Did the Apostle Paul Teach A Righteousness Without Law-Keeping? [Archive] - Page 2 - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : Did the Apostle Paul Teach A Righteousness Without Law-Keeping?


Pages : 1 [2]

Brasso
07-29-2012, 17:07
I'm fairly certain the "10 Commandments" weren't, and are not currently, the covenant. Moses sprinkled the covenant with blood. It was a whole lot more than 10 commandments. Of course He made another covenant after speaking with Moses for 40 days and nights about the Tabernacle. He put that on two tables of the witness. He then made another covenant just before they entered Caanan regarding how He would disperse them if they sinned. I'm not sure what you're talking about. Something to do with 6 commandments? There were in fact 613 commandments in total. They all fell under one of what you call the "10 Commandments". This is why Messiah said that ALL the Torah and the Prophets hang on the two laws of loving God and loving your neighbor.

Vic Hays
07-29-2012, 19:59
I'm fairly certain the "10 Commandments" weren't, and are not currently, the covenant. Moses sprinkled the covenant with blood. It was a whole lot more than 10 commandments. Of course He made another covenant after speaking with Moses for 40 days and nights about the Tabernacle. He put that on two tables of the witness. He then made another covenant just before they entered Caanan regarding how He would disperse them if they sinned. I'm not sure what you're talking about. Something to do with 6 commandments? There were in fact 613 commandments in total. They all fell under one of what you call the "10 Commandments". This is why Messiah said that ALL the Torah and the Prophets hang on the two laws of loving God and loving your neighbor.

Again, I believe the Bible. It says the Ten Commandments are the covenant.
I have noticed where you yourself have accused people of not believing the Bible.

The Ten Commandments were written on the two tables of the covenant.

Exodus 34:28 And he was there with the LORD forty days and forty nights; he did neither eat bread, nor drink water. And he wrote upon the tables the words of the covenant, the ten commandments.

FCoulter
07-30-2012, 03:51
Again, I believe the Bible. It says the Ten Commandments are the covenant.
I have noticed where you yourself have accused people of not believing the Bible.

The Ten Commandments were written on the two tables of the covenant.

Exodus 34:28 And he was there with the LORD forty days and forty nights; he did neither eat bread, nor drink water. And he wrote upon the tables the words of the covenant, the ten commandments.
Vic, does it say only the 10 commandments were written on those 2 tablets?

Brasso
07-30-2012, 07:31
It took him 40 days and nights, without breaking for food or water, to write "10 Commandments" ???

The only thing the Bible says was spoken to Moses during those 40 days and nights were several chapters dealing with the Tabernacle and Priesthood. The entire incident from beginning to end never mentions the "10 Commandments". God does mention the Sabbath at the end so that they don't build it on the Sabbath. Only the Tabernacle with it's 10 parts, and the Priesthood. Which in Hebrew is called the 10 Devarim, or 10 matters discussed.


Whether you want to believe that or not doesn't matter. It is clear that the entire Torah is meant to be kept. This is re-iterated many times. There is no reason or scripture given anywhere that contradicts this.

If the Torah ended with Messiah's death then why did the Apostles keep Pentacost, when they were given the Holy Spirit? Whey did Paul say to keep the feast of Passover? Whey does Revelation say we will be keeping Tabernacles? Why hasn't the feasts of Trumpets, Yom Kippur, or Tabernacles been fulfilled yet? Why does God say over and over in the Prophets that those that eat abominable things will be destroyed if the defintion of food has changed? Why does Ezekiel spend so much time describing a third Temple if according to you, it will never be built? Why does Revelation describe the abomination taking place in this imaginary third temple? Why willl Messiah Himself offer sacrifices in thie imaginary third temple? Why does Paul reference the "Last Great Trump" a term associated with the Feast of Trumpets, in regards to Messiahs return?

Why don't you believe!

Schabesbert
07-30-2012, 07:34
Matthew 13:30 Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather you together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.

It would seem so that when God's kingdom comes there are only two classes, the saved and the lost.
Yep. Brasoo, like you, seems to have many flaws in his theology.

Bert on the other hand believes the kingdom is already here and the pope is the head of it.
Please get it right when you state what I believe. It's deceitful and rude to do otherwise. Do you really think God needs you to lie for Him? If you can't be honest, then your position must be REALLY weak.

