PDA

View Full Version : Sabbath



srchin23
Oct 4th 2008, 05:19 AM
one of the creators commands were to keep the 7th day sabbath holy...why don't christians do this??? Isn't breaking one command ,breaking them all??? Then your living in sin?:hmm::dunno:

valleybldr
Oct 4th 2008, 11:47 AM
one of the creators commands were to keep the 7th day sabbath holy...why don't christians do this??? Isn't breaking one command ,breaking them all??? Then your living in sin?:hmm::dunno: Many Christian do and it seems we discuss this every other week so you might want to click a few pages back and review the endless discussions on the matter. Shabbat shalom, todd

Ethnikos
Oct 4th 2008, 07:35 PM
one of the creators commands were to keep the 7th day sabbath holy...why don't christians do this??? Isn't breaking one command ,breaking them all??? Then your living in sin?:hmm::dunno:
If you did go back and look at all the previous posts on this forum, concerning the Sabbath, you end up with a difference of opinion concerning; if you were to keep one law, do you have to keep all the laws.
My personal opinion is that the Ten Commandments can stand on their own and can be considered as separate from the Levitical laws that were added later. They are the foundation of the Christian Law.

BroRog
Oct 4th 2008, 08:03 PM
one of the creators commands were to keep the 7th day sabbath holy...why don't christians do this??? Isn't breaking one command ,breaking them all??? Then your living in sin?:hmm::dunno:

The commandment is to remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy. The question is: to which Sabbath day does God refer? Typically, when folks raise this issue on discussion boards, they assume the Sabbath day is a 24 hour period at the end of the week, i.e. Saturday.

Another possibility, which seems more likely, is that the Sabbath day mentioned in the Ten Commandments isn't a day of the week but an age or an era in which the people of God have their rest.

OldChurchGuy
Oct 4th 2008, 11:51 PM
one of the creators commands were to keep the 7th day sabbath holy...why don't christians do this??? Isn't breaking one command ,breaking them all??? Then your living in sin?:hmm::dunno:
Here is a link to ponder. While it starts out talking about all the Sabbath laws, it quickly focuses on the Sabbath as a day and how it was transformed by the early church fathers.

Apparently the early leaders of the church felt led to say that the day after the Sabbath was appropriate due to the resurrection. Short of having a time machine so we can go back and interview the apostles plus early church leaders it is unlikely the question will ever be fully resolved.

Sincerely,

OldChurchGuy

http://www.studybibleforum.com/htm_php.php3

Emanate
Oct 5th 2008, 04:17 PM
The commandment is to remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy. The question is: to which Sabbath day does God refer? Typically, when folks raise this issue on discussion boards, they assume the Sabbath day is a 24 hour period at the end of the week, i.e. Saturday.

Another possibility, which seems more likely, is that the Sabbath day mentioned in the Ten Commandments isn't a day of the week but an age or an era in which the people of God have their rest.


That might be true if the word day did not follow the majority of the time.

valleybldr
Oct 5th 2008, 05:52 PM
That might be true if the word day did not follow the majority of the time.
If one has a fundamental understanding of the Jewish people and their faith they will know Sabbath basics. The Sabbath was to early Christianity (before the flood of Gentiles) what baseball and apple pie are to America. todd

BroRog
Oct 5th 2008, 07:17 PM
That might be true if the word day did not follow the majority of the time.

Hebrews 4:8-9

For if Joshua had given them rest, He would not have spoken of another day after that. So there remains a Sabbath rest for the people of God.

Emanate
Oct 5th 2008, 10:28 PM
Hebrews 4:8-9

For if Joshua had given them rest, He would not have spoken of another day after that. So there remains a Sabbath rest for the people of God.


ys, it still says day. do you have more evidence that says creation/sabbath is not actual days?

srchin23
Oct 5th 2008, 10:33 PM
Yisrayl says that if you don't keep the 7th day sabbath..as COMMANDED......then you have the mark of the beast on you.:dunno:does anyone here keep the 7th day sabath???

paradiseinn
Oct 5th 2008, 10:41 PM
i have questioned this and talked to a couple of friends. they made it out like GOD knows our heart and as long as we keep saturday or sunday holy then its ok. but really come on. this is GODS commanment not mans. i feel that saturday is following that command. but i need help too, so if anybody can give a biblical answer, it would help big time. thanks

srchin23
Oct 5th 2008, 11:20 PM
:hmm:some say soon there is gonna be a national sunday LAW...:dunno:because things will be so crazy ...that the pope....and other leaders,will say that God is angry and the only way for any peace would be to make a national sunday LAW....and are u gonna follow mans laws...or the creators?.:hmm:

srchin23
Oct 6th 2008, 03:16 AM
:help:what are the do's and dont's of the sabbath?????:help:

Emanate
Oct 6th 2008, 01:05 PM
Yisrayl says that if you don't keep the 7th day sabbath..as COMMANDED......then you have the mark of the beast on you.:dunno:does anyone here keep the 7th day sabath???


There are some of us on here who rest on the seventh day. There are many places where Sabbath is spoken of as a sign. However, I am not sure the NT writers were referring to not keeping the Sabbath as the mark of the beast. I believe they may have been more clear on that issue.

Richard H
Oct 6th 2008, 01:55 PM
Yisrayl says that if you don't keep the 7th day sabbath..as COMMANDED......then you have the mark of the beast on you.:dunno:does anyone here keep the 7th day sabath???

Hi srchin, :)
I (and others here) keep the Sabbath.

In the Old Testament, we can read:
Speak thou also unto the children of Israel, saying, Verily my sabbaths ye shall keep: for it is a sign between me and you throughout your generations; that ye may know that I am the LORD that doth sanctify you.
Exo 31:13

So, the Sabbath is a sign to us and to God, that we understand that it is He who makes us holy.
We now understand that it is Jesus who makes us holy. Not the keeping of the law.

I've heard one teacher, Walter Veith, talk about it as a "seal", but while he is very good at some things like pointing out paganism in the church, perhaps he is not so perfect in some his theology. (But SDA is another topic)

The New Testament does not speak of the Sabbath as the seal, however there are two verses in Revelation which say:
Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus. Rev 14:12

We see a distinction made between God and Jesus, so the "commandments seem to be the Ten Commandments".

And also this:
I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last.
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. Rev 22:13,14

Scripture does say that God's saints will be sealed during the tribulation (Rev 7:3), but not tell us what the seal is - rather it tells us about those who receive God's seal.
They do not take the mark and they do not worship the image of the beast. (Rev 20:4)

Keeping the Sabbath is a good thing, but we must do it in the Spirit of the Law and not the letter of the Law.
The Spirit gives life and the letter brings death. In other words it is not about rules and regulations or going "back" to the letter of the law to obtain righteousness throught obeying the Law.
Only Jesus is our righteousness.

As for Yisrayl, no matter how "facinating" he may seem - he is false, so pay him no mind.
Instead read Scripture and let the Holy Spirit of the Lord God Himself, lead you.

Don't think that we are all deluded and Yisrayl really is a prophet.
Jesus warned us and then He even stressed the point "Behold! I have told you in advance."

So put Yisrayl aside as you should with any false teachers or prophets.
There is no gain in listening to such - only ultimate deception.
The thing about the false that makes them so dangerous is they take a portion of the truth and twist it to serve their evil desires.


Seek to please God and Him alone.

Richard

mcgyver
Oct 6th 2008, 02:59 PM
:help:what are the do's and dont's of the sabbath?????:help:

Emil Schurer in his excellent work: A History of the Jewish People in the Time of Jesus Christ (Second Division Vol II Pgs 96-104) Gives a list of 39 categories of prohibited works, as well as numerous sub-divisions within each category. His sources are: Hillel, Shammi, and Maimonides.

It is my understanding that these are the same categories that are in force today within Judaism (with modifications necessary for the modern era: e.g. the prohibition against driving a car on the Sabbath)

They are:
1. Sowing 14. Beating 27. Skinning
2. Plowing 15. Dying 28. Salting
3. Reaping 16. Spinning (wool) 29. Preparing (skin)
4. Binding Sheaves 17. Warping (wool) 30. Scraping (hair)
5. Threshing 18. Making 2 cords 31. Cutting it up
6. Winnowing 19. Weaving 2 threads 32. Writing 2 letters
7. Cleansing Crops 20. Separating 2 threads 33.blotting out to
8. Grinding 21. tying a knot write 2 letters
9. Sifting 22. Untying a knot 34. Building
10. Kneading 23. Sewing 2 stitches 35. Pulling down
11. Baking 24. Tearing to sew 2 stitches
12. Shearing Wool 25. Catching a Deer 36. Putting out a fire
13. Washing 26. Killing 37. Lighting a fire
38. Beating smooth with a hammer
39. Carrying from one tenement to another

Within these categories were further sub divisions and definitions (i.e. a "sailors knot" or a knot that can be untied with one hand are not prohibited)

So...there ya go :lol:

EDIT I tried to format this in 3 columns for easier reading...but the board isn't letting me do it...sorry!

paradiseinn
Oct 6th 2008, 03:01 PM
i love reading your posts richard!:pp
you answer my questions even though i don't post the question
thank you so much for posting here!
you always have the best answers!, and i find peace in your posts!
GOD bless and thank you so much!

