An open question on the character of the divine in relation to Judgement

Originally posted by JesuitGarlic
reply to post by adjensen

 

So let me get this straight adjensen, what you have presented for your case is a verse from Mark 2:27, somewhat unclear in meaning read as is, but easily defeated when read in context and analysed

Yes, that's a fine collection of interpretations and discernments, intended to arrive at a conclusion which is the exact opposite of what was said. That's not "reading in context" -- in context, Jesus was telling people who were critical of his apparent disregard for Sabbath Law to "lighten up."

No wall of text, language analysis or cryptic connections to other scripture needed -- just listen to what Jesus said.

As for the rest of it, you continue to labour in your belief that I am a Fundamentalist, which I am not. If you want to live under Judaic Law, feel free, but you'd best be living under it all, not just the bits that you like -- I presume that you are circumcised, refrain from all "unclean" animals and keep a ready supply of stones handy for killing anyone who violates the laws prescribed in Leviticus and Deuteronomy.

Me, I'll take Christ, who said none of that matters.

Originally posted by NewAgeMan
reply to post by JesuitGarlic

 

Jesus upheld the standard of truth, justice and righteousness, while rendering a verdict of mercy and forgiveness.

It's a double bind on sin and evil by a limitless love.

To really "get it" is to be both brought into the tears of repentance, and then out into the tears of joy and even hilarity.

Think of God's love in Christ as the wind that blows through the divided middle which is also the twin pillars of Justice and Mercy, as a set standard as tall as the universe is long.

If it evokes anger, rage, bitterness, and nothing more, then at some level a person is dead already according to a hardened heart, but it's designed in such a way that it's capable of making even the most hardened heart of stone back into a heart of flesh.

I think the acid test, from what I've been able to discern, resides in one's ability to cry, and to laugh in regards to our own human folly and even in relation to our worst aspects.

It is only the devil within who sneers ferociously at it, because by it's very nature and by design it is an all-or-nothing proposition which makes no compromise whatsoever with sin and evil ie: to be curative, it must cut to the core where evil and rebellion lives and there bind the "strong man", whereby our true strength is measured in our weakness and where virtue may be defined as power, restrained.

It's a fantastic "predicament", the final resolution to the age old problem of human sin and evil, which carries with it it's own logic and reason.

I'll take it, even if it hurts, at first..

"That which hurts, instructs."
~ Ben Franklin

bump..

reply to post by JesuitGarlic


Well, if you believe the words of Paul...

Romans 14:5-6

5 One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.

6 He that regardeth the day, regardeth it unto the Lord; and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard it. He that eateth, eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God thanks; and he that eateth not, to the Lord he eateth not, and giveth God thanks.

Colossians 2:16

16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
But in all seriousness, no matter what window you look from, if the homo genus originated in one particular area, and then made a regular practice of spreading out from it's various branches, there's no reason to think that all religions wouldn't have a common ancestor or two.

That's not really the point.

Yes, from a historical standpoint, one would expect to find some commonality, such as multiple civilizations having a flood myth, because of the shared human experience, but from a theological standpoint, apart from generalities, that's not really the case. Idiots like Achyra S notwithstanding, the Christian theological basis is largely unique.

No, what I meant was how can an ancient religion be the basis for a 19th Century one, which uses the 19th Century as the basis for more than a fair amount of its beliefs? Maybe you're not familiar with LDS (or, for that matter, SDA or Jehovah's Witness) theology, but it could not have existed 2,000 years ago, the very concepts of "people becoming gods with planets of their own to rule over" and "lost Israelites in the Americas" impossible to suppose.

Similarly, the SDA belief that the "mark of the beast" is a world government that imposes Sunday worship, upon punishment of death, wouldn't make sense in 700AD. It doesn't make any sense today, either, given the precipitous decline of the church and the rise of secularism, but from 1870 to 1990 or so, I suppose it seemed plausible.

reply to post by Deetermined


The instance in question was during a time when Ernie was feeling downhearted and where a dream he had he did recognize it was from Satan. This has been explained subsequently to this time in mid 2009. I have read all of Ernie Knoll's dreams (65 of them) and have emailed his wife before. The dreams are a combination of teaching important spiritual lessons to help people through the tribulation to keep them focus correctly, visions of future events on Earth, visions of scenes in Heaven and rebukes to certain areas and leaders of the SDA church.

