Calling Out Jewish and Christians- Please Answer ONE Question

reply to post by jmdewey60


Dear jmdewey60,

Actually he did, it is from Matthew. You are no doubt thinking of the book of Luke.

36 “Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?” 37 Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’[a] 38 This is the first and greatest commandment. 39 And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ 40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”

reply to post by Deetermined


Dear Deetermined,

Using one person as an example is far from explaining whether or not all Jews are the chosen people and what God had to say about them as a people.

Actually I didn't use one person, I mentioned three that we knew were saved although I did not mention their names. I also referenced how all had evidence. As for the Israelites being the chosen people, what do you think that means? It did not say that they would all have salvation, it did not say that life would be wonderful for them. They were chosen to fulfill a purpose. It does not say that God loves them and hates everyone else. Read the story of Jonah. Jonah promised God to preach and help people to find salvation, God sent him to preach to non-Jews, Johan did not want to and when he finally did it, he pouted that he had helped the people of Ninevah rather than his own people and God said, "And should not I spare Nineveh, that great city, wherein are more than sixscore thousand persons that cannot discern between their right hand and their left hand; and also much cattle?". There are those who follow Kabbalah that believe non-Jews are a lesser person; but, this is not in the old testament.

As for love, yes the word is tossed around much and it doesn't mean that if you go to church and give ten dollars to charity you are loving. Love is an action word, if you truly love someone you will forgive them for any harm they do you and you will actively dedicate your life to be of service to others. That is love not some emotional watered down concept of lust. The problem with todays church is that it is more defined by what it is against, that is because there are too many people preaching that forgot about love.

Somebody, and it could have been you; but, it doesn't matter, said that I sounded like Joel Osteen. I researched him a bit on line and spoke to another Pastor I know. Apparently the man prefers to focus on what we can do to be better rather than beat people up over past sins. Yep, I agree with that. Nobody is perfect, not the Jews, not the Christians, not the Muslims and not the Atheists. The focus should be on how we can be better and by that I mean be more forgiving and more giving.

Originally posted by AQuestion
reply to post by Deetermined

 

Dear Deetermined,

Using one person as an example is far from explaining whether or not all Jews are the chosen people and what God had to say about them as a people.

Actually I didn't use one person, I mentioned three that we knew were saved although I did not mention their names. I also referenced how all had evidence. As for the Israelites being the chosen people, what do you think that means? It did not say that they would all have salvation, it did not say that life would be wonderful for them. They were chosen to fulfill a purpose. It does not say that God loves them and hates everyone else. Read the story of Jonah. Jonah promised God to preach and help people to find salvation, God sent him to preach to non-Jews, Johan did not want to and when he finally did it, he pouted that he had helped the people of Ninevah rather than his own people and God said, "And should not I spare Nineveh, that great city, wherein are more than sixscore thousand persons that cannot discern between their right hand and their left hand; and also much cattle?". There are those who follow Kabbalah that believe non-Jews are a lesser person; but, this is not in the old testament.

I'm very familiar with the Bible and what it teaches. But if you really wanted to educate people, why wouldn't you direct them to a book of the Bible or a verse that points them in the right direction instead of mentioning "three" that you "didn't name"? What kind of answers are these?

As for love, yes the word is tossed around much and it doesn't mean that if you go to church and give ten dollars to charity you are loving. Love is an action word, if you truly love someone you will forgive them for any harm they do you and you will actively dedicate your life to be of service to others. That is love not some emotional watered down concept of lust. The problem with todays church is that it is more defined by what it is against, that is because there are too many people preaching that forgot about love.

My personal experience with the church, until I switched in the last year, was just the opposite. My experience has been that so many are teaching "love" to a point where the word "sin" isn't even mentioned! What happened to the whole truth? I'm finding that most churches are afraid to speak it! (Hence, the reference to Joel Osteen earlier.)

Somebody, and it could have been you; but, it doesn't matter, said that I sounded like Joel Osteen. I researched him a bit on line and spoke to another Pastor I know. Apparently the man prefers to focus on what we can do to be better rather than beat people up over past sins. Yep, I agree with that. Nobody is perfect, not the Jews, not the Christians, not the Muslims and not the Atheists. The focus should be on how we can be better and by that I mean be more forgiving and more giving.