Richard H
Oct 6th 2008, 03:13 PM
Emil Schurer in his excellent work: A History of the Jewish People in the Time of Jesus Christ (Second Division Vol II Pgs 96-104) Gives a list of 39 categories of prohibited works, as well as numerous sub-divisions within each category. His sources are: Hillel, Shammi, and Maimonides.

It is my understanding that these are the same categories that are in force today within Judaism (with modifications necessary for the modern era: e.g. the prohibition against driving a car on the Sabbath)

They are:
1. Sowing 14. Beating 27. Skinning
2. Plowing 15. Dying 28. Salting
3. Reaping 16. Spinning (wool) 29. Preparing (skin)
4. Binding Sheaves 17. Warping (wool) 30. Scraping (hair)
5. Threshing 18. Making 2 cords 31. Cutting it up
6. Winnowing 19. Weaving 2 threads 32. Writing 2 letters
7. Cleansing Crops 20. Separating 2 threads 33.blotting out to
8. Grinding 21. tying a knot write 2 letters
9. Sifting 22. Untying a knot 34. Building
10. Kneading 23. Sewing 2 stitches 35. Pulling down
11. Baking 24. Tearing to sew 2 stitches
12. Shearing Wool 25. Catching a Deer 36. Putting out a fire
13. Washing 26. Killing 37. Lighting a fire
38. Beating smooth with a hammer
39. Carrying from one tenement to another

Within these categories were further sub divisions and definitions (i.e. a "sailors knot" or a knot that can be untied with one hand are not prohibited)

So...there ya go :lol:

EDIT I tried to format this in 3 columns for easier reading...but the board isn't letting me do it...sorry!

That's hilarious, McGyver! :rofl:

'Just not very helpful. Heehee

Richard

Emanate
Oct 6th 2008, 03:14 PM
Emil Schurer in his excellent work: A History of the Jewish People in the Time of Jesus Christ (Second Division Vol II Pgs 96-104) Gives a list of 39 categories of prohibited works, as well as numerous sub-divisions within each category. His sources are: Hillel, Shammi, and Maimonides.

It is my understanding that these are the same categories that are in force today within Judaism (with modifications necessary for the modern era: e.g. the prohibition against driving a car on the Sabbath)

They are:
1. Sowing 14. Beating 27. Skinning
2. Plowing 15. Dying 28. Salting
3. Reaping 16. Spinning (wool) 29. Preparing (skin)
4. Binding Sheaves 17. Warping (wool) 30. Scraping (hair)
5. Threshing 18. Making 2 cords 31. Cutting it up
6. Winnowing 19. Weaving 2 threads 32. Writing 2 letters
7. Cleansing Crops 20. Separating 2 threads 33.blotting out to
8. Grinding 21. tying a knot write 2 letters
9. Sifting 22. Untying a knot 34. Building
10. Kneading 23. Sewing 2 stitches 35. Pulling down
11. Baking 24. Tearing to sew 2 stitches
12. Shearing Wool 25. Catching a Deer 36. Putting out a fire
13. Washing 26. Killing 37. Lighting a fire
38. Beating smooth with a hammer
39. Carrying from one tenement to another

Within these categories were further sub divisions and definitions (i.e. a "sailors knot" or a knot that can be untied with one hand are not prohibited)

So...there ya go :lol:

EDIT I tried to format this in 3 columns for easier reading...but the board isn't letting me do it...sorry!


While this is true in Judaism, the only biblical prohibitions I have seen are working, buying and selling, and "kindling a fire."

mcgyver
Oct 6th 2008, 03:24 PM
While this is true in Judaism, the only biblical prohibitions I have seen are working, buying and selling, and "kindling a fire."

Absolutely true!!! :)

I find it fascinating that the Rabbis tried to define "work", as well as HOW they defined it :P

Emanate
Oct 6th 2008, 03:49 PM
Absolutely true!!! :)

I find it fascinating that the Rabbis tried to define "work", as well as HOW they defined it :P


Yes, they have surely enacted so many things that it verges on comedic, if it were not so true. In the Talmud there are even laws that define not only when, but how one is to "relieve" oneself of waste.

keck553
Oct 6th 2008, 04:27 PM
Actually it is hillarious (but sad) reading what ALL humans do with God's word, especially with thier transformations of men's traditions into 'holy' days, such as Sunday, Christmas and Easter.

If rabbinical Judaism infused tradtions which God defines as tamei then Christianity had replaced God's calendar with the same tamei traditions.

Not to say all men's traditions from either are inherently bad, They're just not holy and should be recognized as such.

For me, Shabbat is an incredible gift when I have the freedom to cease from common human labor and engage the Holy Spirit fully without distraction to meditate on His word, worship Him and pray for others. To read and follow a list of rabbinical rules is ridiculous. Everyone knows what "cease your labor" means. All the rabbi's did was make a list so they could figure out work-arounds. If there is any confusion about this, just go to a synagogue in New York and watch a congregant come out and have a 'goy' light thier cigarette for them.

Shabbat is a time when I can put to rest the outer flesh and allow my inner spirit, mind and heart to fully engage with my Creator. He is the LORD of Shabbat, so I abide in Him.

What awesome blessings He has given me on His Shabbats.

Ethnikos
Oct 6th 2008, 04:50 PM
Yisrayl says that if you don't keep the 7th day sabbath..as COMMANDED......then you have the mark of the beast on you.:dunno:does anyone here keep the 7th day sabath???
Yisrayl and people like him follow a pattern of preaching 90% truth to hide their own teaching among it and make it sound reasonable.
You find the same thing in politics. Politicians use 90% of their time pointing out a problem and then the other part is their solution but the truth of the problem does not make their solution right.
The failure of Yisrayl should not be used as a reason to discard whatever he said that was true.
A future Sunday Law would be a possibility and should be of concern to everyone and would be an obvious sign of the take-over of religious institutions by evil forces.
People are set up in order to fall, on purpose, to discredit the truth by discrediting the messenger. If they can make people associate the message of future loss of religious rights with a person and them allow him to be humiliated, it inoculates the population from acting when it really happens.

Ethnikos
Oct 6th 2008, 05:03 PM
...just go to a synagogue in New York and watch a congregant come out and have a 'goy' light thier cigarette for them.
Back when I used to regularly visit the local temple, there was a man there of retirement age who dressed in a plaid shirt and never set foot in the main sanctuary. He would set the table in the foyer area and do menial tasks like moving chairs. I suspected he was a goy but never asked him about it. To me, the man was probably getting paid and it was a supplement to his income and I would not fault him. But the idea of having other people who are not Jews doing things you are not allowed to do, is not really according to law, in my opinion.
I was raised in a Sabbath Keeping church and the whole judging thing to me is not called for. The main thing is to pay respect to God and not to analyze how other people go about the day. But, within official doings of the church itself, in the services and things connected to it, there should be a close examination, by the board or governing body.

keck553
Oct 6th 2008, 06:05 PM
Back when I used to regularly visit the local temple, there was a man there of retirement age who dressed in a plaid shirt and never set foot in the main sanctuary. He would set the table in the foyer area and do menial tasks like moving chairs. I suspected he was a goy but never asked him about it. To me, the man was probably getting paid and it was a supplement to his income and I would not fault him. But the idea of having other people who are not Jews doing things you are not allowed to do, is not really according to law, in my opinion.
I was raised in a Sabbath Keeping church and the whole judging thing to me is not called for. The main thing is to pay respect to God and not to analyze how other people go about the day. But, within official doings of the church itself, in the services and things connected to it, there should be a close examination, by the board or governing body.

Well that's the crux of the matter. What is God's view of Shabbat? He exhorted the day to be a day to focus on Him and His creation. Of course the 'don't work' command didn't seem to stop the Levite Priests from their temple duties, which certainly included work, lighting fires and cooking in service to God. Now we are all priests, and the tabernacle is within us in Yeshua, so any 'work' that is in service to Him, and I would think that covers moving chairs in a synagogue - we are innocent as He laid out in Matthew 12.

Dani H
Oct 6th 2008, 06:13 PM
God introduced the Sabbath (along with all of His other laws) as a physical and toucheable and relateable way to present a spiritual reality.

As a believer, we are now "in Christ" ... who is the essence of spiritual reality.

The whole Gospel of Jesus Christ is all-encompassing and removes outward requirements of the Law as we enter into the spirituality of it, as we now live in Him. The Sabbath is a law that was fulfilled in Christ, and we can now live in the truth of it and the inward reality of it, which means to cease from our own works and enter into God's rest. This is meant to be lived 24/7, not one day a week.

Hebrews 3:
10 Therefore I was angry with that generation,
And said, ‘They always go astray in their heart,
And they have not known My ways.’
11 So I swore in My wrath,

‘ They shall not enter My rest.’”

12 Beware, brethren, lest there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief in departing from the living God;

Hebrews 3:18
And to whom did He swear that they would not enter His rest, but to those who did not obey?