For me, I think there is a good deal of merit to them, for people who are unfamiliar with the prophetic writings of Ellen White and SDA theology and issues, I would not recommend those people read/trust them (at this stage). I only put the link out so that you would be aware that information is out there, nothing more.

If future events transpire the way White and Knoll described, let's just say I will be making some posts on ATS about it.

SDA theology is completely proven by the Bible alone (advanced descriptors of things from what we can already see from the Bible is the kind of thing you get from those two)

reply to post by adjensen

that's a fine collection of interpretations and discernments, intended to arrive at a conclusion which is the exact opposite of what was said. That's not "reading in context" -- in context, Jesus was telling people who were critical of his apparent disregard for Sabbath Law to "lighten up."

The context of the passage is that Jesus had come to Earth and was doing exactly what He could do on the Sabbath. He was the law-giver after all and knew what the day was all about. His Sabbath commandment had become polluted with false teaching on what was expected that even Jesus himself was accused of breaking it. Jesus never broke the Sabbath, He was laying out to the people the proper intent behind it. If Jesus did not fulfill the law and the prophets then He was not the Messiah and is sacrifice for us meant nothing.

Jesus'comment about the Sabbath was merely to point out that He did not intent it to be burdensome or arduous for people but "a delight". He never said we weren't meant to keep the Sabbath, just that to keep it for what God intended it for.

Your verse in Mark in no way eliminates the Sabbath commandment.
------------------

As for the rest of it, you continue to labour in your belief that I am a Fundamentalist

I want to get to the heart of what you perceive your highest authority to be, your highest authority therefore isn't the bible which would prove you wrong with numerous examples of what is important to God, but instead your own personal opinion of what God is like. So in a sense you are just making up your own religion based on what you like or is comfortable not on learning from any external authorities. Yes, this is your standard

If you want to live under Judaic Law, feel free, but you'd best be living under it all, not just the bits that you like -- I presume that you are circumcised, refrain from all "unclean" animals and keep a ready supply of stones handy for killing anyone who violates the laws prescribed in Leviticus and Deuteronomy.

Adventist are to live according to the Divine Law which is different from the Judaic Law. The Divine Law is part of the conditions from Christian's to follow under the new Covenant, the Judaic Law is not.

You see adjensen, "foreigners" aka non-jews/gentiles/Christians are commanded to keep the Sabbath as part of the terms of the new covenant.

Isaiah 56:6,7 And foreigners who bind themselves to the LORD to serve him, to love the name of the LORD, and to worship him, all who keep the Sabbath without desecrating it and who hold fast to my covenant--these I will bring to my holy mountain and give them joy in my house of prayer. Their burnt offerings and sacrifices will be accepted on my altar; for my house will be called a house of prayer for all nations."

So what, now Isaiah is a false prophet for you, Jesus is a false prophet for upholding the prophet's past and Paul is a false prophet for saying...

Hebrews 4:9 So then, it remains for the people of God to keep the Sabbath

So with your version of Christianity Jesus is false, Paul is false, Isaiah is false...in your version of Christianity there is no Christianity!

reply to post by JesuitGarlic


she s a whore.

Without *any* knowledge about the nature of God.

..there are millions upon millions, who never heared the Truth, who never knew,
and who never cared.
And yet, He is calling those ' the harvest ' ; desiring to have them.

but yes those who willingly kept ignoring Truth, are in danger.

but
likewise, those who knew truth, yet continually DISTORTED truth,
are in even móre grave danger

hop it makes sense

bless

Originally posted by JesuitGarlic
He never said we weren't meant to keep the Sabbath, just that to keep it for what God intended it for.

No, he did not say that, and he in no way said that salvation depends on which 24 hour period one chooses to observe as a time for worship.

As for the rest of it, you continue to labour in your belief that I am a Fundamentalist

I want to get to the heart of what you perceive your highest authority to be, your highest authority therefore isn't the bible

You don't seem to understand what a Fundamentalist is (and therefore what a non-Fundamentalist is,) so I'd suggest you do some reading before you declare what my "highest authority is or isn't."

Here is a starting point for you: What is a Fundamentalist anyway?

You see adjensen, "foreigners" aka non-jews/gentiles/Christians are commanded to keep the Sabbath as part of the terms of the new covenant.