Yes, the Kingdom is already here, but is not here completely. And the Pope is the head in the sense that the prime minister of a country, such as the Davidic Kingdom which is the foreshadow of the Messianic Kingdom, is the head in the absence of the King.

Schabesbert
07-30-2012, 07:47
I don't recall the saints torturing people. We must be reading different books again.:upeyes:
Maybe. I read the Bible, the Church Fathers, and actual history. Since your slanderous reply was in response to me calling out Vic on his false accusation, you seem to be confused over your very own charges. Or, you think you can score cheap points by being dishonest.


As I qouted from official Church doctrine and Scripture and that doctrine are completely at diametrical odds. How do you reconcile this?
Easy. You're mistaken. Or distorting on purpose.

I can't really tell what you're saying here, though, since your sentence doesn't parse. Is English your first language?
Not really.
I didn't think so. What IS your first language?

I qouted the primary source word or word from the original document.
First, as someone fluent in English and had less problems with comprehension that do you would be able to ascertain, I said that YOUR sentence, which I have quoted above, doesn't parse.

Second, you're completely mistaken since most if not all of what you quoted was not even written in English originally, and must have therefore undergone some translation, by someone, which could have been done well or poorly.

You are obviously being deceitful since in post 223 you said "I think I narrowed the gist of his entire book rather well." The meaning is that you did NOT get the quotes from any "primary source word or word from the original document" and that statement is a complete lie.

Please disect it and tell me how it does not conflict with scripture. I see nothing but rife contradictions and blasphemies.
What you see is completely irrelevant, since your vision is non-existant.

IF you'd care to ask about one or two phrases, I'd be happy to address them. But since you seem incapable of doing that, I'm just as happy to ignore you.

Schabesbert
07-30-2012, 07:53
, the Pope is not flawless and perfect, that belongs only to God.
Of couse not. We don't claim that he is. That's YOUR strawman. It seems that you need to argue against something of your own making or else your arguments fail. Repeatedly.

Neither is the pope the Rock, as that is clearly God's domain as well.
Jesus NAMED Simon "rock." How can you contradict something so obvious? How can you contradict Jesus?

Why would such a man claim these things for himself?
He didn't. Jesus named his thus.

To believe you, I'd have to disbelieve Jesus. I don't do that.

Vic Hays
07-30-2012, 08:50
Vic, does it say only the 10 commandments were written on those 2 tablets?

The Bible says the words of the covenant, the ten commandments, were written on the two tables.

Exodus 34:28 And he was there with the LORD forty days and forty nights; he did neither eat bread, nor drink water. And he wrote upon the tables the words of the covenant, the ten commandments.

This is not the only place in the Bible that says this. How can it not be clear to you unless you are desperately struggling against the Truth to uphold your theology?

Please provide the text that says anything other than the Ten Commandments were written on the Tables of the Covenant.

Vic Hays
07-30-2012, 08:57
It took him 40 days and nights, without breaking for food or water, to write "10 Commandments" ???

The only thing the Bible says was spoken to Moses during those 40 days and nights were several chapters dealing with the Tabernacle and Priesthood. The entire incident from beginning to end never mentions the "10 Commandments". God does mention the Sabbath at the end so that they don't build it on the Sabbath. Only the Tabernacle with it's 10 parts, and the Priesthood. Which in Hebrew is called the 10 Devarim, or 10 matters discussed.

Why don't you believe!

Where does the Bible say that Moses recorded the other things that God spoke to him during the 40 days? Not on the Tables of the Covenant with the Ten Commandments written on them, but in a book called the Book of the Law or the Law of Moses.

Deuteronomy 31:24 And it came to pass, when Moses had made an end of writing the words of this law in a book, until they were finished,
31:25 That Moses commanded the Levites, which bore the ark of the covenant of the LORD, saying,
31:26 Take this book of the law, and put it in the side of the ark of the covenant of the LORD your God, that it may be there for a witness against you.


If the tables of stone had the Law of Moses written on them as you claim, why did they need the Book of the Law?

Please provide the text that says this law was written on the tables of stone.

I believe what is written in the Bible. Where is what you believe written in the Bible?

Brasso
07-30-2012, 09:05
The Bible never says what was written on the Tablets. The only context is what was told to Moses immediatley before He got them.