Joel Osteen is only telling them what they want to hear. That's why he's rolling in the dough. This is why he hesitates and stutters and gives partial answers when someone asks him if something in particular is considered a sin! A pastor should be honest and straight forward in his answers concerning what the Bible says is sin. Especially when asked! I think it's great that he teaches people how to better themselves and how to be forgiving! But that shouldn't be his only message! And it is! Somehow, the church needs to develop an equal balance of the message so parts of it don't get watered down or end up getting scrapped altogether. There has to be a medium somewhere. Pastors can not eliminate this totally from their message without being seriously judged for it themselves.

reply to post by Deetermined


Dear Deetermined,

The reason I don't just quote chapter and verse is because too many take verses out of context. I prefer to give context and reference the bible. There are two types of responses. Either people know the stories in the bible and don't need the reference or they don't know their bible and the references don't matter.

As for sin, simple, it is anything that falls short and I am not afraid to discuss it; but, it should not be our focus. Our focus should be on salvation, forgiveness and service. Again, I have don't have sufficient information regarding Mr. Osteen; but, I will continue to learn about him. It is important to remember that there is only one unforgivable sin and not worry too much about pointing out the spec in your brothers eye.

Which is the bigger sin, adultery or not loving others? Sin is not just our actions, it is our intent. Jesus sought to have people focus on their intent and forgave the adulteress. His comment was simple, let he who is without sin cast the first stone. As you know your bible, you do not need the reference.

Originally posted by AQuestion
reply to post by Deetermined

 

Dear Deetermined,

The reason I don't just quote chapter and verse is because too many take verses out of context. I prefer to give context and reference the bible. There are two types of responses. Either people know the stories in the bible and don't need the reference or they don't know their bible and the references don't matter.

If they don't know the Bible, they need the reference along with an interpretation from you to guide them! Let them consider the two together to make a determination for themselves if they think it's trash or not! That's what you're there for! You are supposed to guide them! It's not up to you to decide for them how to decipher the information! Or to withhold it from them in case you think they will!!! Step up! Be a leader!

As for sin, simple, it is anything that falls short and I am not afraid to discuss it; but, it should not be our focus.

Good. Don't be afraid to discuss it or be afraid to acknowledge it when you see it happening in your church! By the way, depending on who you're preaching to, you may want to define what "falls short" means. You can never assume that anyone you're preaching to knows as much as you do. Terminology or otherwise.

Our focus should be on salvation, forgiveness and service.

That's great! I hope it leads to salvation for many who truly understand what it means to be saved and want to continue to develop their relationship with Christ a year later. I recently read an article that showed a very high percentage of new Christians dropping their faith or interest in it after the first year. Remind them that it's like a marriage. The more work they put into it, the more results they'll receive out of it. Let me rephrase that. People are lazy, they don't want to work. Tell them the more "desire" they put into building this relationship, the more desirable and favorable they will become in God's eyes.

Again, I have don't have sufficient information regarding Mr. Osteen; but, I will continue to learn about him. It is important to remember that there is only one unforgivable sin and not worry too much about pointing out the spec in your brothers eye.

True, but that doesn't mean our Father isn't going to discipline us along the way to point us in the right direction. I've had my share and I've finally learned how to avoid most of it.

Which is the bigger sin, adultery or not loving others? Sin is not just our actions, it is our intent. Jesus sought to have people focus on their intent and forgave the adulteress. His comment was simple, let he who is without sin cast the first stone. As you know your bible, you do not need the reference.

We should all be aware of our own shortcomings. As Christians, we're supposed to be held accountable to each other too! Hopefully, it will save us all from that discipline from the Lord, because I think it could be worse than judging each other some day! But all will be forgiven in the end!

reply to post by Deetermined


Dear Deetermined,

What I write on ATS and what I say on Sundays is different and I am dealing with different audiences. Endlessly quoting the bible to people who are atheists does little other than make them angry. It is not our job as Christians to chase people down and win them over, we are to have an answer for why their is hope within us. An answer for why we believe, that presumes a question from them.