No, they are not.

If there are conditions and codicils placed on salvation due to behaviour, then it becomes entirely a matter of works, not faith, and that contradicts the whole of the New Testament.

Belief that God cares whether you worship him on Saturday or Sunday diminishes God, makes salvation a matter of works, and works alone, and rejects the notion that salvation is through Christ, since it doesn't matter if he died on the cross, all that matters is what your calendar says when you turn up at church.

reply to post by Deetermined


Yes I believe Paul's words I just quoted Paul's most clear words on the Sabbath from Hebrews 4:9 to adjensen.

Hebrews 4:9 So then, it remains for the people of God to keep the Sabbath

Paul's words in Colossians 2:16 are referring to the annual Jewish feast days like Passover ect. that were known as sabbath days/High sabbaths ect... because the days were rest days even if they did not fall on the weekly Sabbath day. Paul said these are past because the different Jewish feast days were pointing towards things about Jesus that were completed upon His death.

Paul is saying that Christians can keep those annual Jewish feast days if they like but it is not necessary (so people should not be judged for keeping them or not).

----
Please read this commenarty and analysis on Romans 14 and let me know if any uncertainties remain.

reply to post by adjensen

If there are conditions and codicils placed on salvation due to behaviour, then it becomes entirely a matter of works, not faith, and that contradicts the whole of the New Testament. Belief that God cares whether you worship him on

Saturday or Sunday diminishes God, makes salvation a matter of works, and works alone, and rejects the notion that salvation is through Christ, since it doesn't matter if he died on the cross, all that matters is what your calendar says when you turn up at church.

That Contradicts the Whole of the New Testament?

John 14:15, 21 If you love me, you will keep my commandments. [21] Whoever has my commands and obeys them, he is the one who loves me. He who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I too will love him and show myself to him."

Do you Love God Adjensen?

Matthew 22:36-40

36 “Teacher, which is the great commandment in the Law?” 37 And he said to him, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. 38 This is the great and first commandment. 39 And a second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. 40 On these two commandments depend all the Law and the Prophets.”

Love the Lord your God (commandments 1 through 4), Love your neighbor as yourself (commandments 5 through 10)

1 John 2:3 And by this we know that we have come to know him, if we keep his commandments.

Do you KNOW God adjensen?

1 John 2:7 Brethren, I write no new commandment unto you, but an old commandment which ye had from the beginning. The old commandment is the word which ye have heard from the beginning.

No adjensen, the old commandment isn't the Judaic Law, it is the Divine Law please learn the difference

Revelation 22:14 Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.

Luke 16:17 However, it is easier for heaven and earth to disappear than for one stroke of a letter in the Law to be dropped.

The Divine Law was in Heaven before the Earth was created, it was with us from the beginning of our creation and it will continue on once we are in Heaven (and the New Earth) again, as shown by by Isaiah 66:22, 23

“For as the new heavens and the new earth that I make shall remain before me, says the Lord, so shall your offspring and your name remain. 23 From new moon to new moon, and from Sabbath to Sabbath, all flesh shall come to worship before me, declares the Lord.

This passage in Isaiah is saying that we all come together to meet each Sabbath in Heaven (and on the new Earth) to worship before God. The reference to each new moon is the cycle of fruit production from the tree of life. So adjensen, if you think the Sabbath is "Slavish" now then it really looks like you aren't gonna like Heaven at all, too bad my friend!

Revelation 14:12 Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.

Faith AND obedience (to show you actually love and know God)...not one or the other, BOTH. That is what Adventist's teach, that is what the Bible teaches.

2 Peter 2:21, 22 It would have been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness than to know it and turn their backs on the holy commandment that was committed to them. The proverb is true that describes what has happened to them: "A dog returns to its vomit," and "A pig that is washed goes back to wallow in the mud."

It would have been better for them to an unknowling believed a lie than to have known the standard God set for them in His Law and disobeyed it.

You think God takes lightly to willful disobedience to his Holy commandments? You think you can get by unscathed? Think again!

Hebrews 10:26 If we deliberately keep on sinning after we have received the knowledge of the truth, no sacrifice for sins is left,

If Christians knowingly transgress God's Law, there are saying they do not accept Jesus. People can repent of their sins but they need to be sincere in trying to turn over a new leaf.