Moses goes up and talks to God, after which he gets the covenant, all the people agree to it, and he sprinkles it with blood. Moses then goes back up the mountain and spends 40 days discussing the Tabernacle, immediately after which he gets the two tablets. He comes down. The people have sinned and he breaks the tablets. God makes a new covenant that includes the Levitical Priesthood. Moses goes back up the mountain and gets two new tablets, identical to the first. Still no mention of the "10 commandments" as you call them. As far as the Bible is concerned, the only thing on those two tablets of the testimony, which went inside the tabernacle of the testimony, which, went inside the ark of the testimony, was the instructions for the Tabernacle, which was all about the need for blood to atone for sin. And the added Levitical Priesthood to minister in it.

This whole thing is irrelevent anyway. It doesn't really matter what you believe was written on the tablets.


You're problem is that your belief that the "10 commandments" are the only thing we'er supposed to keep contradicts hundreds of other passages. It's not my problem.


The only reason the Book of the Law was placed beside the Ark is because the only way to the mercy seat was through the covenant. And the Book of the Law contained what you call the 10 Commandments. If it's gone, then so is what was written on the tablets.

Read Exodus 35. Verse 1 and 4. These are the words. The 10 things God commanded them to do. The building of the Tabernacle.

Vic Hays
07-30-2012, 10:32
The Bible never says what was written on the Tablets. The only context is what was told to Moses immediatley before He got them.



Exodus 34:28 And he was there with the LORD forty days and forty nights; he did neither eat bread, nor drink water. And he wrote upon the tables the words of the covenant, the ten commandments.

Why are you directly contradicting the Bible?

Vic Hays
07-30-2012, 10:42
Please get it right when you state what I believe. It's deceitful and rude to do otherwise. Do you really think God needs you to lie for Him? If you can't be honest, then your position must be REALLY weak.

Yes, the Kingdom is already here, but is not here completely. And the Pope is the head in the sense that the prime minister of a country, such as the Davidic Kingdom which is the foreshadow of the Messianic Kingdom, is the head in the absence of the King.

You sure are touchy about what you believe. Probably because it is an error.

Jesus is not absent. He is here in the person of the Holy Spirit.

Matthew 28:18 And Jesus came and spoke to them, saying, All power is given to me in heaven and in earth.
28:19 Go you therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
28:20 Teaching them to observe all things whatever I have commanded you: and, see, I am with you always, even to the end of the world. Amen.

Schabesbert
07-30-2012, 11:43
You sure are touchy about what you believe. Probably because it is an error.
Exactly the opposite.
Because it's the Truth, and we've been commanded by Jesus to spread the Truth (as stated in the scripture you just quoted), I am opposed tothose who distort or outright fabricate.

Jesus is not absent. He is here in the person of the Holy Spirit.
Yes; the Holy Spirit is present in the Church.


Matthew 28:18 And Jesus came and spoke to them, saying, All power is given to me in heaven and in earth.
28:19 Go you therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
28:20 Teaching them to observe all things whatever I have commanded you: and, see, I am with you always, even to the end of the world. Amen.

Pleas pay attention to the intended audience here, Vic:
Mt 28:16 Now the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain to which Jesus had directed them.

His promise was to the leaders of the Church He had instituted. It is only THROUGH His Church that we are guaranteed the promise of the Truth.

If you disagree, then please answer me this: why are there thousands upon thousands of denominations all claiming to be led by scripture alone through the Holy Spirit?

Brasso
07-30-2012, 12:11
Exodus 34:28 And he was there with the LORD forty days and forty nights; he did neither eat bread, nor drink water. And he wrote upon the tables the words of the covenant, the ten commandments.

Why are you directly contradicting the Bible?

I'm not contradicting anything. I'm disputing what these "10 Commandments" actually were. They are not listed as such. There is no passage that says, "The 10 Commanmdments were....1,2,3...". You have to use context, and evey context dealing with them is entirely about the Tabernacle.

The chapter tells us what they discussed. It was all about the Tabernacle, which btw, had exactly 10 components. Read chapter 35.