The purpose of the old testament was to show that we could not attain perfection, that we couldn't meet the rules. Jesus came to show that we could circumcise our hearts and that the mistakes were paid for. We are to correct other Christians when they are off course; but, we are not told to correct non-Christians. I deal with the people who attend my services or tell me they are Christians, not non-believers. For non-believers we should have and answer for why we believe. You might wonder why I mention this

If they don't know the Bible, they need the reference along with an interpretation from you to guide them! Let them consider the two together to make a determination for themselves if they think it's trash or not! That's what you're there for! You are supposed to guide them! It's not up to you to decide for them how to decipher the information! Or to withhold it from them in case you think they will!!! Step up! Be a leader!

That is not why I am there, I am not there to give references. I am there to get them to read the bible and ask questions about it. By the way, I was asked to pastor this group, it was not something I sought out, I already have a full time job. I am not there to be their leader, too many leaders. I preach (hate that word) to people who don't want to go to the type of churches that seem to predominate. Our services are interactive and I ask more questions than I answer. It is my responsibility to show them how to decipher the bible for themselves. As for withholding things, I can't, I tell them to read their bible and be ready to discuss it.

As for being a "leader", no thank you, we have enough of them. It is not for me to sit between people and God, it is for me to help them on their journey as questions arise in their lives. The OP was about who was right, Jews or Christians. I believe we have gotten off track and don't wish to hijack the thread. If you wish to discuss more then please U2U me, unless it is specifically related to this thread. Peace.

Originally posted by AQuestion
reply to post by Deetermined

 

Dear Deetermined,

What I write on ATS and what I say on Sundays is different and I am dealing with different audiences. Endlessly quoting the bible to people who are atheists does little other than make them angry. It is not our job as Christians to chase people down and win them over, we are to have an answer for why their is hope within us. An answer for why we believe, that presumes a question from them.

Who's chasing people down trying to win them over? If you'll notice, there are plenty of Atheists who come to these religious threads without having to seek them out. If you look closer, in some of them you'll probably even notice that they're the ones who hang around the longest. As long as I'm civil, I don't see them getting angry with me and I've posted LOTS of Bible verses on ATS. There are ways of discussing and debating that are productive. I just had a discussion with someone else where we kind of rehashed the same thoughts over and over until I had an aha moment and acknowledged it. I found it to be very helpful, even though it might have annoyed a lot of the other posters, but no one said anything.

What you also forget is the fact there are there are lots of members on ATS that have never posted. They read and observe. Never forget that you may be providing helpful information or answers to someone out there who you didn't even know was reading it.

The purpose of the old testament was to show that we could not attain perfection, that we couldn't meet the rules. Jesus came to show that we could circumcise our hearts and that the mistakes were paid for.

See, this is helpful information worth knowing.

We are to correct other Christians when they are off course; but, we are not told to correct non-Christians.

Yes, Christians should hold other Christians accountable. Correct non-Christians? Is there such a thing? You can only lead them. People can only correct themselves, you can't do if for them.

I deal with the people who attend my services or tell me they are Christians, not non-believers. For non-believers we should have and answer for why we believe. You might wonder why I mention this. That is not why I am there, I am not there to give references. I am there to get them to read the bible and ask questions about it. By the way, I was asked to pastor this group, it was not something I sought out, I already have a full time job. I am not there to be their leader, too many leaders. I preach (hate that word) to people who don't want to go to the type of churches that seem to predominate. Our services are interactive and I ask more questions than I answer. It is my responsibility to show them how to decipher the bible for themselves. As for withholding things, I can't, I tell them to read their bible and be ready to discuss it.

Yes, self testimony is the best testimony. Glad to hear that you're in a group that encourages more reading of the Bible! As for deciphering the Bible, I've seen better explanations for scripture on ATS than I've ever heard from a pastor in real life. But then again, there are so many more resourceful people to seek out and choose from here! I use the internet a lot to weigh the different interpretations of scripture to compare against each other.

As for being a "leader", no thank you, we have enough of them.

Actually, we don't have enough of the right ones. I wouldn't want it either. Too much drama! LOL!

It is not for me to sit between people and God, it is for me to help them on their journey as questions arise in their lives. The OP was about who was right, Jews or Christians. I believe we have gotten off track and don't wish to hijack the thread. If you wish to discuss more then please U2U me, unless it is specifically related to this thread. Peace.

