so much about the "New Covenant", we would not take into account of the other things they talk of, taking them as the guidelines for this new covenant. Sure, some of them line up with old covenant rules...like 'have no other Gods'...that's just not gonna change!

Look, I appreciate that brothers and sisters in Christ have the right to rebuke others should they stray from the truth. The problem, however, is that I do not think I am. I think that perhaps you are, which would lead me to rebuke you....can you see how that could go around and around? Where do we stop? Where does it go from rebuking biblically, to finger pointing, to argument, to having nothing to do with the truth any more and only about being right?? I do not want to go there...I don't think we're ever going to agree, so perhaps we should just drop it?

Besides, it all suddenly just struck me as silly. You say some of the old laws must be followed, but you don't say which ones...so how can I know what you're talking about. I say that I follow what Jesus says in the NT, but you can't know what I'm really talking about or which ones I'm referring to...whether they echo the old laws or not, so you can't really know If I am sinning. It's a pointless argument, with pointless accusations.

How about we leave it at this: I love Jesus. I pray that the Holy Spirit will lead and reveal truth to me, even if it's not what I believe now. But until He does that, I will continue to follow the scripture as best I can...after all, until and if God shows me differently, I am following the truth as I know it, as He has led me to see it. Because I do read scripture and pray. I do not blunder along on my own...I have always been aware that I need God to guide me to understanding. Really, that is all you can ask of me, and I will do the same and ask it of you.

Sorry, but it's pretty clear you don't know the difference between God's laws and the Old Covenant. If you did, you wouldn't make the mistake of calling those laws "old Laws, of the old covenant".

For example, God gave His Ten Commandments through Moses at that time of the Old Covenant, so what was the difference, for those are "old Laws" too per what you've said?

Not just those Ten Commandments only, but also God's commandment to love thy neighbor as thyself is also... in that category you call "old Laws" (Leviticus 19).

God's laws against murder, rape, homosexuality, incest, doing false witness, thefts, perjury, drunkenness, idolatry, witchcraft, etc., were all... given through Moses. Yet we find Apostle Paul covering many of those same things under the New Covenant, and he was being brief with his list of 1 Timothy 1 when he said, "... and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine." (1 Tim.10). Then at the end of that he said, "According to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, which was committed to my trust." (1 Tim.1:11).

So just what was the difference with that Old Covenant? (Don't judge me for capitalizing that, for I only do that out of respect for God's Covenants He gave, doesn't mean I believe the Old Covenant is still in effect today).

Do we have to go through a priest today like the Old Covenant? No.
Do we have to sacrifice a dove or a priest sacrifice an animal for our sins? No.
Do we have to bring literal firstfruit offerings, peace offerings, for the priests to give to God? No.
Do we require a literal temple in order to properly worship God through His Son? No.
Are there any... blood ordinances that we have to follow? No. (Not about drinking or eating blood, which we still are not to do per God's laws).

What the Old Covenant structure was about, was ritual and ceremonial requirements and various ordinances that were required for forgiveness of sins. Even the priest had to purify himself with ritual before he could even offer up sacrifices for the sins of the people. The tabernacle was required at minimum, special feasts and sabbaths had to be held and attended, including the old passover rituals, various washings and cleansings per ceremonial ritual were required, basically the idea of outward ceremonial religion. All those things PLUS the people following all of God's commandments, judgments, and statutes were a requirement to agreeing to the Old Covenant God made with Israel.

Our Lord Jesus Christ freed us from those ritual ordinances and ceremonial requirements, all except the rituals of water baptism and taking Holy Communion with Him. Jesus even became our Passover, showing that God's Passover did not end as He said it would be forever, and so it is through Christ Jesus our Passover sacrificed for us. Yet the rituals of only eating certain foods and removing yeast out of homes on Passover is no longer required with Jesus being our Passover today. Those things especially are the types of differences between the Old and New Covenants, but not all.

NOW, we are to have God's laws written in our hearts and minds per The New Covenant. The old laws of Old Covenant ritual and ceremonial worship, etc.? No, for that's specifically what our Lord Jesus nailed to His cross. It's a good thing too, because the way things are to be in the end times, it would be even more impossible to follow than in Moses' days!

Some of those "old Laws" were written in God's creation, and are not things dependent upon ritual ordinances and ceremonial religious worship. His commandment to love thy neighbor as thyself is an example. His list of meats He created for man to receive is another law in concrete within His creation of things, but it is no longer tied to a covenant relationship, and that's the difference. Under the Old Covenant, following those laws WAS a Salvation requirement back then.

Even little things like don't mix your crop seed together when planting, wash using running water instead of stagnate water, etc., were given with God's laws. Even laws involving a woman's purity after birth and during menstruation were given in God's laws, which modern science follows today. That's my point, many of God's laws involve how He created this world, and we cannot get around those laws. Modern science eventually began to abide by those laws too. (somewhere there's Bible study someone did showing how many of those laws modern science had discovered over history, and began following per scientific reasons, not religious reasons).

 

[Rach1370]

Sorry, but it's pretty clear you don't know the difference between God's laws and the Old Covenant. If you did, you wouldn't make the mistake of calling those laws "old Laws, of the old covenant".