1. 35:11 the tabernacle, its tent, and its
cover, its hooks, its boards, its bars, its
pillars, and its sockets;

2. 35:12 the ark, and its poles, the
mercyseat and the veil of the covering,

3. 35:13 the table and its poles, and all its
vessels, and the Bread of the Presence;

4. 35:14 and the lampstand of the light,
and its vessels, and its lamps, and the
oil of the light;

5: 35:15 and the incense altar and its
poles, and the oil of anointing, and the
incense of perfumes, and the screen of
the door, at the door of the tabernacle;

6. 35:16 the altar of burnt offering, and its
bronze grating, its poles, and all its
vessels,

7. the laver and its base;

8. 35:17 the screens of the court, its
pillars, and its sockets, and the screen
for the gate of the court;

9. 35:18 the pins of the tabernacle, and
the pins of the court, and their cords;

10. 35:19 the woven garments to minister
in the sanctuary, the holy garments for
Aaron the priest, and the garments for
his sons, to minister as priests.


They're listed again starting in 39:32.

Vic Hays
07-30-2012, 14:19
I'm not contradicting anything. I'm disputing what these "10 Commandments" actually were. They are not listed as such. There is no passage that says, "The 10 Commanmdments were....1,2,3...". You have to use context, and evey context dealing with them is entirely about the Tabernacle.



You are contradicting again when you say we do not know what the Ten Commandments were. God spoke them himself according to the Bible.

Exodus 20:1 And God spoke all these words, saying,
20:2 I am the LORD your God, which have brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.
20:3 You shall have no other gods before me.
20:4 You shall not make to you any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.
20:5 You shall not bow down yourself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD your God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and fourth generation of them that hate me;
20:6 And showing mercy to thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.
20:7 You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain; for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that takes his name in vain.
20:8 Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.
20:9 Six days shall you labor, and do all your work:
20:10 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD your God: in it you shall not do any work, you, nor your son, nor your daughter, your manservant, nor your maidservant, nor your cattle, nor your stranger that is within your gates:
20:11 For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: why the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.
20:12 Honor your father and your mother: that your days may be long on the land which the LORD your God gives you.
20:13 You shall not kill.
20:14 You shall not commit adultery.
20:15 You shall not steal.
20:16 You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.
20:17 You shall not covet your neighbor’ house, you shall not covet your neighbor’ wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is your neighbor’.
20:18 And all the people saw the thunder, and the lightning, and the noise of the trumpet, and the mountain smoking: and when the people saw it, they removed, and stood afar off.
20:19 And they said to Moses, Speak you with us, and we will hear: but let not God speak with us, lest we die.

This is all that God spoke to the people.

Deuteronomy 9:10 and Jehovah delivered to me the two tables of stone written with the finger of God; and on them [was written] according to all the words which Jehovah spoke with you on the mountain from the midst of the fire on the day of the assembly.

Vic Hays
07-30-2012, 14:27
Yes; the Holy Spirit is present in the Church.

If you disagree, then please answer me this: why are there thousands upon thousands of denominations all claiming to be led by scripture alone through the Holy Spirit?

I disagree with you.

Here is the deal. The Holy Spirit is given to individuals not institutions or denominations.

Acts 10:44 While Peter yet spoke these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word.
10:45 And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.

Your sect denies the fact that individuals can be led by the Holy Spirit without their "guidance" and "authority".

Schabesbert
07-30-2012, 14:46
I disagree with you.
Oh, of that I'm certain. Another thing of which I'm certain is that you'll ignore the fact that this is an illogical stance.

Here is the deal. The Holy Spirit is given to individuals not institutions or denominations.
The Holy Spirit is given in various ways; the scriptures use the term charisms to describe the gifts of the Holy Spirit.

That's one reason why you see the Holy Spirit given multiple times to the same individual.


Your sect denies the fact that individuals can be led by the Holy Spirit without their "guidance" and "authority".
We deny that the Holy Spirit guides different "churches" to different "truths." We believe that there is ONE Truth. One Faith, One Hope, One Baptism, One God and Father of All.

BTW, Catholicism is not a "sect." Much as you'd like to believe it to be. Ours is the ORIGINAL Christian Church, started by Jesus circa 30AD.

Brasso
07-30-2012, 14:48
You are making implications that don't exist. We know what the covenant is. Every part of it is detailed. It is more than 10 commandments. God stopped speaking after the intial "10" commandments because the people were afraid and wanted Moses to tell them the rest, which he did. It was considerably more than 10. By the time he finishes Israel is up to almost 70 commandments. And it's ALL of that which is sprinkled with blood and the people agree to. Not just the 9-13 that God spoke before they asked Him to stop and give the rest to Moses.