So, the O.P. asked who was right. That's what we should all be asking ourselves!! Without asking and having a discussion about it, how are we ever going to determine for ourselves if one is right, both or right, or none are right? Even if there is no answer to any question, does that mean we shouldn't be asking it? That's like saying why bother to find out if there's really a God? Just sit back and wait until you die to find out for sure. I kind of like the idea of having been informed of all the possible outcomes I may be facing, regardless. That's just me.

reply to post by Deetermined


Dear Deetermined,

Who's chasing people down trying to win them over? If you'll notice, there are plenty of Atheists who come to these religious threads without having to seek them out. If you look closer, in some of them you'll probably even notice that they're the ones who hang around the longest.

I fear there is a misunderstanding, I was not accusing you of doing such a thing, I was explaining my approach. Yes, I have noticed many atheists and others who come to these threads just to antagonize. Many know their bible better than the Christians.

As for the original question, who is right, both are right and both are wrong. The Jews were given a job and the Christians were given a job, they did not get the same jobs. Some of us are fingers and some of us are toes, neither is wrong and neither is perfect. It is our privilege to do our jobs rather than someone elses.

Originally posted by AQuestion
reply to post by jmdewey60

 

Dear jmdewey60,

Actually he did, it is from Matthew. You are no doubt thinking of the book of Luke.

36 “Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?” 37 Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’[a] 38 This is the first and greatest commandment. 39 And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ 40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”

There seems to be different versions of a very similar story.
Here Jesus is asked a specific question about a specific thing already in existence which would be the Law, as in The Law of Moses, so he gives an answer specifically about that said Law, which is The Law of Moses.
Jesus is not here being asked what he would propose as a hypothetical Law if he was given the job of creating his own Law.

SuperiorEd linked this in another thread. It is perfect for this discussion. There is a much greater explanation inside the link that is definitely worth a full read if anyone is really interested in the subject of this thread.

THE LAW OF JUBILEE

"Jesus came to earth to redeem His people (Luke 1:68). He did not come in the form of an angel, but was born a man, specifically of the seed of Abraham. He did this in order to have the lawful right of redemption. If He had come as an angel, the divine law would have ruled that He was only a FRIEND of sinners, whose sin had given them a debt they could not pay, men who had lost their inheritance through Adam’s sin."

"Jesus was indeed a friend of sinners, but He chose to be more than that. In order to have the RIGHT of redemption for Israel, He had to be more than a mere friend. He had to be born of the seed of Abraham. In order to have the RIGHT of redemption for all mankind, He had to be more than an angelic friend. He had to be born of flesh and blood. He qualified on both counts, as we read in Hebrews 2:11-17."

ariseshinenow.com...

reply to post by Deetermined

I believe in the Holy Trinity. I think I saw someone make the statement on here that the Holy Trinity wasn't confusing, but obviously it is for some people. I also believe the Bible when it says that God created everything. Maybe you don't.

I have never been an adherent to the orthodox version of the Trinity, having been brought up in a church which at the time was decidedly Arian. What this means practically is that the congregation I attended was populated by people who took the Bible in a very straightforward way and held no creed, or doctrine of Trinity other than what could be presented by actually just quoting the Bible, and no added philosophical treatises.
Here is what we should look at, in my opinion, in regards to creation:

COLOSSIANS 1:15-18 NKJ
15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.
16 For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things were created through Him and for Him.
17 And He is before all things, and in Him all things consist.
18 And He is the head of the body, the church, who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in all things He may have the preeminence.

What this is telling me is that God is in charge of the ethirial things such as concepts, including things like justice and government. So if you read in Revelation people praising God for making all things, you should see it in this light, that God is the ultimate judge and ruler and will rescue those He sees as having been unjustly persecuted or whatever.

I posted scripture for you, did you have trouble understanding it? I'm beginning to believe that you don't understand what's written in the Bible or maybe you're trying too hard to teach yourself the Hebrew language and connecting it altogether.

The reason people are so upset with me, seems to me anyway, is my criticism of their posting style. I find it annoying in the extreme how people post, and here is a good example. What scripture, and in what post? If you already quoted it, then it should be pretty simple to copy and paste it instead of me having to go back and guess which post you are referring to and exactly which verse. I wish someone would read this and understand this is just common courtesy. Especially people who pretend to be Christians who should, I would think, have consideration for others. Anyway, back to your comment, I have to guess you mean something about idols made of wood. I don't see how that has anything to do with anything and was about something that was maybe a concern in ancient times where Israelites were worshiping idols as a common practice. Now in Paul's day, there were temples but I don't think those gods were worshiped any differently than say a Catholic cathedral or something.
Right now I am concentrating on the Septuagint version of the OT, having lost confidence in the Hebrew version.