Hebrews 4:
2 For indeed the gospel was preached to us as well as to them; but the word which they heard did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in those who heard. 3 For we who have believed do enter that rest, as He has said:

“ So I swore in My wrath,

‘ They shall not enter My rest,’”
although the works were finished from the foundation of the world. 4 For He has spoken in a certain place of the seventh day in this way: “And God rested on the seventh day from all His works”;

Hebrews 4:10
For he who has entered His rest has himself also ceased from his works as God did from His. Let us therefore be diligent to enter that rest, lest anyone fall according to the same example of disobedience.

So you can see that keeping the Sabbath has nothing to do with an outward physical anything, or keeping of a day, but instead an inward act of obedience and entering into the rest from our own works and instead walking in the reality of living in Christ, and doing what He requires, every day, every week, every month, and every year. If you understand the spiritual reality of that, and live in it, then outward adherence becomes unnecessary, and will instead turn into a burden. Yet Jesus' yoke is easy, and His burden is light, because He actually carries it for us as we abide in Him. So you can see that the Sabbath rest is to be a lifestyle. Our flesh always wants to keep outward rules. Yet our spirits understand the reality of God, and how to just connect with and abide in Him, always. You can then keep any day that you wish, if that is your heart's desire and if that is what you feel God is leading you to do. Because Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath. Do you see how liberating this is? Praise His holy name!

keck553
Oct 6th 2008, 06:37 PM
The Word of God says Yeshua is the LORD of Shabbat. It doesn't say He changed His mind about a commandment He wrote.

uric3
Oct 6th 2008, 07:30 PM
I think the reason a lot of Christians today don't keep the Sabbath is because its no longer commanded in the NT. We are no longer under OT law and several passages show the 10 commandments are done away with.

If we read in 2nd Cor 3:7-11 it states

" 7But 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: 8How shall not the ministration of the spirit be rather glorious? 9For if the ministration of condemnation be glory, much more doth the ministration of righteousness exceed in glory. 10For even that which was made glorious had no glory in this respect, by reason of the glory that excelleth.11For if that which is done away was glorious, much more that which remaineth is glorious."

The only thing I know of in all my studies that was written and engraven in stone is the 10 commandments... any other ideas?

Also we see Gal 5:1-5 that if anyone is going to be justified by the law that they should be a debtor the the whole law and Christ is of no affect.

Lastly if you look at Col 2:14-17 it states

"14Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross; 15And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it. 16Let 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: 17Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ."

We see there that Christ Nailed the OT to the cross and that we should let no man judge us of Sabbath Days, new moons, etc..

Anywho thats a brief overview of why I think Christians don't keep it any more... I could go into more detail however due to sake of time those should suffice... I'll check back later to post more or answer any questions concerning my post.

keck553
Oct 6th 2008, 07:35 PM
We are no longer under OT law and several passages show the 10 commandments are done away with.




I see. Do you think that why the 10 commandments are being removed from American public institutions like courts and such? Because they are done away with?

threebigrocks
Oct 6th 2008, 07:36 PM
Shabbat is a time when I can put to rest the outer flesh and allow my inner spirit, mind and heart to fully engage with my Creator. He is the LORD of Shabbat, so I abide in Him.

What awesome blessings He has given me on His Shabbats.

Goodness - isn't our flesh to die daily? We are to perpetually abide in Him, every moment of every day. Why look forward to it when we have that daily, every breathe we take?

uric3
Oct 6th 2008, 07:42 PM
I see. Do you think that why the 10 commandments are being removed from American public institutions like courts and such? Because they are done away with?

No I don't think thats the reason its being removed from American institutions... its mostly being removed from those areas because non-believers and atheist state that it goes against their rights. As non-believers they feel they have the right to go to a public place without seeing religious emblems.

Thus with a separation of church and state those public places are removing it to uphold the rights of unbelievers.

keck553
Oct 6th 2008, 07:43 PM
I agree. But if they are "done away with", why the objection? They are just something God wrote for Jews, right?

uric3
Oct 6th 2008, 08:02 PM
True however these are atheist who want nothing to do with God or any emblems that represent any kind of faith...

This same Atheist have even went to court in the US trying to get "In God we Trust" removed off of our currency... so its no surprise they wanted it removed in the courts and schools as well...

keck553
Oct 6th 2008, 08:09 PM
Can you agree with this?

Jer 31:33 (31:32) "For this is the covenant I will make with the house of Isra'el after those days," says Adonai: "I will put my Torah within them and write it on their hearts; I will be their God, and they will be my people.

uric3
Oct 6th 2008, 08:30 PM
Are you asking me if I agree with that passage? I'm a little confused as to what your asking...

I'll state that I believe every thing recorded in the Bible is true...

However I do think the commands and laws in the OT are no longer bound...

I don't think I'm sinning if i eat pork or various other meats that was condemned in the OT...

Anyway once I have a better understanding of what your asking I'll answer properly.

keck553
Oct 6th 2008, 09:00 PM
Are you asking me if I agree with that passage? I'm a little confused as to what your asking...

I'll state that I believe every thing recorded in the Bible is true...

However I do think the commands and laws in the OT are no longer bound...

I don't think I'm sinning if i eat pork or various other meats that was condemned in the OT...

Anyway once I have a better understanding of what your asking I'll answer properly.

I think we are on the same page, but missing each other in human communications. Superficailly, we don't have to be 'bound', because we are bound to Messiah. If we are truely surrenedered to Him, then we trust His words are wisdom for us that are beyond the pale of our understanding, and we do them out of blind trust in our Master. So if we are one with Messiah, those ordinances and standards are written on our hearts, and obeying the 10 commandments are the fruit of our sanctification and unty with Messiah.

No, I don't think you sin by eating ham. Even though science is beginning to prove that eating animals God designed to clean the earth are not healthy. I just simply trust what God says over what man says. It has nothing to do with sin or righteousness or any of that judgment dogma. I simply trust what God says. That's between me and God, and let no man come in between.

Unless of course I commit a sin or offense, then I praise God for being held accountable. And believe me, I do get held accountable, even on this forum, by people who love God and practice the love of our Messiah in dealing with me.

Ethnikos
Oct 6th 2008, 09:13 PM
I think the reason a lot of Christians today don't keep the Sabbath is because its no longer commanded in the NT. We are no longer under OT law and several passages show the 10 commandments are done away with.
If we read in 2nd Cor 3:7-11 it states
Paul is talking about the face of Moses being too bright to look at and it just so happens he was carrying the tablets when that happened. What kills is the letter and the Spirit gives life. He could have been talking about any part of the Law or the Law as a whole but was specific, to be in accordance with the story.

Richard H
Oct 6th 2008, 09:45 PM
Paul is talking about the face of Moses being too bright to look at and it just so happens he was carrying the tablets when that happened. What kills is the letter and the Spirit gives life. He could have been talking about any part of the Law or the Law as a whole but was specific, to be in accordance with the story.

Amen!!!
It is the Spirit who gives life. Not the letter.

In fact, anyone seeking to toss out the Commandments of God should read in the Book of Revelation (the fulfilment yet to come):
Rev 14:12 Here is a call for the endurance of the saints, those who keep the commandments of God and their faith in Jesus.

One should realize that we are actually called to a higher standard. Read Matthew 5:17-48


Seriously. Read it.

You might be inclined to agree with Ethnikos.
You might be less inclined to seek to get rid of God's commandments - in favor of human "wisdom".

...Not the letter. The Spirit gives life.

Richard

keck553
Oct 6th 2008, 09:48 PM
Amen!!!
It is the Spirit who gives life. Not the letter.

In fact, anyone seeking to toss out the Commandments of God should read in the Book of Revelation (the fulfilment yet to come):
Rev 14:12 Here is a call for the endurance of the saints, those who keep the commandments of God and their faith in Jesus.

One should realize that we are actually called to a higher standard. Read Matthew 5:17-48


Seriously. Read it.

You might be inclined to agree with Ethnikos.
You might be less inclined to seek to get rid of God's commandments - in favor of human "wisdom".

...Not the letter. The Spirit gives life.

Richard

I don't know how my faith in Yeshua could 'do away with' God's Word. It just doesn't make sense to me.

uric3
Oct 7th 2008, 11:51 AM
I guess I should take a moment to explain... when I say done away with... it means we don't follow it any more. We don't obey the commands of the OT... therefore we can eat various foods which where at one time forbidden, we don't have to be circumcised, we don't stone ppl any more, etc, etc...

We are now under the law of Christ, and really when you think about it most of the ten commandments are still in affect in same shape form of fashion. For example take these two passages.

John 13:34

"A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another."

Matt 5:43-45

"Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy. 44But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; 45That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust."

If we truly love one another and love our enemies we aren't going to Kill, Steal, Covet, Bear false witness, etc...

Obviously if we are Christians we aren't going to worship any other Gods, or use his name in vain, etc...

