Did Jesus ever tell us that we no longer need to keep the law of Moses?

[posthuman]

Abraham did nothing but believe? You call packing up the family, moving to parts unknown nothing? You call demonstrating a willingness to kill your own son nothing? Genesis 28:5because Abraham obeyed me and did everything I required of him, keeping my commands, my decrees and my instructions."

re-read Romans 4:1-3 please.

 

[Guojing]

look,dude. it's not an universally applicable logical construct. i have proven it in the abstract, and i have given you two definite counterexamples. look up De Morgan's rules: your error in Mark 16:16 is because you are not negating the intersection correctly. or, if you'd rather use philosophical pseudo-logic, you are affirming the consequent.

trying to impress with latin phrases does not make up for being poor at math.
if my math is wrong, point it out.
if not being a woman really implies that you are not an human, please explain why men are not people.

Since you already stated you never heard of modus tollens, this debate has already concluded. Thanks for clarifying.

 

[posthuman]

Genesis 28:5because Abraham obeyed me and did everything I required of him, keeping my commands, my decrees and my instructions."

that's 26:5. you made typo.
read 26:4 -- God gives him the land because of this.

but read Genesis 15:6. Abraham believed, and that belief -- apart from works -- was credited as righteousness.

Abraham was saved whether he ever inherited the land or not.

 

[posthuman]

Since you already stated you never heard of modus tollens, this debate has already concluded. Thanks for clarifying.

rofl

since you have no argument, and your mouth is shut, but you still want to talk, you say 'because this guy didn't waste his time in philosophy classes learning fancy lingo, i win'

wow dude. way to shoot your credibility in the foot.
here i am spitting out all kinds of specialized mathematical jargon - a whole other language - and you think you have some kind of intellectual superiority because you learned some vocabulary word in an easy-A course in the liberal arts department.

if you don't understand the math in post #1546 i will be happy to explain it to you in simpler terms without the mathematical terms and symbology.
it's just way easier to write the other way - and IMO set notation & operations are very valuable things to know.

 

[SimpleGardner]

Since you already stated you never heard of modus tollens, this debate has already concluded. Thanks for clarifying.

I think you were being "Gaslighted"...You were wise to back away. You were not confused or confusing, but if you kept up long enough you might have questioned yourself

 

[DeighAnn]

rofl

since you have no argument, and your mouth is shut, but you still want to talk, you say 'because this guy didn't waste his time in philosophy classes learning fancy lingo, i win'

wow dude. way to shoot your credibility in the foot.
here i am spitting out all kinds of specialized mathematical jargon - a whole other language - and you think you have some kind of intellectual superiority because you learned some vocabulary word in an easy-A course in the liberal arts department.

if you don't understand the math in post #1546 i will be happy to explain it to you in simpler terms without the mathematical terms and symbology.
it's just way easier to write the other way - and IMO set notation & operations are very valuable things to know.

Ok. I think I might get the very first picture, maybe. I hope we have a long time because I once had someone try to teach me how the "order of operations" is that something? goes because the way I did math always ended up with me being owed money and that wasn't right, but I thought it was

 

[Guojing]

rofl

since you have no argument, and your mouth is shut, but you still want to talk, you say 'because this guy didn't waste his time in philosophy classes learning fancy lingo, i win'

wow dude. way to shoot your credibility in the foot.
here i am spitting out all kinds of specialized mathematical jargon - a whole other language - and you think you have some kind of intellectual superiority because you learned some vocabulary word in an easy-A course in the liberal arts department.

if you don't understand the math in post #1546 i will be happy to explain it to you in simpler terms without the mathematical terms and symbology.
it's just way easier to write the other way - and IMO set notation & operations are very valuable things to know.

Actually once you debate long enough on the Internet, you will realize that people very rarely change their minds about issues.

To me, once I can understand the thinking behind why one would believe the things he do, I am contented.

There is no need to be so agitated and start criticizing your opponents, we are just fellow believers here.

 

[posthuman]

Since you already stated you never heard of modus tollens, this debate has already concluded. Thanks for clarifying.

you are committing what is called "genetic fallacy"

proposing that anything post says is invalid because it came from post.

this is compounded with "group think fallacy"

you propose that only people who know certain fancy latin phrases can construct logical arguments.

in latin, for all you really smart types, that's "fallacia geneticae" and "videtur coetus"
((but there may be fancier more formal phrases for it, that's just literal translation lol -- i'm not smart))

 

[UnderGrace]

Oh, yeah, you told me that some time ago! But Jesus just hinted at the New Covenant, he didn't explicitly say we would no longer need to obey the Law.