In any case, will you do me one small little favor and refrain from telling someone else that they're not a real Christian based on statements that you clearly didn't understand when you read them either?

It is pretty simple, either someone believes in the old covenant, or they believe in the new covenant. This is actually what is behind the Christian practice of designating part of the Bible as the Old Testament, and the Christian part as the New Testament. If someone holds to the old covenant, then automatically they are not Christian. Really quite simple. Those who do hold to the old should put little disclaimers on their signature or in their posts warning readers that they are Messianic Jews, and are not actually Christians, in the classical sense of the word, such as for example, one poster here going by the user name, Superior Ed.

Originally posted by jmdewey60

I have never been an adherent to the orthodox version of the Trinity, having been brought up in a church which at the time was decidedly Arian. What this means practically is that the congregation I attended was populated by people who took the Bible in a very straightforward way and held no creed, or doctrine of Trinity other than what could be presented by actually just quoting the Bible, and no added philosophical treatises.

Matthew 28:19 - "Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,"

Father = God
Son = Jesus (God in human form)
Holy Spirit = (God in spirit form)

Here is what we should look at, in my opinion, in regards to creation:

COLOSSIANS 1:15-18 NKJ

15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.
16 For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things were created through Him and for Him.
17 And He is before all things, and in Him all things consist.
18 And He is the head of the body, the church, who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in all things

He may have the preeminence.

What this is telling me is that God is in charge of the ethirial things such as concepts, including things like justice and government. So if you read in Revelation people praising God for making all things, you should see it in this light, that God is the ultimate judge and ruler and will rescue those He sees as having been unjustly persecuted or whatever.

Yes, God is the Creator as well as the ultimate judge and ruler. This is why you should believe that he is the one true God. Some of your previous comments weren't detailed enough in describing who the other "gods" were in the Bible, which were made up of idols, unclean spirits, demons, fallen angels, etc. To use the term "gods" without reference led me to believe that you were telling people that you thought there was more than one TRUE God. Sorry, if I was the one who misunderstood you if you meant something different.

The reason people are so upset with me, seems to me anyway, is my criticism of their posting style. I find it annoying in the extreme how people post, and here is a good example.

People are upset with you because of your own posting style. LOL!

What scripture, and in what post? If you already quoted it, then it should be pretty simple to copy and paste it instead of me having to go back and guess which post you are referring to and exactly which verse.

Psalms 96:5

5) For all the gods of the nations are idols: but the LORD made the heavens.

I wish someone would read this and understand this is just common courtesy. Especially people who pretend to be Christians who should, I would think, have consideration for others.

You know what I think is inconsiderate? Telling someone else they're not a Christian. If you want to point out what you think is an error in their thinking, go ahead, but please don't tell people you don't believe they're a true Christian. No, your comment wasn't directed at me, but it shocked me when I read it.

It is pretty simple, either someone believes in the old covenant, or they believe in the new covenant. This is actually what is behind the Christian practice of designating part of the Bible as the Old Testament, and the Christian part as the New Covenant.

You should have stated it just like that!

If someone holds to the old covenant, then automatically they are not Christian. Really quite simple. Those who do hold to the old should put little disclaimers on their signature or in their posts warning readers that they are Messianic Jews, and are not actually Christians, in the classical sense of the word, such as for example, one poster here going by the user name, Superior Ed.

Just a suggestion. If you think someone's speaking from the viewpoint of a Messianic Jew, just ask them if they are. Everyone will know the difference once they answer. Just be conscious of how you ask it or word it. SuperiorEd is a Messianic Jew? Cool! I have a pretty high respect for him. Here's something Wikipedia says about it, " any Jewish laws or customs that are followed are cultural and do not contribute to attaining salvation." I'm pretty sure there are denominations of Christianity that have their own customs and traditions too that not every Christian would agree with, but that doesn't make them non-Christian. If you're using the term "Christian" in the "classical sense", maybe you should be careful to point that out too.

It's all in the wording, my friend. Thanks for taking the time to explain what you meant.

reply to post by Deetermined

Just a suggestion. If you think someone's speaking from the viewpoint of a Messianic Jew, just ask them if they are.