So that takes care of 9 of the 10 commandments right there pretty much... the only one left would be the sabbath day and since Col 2 states that it was blotted out and not to let any man judge you of it... I would think you couldn't tell someone they was sinning if they mowed their law or something of that sort on the sabbath... granted it may bother your conscience if so don't do it... however its not binding any more so therefore to the Christian mowing his law it isn't sin.

Because the OT is "done away" (means we don't follow its commands any longer) does that mean its useless and we should never use it... God Forbid!!!

It has its purpose just look at Rom 15:4 "For whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning, that we through patience and comfort of the scriptures might have hope."

We can learn a lot for reading and studying the OT scriptures, for example without them if I read Hebrews 11 I would be wondering who those people who are noted for their faith where... without the OT I would have no proof that Jesus was the messiah that was prophesied that would come according to the OT.

We see in Gal 3:24-25 that the OT was our schoolmaster "Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. 25But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster."

We see that the OT as stated was our schoolmaster bring us up to Christ, but now we are no longer under the Schoolmaster but under Christ...

So to sum it up... the OT still has its value and we can still study and learn from it... however its laws and commands was for the testament at that time... we are under the NT with new laws. Thus we are no longer bound by them unless something in the NT over laps it. Thus as stated before John 13:34 that one command covers a lot of them in one simple statement.

Lastly we are not to be justified by the law or say that we have to keep part of the law when in fact we don't... it can be very dangerous to our Salvation.

Just look when the Jews tried to bind that the Gentiles has to be circumcised(an OT command) it was quickly shot down and stated in Acts 15 when it was brought up. Whole chapter is a good ready but I'll just post verse 24 "Forasmuch as we have heard, that certain which went out from us have troubled you with words, subverting your souls, saying, Ye must be circumcised, and keep the law: to whom we gave no such commandment:"

We can see they didn't have to be circumcised or keep the law... also read Gal 5:1-5 notice in verse 3 its stated that if you do one part of the law such as circumcision then you a debtor to do the whole law... thus build an alter and offer up a calf, etc...

So is the OT "Done away" yes, however it has its place as a wonderful study tool and it was written for our learning. However we don't obey its laws but the laws of Christ.

Richard H
Oct 7th 2008, 01:21 PM
I guess I should take a moment to explain...

<snip>
Hi Uric,
You've got it. :)
My only thing about Sabbath - which other then (the RCC) is the only controversial command - is that man (specifically a Roman emperer and the RCC) changed the selection of the day and not GOD.
('But that's another thread... Oh wait! That's THIS thread. J )

God’s Commandments haven’t changed, only the How-To of keeping them.
So the OT Levitical practices will not gain us righteousness. Only Christ, Jesus.

We can however, learn deeper insight into God’s ways by looking at OT practices, but the rabbinical talmud is of no value at all.

Richard

BTW: The Talmud is not in your Bible, so don’t be concerned. Heehee

uric3
Oct 7th 2008, 01:40 PM
Hi Uric,
You've got it. :)
My only thing about Sabbath - which other then (the RCC) is the only controversial command - is that man (specifically a Roman emperer and the RCC) changed the selection of the day and not GOD.
('But that's another thread... Oh wait! That's THIS thread. J )

God’s Commandments haven’t changed, only the How-To of keeping them.
So the OT Levitical practices will not gain us righteousness. Only Christ, Jesus.

We can however, learn deeper insight into God’s ways by looking at OT practices, but the rabbinical talmud is of no value at all.

Richard

BTW: The Talmud is not in your Bible, so don’t be concerned. Heehee

Sorry for all the other commands and examples I was just trying to get my point across... as to why I was saying the Sabbath was no longer binding due to the OT being "done away" with... meaning we no longer are under its commands and laws but we are now under the laws and commands of Christ.

Agreed there are many today who claim you have to keep the Sabbath but state that the Sabbath is Sunday in which we have no biblical example or command to keep it or that it changed days. The sabbath has always been Saturday or the last day of the week... ask any practicing Jew.

Richard H
Oct 7th 2008, 01:56 PM
Sorry for all the other commands and examples I was just trying to get my point across... as to why I was saying the Sabbath was no longer binding due to the OT being "done away" with... meaning we no longer are under its commands and laws but we are now under the laws and commands of Christ.

Agreed there are many today who claim you have to keep the Sabbath but state that the Sabbath is Sunday in which we have no biblical example or command to keep it or that it changed days. The sabbath has always been Saturday or the last day of the week... ask any practicing Jew.
No need for apology, I’m glad you clarified what you meant, though. Thanks. J

Richard
BTW: I use doors, because I don't like windows. :rolleyes:

keck553
Oct 7th 2008, 03:05 PM
. The sabbath has always been Saturday or the last day of the week... ask any practicing Jew.

No need to ask an observent Jew when God clearly defines it. :)

Firstfruits
Oct 7th 2008, 03:28 PM
Can you agree with this?

Jer 31:33(31:32) "For this is the covenant I will make with the house of Isra'el after those days," says Adonai: "I will put my Torah within them and write it on their hearts; I will be their God, and they will be my people.


The covenant you speak of was already in their hearts according to the following. so which covenant is God speaking of in the scripture you have given?

Is 51:7 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=23&CHAP=51&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=7) Hearken unto me, ye that know righteousness, the people in whose heart is my law; fear ye not the reproach of men, neither be ye afraid of their revilings.

Ps 119:11 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=19&CHAP=119&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=11) Thy word have I hid in mine heart, that I might not sin against thee.

Why would God put the same covenant/law into their hearts which they have broken?

Heb 8:9 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=58&CHAP=8&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=9) Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued Not in my covenant, and I regarded them Not, saith the Lord.

Firstfruits

keck553
Oct 7th 2008, 03:45 PM
For the same reason He put His Torah on our hearts dispite our lawlessness and rebellion. That's be beauty of the gift.

uric3
Oct 7th 2008, 03:47 PM
No need to ask an observent Jew when God clearly defines it. :)

Very true... but you'd be surprised how many people who claim to be Christians think the Sabbath has always been on Sunday... When in fact it has always been Saturday and as stated before it never moved, and as we are under the NT we are no longer bound by it... so if I mow my lawn on Saturday its not a sin...

Firstfruits
Oct 7th 2008, 04:03 PM
For the same reason He put His Torah on our hearts dispite our lawlessness and rebellion. That's be beauty of the gift.
Is the Torah not the same law that was already in their hearts, what therefore has changed?

Heb 8:9 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=58&CHAP=8&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=9) Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued Not in my covenant, and I regarded them Not, saith the Lord.

It is understood that before Christ came that rightreousness was by the law, that was in their hearts.

How does the following apply?

Rom 10:4 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=45&CHAP=10&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=4) For Christ is the end of the law For righteousness to every one that believeth.

Is it the same?

Firstfruits

Emanate
Oct 7th 2008, 04:40 PM
Very true... but you'd be surprised how many people who claim to be Christians think the Sabbath has always been on Sunday... When in fact it has always been Saturday and as stated before it never moved, and as we are under the NT we are no longer bound by it... so if I mow my lawn on Saturday its not a sin...


of course not, sin is temporal. it depends on culture as to what defines sin. right? or is sin transgression of the law?

keck553
Oct 7th 2008, 04:53 PM
Is the Torah not the same law that was already in their hearts, what therefore has changed?

Heb 8:9 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=58&CHAP=8&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=9) Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued Not in my covenant, and I regarded them Not, saith the Lord.

It is understood that before Christ came that rightreousness was by the law, that was in their hearts.

How does the following apply?

Rom 10:4 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=45&CHAP=10&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=4) For Christ is the end of the law For righteousness to every one that believeth.

Is it the same?

Firstfruits

Yep. It's in us, not outside of us.

uric3
Oct 7th 2008, 05:08 PM
of course not, sin is temporal. it depends on culture as to what defines sin. right? or is sin transgression of the law?

You bring up an interesting point, actually sin is anything that violates Gods law, or your conscience, as well as laws of the land as long as they don't interfere with Gods law.

Read Rom 14:20-23

Emanate
Oct 7th 2008, 06:09 PM
You bring up an interesting point, actually sin is anything that violates Gods law, or your conscience, as well as laws of the land as long as they don't interfere with Gods law.

Read Rom 14:20-23


I will agree with that. I will also agree with YHWH and David who called the law and Sabbath a "delight."

Firstfruits
Oct 7th 2008, 06:16 PM
Yep. It's in us, not outside of us.

What therefore is the difference between the righteousness of the law and the righteousness of the Gospel?

Firstfruits

keck553
Oct 7th 2008, 06:21 PM
You're asking about things that are God-breathed. What do you think?

Firstfruits
Oct 7th 2008, 06:34 PM
You're asking about things that are God-breathed. What do you think?

I am asking because you believe that the law of righteousness that God put in the hearts of Israel is the same as the one he promised to put into their hearts, so what is the difference between the righteousness of the law and the righteousness of the Gospel?

Firstfruits

keck553
Oct 7th 2008, 06:35 PM
I believe I already answered that.

Firstfruits
Oct 7th 2008, 06:40 PM
I believe I already answered that.