Ephesians 2:15
14For He Himself is our peace, who has made the two one and has torn down the dividing wall of hostility 15by abolishing in His flesh the law of commandments and decrees. He did this to create in Himself one new man out of the two, thus making peace

 

[DeighAnn]

Ephesians 2:15
14For He Himself is our peace, who has made the two one and has torn down the dividing wall of hostility 15by abolishing in His flesh the law of commandments and decrees. He did this to create in Himself one new man out of the two, thus making peace

even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace; Isn't the "contained in the ordinances" part kinda important

 

[posthuman]

There is no need to be so agitated and start criticizing your opponents, we are just fellow believers here.

uh yeah, agree, so why you doing that to me?

i'm pointing out that you're being obtuse.

look again at the examples i gave you -- schwinn bicycles have two wheels, but not everything that isn't a schwinn isn't a bicycle. all women are human but not everyone who isn't a woman isn't a human. look up de morgan's law and look at the notation i gave for Mark 16:16. look at the diagrams and the proof that shows modus tollens is not applicable to sets which are not mutually proper subsets.

if you think my math is wrong, prove it. prove modus tollens for the sets i diagrammed, if you can. i'm not incapable of mistakes, but i don't see any flaw in what i've shown you. if you find what you think is one, show me. 'modus tollens by fiat!!!!' is not a proof.

i'm going to bed. in the morning, if i have to, i will give a full proof of modus tollens failure. tho i should write something for DeighAnn, too - if i am up early enough, i'll do both in one.

 

[posthuman]

you are committing what is called "genetic fallacy"

proposing that anything post says is invalid because it came from post.

this is compounded with "group think fallacy"

you propose that only people who know certain fancy latin phrases can construct logical arguments.

in latin, for all you really smart types, that's "fallacia geneticae" and "videtur coetus"
((but there may be fancier more formal phrases for it, that's just literal translation lol -- i'm not smart))

forgive me if i have gone too far in poking at you

 

[Karraster]

Ephesians 2:15
14For He Himself is our peace, who has made the two one and has torn down the dividing wall of hostility 15by abolishing in His flesh the law of commandments and decrees. He did this to create in Himself one new man out of the two, thus making peace

Do you know what this is talking about? What 2 groups?

 

[Mii]

uh yeah, agree, so why you doing that to me?

i'm pointing out that you're being obtuse.

look again at the examples i gave you -- schwinn bicycles have two wheels, but not everything that isn't a schwinn isn't a bicycle. all women are human but not everyone who isn't a woman isn't a human. look up de morgan's law and look at the notation i gave for Mark 16:16. look at the diagrams and the proof that shows modus tollens is not applicable to sets which are not mutually proper subsets.

if you think my math is wrong, prove it. prove modus tollens for the sets i diagrammed, if you can. i'm not incapable of mistakes, but i don't see any flaw in what i've shown you. if you find what you think is one, show me. 'modus tollens by fiat!!!!' is not a proof.

i'm going to bed. in the morning, if i have to, i will give a full proof of modus tollens failure. tho i should write something for DeighAnn, too - if i am up early enough, i'll do both in one.

I read "I'm not capable of mistakes" was like!!!!!!!!!!!!

but I digress, if you could explain it to me what you are talking about it sounds rather interesting in regards to the thread. I wiki'd what modus tollens is so hopefully I'll be able to follow. Logic applied to scripture is helpful because I find myself following random bits of the law and then struggling with "I'm a gentile" excuse for others when I get to legalistic about it.

 

[UnderGrace]

even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace; Isn't the "contained in the ordinances" part kinda important

Here is your preferred translation

King James Bible
Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;

 

[UnderGrace]

Do you know what this is talking about? What 2 groups?

The separation between Jew and Gentile

 

[DeighAnn]

?

Here is your preferred translation

King James Bible
Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;

is the law of commandments contained in ordinances Matt 15: 6-9 or col 2:13,14 or something else?

 

[UnderGrace]

?

is the law of commandments contained in ordinances Matt 15: 6-9 or col 2:13,14 or something else?

There are many places where the ten commandments are referred to as statutes and/or ordinances, if you are trying to make a case for separating them out.

 

[Karraster]

The separation between Jew and Gentile

That's half of it, but what was the issue? The issue was circumcision of the flesh....not the entire law.

 

[UnderGrace]

That's half of it, but what was the issue? The issue was circumcision of the flesh....not the entire law.

The issue was the entire law .... the gentiles were not given the law