It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Yes af course it is.
originally posted by: ChesterJohn
by the MO (Modus Operandus) we can see by all the "words" and "claims" used by Disturbinatti in the last two post alone, this is in fact Gnosisifaith from January 2016 who has had over 70 different user account names and having been banned every time.
a reply to: ChesterJohn Whoever you are whatever your problem is... It is not my fault you can't explain the doctrines of Christianity. Or yours. It doesn't match the teachings of Jesus pbuh, doesn't make sense regarding Paul and his and the ones in his name's epistles are rambling nonsense. edit on 27-5-2017 by Disturbinatti because: (no reason given)
I'm an atheist but can I answer??? pleaassseeee? I love mythology. This is all in reference to the old covenant (the 10 commandments) and the new law (blood of the lamb.) The old covenant was very strict and almost impossible to follow. The new covenant is supposed to eliminate the need for the old covenant.
“Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.
Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye."
originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: DISRAELI
I think the point of the thread is to question how Jesus became cursed when he is supposedly God. How can God be cursed and how is accepting a curse a good thing? Also if we accept Jesus then does that mean we have accepted a curse?
HOW many children appreciate the value of rules and discipline? Not many. For them, restrictions are tiresome. Those with the responsibility of helping young ones, however, know that appropriate oversight is absolutely necessary. And as the years pass, most youngsters will probably come to appreciate the value of the guidance received. The apostle Paul used the image of a man who protected children to illustrate an aspect of the developing relationship between Jehovah God and his people.
Some first-century Christians in the Roman province of Galatia insisted that God favored only those who obeyed the Law that God gave to the Israelites through Moses. The apostle Paul knew this to be false, for God gave holy spirit to some who had never observed Jewish law. (Acts 15:12) So Paul corrected the wrong idea by means of an illustration. In a letter to the Galatian Christians, he wrote: “The Law has become our tutor leading to Christ.” (Galatians 3:24) The figure of a tutor, says one scholar, has “an ancient and rich background.” Understanding this background clarifies the point that the apostle Paul was making.
The Tutor and His Responsibilities
Tutors were widely used in well-to-do Greek, Roman, and perhaps even Jewish households to supervise the activities of children from infancy to puberty. The tutor was generally a trusted slave, often aged, who acted as an attendant to ensure a child’s safety and to see to it that the father’s wishes for the child were respected.
Rather than giving formal scholastic instruction, the tutor merely administered the father’s directives in a custodial fashion. He did, however, give indirect instruction through supervision and discipline. This included inculcating decorum, imparting rebukes, and even inflicting physical punishment for misconduct. The mother and father, of course, were the child’s primary educators. Yet, as the boy grew, his tutor taught him that he should have good posture when he walked in the streets, that he should wear his cloak, sit, and eat properly, and that he should rise for his elders, love his parents, and so on.
The constant presence of tutors earned them a reputation as oppressive guards and harsh disciplinarians, the source of an endless flow of petty, tiresome, and ineffective accusations. Even so, the tutor provided protection, both moral and physical.
Immorality was rife in the Hellenistic world. Children, especially boys, needed protection from sexual molestation. Tutors would thus attend the child’s lessons, since many schoolteachers could not be trusted. Greek orator Libanius of the fourth century C.E. went so far as to say that tutors had to act as “guards of the blossoming youth,” to “drive out the undesirable lovers, thrusting them away and keeping them out, not allowing them to fraternize with the boys.” Many tutors earned the respect of those whom they protected.
The Law as a Tutor
Why did the apostle Paul compare the Mosaic Law to a tutor? What makes this illustration particularly appropriate?
The first aspect is the protective nature of the Law. Paul explained that the Jews were “guarded under law.” It was as though they were in the protective custody of a tutor. (Galatians 3:23) The Law influenced every aspect of their life. It bridled their lustful passions and their fleshly desires. It supervised their conduct and continually rebuked them for their shortcomings, making each Israelite aware of his own imperfections.
The Law was also a protection from corrupting influences, such as the degraded moral and religious practices of the nations that surrounded Israel. God’s prohibition on intermarriage with pagans, for example, was essential to the spiritual well-being of the nation as a whole. (Deuteronomy 7:3, 4) Such statutes preserved the spiritual purity of God’s people and prepared them to be able to recognize the Messiah. These were loving provisions indeed. Moses reminded his fellow Israelites: “Just as a man corrects his son, Jehovah your God was correcting you.”—Deuteronomy 8:5.