If the following is your answer it does not answer what the differences between the righteousness of the law and the righteousness of the Gospel, only that they are given by God.

Firstfruits

keck553
Oct 7th 2008, 06:46 PM
I think the fact that God gave it speaks for itself. Anyway, I think in other threads it has been shown the Gospel isn't 'new.' Certainly God knew it. Even Abraham knew that. Am I wrong?

uric3
Oct 7th 2008, 06:59 PM
I will agree with that. I will also agree with YHWH and David who called the law and Sabbath a "delight."

I agree with that as well... I guess my main point is that the sabbath is no longer binding... so if someone mows their lawn, or does something on the sabbath and it doesn't violate their conscience then it isn't sin.

However if you choose to keep it then it is a delight... we can't tell others that they have to keep it or its a sin... kind of like those Jews who told the Gentiles they would need to keep the law to be saved when in fact they didn't. Acts 15

keck553
Oct 7th 2008, 07:07 PM
I bind my love to Yeshua, my Jewish Messiah. I judge no one's heart.

Firstfruits
Oct 7th 2008, 07:10 PM
I think the fact that God gave it speaks for itself. Anyway, I think in other threads it has been shown the Gospel isn't 'new.' Certainly God knew it. Even Abraham knew that. Am I wrong?

By keeping the law you cannot attain the righteousness of God. By following the Gospel we attain the righteousness of God. That however is not the only difference. So although they are both of God only one gets us the the righteousness of God.

Firstfruits

keck553
Oct 7th 2008, 07:37 PM
I already have attained the righteousness of God in Yeshua HaMachiach, long, long, long ago. :) My obedience is fruit of faith and trust, not some labor to gain something.

Emanate
Oct 7th 2008, 07:43 PM
By keeping the law you cannot attain the righteousness of God. By following the Gospel we attain the righteousness of God. That however is not the only difference. So although they are both of God only one gets us the the righteousness of God.

Firstfruits


Incorrect, we are made righteous by the death burial and resurrection of Messiah Y'shua, not by "following the gospel"

Emanate
Oct 7th 2008, 07:47 PM
I agree with that as well... I guess my main point is that the sabbath is no longer binding... so if someone mows their lawn, or does something on the sabbath and it doesn't violate their conscience then it isn't sin.

However if you choose to keep it then it is a delight... we can't tell others that they have to keep it or its a sin... kind of like those Jews who told the Gentiles they would need to keep the law to be saved when in fact they didn't. Acts 15


I dont see any difference in telling someone they should or they shouldn't. Fact of the matter is, the NT is quite clear that believers, jew and gentile, were observing Sabbath (Acts 15). Not as a matter of Salvation, but one of personal obedience and blessing.

Richard H
Oct 7th 2008, 08:27 PM
By keeping the law you cannot attain the righteousness of God. By following the Gospel we attain the righteousness of God. That however is not the only difference. So although they are both of God only one gets us the the righteousness of God.

Firstfruits
True.
But must everything be of reward? We have our reward, Christ.

By choosing to observe the Sabbath I know I gain no additional righteousness on top of His.
Still, I choose to keep the 7th day, because I believe that it pleases HIM and that makes me happy too. :spin:

Richard

Richard H
Oct 7th 2008, 08:31 PM
... we are made righteous by the death burial and resurrection of Messiah Y'shua, not by "following the gospel"

er... that's what I meant to say: "true" to. Heehee

But I knew what First Fruits meant.

threebigrocks
Oct 8th 2008, 01:41 AM
I'm just gonna toss this out.

We now have absolutely no righteousness of our own. We are covered, through faith, by Christ's righteousness. We do not gain our own righteousness, that which we own, until we are raised up at the time of judgment. Right now all things from and through Christ.

Firstfruits
Oct 8th 2008, 07:53 AM
I'm just gonna toss this out.

We now have absolutely no righteousness of our own. We are covered, through faith, by Christ's righteousness. We do not gain our own righteousness, that which we own, until we are raised up at the time of judgment. Right now all things from and through Christ.

I believe that is what Paul was saying in the following scripture.

Phil 3:9 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=50&CHAP=3&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=9) And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith:

Firstfruits

Ethnikos
Oct 8th 2008, 08:46 AM
not having mine own righteousness,

Paul was talking about things that come in an earthly way, that can be discarded in exchange for something infinitely better, that comes from God.

Firstfruits
Oct 8th 2008, 11:29 AM
Paul was talking about things that come in an earthly way, that can be discarded in exchange for something infinitely better, that comes from God.

According to the following Paul was speaking about the righteousness of the law and the righteousness God.

Phil 3:9 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=50&CHAP=3&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=9) And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith:

Firstfruits

Emanate
Oct 8th 2008, 12:34 PM
According to the following Paul was speaking about the righteousness of the law and the righteousness God.

Phil 3:9 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=50&CHAP=3&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=9) And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith:

Firstfruits


Keep in mind, as many have said previously, the righteousness of the law that Paul speaks of is a man made set of rules based loosely on Torah, not the Torah itself. Man has likewise taken the NT and made rulings to attain righteousness, forgetting it is by Messiah alone that we are made righteous.

Firstfruits
Oct 8th 2008, 12:55 PM
Keep in mind, as many have said previously, the righteousness of the law that Paul speaks of is a man made set of rules based loosely on Torah, not the Torah itself. Man has likewise taken the NT and made rulings to attain righteousness, forgetting it is by Messiah alone that we are made righteous.

What then does Paul mean in the following regarding righteousness by the law?

Rom 10:4 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=45&CHAP=10&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=4) For Christ is the end of the law For righteousness to every one that believeth.

Does that mean that even if we kept the law 100% we cannot attain righteousness?

Firstfruits

mcgyver
Oct 8th 2008, 01:05 PM
Keep in mind, as many have said previously, the righteousness of the law that Paul speaks of is a man made set of rules based loosely on Torah, not the Torah itself. Man has likewise taken the NT and made rulings to attain righteousness, forgetting it is by Messiah alone that we are made righteous.

I would respectfully disagree with your assertion here. Paul (being a trained Rabbinical scholar); when he speaks of the law is speaking of the whole body of the law to include the Torah.

This may be seen in the references he makes to specific laws all through his letters.

As a representative example, Paul writes (reference being freed from the law) in Romans 7:

"But now we have been delivered from the law, having died to what we were held by, so that we should serve in the newness of the Spirit and not in the oldness of the letter." (vs 6 NKJV)

and then to clarify what he means by the law (as well as the purpose of the law) he writes:

"What shall we say then? Is the law sin? Certainly not! On the contrary, I would not have known sin except through the law. For I would not have known covetousness unless the law had said, “You shall not covet.”

There are many other examples given by which Paul establishes that the law of which he speaks is the entire body of ordinances and commandments (I just don't have time to dig them all up right now)..."the old covenant" of law...which has been replaced by the "new covenant" of Grace sealed by the blood of Christ.

Emanate
Oct 8th 2008, 01:08 PM
I would respectfully disagree with your assertion here. Paul (being a trained Rabbinical scholar); when he speaks of the law is speaking of the whole body of the law to include the Torah.

This may be seen in the references he makes to specific laws all through his letters.

As a representative example, Paul writes (reference being freed from the law) in Romans 7:

"But now we have been delivered from the law, having died to what we were held by, so that we should serve in the newness of the Spirit and not in the oldness of the letter." (vs 6 NKJV)

and then to clarify what he means by the law (as well as the purpose of the law) he writes:

"What shall we say then? Is the law sin? Certainly not! On the contrary, I would not have known sin except through the law. For I would not have known covetousness unless the law had said, “You shall not covet.”

There are many other examples given by which Paul establishes that the law of which he speaks is the entire body of ordinances and commandments (I just don't have time to dig them all up right now)..."the old covenant" of law...which has been replaced by the "new covenant" of Grace sealed by the blood of Christ.


The New Covenant does not replace the Old covenant, it simply writes the "old" Covenant on our heart. In Judaism "law" rarely refers to Torah, it refers to Rabbinic Rulings in regard to Torah.

mcgyver
Oct 8th 2008, 01:23 PM
The New Covenant does not replace the Old covenant, it simply writes the "old" Covenant on our heart. In Judaism "law" rarely refers to Torah, it refers to Rabbinic Rulings in regard to Torah.

In reference to "law" in Judaism, although that certainly is the case today; from the studies I have done in regard to 1st century culture (and I freely admit that I don't know it all)...From what I have gathered, references to "The law of Moses", "The law of God", and "The law" all refer to the entire law; to include of course the Rabbinic rulings you mentioned earlier.

As far as the New Covenant...is it not written in Hebrews 8 (summation in verse 13 following):

In that He says, “A new covenant, ” He has made the first obsolete. Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.

Therefore, IMO the Old Covenant of law has been superseded (replaced) by the New Covenant of Grace.

Emanate
Oct 8th 2008, 01:25 PM
In reference to "law" in Judaism, although that certainly is the case today; from the studies I have done in regard to 1st century culture (and I freely admit that I don't know it all)...From what I have gathered, references to "The law of Moses", "The law of God", and "The law" all refer to the entire law; to include of course the Rabbinic rulings you mentioned earlier.