For example, God gave His Ten Commandments through Moses at that time of the Old Covenant, so what was the difference, for those are "old Laws" too per what you've said?

Not just those Ten Commandments only, but also God's commandment to love thy neighbor as thyself is also... in that category you call "old Laws" (Leviticus 19).

God's laws against murder, rape, homosexuality, incest, doing false witness, thefts, perjury, drunkenness, idolatry, witchcraft, etc., were all... given through Moses. Yet we find Apostle Paul covering many of those same things under the New Covenant, and he was being brief with his list of 1 Timothy 1 when he said, "... and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine." (1 Tim.10). Then at the end of that he said, "According to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, which was committed to my trust." (1 Tim.1:11).

So just what was the difference with that Old Covenant? (Don't judge me for capitalizing that, for I only do that out of respect for God's Covenants He gave, doesn't mean I believe the Old Covenant is still in effect today).

Do we have to go through a priest today like the Old Covenant? No.
Do we have to sacrifice a dove or a priest sacrifice an animal for our sins? No.
Do we have to bring literal firstfruit offerings, peace offerings, for the priests to give to God? No.
Do we require a literal temple in order to properly worship God through His Son? No.
Are there any... blood ordinances that we have to follow? No. (Not about drinking or eating blood, which we still are not to do per God's laws).

What the Old Covenant structure was about, was ritual and ceremonial requirements and various ordinances that were required for forgiveness of sins. Even the priest had to purify himself with ritual before he could even offer up sacrifices for the sins of the people. The tabernacle was required at minimum, special feasts and sabbaths had to be held and attended, including the old passover rituals, various washings and cleansings per ceremonial ritual were required, basically the idea of outward ceremonial religion. All those things PLUS the people following all of God's commandments, judgments, and statutes were a requirement to agreeing to the Old Covenant God made with Israel.

Our Lord Jesus Christ freed us from those ritual ordinances and ceremonial requirements, all except the rituals of water baptism and taking Holy Communion with Him. Jesus even became our Passover, showing that God's Passover did not end as He said it would be forever, and so it is through Christ Jesus our Passover sacrificed for us. Yet the rituals of only eating certain foods and removing yeast out of homes on Passover is no longer required with Jesus being our Passover today. Those things especially are the types of differences between the Old and New Covenants, but not all.

NOW, we are to have God's laws written in our hearts and minds per The New Covenant. The old laws of Old Covenant ritual and ceremonial worship, etc.? No, for that's specifically what our Lord Jesus nailed to His cross. It's a good thing too, because the way things are to be in the end times, it would be even more impossible to follow than in Moses' days!

Some of those "old Laws" were written in God's creation, and are not things dependent upon ritual ordinances and ceremonial religious worship. His commandment to love thy neighbor as thyself is an example. His list of meats He created for man to receive is another law in concrete within His creation of things, but it is no longer tied to a covenant relationship, and that's the difference. Under the Old Covenant, following those laws WAS a Salvation requirement back then.

Even little things like don't mix your crop seed together when planting, wash using running water instead of stagnate water, etc., were given with God's laws. Even laws involving a woman's purity after birth and during menstruation were given in God's laws, which modern science follows today. That's my point, many of God's laws involve how He created this world, and we cannot get around those laws. Modern science eventually began to abide by those laws too. (somewhere there's Bible study someone did showing how many of those laws modern science had discovered over history, and began following per scientific reasons, not religious reasons).

Ok, clearly we have a communication problem...either I have not explained my position very well, or you have not yours. Because the deal is....I pretty much agree with everything you just said. And I'm pretty sure I've never said anything to the contrary.
I've always claimed that Jesus reiterated some of the OT laws as important...much of the 10 etc. That what He said and taught, that is what is now written in our hearts. I believe these things are closely intertwined with fruit and works, Jesus was very much about 'doing', as sin is easily done in omission as in co-mission.
I think the point I've been trying to make, where our disagreement might have stemmed from, is the 'laws' you say that are common sense, and that science is now picking up...well, i see those as 'common sense issues that God has given for our own well being'. They are to be observed and followed if one has sense, but it is far from a salvation issue. Unlike the 'old law', if we do not follow them it does not bring wrath down on us...makes us a little stupid maybe! In the OT the result of not following a law was fairly harsh...especially if caught! But under the New covenant, we have choice and freedom to chose in all things. As Paul says, however, just because we already have salvation, have that freedom, doesn't mean we should take it and skip merrily into folly. We should take it and follow the good path, and we should do that exactly because of Jesus' sacrifice and the freedom we have.
Does does make my position a little clearer??

 

[aspen]

Loving perfectly might be possible in the ideal, but does it actually happen? NO!

You could have said the same thing to Jesus when He told the women at the well to go and sin no more.

We are living in a world of two kingdoms, and as long as there are two kingdoms we will NEVER be able to have peace.

Dualism seems so deeply rooted in your theology! Your vision of God and His Kingdom must be pretty wimpy.

Jesus showed love, incomprehensible love, when he died on the cross, but I can assure you that according to Scripture, if you kill or lie or such and don't repent, you ARE STILL DOOMED!

Actually killing isn't a sin. Of course unrepentant murderers and liars remain unredeemed - they are guilty of not loving God or neighbor.