I was using him as an example because I was, after a lot of harassment on my part, able to get him to admit to it. He was using terminology which if you looked it up on Wikipedia, you could find out that only Messianic Jews use it. The point being is that here is one person and even then was hedging around and not actually calling himself a Jew but that his system or whatever included Jews, or something like that, where the main point is that people want to pretend to fit in and I believe the intention is to pull Christians into being virtual Jews by giving up the fundamental beliefs of Christianity.
Now I don't have a problem with people being Jews and that is their business but I do have a problem with heretics pretending to be Christians when they do not believe in what makes someone a Christian. If I say, "You are not a Christian", when they have every opportunity to correct my assumption if I am wrong. It could be they aren't Christians but have been so deluded by the cult type church environment that they associate in, that they do not realize they have already renounced Christianity in their adopting of other religious beliefs that are not compatible with Christianity as it has exited from time way past, up to modern times, where now we have this element of Zionism which increases as the conflicts in the Middle East increases due to the presence of the illegal and criminal and immoral occupation of Palestine.

]


on page seven the op states he does not follow an invisible god and lives by his own rules, So he did not start this thread to seek knowledge but to troll everyone who posted.

reply to post by jmdewey60


personally, I feel you have now ventured into very dangerous territory. You yourself are now allowing yourself to be judged on the law.
I would suggest you spend ALOT of time studying Hebrews. You will learn that the Spirit only ventures in the discussion of life, not death as the old covenant is void as the new testament is based on nothing but that, a testament.
It is NOT a covenant at all.
A covenant is a binding contracty between the 2 parties.
There are curses and blessings attached to it. Legalism is dead in this respects, unless you aspire to be a pharisee. We live by grace and grace alone as we CANNOT fulfill the law in ANY respects. If so then the sacrifice of the lamb is for naught. If you feel you can fulfill the law in even a small way then you make Yashayah a liar and a partial sacrifice, because He and He alone could make the claim "It is finished".
He fulfilled all the law, and at His death the new testament came into effect, as in the last will and testament type of thing. This could only take place after the law was fulfilled. After His death.
Eph.2:8,9
8For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; 9not as a result of works, so that no one may boast.
I hope you are not attempting to plead for more sacrifices of more lambs???
check yourself brother, you are going down a dangerous path here.
So I tell you the truth, there is not 2 covenants, and only one testament.
Read and study Hebrews for the legalities you seek to address.
Nobody was ever able to fulfill the law but He who was sacrificed as the lamb of God.

2 Corinthians 3:6-8 6 Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.

7 But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away:

8 How shall not the ministration of the spirit be rather glorious?



“These also who erred in spirit will come to understanding, and those who complained will learn doctrine” (Isaiah 29:24).

Originally posted by Foxy1
]


on page seven the op states he does not follow an invisible god and lives by his own rules, So he did not start this thread to seek knowledge but to troll everyone who posted.

You couldnt be any further from the truth my friend
By the way who is trolling, me or you? It would appear with your failure to add any substance to the thread and your condescending remarks, you would be the one who is indeed trolling

Originally posted by AQuestion

The purpose of the old testament was to show that we could not attain perfection, that we couldn't meet the rules. Jesus came to show that we could circumcise our hearts and that the mistakes were paid for.

Actually I believe that you have misunderstood both the point of the Old Testament and the message from Jesus Christ.

The Old Testament shows how God gave man what man instinctively wanted. Man rejected love and what God had made obvious, there is a creator. Men instead were evil and worshiped what was created and not the creator. They even made idols that obviously had no power and worshiped them.

Because man rejected love and a creator he gave them laws to teach what sin was. God’s word written on the heart of all, along with the law was glorious. But the glory of the law was lost in man, you know the saying, “rules are meant to be broken”, this is what mad did. Then they asked God for a king to rule over them, they rejected God. So God again gave man what they wanted.

A full understanding of the Old Testament shows that man could not live sin free by his own nature, no matter how hard he tried. The New Testament provides man a different way of living. Unfortunately most of the world, even those that call themselves Christians, reject this new way and continue to live by the Law of Moses. If one would truly live by God’s new covenant of Grace they would live a much different life because they would become a new person.