After all of this is done and the people agree to this covenant, Moses is called back up the mountain and receives all the instructions for the Tabernacle, along with two tablets. Nothing else is mentioned.

Notice that the Bible never calls them commandments. They are called devarim. Matters discussed. It's english translations that call them commandments. The word in Hebrew is devarim. Commandments is mitzvot.

Vic Hays
07-30-2012, 15:05
BTW, Catholicism is not a "sect." Much as you'd like to believe it to be. Ours is the ORIGINAL Christian Church, started by Jesus circa 30AD.

That is really strange because my Church is the same as the original and it bears little resemblance to yours.

Revelation 12:17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.

Vic Hays
07-30-2012, 15:08
You are making implications that don't exist. We know what the covenant is. Every part of it is detailed. It is more than 10 commandments. God stopped speaking after the intial "10" commandments because the people were afraid and wanted Moses to tell them the rest, which he did. It was considerably more than 10. By the time he finishes Israel is up to almost 70 commandments. And it's ALL of that which is sprinkled with blood and the people agree to. Not just the 9-13 that God spoke before they asked Him to stop and give the rest to Moses.

After all of this is done and the people agree to this covenant, Moses is called back up the mountain and receives all the instructions for the Tabernacle, along with two tablets. Nothing else is mentioned.

Notice that the Bible never calls them commandments. They are called devarim. Matters discussed. It's english translations that call them commandments. The word in Hebrew is devarim. Commandments is mitzvot.

Where are your Bible texts to back up your philosophy?

The fact is that the Ten Commandments that God spoke were written on the stone tablets by God Himself and spoken by Him from the mount. At least if you can believe the Bible.

Schabesbert
07-30-2012, 15:14
That is really strange because my Church is the same as the original and it bears little resemblance to yours.
Your "church" was invented in 1863, and has only a slight tangential relationship with the original.

Revelation 12:17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.
Absolutely. "The Woman," Jesus' mother, was given at the foot of the cross to be the mother of the Church (i.e., the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ."

FCoulter
07-30-2012, 15:48
That is really strange because my Church is the same as the original and it bears little resemblance to yours.

Revelation 12:17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.
Actually your church is just a daughter of the Catholic church. Your churches doctrines have much more in common withe the RCC than the Church Jesus is the head of. If you disagree perhaps you would like me to show you how much you have in common with the RCC verses the NT church?

Vic Hays
07-30-2012, 16:19
Your "church" was invented in 1863, and has only a slight tangential relationship with the original.


Absolutely. "The Woman," Jesus' mother, was given at the foot of the cross to be the mother of the Church (i.e., the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ."

Your sect teaches a different set of commandments than the original and the Testimony of Jesus Christ is the Spirit of Prophecy which I doubt you claim, however, you make a lot of unsubstantiated claims.

Revelation 19:10 And I fell at his feet to worship him. And he said to me, See you do it not: I am your fellow servant, and of your brothers that have the testimony of Jesus: worship God: for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.

Schabesbert
07-30-2012, 17:24
Your sect teaches a different set of commandments than the original
No, we follow Christ's commandments to the letter.

and the Testimony of Jesus Christ is the Spirit of Prophecy which I doubt you claim,
Ahh, yes, your reliance on the false prophetess.

however, you make a lot of unsubstantiated claims.
I have substantiated each and every claim. You keep trying to add false claims which the Church doesn't make.

Revelation 19:10 And I fell at his feet to worship him. And he said to me, See you do it not: I am your fellow servant, and of your brothers that have the testimony of Jesus: worship God: for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.
Great. Yes, the Catholic Church teaches this.

Oh, yeah: why do you believe Revelation to be inspired? Outside of the testimony of the Catholic Church, that is?

Vic Hays
07-30-2012, 17:40
No, we follow Christ's commandments to the letter.