James 4:17 Whoever knows the good and does not do it, to him it is sin.

You still think salvation in the New Testament has nothing to do with behavior?

John 15:2 He cuts off every branch in me that bears no fruit, while every branch that does bear fruit he prunes so that it will be even more fruitful.

Matthew 7:19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.

So adjensen are you suggesting God is advocating that no good fruit is necessary to prove faith, because the idea of being cut off from the vine (God) and thrown into the fire (being erased from existence in the lake of fire at judgment), seems to indicate you don't know what you are talking!

reply to post by Lone12


A little difficult to read but yeah I got the message

likewise, those who knew truth, yet continually DISTORTED truth, are in even móre grave danger

Full agreement

reply to post by JesuitGarlic

Faith AND obedience (to show you actually love and know God)...not one or the other, BOTH. That is what Adventist's teach, that is what the Bible teaches.

I'm just going to pick on this one line here.

Faith and obedience...I don't like that mix at all. See, I've always said that faith is nothing more than having a very good reason to lie to yourself. Otherwise, it wouldn't be faith, it would be fact-based knowledge.

So in conjunction with obedience, this would mean, "I have a very good reason to do this, even if I don't know why I'm doing it." Once this becomes an established practice, you lose all ability to determine for yourself the value of an action or the moral implications of your choices. Your sole consideration is whether you were told to or not, and whether it conflicts with previous commands.

This, in my view, is not a healthy process at all. It says that you are not strong enough to decide for yourself. It says you don't deserve the gift of free will, because you've chosen to obey someone else's free will instead. Let them choose their own path - your destiny is yours to decide, no one else's. So faith and obedience can kiss my keister, because I have this little thing called "free will" that I am quite fond of.

If "God" doesn't like it, he has only himself to blame. He engineered my perspective, every inch of it. And he can cash in his warranty if he decides he can't handle me.

reply to post by AfterInfinity


Obedience to the will (and reason) of God, which is the will and reason to love, was the key to Jesus' power, and spiritual authority.

reply to post by adjensen

No, he did not say that, and he in no way said that salvation depends on which 24 hour period one chooses to observe as a time for worship.

You can reframe it however you wish, put words into my mouth, misrepresent the intention of the Law all so you can feel good about yourself.

The only one you are lying to is yourself. Seek to understand God's intention rather than framing something legalistically

Would you care to comment on the plain verse of Hebrew 4:9 I cited or do you wish to forget about things that may inconvience you

No, they are not.

Please explain adjensen, a personal opinion of No doesn't count

While you're at it explain away a reiteration of a term in the new covenant again

Isaiah 58:13,14
"If you keep your feet from breaking the Sabbath and from doing as you please on my holy day, if you call the Sabbath a delight and the LORD's holy day honorable, and if you honor it by not going your own way and not doing as you please or speaking idle words, then you will find your joy in the LORD, and I will cause you to ride on the heights of the land and to feast on the inheritance of your father Jacob." The mouth of the LORD has spoken.

These promises are for God's people, not just Israelites

reply to post by AfterInfinity

See, I've always said that faith is nothing more than having a very good reason to lie to yourself. Otherwise, it wouldn't be faith, it would be fact-based knowledge.

an interesting point for sure. I think it is important for people to have a good reason for faith as otherwise it can sway with whatever way the wind is blowing. As you know from my posting on the thread Christianity and Theosophy in the Secret Society section, Adventist's are handling ones to rest on their laurels when it comes to having no reason for faith. I was more than happy to progress slowly through the evolutionary process of the big bang up to organic evolution to poke big holes through established science. I posted extensively there videos backing up the facts of the occurrence of events in the OT.

This, in my view, is not a healthy process at all. It says that you are not strong enough to decide for yourself. It says you don't deserve the gift of free will, because you've chosen to obey someone else's free will instead.

Well this is very much what it would mean to give your life over to God. It doesn't have to happen all of a sudden on blind faith. The best way to do it is to learn about the character of the one you are giving your life over to so that you know his plans for you are only after your best interests, plans not to harm you. This is why I advocate the book The Desire of Ages, because it is the best book someone can read on the life of Jesus. I was not a serious Christian until I read that book (at about 18yrs old) despite growing up as a Christian home.