As far as the New Covenant...is it not written in Hebrews 8 (summation in verse 13 following):

In that He says, “A new covenant, ” He has made the first obsolete. Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.

Therefore, IMO the Old Covenant of law has been superseded (replaced) by the New Covenant of Grace.

That is where we differ then. I choose the believe that when God says forever, he means it. Not to mention the blessing found in the recognition of things like Sabbath. As the prophets prophesied regarding me, I call Sabbath a delight.

valleybldr
Oct 8th 2008, 01:30 PM
Keep in mind, as many have said previously, the righteousness of the law that Paul speaks of is a man made set of rules based loosely on Torah, not the Torah itself. Maybe, but to transgress in one (biblical) "law" would require a sacrifice. Paul keeps making the point that human effort (to any set of laws) does not gain us some level of "righteousness' that requires God to raise us from the dead and give us the gift of eternal life. Why is this so hard to understand? It in no way means that we don't live obedient lives but rather it puts the focus on our Messiah's redemptive work.

todd

Firstfruits
Oct 8th 2008, 01:55 PM
The New Covenant does not replace the Old covenant, it simply writes the "old" Covenant on our heart. In Judaism "law" rarely refers to Torah, it refers to Rabbinic Rulings in regard to Torah.

Gods righteousness which was by the law is now attained by faith in Christ. Jesus is Gods righteousness. It is Gods righteous that we have in our hearts.

Ps 119:142 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=19&CHAP=119&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=142) Thy righteousness is an everlasting righteousness, and thy law is the truth.

If it was the same law then why is it no longer possible to attain righteousness by keeping Gods holy law as it was before Christ came?

Firstfruits

Emanate
Oct 8th 2008, 02:15 PM
Gods righteousness which was by the law is now attained by faith in Christs. Jesus is Gods righteousness. It is Gods righteous that we have in our hearts.

Ps 119:142 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=19&CHAP=119&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=142) Thy righteousness is an everlasting righteousness, and thy law is the truth.

If it was the same law then why is it no longer possible to attain righteousness by keeping Gods holy law as it was before Christ came?

Firstfruits

I do not know if you are sidestepping me or just not understanding me. There was no righteousness in Torah, not ever. Torah was given as the model for those living in God's Righteousness as a lifestyle. Paul was "righteous as to the law" because it was basd on man made views about said Torah. If there righteousness based on keeping commands, then there would be no need for Messiah, nor would there have been a sacrifical system established in Torah.

mcgyver
Oct 8th 2008, 02:21 PM
That is where we differ then. I choose the believe that when God says forever, he means it. Not to mention the blessing found in the recognition of things like Sabbath. As the prophets prophesied regarding me, I call Sabbath a delight.

This is where the "agree to disagree" thing comes in :)

If you wish to keep the Sabbath for example...I have not a problem in the world with it! I am glad that you find it such a blessing. :hug:

I would leave you with something to ponder though, just something to think about.

Firstfruits has under his/her (sorry FF, I don't know which it is :P) avatar the moniker: "Neither Jew nor Gentile"...and this reflects a profound theological truth.

We are not Jews under the covenant of the Law (for that in fact is the Mosaic covenant...that the Jews are a people set apart under the law of God) therefore the "forever" you mentioned in this particular case does not apply to us...but rather to His people Israel.

We are not Gentiles, apart from the mercies of God...

We are Christians, partakers of the new and better covenant given to us through Jesus Christ. In this we are a unique and special people as is written in 1 Peter 2:9...Neither Jew nor Gentile ;)

Firstfruits
Oct 8th 2008, 02:26 PM
I do not know if you are sidestepping me or just not understanding me. There was no righteousness in Torah, not ever. Torah was given as the model for those living in God's Righteousness as a lifestyle. Paul was "righteous as to the law" because it was basd on man made views about said Torah. If there righteousness based on keeping commands, then there would be no need for Messiah, nor would there have been a sacrifical system established in Torah.

If there was no righteousness in doing what God had commanded in the law, why then did it end?

Rom 10:4 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=45&CHAP=10&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=4) For Christ is the end of the law For righteousness to every one that believeth.

Or are you saying that it is the law itself that has ended, if there was no righteousness to end?

Firstfruits

Emanate
Oct 8th 2008, 02:30 PM
This is where the "agree to disagree" thing comes in :)

If you wish to keep the Sabbath for example...I have not a problem in the world with it! I am glad that you find it such a blessing. :hug:

I would leave you with something to ponder though, just something to think about.

Firstfruits has under his/her (sorry FF, I don't know which it is :P) avatar the moniker: "Neither Jew nor Gentile"...and this reflects a profound theological truth.

We are not Jews under the covenant of the Law (for that in fact is the Mosaic covenant...that the Jews are a people set apart under the law of God) therefore the "forever" you mentioned in this particular case does not apply to us...but rather to His people Israel.

We are not Gentiles, apart from the mercies of God...

We are Christians, partakers of the new and better covenant given to us through Jesus Christ. In this we are a unique and special people as is written in 1 Peter 2:9...Neither Jew nor Gentile ;)


I would just add that the Torah was given not only to Judah, but all of Israel and the strangers who join themselves to her. The Torah and the Prophets speak very distinctly about Strangers becoming part of the covenant. Romans 11 speak of the grafting in to a certain tree. Regarding Sabbath:

Isaiah 56:5-7

5 Even unto them will I give in mine house and within my walls a place and a name better than of sons and of daughters: I will give them an everlasting name, that shall not be cut off.
6 Also the sons of the stranger, that join themselves to the LORD, to serve him, and to love the name of the LORD, to be his servants, every one that keepeth the sabbath from polluting it, and taketh hold of my covenant;
7 Even them will I bring to my holy mountain, and make them joyful in my house of prayer: their burnt offerings and their sacrifices shall be accepted upon mine altar; for mine house shall be called an house of prayer for all people.

mcgyver
Oct 8th 2008, 03:10 PM
I would just add that the Torah was given not only to Judah, but all of Israel and the strangers who join themselves to her. The Torah and the Prophets speak very distinctly about Strangers becoming part of the covenant. Romans 11 speak of the grafting in to a certain tree. Regarding Sabbath:

Isaiah 56:5-7

5 Even unto them will I give in mine house and within my walls a place and a name better than of sons and of daughters: I will give them an everlasting name, that shall not be cut off.
6 Also the sons of the stranger, that join themselves to the LORD, to serve him, and to love the name of the LORD, to be his servants, every one that keepeth the sabbath from polluting it, and taketh hold of my covenant;
7 Even them will I bring to my holy mountain, and make them joyful in my house of prayer: their burnt offerings and their sacrifices shall be accepted upon mine altar; for mine house shall be called an house of prayer for all people.

True. However this is where we IMO must be circumspect in our understanding and application of what is written, and use the entire counsel of God in trying to discern the meaning.

That we were grafted in "as a wild vine" to Israel is certainly true...for it was to Abraham that the promise of blessing through Messiah was given.

If we were brought into all the covenants (specifically the law as written in the Torah), then we run into a severe problem...Paul must have been very confused when he wrote condemning those who were known as Judaizers.

The Judaizers were teaching that to be a Christian, one must first become a Jew; being obedient to all the law...to include circumcision and keeping of the Sabbath...that's history.

Paul went as far as declaring those who taught such things "anathema". In fact the book of Galatians has been referred to as "a sword wielded in the hand of a master swordsman" as Paul decries such teaching...and this is not the only Epistle in which he challenges such teaching as heretical.

In Isaiah, if this passage refers to Christians and not to those gentiles who converted to Judaism...once again we have a conundrum, a problem that can only be solved if we declare that Paul is wrong IMO...but yet we are told (and believe) that Paul's words were also "theopneustos"...therefore we must look to our understanding as being possibly flawed, as the word of God is inerrant (all truth with no mixture of error). There really can be no other way. :)

Richard H
Oct 8th 2008, 03:25 PM
If there was no righteousness in doing what God had commanded in the law, why then did it end?

Rom 10:4 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=45&CHAP=10&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=4) For Christ is the end of the law For righteousness to every one that believeth.

Or are you saying that it is the law itself that has ended, if there was no righteousness to end?

Firstfruits
Jesus said the law did not end.
"Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill.
"For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished.
"Whoever then annuls one of the least of these commandments, and teaches others to do the same, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever keeps and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
Mat 5:17-19


However, we now gain no righteousness by keeping the law. (do I need a Scripture?) :)

So the emphasis in your quote above should be on "For righteousness".

I still wonder why this is the only point of contention.

I know people have been observing Sunday for over 1600 years, but why are there no arguments for doing away with that pesky adultery thing? :rolleyes:

Richard

valleybldr
Oct 8th 2008, 03:32 PM
If there was no righteousness in doing what God had commanded in the law, why then did it end?

Rom 10:4 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=45&CHAP=10&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=4) For Christ is the end of the law For righteousness to every one that believeth.

Or are you saying that it is the law itself that has ended, if there was no righteousness to end?