Lets do some comparison and see if you follow Christ's commandments:

Luke 9:49 And John answered and said, Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name; and we forbad him, because he followeth not with us.
9:50 And Jesus said unto him, Forbid him not: for he that is not against us is for us.

http://history.hanover.edu/texts/trent/ct04.html

From the Council of Trent:
"Furthermore, in order to restrain petulant spirits, It decrees, that no one, relying on his own skill, shall,--in matters of faith, and of morals pertaining to the edification of Christian doctrine, --wresting the sacred Scripture to his own senses, presume to interpret the said sacred Scripture contrary to that sense which holy mother Church,--whose it is to judge of the true sense and interpretation of the holy Scriptures,--hath held and doth hold; [Page 20] or even contrary to the unanimous consent of the Fathers; even though such interpretations were never (intended) to be at any time published. Contraveners shall be made known by their Ordinaries, and be punished with the penalties by law established."

Just as I suspected, not a match. :whistling:

Schabesbert
07-30-2012, 18:19
Lets do some comparison and see if you follow Christ's commandments:

Luke 9:49 And John answered and said, Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name; and we forbad him, because he followeth not with us.
9:50 And Jesus said unto him, Forbid him not: for he that is not against us is for us.
It's dangerous to have those who are unlearned and undiscipled take things out of context.

Mt 12:30 He who is not with me is against me, and he who does not gather with me scatters.

This is contrued by many atheists as a contradiction; the Catholic Church says, however, that both are true when both are taken in context. YOUR personal, fallible interpretation, however, takes Luke 9:50 out of context.

Thus we NEED the magisterial proclaimation that you quoted from: to protect us against being "tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the cunning of men [and women, such as EG White], by their craftiness in deceitful wiles." [Eph 4:14]



http://history.hanover.edu/texts/trent/ct04.html

From the Council of Trent:
"Furthermore, in order to restrain petulant spirits, It decrees, that no one, relying on his own skill, shall,--in matters of faith, and of morals pertaining to the edification of Christian doctrine, --wresting the sacred Scripture to his own senses,
Echoing St. Peter here:
2Pe 1:20 First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation,

presume to interpret the said sacred Scripture contrary to that sense which holy mother Church,--whose it is to judge of the true sense and interpretation of the holy Scriptures,--hath held and doth hold;
Yep. Truth cannot contradict Truth (I know this is contrary to YOUR, and Muslim, beliefs).

Further, another piece of scripture that you don't adhere to proclaims that it is the CHURCH that is "the pillar and bulwark of the truth." [1Ti 3:15] That completes the phrase above after the "--".

Just as I suspected, not a match. :whistling:
Well, it doesn't match YOUR beliefs, which were invented 1800 years later, at any rate.

Completely in line with scripture, though. But that's what I'd expect, since I don't believe that Jesus' promise had an expiration date.

Brasso
07-30-2012, 18:36
Where are your Bible texts to back up your philosophy?

The fact is that the Ten Commandments that God spoke were written on the stone tablets by God Himself and spoken by Him from the mount. At least if you can believe the Bible.

If you were to take someone who never heard of the Bible and told them to read Exodus chapters 20-40 and that their job was to tell you what God wrote on the two tablets given to Moses, they would say the instructions for the Tabernacle. They would never say it was the "10 Commandments". It's not even mentioned in context with the tablets. Never. Every single context is dealing with the Tabernacle.

Furthermore, the testimony is always about blood. Always. What was the testimony of the Mosaic Covenant? There is always a Torah and a Testimony. We know what the covenant was. What was the testimony? They aren't the same.

Vic Hays
07-31-2012, 09:28
If you were to take someone who never heard of the Bible and told them to read Exodus chapters 20-40 and that their job was to tell you what God wrote on the two tablets given to Moses, they would say the instructions for the Tabernacle. They would never say it was the "10 Commandments". It's not even mentioned in context with the tablets. Never. Every single context is dealing with the Tabernacle.


If you were to take someone who was honest they would say that the Ten Commandments were written on the two tablets given to Moses.

It is not difficult to read the words of the Bible and come to that conclusion.

Exodus 34:28 And he was there with the LORD forty days and forty nights; he did neither eat bread, nor drink water. And he wrote upon the tables the words of the covenant, the ten commandments.

Deuteronomy 4:13 And he declared unto you his covenant, which he commanded you to perform, even ten commandments; and he wrote them upon two tables of stone.

Someone honest would say that the rest of the statutes and judgments and the priestly things and the tabernacle were written in the Book of the Law.

Deuteronomy 4:14 And the LORD commanded me at that time to teach you statutes and judgments, that ye might do them in the land whither ye go over to possess it.