If "God" doesn't like it, he has only himself to blame. He engineered my perspective, every inch of it. And he can cash in his warranty if he decides he can't handle me.

Your perspectives are still pliable enough that nothing is set in stone for you yet. Of course I may not get through to you on this occasion but I hope I have laid some ground work for you to see that I was speaking truthfully when events in the world transpire (which I believe I detailed in that secret societies thread). So I will be reminding you of those things when the time comes, it is up to you which path to take. I am just a messenger trying to help you make an informed decision.

What did you think of what I wrote on pg 1 of this thread to you about the purpose of our creation? Did that make sense to you, even if you don't believe it?

reply to post by NewAgeMan


Very good post NewAgeName.

I think this post has a lot of truth in helping someone think of the "intent" of the Law and what it means to follow God .

Originally posted by JesuitGarlic
Would you care to comment on the plain verse of Hebrew 4:9 I cited or do you wish to forget about things that may inconvience you

I assume that you know who the author of Hebrews (who was not Paul, by the way) was writing to, right? The Hebrews? So I assume that you would understand that the author would frame his arguments in terms of Judaic Law, right? And I assume that you read all of Hebrews 4, so that you would know that it isn't about "rest on the Sabbath", but "rest in God", ie: eternal rest.

Okay, that last one is obviously a bad assumption, since you seem to think it's about worshiping God on Saturday.

Isaiah 58:13,14
"If you keep your feet from breaking the Sabbath and from doing as you please on my holy day, if you call the Sabbath a delight and the LORD's holy day honorable, and if you honor it by not going your own way and not doing as you please or speaking idle words, then you will find your joy in the LORD, and I will cause you to ride on the heights of the land and to feast on the inheritance of your father Jacob." The mouth of the LORD has spoken.

These promises are for God people, not just Israelites

Again, you do realize that Isaiah was writing to a Jewish audience, not a Christian one, right?

As I said, if you want to live by the Jewish Law, feel free, but it's not a buffet where you choose the bits that you want to follow and the ones you don't. For the rest of us, Christ is our liberation from nitpickers and legalists like you.

reply to post by NewAgeMan

Obedience to the will (and reason) of God, which is the will and reason to love, was the key to Jesus' power, and spiritual authority.

From what I've read in the Bible, he doesn't have anything to do with love. Oh wait, I take that back - he appears to love himself. That's it. If you don't love him, you aren't worth having around. You're a criminal.

I don't know where Jesus got his power, if in fact he existed at all, but I'm sure it wasn't from such a being as that. If so, then he had an ulterior motive. Sacrificing his own son for something he could have done with a mere thought? People tell me that's the ultimate act of love. But why would he sacrifice his son when he knew before he even created man that the necessity would arise? Why create a flawed species to begin with?

Oh, wait. The free will argument. Have you seen my counter for that? It's pretty cool.

The Bible has made it clear that "God" is all-powerful in every sense of the phrase. This is accepted in churches all around the globe. He is omniscient and omnipotent, they say. He has no equal. Let's break it down for the members of ATS. In matters of omniscience and omnipotence, there are only two choices:

1. There is an opportunity at some point along a particular timeline. "God" prevents it.

2. There is an opportunity at some point along a particular timeline. "God" allows it.

At any given moment in any given timeline in any given place, both choices belong to "God" and "God" alone. Any illusion of choice in our lives results from his having made one of the two choices above. Nothing can happen unless one of those two choices is made.

In this sense, free will is an illusion for every single creature and object that isn't "God". All choices pass through his screening process before we are ever aware of the opportunity to make those choices, but we think we have free will because we can't miss a choice we never had. And "God", knowing this, is laughing all the while.

I look at it like a circle of dots. If you see the whole circle, you can choose one at random and count all the way around until you reach it again. But if you only see a small portion of it at a time, twenty dots become an infinite number because your perception leads you to believe that there is still more dots to be followed. Because of your limited perception, you remain ignorant of the reality of the circle, and you chase yourself in circles for your entire existence, because you never realize you're tracing the same path. Now say a loop extends from that circle, leading back around to it. You follow that loop and you believe you've found an entirely new circle. Sometimes, it changes color just to sustain that illusion. But it's still the same circle.

That's called the illusion of free will. You see it everywhere, if only you can peek outside the little box of your limited perception. It's possible, but you have to be willing to accept what you find. If you don't want answers, don't ask questions.