John 5:19
Jesus gave them this answer: "I tell you the truth, the Son can do nothing by himself; he can do only what he sees his Father doing, because whatever the Father does the Son also does.

John 3:3-7
3 Jesus replied, “Very truly I tell you, no one can see the kingdom of God unless they are born again.[a]” 4 “How can someone be born when they are old?” Nicodemus asked. “Surely they cannot enter a second time into their mother’s womb to be born!” 5 Jesus answered, “Very truly I tell you, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless they are born of water and the Spirit. 6 Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit. 7 You should not be surprised at my saying, ‘You[c] must be born again.’

John 8:34, 36 Whosoever committeth sin is the servant of sin...If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed. And we know that whosoever is born of God sinneth not; but he that is begotten of God keepeth himself, and that wicked one toucheth him not.

I John 3:9 Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God.

Rom. 6:14 Sin shall not have dominion over you; for ye are not under the law, but under grace.
I John 5:4 For whatsoever is born of God overcometh the world.

1 Corinthians 10:13 No temptation has seized you except what is common to man. And God is faithful; he will not let you be tempted beyond what you can bear. But when you are tempted, he will also provide a way out so that you can stand up under it.

If you understood what you were reading than you would understand that God has made a way for you to overcome sin in your life. These verses do not imply that you can simply sin less, but that you can completely overcome sin. This could not be accomplished by mans way, the law, but can only be accomplished by Gods way Grace.

Jesus only used the 2 things that are promised to us to overcome sin. The word and the Spirit. So although he was God he was fully a man. Meaning he had no rights other than the 2 things promised to us in the New Testament. It is through this understanding that one can come to realize that they truly can inspire to be Christ Like. If what I say is untrue than explain this following verse.

John 14:12
I tell you the truth, anyone who has faith in me will do what I have been doing. He will do even greater things than these, because I am going to the Father.

You see Jesus is the way, the light and the truth just as he said but again even this has been misunderstood.
Jesus life is the way we are to live; Jesus is the light that leads us to live this way, everything he said, the entire word of God is the truth. So as you see now that I am a son of God and brother to Jesus I am on the path to only do the will of my father.

reply to post by manna2


Actually you have 2 choices only one is the new covenant. You can live by the law, and be judged by the law. Or you can live by faith and Grace and to submit yourself completely to your father so that your will is to only do his will. Then you will be judged by faith and grace and not by the law, this is the new covenant.

If one chooses to live by the new covenant they will indeed follow the law but not because they live by the law but because they only do the will of the father.

Just in case a posters' mis-conception came from this, I wanted to point out; when studying the Bible...

GOD = God
God = God
gods = Things God made that people formed to images and were worshiping - wood, stone and metal images.

Notice the capitalization. They are clearly defined multiple times, in multiple places (compare scripture with scripture).
----

LORD = Lord
Lord = Lord (Can mean God or Christ, but can also mean people in authority.)
lords = People in authority.

Notice the capitalization. They are clearly defined multiple times, in multiple places (compare scripture with scripture).
----

Just in-case someone didn't know. It might throw someone off into thinking multiple gods were authenticated as true, in a reverse way - but is a clearly multi-defined constant.


Those folks might have more to sink their teeth into (more fun) trying to figure out the mystery of The Watchers (not clearly defined). Unearthly beings may be mentioned in the Bible (or they may be angles or patriarchs) , but never eluded to as "Gods" - or "gods"... Giving the truth that if there were unearthly beings, they aren't gods, and God made them too.

reply to post by sacgamer25


I feel you are misreading what is in the Bible.
We do not have a new covenant.
We have a testament.
A testament is something that comes into force after death, in this case the savior.
He did it all.
The only part we play in the salvation is to lay our sins at the foot of the cross.
He did it all, he fulfilled the law.
"It is finished"
A covenant is an agreement between 2 parties and broken once either party transgresses the agreement.
We have a testament that replaces the covenant.
This is one of those areas where the translations seriously skew the meaning of scripture and confuses the issue.
I will repeat, we are no longer bound by law if we live in the Spirit by grace through faith.
Yes, we do take His yoke upon us, but most definately free from the law which can only lead to death.
We did not take on another burden to replace the old burden, which is the law.
All the law, every jot and tittle is fulfilled in His sacrifice at calvary.
You are free indeed through His sacrifice.
In Him you have no covenant, only life in the Spirit.