Joshua 8:34 And afterward he read all the words of the law, the blessings and cursings, according to all that is written in the book of the law.
8:35 There was not a word of all that Moses commanded, which Joshua read not before all the congregation of Israel, with the women, and the little ones, and the strangers that were conversant among them.

Vic Hays
07-31-2012, 09:44
Furthermore, the testimony is always about blood. Always. What was the testimony of the Mosaic Covenant? There is always a Torah and a Testimony. We know what the covenant was. What was the testimony? They aren't the same.

The blood is always about Christ's blood, Always.

Apparently there was more than one covenant because the laws in the book of the law were not part of the covenant with Abraham.

I have chosen the faith covenant of Abraham, not the works covenant of the nation of Israel.

Read carefully: the covenant with Abraham was before the Law of Moses so the covenant with Abraham cannot include the Law of Moses.


Galatians 3:17 And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot cancel, that it should make the promise of none effect.

Brasso
08-02-2012, 08:03
Well yeah. There were 7 Covenants. And when a new covenant was made it didn't annul the covenants before it. It added to it. Like layering transparencies on top of one another. This is why Paul says that if we are in Messiah then we have been brought under the covenants (plural) of Israel.

12 That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world:

13 But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ


This is exactly why your theology is so screwed up. The Jews never left the Mosaic Covenant or any of the covenants. It was the Hosue of Israel that God divorced. That's why it's called the Good News. Because of Messiah the House of Israel could finally come back into covenant.

"I have come only for the Lost Sheep of the House of Israel."

And since the House of Judah, the Jews, never left the covenant, they are sill obliged to keep the commandments contained in it. And if they are still supposed to keep them, and there is neither Jew nor Greek, and one law for everyone, then how can you claim we no longer need to keep the commandments? You make God a liar.

Norske
08-02-2012, 15:34
I find it extremely unlikely that "God" actually spoke directly to Abraham at any time.

I find it extremely unlikely that "God" actually spoke directly to Moses at any time.

In both cases, how do we know either of them were spoken to by "God"?

Because THEY said so!

wow. i guess that clinches it, doesn't it.

I find it extremely likely that either or both men were either lying or delusional as to their allegations about having been talked to directly by "God".

If I am right, what does that say about the entire Bible and the religions that have descended from it?

For that matter, I don't think Allah spoke directly to the "Prophet" Mohammed, either.

Lying. Delusional.

Religion. Invalid.

dereklord
08-03-2012, 20:42
I find it extremely unlikely that "God" actually spoke directly to Abraham at any time.

I find it extremely unlikely that "God" actually spoke directly to Moses at any time.

In both cases, how do we know either of them were spoken to by "God"?

Because THEY said so!

wow. i guess that clinches it, doesn't it.

I find it extremely likely that either or both men were either lying or delusional as to their allegations about having been talked to directly by "God".

If I am right, what does that say about the entire Bible and the religions that have descended from it?

For that matter, I don't think Allah spoke directly to the "Prophet" Mohammed, either.

Lying. Delusional.

Religion. Invalid.

How do I know the civil war happened?

Holy crap! Everything in all those history books I have read must be wrong!

Lying. Delusional.

History. Invalid.

Vic Hays
08-05-2012, 08:15
Well yeah. There were 7 Covenants. And when a new covenant was made it didn't annul the covenants before it. It added to it. Like layering transparencies on top of one another. This is why Paul says that if we are in Messiah then we have been brought under the covenants (plural) of Israel.

12 That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world:

13 But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ


This is exactly why your theology is so screwed up. The Jews never left the Mosaic Covenant or any of the covenants. It was the Hosue of Israel that God divorced. That's why it's called the Good News. Because of Messiah the House of Israel could finally come back into covenant.

"I have come only for the Lost Sheep of the House of Israel."

And since the House of Judah, the Jews, never left the covenant, they are sill obliged to keep the commandments contained in it. And if they are still supposed to keep them, and there is neither Jew nor Greek, and one law for everyone, then how can you claim we no longer need to keep the commandments? You make God a liar.

You missed the point that Paul was making. The Gentiles come under the faith covenant with Abraham. That is why they may disregard the covenants afterward.

Does this mean they may disregard God's morality? No. God's Covenant has always been moral because these morals reflect who and what God is.