Firstfruits Firstfruits, you need to look up everywhere the bible talks about "the end" of something. You will find it often means the end result. todd

mcgyver
Oct 8th 2008, 03:43 PM
<snip>I know people have been observing Sunday for over 1600 years, but why are there no arguments for doing away with that pesky adultery thing? :rolleyes:

Richard

'Cause then most TV shows would have to go off the air? :lol:

Richard H
Oct 8th 2008, 03:48 PM
'Cause then most TV shows would have to go off the air? :lol:

______________________________:rofl:

Firstfruits
Oct 8th 2008, 04:06 PM
Jesus said the law did not end.
"Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill.
"For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished.
"Whoever then annuls one of the least of these commandments, and teaches others to do the same, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever keeps and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
Mat 5:17-19


However, we now gain no righteousness by keeping the law. (do I need a Scripture?) :)

So the emphasis in your quote above should be on "For righteousness".

I still wonder why this is the only point of contention.

I know people have been observing Sunday for over 1600 years, but why are there no arguments for doing away with that pesky adultery thing? :rolleyes:

Richard

So what is it that has ended, since we cannot attain the righteousness of God by the law? for Paul mentions the righteousness that is of the law.

Phil 3:9 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=50&CHAP=3&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=9) And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith:

Firstfruits

maasive10
Oct 8th 2008, 04:14 PM
I am wondering what do you say then to Christians who practice the Sunday as their day of rest? For example - I attend church on Sunday with my family, in the morning and in the afternoon, we do not work on Sundays, we do not go to restaurants or shop, we rest and have a day with family and fellow believers. So what say you? Is the practicing of Sunday as the Sabbath wrong?

valleybldr
Oct 8th 2008, 04:17 PM
I am wondering what do you say then to Christians who practice the Sunday as their day of rest? For example - I attend church on Sunday with my family, in the morning and in the afternoon, we do not work on Sundays, we do not go to restaurants or shop, we rest and have a day with family and fellow believers. So what say you? Is the practicing of Sunday as the Sabbath wrong? You can treat Sunday, Monday, Tuesday etc as if it were the Sabbath. God designates His Sabbath as the seventh day but you are free to rest and church on any day you choose. todd

Emanate
Oct 8th 2008, 04:25 PM
The Judaizers were teaching that to be a Christian, one must first become a Jew; being obedient to all the law...to include circumcision and keeping of the Sabbath...that's history.

Paul went as far as declaring those who taught such things "anathema". In fact the book of Galatians has been referred to as "a sword wielded in the hand of a master swordsman" as Paul decries such teaching...and this is not the only Epistle in which he challenges such teaching as heretical.

That is exactly what Saul taught. His issue was not with Torah, it was with self righteous attitudes regarding Torah. It was the teaching that a person had to do x, y, or z before being accepted as a believer, a teaching which is completely wrong. I will agree that a believer has no need to first accept Torah to become a believer in Messiah. Nor should issues such as circumcision or Sabbath define how "righteous" a person is. Saul rightly taught that our Salvation is by Messiah alone.


In Isaiah, if this passage refers to Christians and not to those gentiles who converted to Judaism...once again we have a conundrum, a problem that can only be solved if we declare that Paul is wrong IMO...but yet we are told (and believe) that Paul's words were also "theopneustos"...therefore we must look to our understanding as being possibly flawed, as the word of God is inerrant (all truth with no mixture of error). There really can be no other way. :)


If Isaiah was referring to gentiles converting to Judaism then it would have referred to Jews and strangers. As I read the Bible there can opnly be two conclusions regarding Saul.

1. He was either false prophet or a false teacher (who comes to steal kill and destroy). In this case he was an enemy of the Word of YHWH and should have rightly been put to death.

2. He has been misinterpreted (as Peter mentioned) as being a worker of lawlesness and his words should be read in the light of Torah and the Torah made flesh, and not vice versa.

I am one who believes in the second view. Saul was always in the synagogue on Sabbath teaching Jews and Greeks. Saul continued in the sacrifical system under the direction of the first century church elders (and was thwarted by Pharisees). Saul said he was under the law to Messiah. The church elders said that people wrongly taught the Saul spoke that the law was superceded and Saul himself agreed in action that this was wrong.

So was Saul a double minded man unstable in all his ways, or is it we that have misunderstood?

Saul correctly taught the balance between law and grace to a people who were daily inundated with the supremacy of the blind obedience sans grace.
Today we have a different story. Today we are taught the law is no longer valid to the believer. We are taught that if it comes from the law it is to be avoided, yet if it comes from paganism one should openly accept. There are some of us that like to challenge this concept and show the freedom that is in the law when correctly balanced by grace. We are quickly branded as having no understanding, without Messiah, or just plain ol dumb.

Long story short, I find great delight in Sabbath. Both of my sons accepted Y'shua as Messiah during Passover because they saw Messiah in the meal. Torah is my delight and the Path that Messiah Y'shua led me to by His very words. Saul only confirms the words of Messiah.

Richard H
Oct 8th 2008, 04:31 PM
So what is it that has ended, since we cannot attain the righteousness of God by the law? for Paul mentions the righteousness that is of the law.

Phil 3:9 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=50&CHAP=3&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=9) And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith:

Firstfruits
Before Christ the only way to gain righteousness was through the letter of the law. The letter has ended. We now gain righteousness through Christ and not of ourselves, and we express it through the spirit of the law.

The law has not ended and neither has righteousness. Only our path to righteousness has changed.
So what has ended? The old path to righteousness.

Emanate
Oct 8th 2008, 04:33 PM
Before christ the only way to gain righteousness was through the letter of the law. The letter has ended. We now gain righteousness through Christ and not of ourselves, and we express it through the spirit of the law.

The law has not ended and neither has righteousness. Only our path to righteousness has changed.
So what has ended? The old path to righteousness.


I would disagree, my friend. Righteousness has been by one way since the time of Abraham. Faith.

Richard H
Oct 8th 2008, 05:18 PM
I would disagree, my friend. Righteousness has been by one way since the time of Abraham. Faith.
I agree that Abraham was before the law and his faith in God's ability to keep His in promise was credited as righteousness. (Rom 4:3)

But are you saying that animal offerings during the time of the law were of no value in being reckoned as righteousness through obedience?

Richard

Richard H
Oct 8th 2008, 05:29 PM
Before you answer that, let me add this:

Rom 5:19 For as through the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners, even so through the obedience of the One the many will be made righteous.

Richard

Emanate
Oct 8th 2008, 06:02 PM
I agree that Abraham was before the law and his faith in God's ability to keep His in promise was credited as righteousness. (Rom 4:3)

But are you saying that animal offerings during the time of the law were of no value in being reckoned as righteousness through obedience?

Richard


No, I do not see the sacrificial system as a way of attaining righteousness. I believe it was faith alone. God has always preferred our love and obedience, as well as our love for fellow man (Isaiah 1) over blindly sacrificing as a means of righteousness.

Firstfruits
Oct 8th 2008, 07:12 PM
Firstfruits, you need to look up everywhere the bible talks about "the end" of something. You will find it often means the end result. todd

Okay, so are you saying that Jesus is the end result for keeping the law?

That would contradict the following wouldn't it?

Rom 9:31 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=45&CHAP=9&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=31) But Israel, which followed after the law of righteousness, hath not attained to the law of righteousness.

Rom 9:32 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=45&CHAP=9&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=32) Wherefore? Because they sought it not by faith, but as it were by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumblingstone;

If that is not what you meant then can you explain what you did mean?

Firstfruits

Firstfruits
Oct 8th 2008, 07:29 PM
Before Christ the only way to gain righteousness was through the letter of the law. The letter has ended. We now gain righteousness through Christ and not of ourselves, and we express it through the spirit of the law.

The law has not ended and neither has righteousness. Only our path to righteousness has changed.
So what has ended? The old path to righteousness.

So if according to the following you can no longer attain righteousness by the works of the law, and we can only attain it by faith in Christ, does the fact that the law is not of faith have anything to do with it?

Gal 3:12 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=48&CHAP=3&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=12) And the law is not of faith: but, The man that doeth them shall live in them.

Rom 4:13 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=45&CHAP=4&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=13) For the promise, that he should be the heir of the world, was not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through the righteousness of faith.

The law is not of faith.

Firstfruits

valleybldr
Oct 8th 2008, 08:55 PM
Okay, so are you saying that Jesus is the end result for keeping the law?

That would contradict the following wouldn't it?

Rom 9:31 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=45&CHAP=9&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=31) But Israel, which followed after the law of righteousness, hath not attained to the law of righteousness.

Rom 9:32 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=45&CHAP=9&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=32) Wherefore? Because they sought it not by faith, but as it were by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumblingstone;

If that is not what you meant then can you explain what you did mean?

Firstfruits Jesus, not Israel, was perfect. todd

Richard H
Oct 8th 2008, 09:07 PM
No, I do not see the sacrificial system as a way of attaining righteousness. I believe it was faith alone. God has always preferred our love and obedience, as well as our love for fellow man (Isaiah 1) over blindly sacrificing as a means of righteousness.
That's in there too. :)
Blindly following regulations without a real righteous intent was not pleasing the the Almighty, because they never changed the inside - only concentrating on the outer.