According to the above system of logical deduction, which operates under the assumption that the Bible is fully accurate, "God" is the only entity since the very beginning who has ever possessed true free will. All else is determined by his choices, every second in every single space of existence throughout the universe. We are the puppets in the stories he writes. And if we don't play our roles as he wills it, then we are condemned. Because that makes us broken puppets. And his palace has no room for broken puppets. He has already said this.

So there's really no excuse. "God" loves us just about as much as a puppet maker loves his creations.

Originally posted by JesuitGarlic
reply to post by NewAgeMan

 

Very good post NewAgeName.

I think this post has a lot of truth in helping someone think of the "intent" of the Law and what it means to follow God.

Thanks. From what I've been able to gather, to even begin to follow it (law of love) we need to first be broken by it, which is where the capacity for humor, mirth and charm (on the other side of repentant tears) arises. Happy and kind hearted is the person who the spirit has broken, hard-hearted and willful is the one who is lost.

reply to post by adjensen

And I assume that you read all of Hebrews 4, so that you would know that it isn't about "rest on the Sabbath", but "rest in God", ie: eternal rest.

Adjensen, I trust that you have studied the original greek of this text before you would bring this up?

In case you haven't...

Now we come to a controversial statement: “there remains therefore a rest for the people of God” (verse 9). The Greek word translated “rest” in every other verse throughout Hebrews 3 and 4 is katapausis. The word for “rest” in Hebrews 4:9 is sabbatismos. This is the only New Testament occurrence of this word, and its meaning is fundamental to understanding this pivotal verse, which is the conclusion of everything previously said about “rest” beginning in Hebrews 3:7.

The Anchor Bible Dictionary states about the meaning of sabbatismos:

“The words ‘Sabbath rest” translate the [Greek] noun ‘sabbatismos,’ a unique word in the New Testament. This term appears also in Plutarch…for Sabbath observance, and in four postcanonical Christian writings which are not dependent on Hebrews 4:9, for seventh day ‘Sabbath celebration.’”

The Anchor Bible Dictionary continues with an explanation of the context:

“The author of Hebrews affirms in Hebrews 4:3-11 through the joining of quotations from Genesis 2:2 and Psalm 95:7 that the promised ‘Sabbath rest’ still anticipates a complete realization ‘for the people of God’ in the … endtime which had been inaugurated with the appearance of Jesus [Hebrews 1:1-3]… The experience of ‘Sabbath rest’ points to a present ‘rest’ (katapausis) reality in which those ‘who have believed are entering’ (4:3) and it points to a future ‘rest’ reality (4:11). Physical Sabbath-keeping on the part of the New Covenant believer as affirmed by ‘Sabbath rest’ epitomizes cessation from ‘works’ (4:10) in commemoration of God’s rest at creation (4:4 = Genesis 2:2) and manifests faith in the salvation provided by Christ.

“Hebrews 4:3-11 affirms that physical ‘Sabbath rest’ (sabbatismos) is the weekly outward manifestation of the inner experience of spiritual rest (katapausis) in which the final…rest is…experienced already ‘today’ (4:7). Thus ‘Sabbath rest’ combines in itself creation-commemoration, salvation-experience, and eschaton [end-time]-anticipation as the community of faith moves forward toward the final consummation of total restoration and rest.”
source

Definition: a keeping of the Sabbath, a Sabbath rest
Sabbatismos 4520

The dictionary (a higher source of authority than your opinion) would suggest I was spot on correct....

I assume that you know who the author of Hebrews (who was not Paul, by the way) was writing to, right? The Hebrews? So I assume that you would understand that the author would frame his arguments in terms of Judaic Law, right?

Lets see, he is writing to thse had accepted the gospel about Jesus in the past (2:3-4) and had shown strong commitment to Him in the face of persecution (10:32-24) and makes a clear reference to Italy [13:24]. The writer is addressing Christian's most likely from Rome, where Claudius expelled Jews and many Christians form Rome in 49A.D.

Again, you do realize that Isaiah was writing to a Jewish audience, not a Christian one, right?

You realise that Isaiah is writing for the audience who will participate in the new covenant...

Of course, lets not nitpick about the NT references I just gave you making it clear as day it is faith and obedience