An essential element of the apostle Paul’s illustration, however, was the temporary nature of a tutor’s authority. When the child reached the age of maturity, he was no longer under his tutor’s control. The Greek historian Xenophon (431-352 B.C.E.) wrote: “When a boy ceases to be a child, and begins to be a lad, others release him from his [tutor] and from his [teacher]; he is then no longer under them, but is allowed to go his own way.”
It was the same with the authority of the Law of Moses. Its function was temporary—“to make transgressions manifest, until the seed [Jesus Christ] should arrive.” The apostle Paul explained that for the Jews, the Law was a “tutor leading to Christ.” In order for Paul’s Jewish contemporaries to enjoy God’s favor, they had to recognize Jesus’ role in God’s purpose. Once they did so, the function of the tutor was fulfilled.—Galatians 3:19, 24, 25.
The Law that God gave to the Israelites was perfect. It fully achieved the purposes for which God established it—to protect his people and to make them aware of his high standards. (Romans 7:7-14) The Law was a good tutor. For some who lived under its protection, however, its requirements might have seemed burdensome. Hence, Paul could write that when God’s appointed time arrived, “Christ by purchase released us from the curse of the Law.” The Law was a “curse” only in the sense that it subjected imperfect Jews to standards they could not completely measure up to. It called for the scrupulous observance of rituals. Once a Jew accepted the superior provision made possible by Jesus’ ransom sacrifice, adherence to the tutor’s restrictions was no longer necessary.—Galatians 3:13; 4:9, 10.
Paul’s focus, then, in likening the Law of Moses to a tutor was to emphasize its custodial function and its temporary nature. Jehovah’s favor is gained, not by obedience to that Law, but by recognizing Jesus and exercising faith in him.—Galatians 2:16; 3:11.
Evidence for genuine conviction was also involved in the case of those who came to or who were brought to Jesus to be healed. Even if not eyewitnesses personally, they at least had heard about Jesus’ powerful works. Then, on the basis of what they saw or heard, they concluded that Jesus could heal them also. Moreover, they were acquainted with God’s Word and thus were familiar with the miracles performed by the prophets in times past. Upon hearing Jesus, some concluded that he was “The Prophet,” and others that he was “the Christ.” In view of this, it was most fitting for Jesus on occasion to say to those who were healed, “Your faith has made you well.” Had those persons not exercised faith in Jesus, they would not have approached him in the first place and, therefore, would not have received healing for themselves.—Joh 7:40, 41; Mt 9:22; Lu 17:19.
The Law was a good tutor. For some who lived under its protection, however, its requirements might have seemed burdensome. Hence, Paul could write that when God’s appointed time arrived, “Christ by purchase released us from the curse of the Law.” The Law was a “curse” only in the sense that it subjected imperfect Jews to standards they could not completely measure up to. It called for the scrupulous observance of rituals. Once a Jew accepted the superior provision made possible by Jesus’ ransom sacrifice, adherence to the tutor’s restrictions was no longer necessary.—Galatians 3:13; 4:9, 10.
originally posted by: Disturbinatti
a reply to: the2ofusr1
Jesus pbuh kept it.
He is someone.
Doesn't make sense or make the Law a curse.
It's free will, not the Law, that causes the transgression of the Law.
Curse has nothing to do with it.
You are accusing God of making a Law that was impossible to obey?
Quite an accusation.
originally posted by: Disturbinatti
a reply to: TzarChasm
If that was meant to make sense you are superior in speech than I because who knows what you are talking about is a mystery to me.
I stated logically sound observations, let me make another.
You are not a fan of my logical observations.
Can not refute as they are logical and true in the context of the Bible.
Resort to odd rambling with an accusatory tone to your wording and words.
Think I am going to understand what your problem is.
And finally you have nothing but those ramblings, your inability to refute me is the real issue.
Or you agree with me and I can't tell because I don't understand who is the progeny or progenitor or why you used the word in the first place.
originally posted by: Disturbinatti
a reply to: TzarChasm
I know what it means I used 2 forms, you 1.
You are not very observant.
Or you think telling me the definition of a word I obviously know how to use in different forms so know what it means as most people would notice is clever as a deception tactic.
It's not. It makes you look like you think I asked for a definition, I definitely didn't so you didn't need your Wiktionary.
And you look foolish.