There was an element of intent or "faith", but they were to be obedient to the law. It was the law and any righteousness obtained was only temporary intil the next infraction.

The law has not gone away, but Jesus fulfilled it through His obedience and intent - having never broken the law, but paying the price for you and me. Still, the law has not passed away, and our obedience can no longer gain righteousness, or Jesus would have died for nothing. Still, the law has not passed away - but now righteousness is only throught faith in the Lamb of God as being sufficient.

Richard

Richard H
Oct 8th 2008, 09:30 PM
One might take that I am arguing against the law, but I only reject the rules for obedience – not the commandments.

I observe it not to gain righteousness – but because it is right. And I think it gladdens His heart.
The Sabbath is still important to God, or He would not have included in the commandments.

Richard

And I think: on much of this, we are not in dissagreement. :)

ƒσяєяυииєя
Oct 8th 2008, 09:41 PM
That's in there too. :)
Blindly following regulations without a real righteous intent was not pleasing the the Almighty, because they never changed the inside - only concentrating on the outer.

There was an element of intent or "faith", but they were to be obedient to the law. It was the law and any righteousness obtained was only temporary intil the next infraction.

The law has not gone away, but Jesus fulfilled it through His obedience and intent - having never broken the law, but paying the price for you and me. Still, the law has not passed away, and our obedience can no longer gain righteousness, or Jesus would have died for nothing. Still, the law has not passed away - but now righteousness is only throught faith in the Lamb of God as being sufficient.

Richard

Amen.

And supporting the point that the law has not passed away I`ll quote some verses.

""And the temple of God was opened in heaven, and there was seen in his temple the ark of his testament: and there were lightnings, and voices, and thunderings, and an earthquake, and great hail. Rev. 11:19

As the tabernacle shown to Moses was done as a shadow of the true one described and quoted above, then what was inside the ark which was shown to Moses, the same is into the heavenly ark.

"For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled." Mat. 5:18

God bless


______________________
Peace and so forth

-"For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation..."[Salvation from what?.]
-Jesus answered them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whosoever committeth sin is the servant of sin.

Now unto him that is able to keep you from falling, and to present you faultless before the presence of his glory with exceeding joy, To the only wise God our Saviour, be glory and majesty, dominion and power, both now and ever. Amen. (Romans 1:16; John 8:34; Jude 1:24-25.)

http://img112.imageshack.us/img112/5459/natureavyty7.jpg

http://img112.imageshack.us/img112/3020/lifesigyyt9.gif

Firstfruits
Oct 9th 2008, 07:57 AM
Jesus, not Israel, was perfect. todd


Heb 7:19 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=58&CHAP=7&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=19) For the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did; by the which we draw nigh unto God. (Would this be the same as saying the law made nothing righteous?)

So we cannot be made perfect/righteous by the law, so the following can only be attained by following after the righteousness of God which is Christ. Is that how you understand it to be?

Heb 12:23 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=58&CHAP=12&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=23) To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect,

Gal 3:28 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=48&CHAP=3&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=28) There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

Col 3:11 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=51&CHAP=3&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=11) Where there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision, Barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free: but Christ is all, and in all.

Firstfruits

MLC
Oct 9th 2008, 08:30 AM
Kind of controversial in some ways, but you all can take from this chapter as you'd like. Pay particular attention to verses 5 & 6. (Also, sorry if someone already discussed these verses) God Bless.


Romans 14
The Weak and the Strong
1Accept him whose faith is weak, without passing judgment on disputable matters. 2One man's faith allows him to eat everything, but another man, whose faith is weak, eats only vegetables. 3The man who eats everything must not look down on him who does not, and the man who does not eat everything must not condemn the man who does, for God has accepted him. 4Who are you to judge someone else's servant? To his own master he stands or falls. And he will stand, for the Lord is able to make him stand.

5One man considers one day more sacred than another; another man considers every day alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. 6He who regards one day as special, does so to the Lord. He who eats meat, eats to the Lord, for he gives thanks to God; and he who abstains, does so to the Lord and gives thanks to God. 7For none of us lives to himself alone and none of us dies to himself alone. 8If we live, we live to the Lord; and if we die, we die to the Lord. So, whether we live or die, we belong to the Lord.

9For this very reason, Christ died and returned to life so that he might be the Lord of both the dead and the living. 10You, then, why do you judge your brother? Or why do you look down on your brother? For we will all stand before God's judgment seat. 11It is written:
" 'As surely as I live,' says the Lord,
'every knee will bow before me;
every tongue will confess to God.' "[a] 12So then, each of us will give an account of himself to God.

13Therefore let us stop passing judgment on one another. Instead, make up your mind not to put any stumbling block or obstacle in your brother's way. 14As one who is in the Lord Jesus, I am fully convinced that no food[b] is unclean in itself. But if anyone regards something as unclean, then for him it is unclean. 15If your brother is distressed because of what you eat, you are no longer acting in love. Do not by your eating destroy your brother for whom Christ died. 16Do not allow what you consider good to be spoken of as evil. 17For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking, but of righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit, 18because anyone who serves Christ in this way is pleasing to God and approved by men.

19Let us therefore make every effort to do what leads to peace and to mutual edification. 20Do not destroy the work of God for the sake of food. All food is clean, but it is wrong for a man to eat anything that causes someone else to stumble. 21It is better not to eat meat or drink wine or to do anything else that will cause your brother to fall.

22So whatever you believe about these things keep between yourself and God. Blessed is the man who does not condemn himself by what he approves. 23But the man who has doubts is condemned if he eats, because his eating is not from faith; and everything that does not come from faith is sin.

valleybldr
Oct 9th 2008, 11:35 AM
Heb 7:19 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=58&CHAP=7&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=19) For the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did; by the which we draw nigh unto God. (Would this be the same as saying the law made nothing righteous?)

So we cannot be made perfect/righteous by the law, so the following can only be attained by following after the righteousness of God which is Christ. Is that how you understand it to be?

Heb 12:23 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=58&CHAP=12&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=23) To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect,

Gal 3:28 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=48&CHAP=3&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=28) There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

Col 3:11 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=51&CHAP=3&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=11) Where there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision, Barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free: but Christ is all, and in all.

Firstfruits Christ did not transgress the law...he was perfect. Please read the context of passages while on your way cherry picking. todd

Firstfruits
Oct 9th 2008, 11:53 AM
Christ did not transgress the law...he was perfect. Please read the context of passages while on your way cherry picking. todd

When was it said that Jesus transgressed the law, and how does that apply to these scriptures?

Heb 7:19 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=58&CHAP=7&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=19) For the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did; by the which we draw nigh unto God. (Would this be the same as saying the law made nothing righteous?)

So we cannot be made perfect/righteous by the law, so the following can only be attained by following after the righteousness of God which is Christ. Is that how you understand it to be?

Heb 12:23 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=58&CHAP=12&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=23) To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect,

Gal 3:28 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=48&CHAP=3&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=28) There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

Col 3:11 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=51&CHAP=3&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=11) Where there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision, Barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free: but Christ is all, and in all.

Firstfruits

valleybldr
Oct 9th 2008, 11:57 AM
When was it said that Jesus transgressed the law, and how does that apply to these scriptures?

Heb 7:19 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=58&CHAP=7&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=19) For the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did; by the which we draw nigh unto God. (Would this be the same as saying the law made nothing righteous?)

So we cannot be made perfect/righteous by the law, so the following can only be attained by following after the righteousness of God which is Christ. Is that how you understand it to be?

Heb 12:23 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=58&CHAP=12&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=23) To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect,

Gal 3:28 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=48&CHAP=3&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=28) There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

Col 3:11 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=51&CHAP=3&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=11) Where there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision, Barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free: but Christ is all, and in all.

Firstfruits No time for tail chasing today...off to services:thumbsup:. Shalom! todd

Firstfruits
Oct 9th 2008, 12:28 PM
No time for tail chasing today...off to services:thumbsup:. Shalom! todd

With regards to what I had asked you said;

Originally Posted by valleybldr http://bibleforums.org/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://bibleforums.org/showthread.php?p=1817823#post1817823)
Christ did not transgress the law...he was perfect. Please read the context of passages while on your way cherry picking. todd


So when was it said that Jesus transgressed the law, and how does that apply to these scriptures that I have given?

Heb 7:19 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=58&CHAP=7&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=19) For the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did; by the which we draw nigh unto God. (Would this be the same as saying the law made nothing righteous?)

So we cannot be made perfect/righteous by the law, so the following can only be attained by following after the righteousness of God which is Christ. Is that how you understand it to be?

Heb 12:23 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=58&CHAP=12&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=23) To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect,

Gal 3:28 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=48&CHAP=3&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=28) There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

Col 3:11 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=51&CHAP=3&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=11) Where there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision, Barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free: but Christ is all, and in all.

Firstfruits