What Laws are still valid to christians

[Hizikyah]

Yahchanan 5:14, "Afterward, Yahshua found him in the sacred precinct and said to him: Behold, you are healed. Sin no more, or a worse thing will come upon you."

1 Yahchanan 3:4, "Whoever commits sin, transgresses also the Law; for sin is the transgression of the Law."

Mattithyah 22:37-40, "Yahshua said to him: You must love Yahweh your Father with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your might. This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: You shall love your hneighbor as yourself. On these two commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets."

Romans 8:6-8, "For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace. Because the carnal mind is enmity against; (bitterly opposed to), Yahweh; for it his not subject to the Law of Yahweh, nor indeed can be. So then, those who are of the flesh cannot please Yahweh."

Psalm 19:7-10, "The Laws of Yahweh are perfect, converting the whole person. The testimony of Yahweh is sure, making the simple ones wise. The statutes of Yahweh are right, rejoicing the heart; mind. The commandments of Yahweh are pure,
bringing understanding to the eyes. The reverence of Yahweh is clean, enduring forever. The judgments of Yahweh are true and altogether righteous. They are more to be desired than gold, yes, than even much fine gold. They are sweeter than honey and the honeycomb."

 

[HeRoseFromTheDead]

Why don't you acknowledge this? Is it because you can't see past the physical corruption?

Deuteronomy 10:16 (KJV)
[SUP]16 [/SUP]Circumcise therefore the foreskin of your heart, and be no more stiffnecked.

Acts 7:51-53 (KJV)
[SUP]51 [/SUP]Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye.
[SUP]52 [/SUP]Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted? and they have slain them which shewed before of the coming of the Just One; of whom ye have been now the betrayers and murderers:
[SUP]53 [/SUP]Who have received the law by the disposition of angels, and have not kept it.

I get the feeling that you might think that if the heart is circumcised, and it would be a bloody mess, a major heart attach, or maybe even a heart transplant, all in the physical aspects.

I'll give you the thoughts I have for you that Jesus said.

John 3:12 (KJV)
[SUP]12 [/SUP]If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things?

Why don't I acknowledge what? That physical circumcision is a shadow and type of spiritual circumcision?

I acknowledge that.

When will you acknowledge that physical circumcision and spiritual circumcision are not the same thing?

 

[Hizikyah]

Non-responsive.

Why would you not follow the language in which it was written rather than the language in which it was not written?


Non-responsive.

I have my rabbi.

Sorry you do not agree with Rabbi Jesus and Paul in supporting established authority.

If the Messiah is your master, than why do you fight those who do and teach Yahweh's Law?

Mattithyah 5:18 "For truly I say to you; Unless heaven and earth passes away, one yodh--the smallest of the letters--will in no way pass from the Law, until all things are perfected."19 "Whosoever, therefore, will break one of the least of these Laws, and will teach men so, he will be called the least in the Kingdom of Yahweh; but whosoever will do and teach them, the same will be called great in the Kingdom of Yahweh."

Luke 16:17, "But it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one yodh of the Law to fail."

Mattithyah 24:35, "Heaven and earth may pass away, but My words will not pass away."

 

[cfultz3]

Try asking questions to people about themselves, rather than question about something else that they haven't had first hand knowledge about.

EG is simply asking which church you would reject because you simply said "that" church.

The church which would demand a physical circumcision

or

The church which would not demand a physical circumcision.

 

[chubbena]

lol, if we did this, we would be following in their sin, and ignoring the love God has shown us would we not?

It was HeRoseFromTheDead's explanation of why Timothy was circumcised.

No, because he did it so that people who did think circumcision was a big deal wouldn't have an excuse to be offended and persecute them.

 

[chubbena]

Are you judging Paul for not wanting to offend the Jews and be persecuted? To the Jews he became as a Jew; to the Romans he became as a Roman. Perhaps his motive wasn't to avoid persecution, but to avoid offense to the gospel. That actually makes more sense.

I believe you quoted literally from Paul that whoever circumcised is under curse. So are you saying Paul contradicted himself? So here are you saying to avoid offense to the gospel Paul had to put Timothy under curse?

 

[just-me]

I did not know this. Thanks for the info

Welcome my friend!!

 

[just-me]

EG is simply asking which church you would reject because you simply said "that" church.

The church which would demand a physical circumcision

or

The church which would not demand a physical circumcision.

And my first answer was that I would reject a church that did such a thing.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

It is always suppose to be Spiritual when discussing the Word of God. I could care less about the fleshly right and wrongs that don’t involve the motivation of the rights and wrongs.

Why is it you are so afraid to admit when your wrong? This statement in itself is not true. And if it is it has HUGE ramification. By this statement alone. When God says, "do not commit adultry" the physical aspect of the command is not in question. IT MUST ALWAYS BE TAKEN SPIRITUALLY. In other words. When God said this. He meant, do not commit spiritual adultry against him. But it is perfectly fine to be married, and sleep with as many other women as you wish (which you and I both know is not true. It must be taken physically as well as spiritually.

I submit that if you ask a question, I will answer it as best as I can, but not in fleshly terms.

So then I will take it, If I ask you if it is ok to commit adultry, You would only answer in the spiritual way, You would not care about the physical. So if I commited adultry, you would not in any way shape or form try to help me with my struggle with the physical sin, because it is not your concern. I do not know what bible you read. but it is YOUR JOB to help a brother and sister you see in sin..

To do otherwise would be like the gun debate, and if I agreed that guns should be banished, I would say, “let all the murders go free and put the guns in jail, for hang them, stone them, whatever it takes.”

To be honest. I believe you would answer it like this. And you wonder why people get so confused when they talk to you. because you do not give an answer, you go off in every direction like your afraid to answer.

To be truthful I would answer any question concerning that topic with another question to avoid ridiculous rhetoric. I would ask, “Would any of you politicians consider what motivates the finger to pull the trigger? In other words, the physical aspect of murder is not the cure to the problem; it’s what motivates those actions that are the problem. I want to think about motivation (Spirit) rather than physical. Treating the disease instead of the symptoms is the cure.

And thats your problem.

If someone asks. Do you believe in gun control. And go off on some rhetorical answer which has nothing to do with the question. All people can do is think your trying to avoid the question. Are afraid to answer the question. Or are insulting them (which you are.)

If you said, No I do not. THEN explained why. At least you honored the person and did not insult them, And they can completely understand what your true feelings are. And even if they do not agree with you, At least you have had a discussion.

But when you refuse to answer, and just go off on some diversion.

1. You have insulted the person who asked yo uthe question
2. You have brought suspicion on yourself (why are you afraid? what are you hiding/)
3. You have people thinking you are so insecure in your own belief, your afraid to answer because you think you may be judged.

Non of these are good things for you., the person asking, or anyone else for that matter!

 

[just-me]

Why don't I acknowledge what? That physical circumcision is a shadow and type of spiritual circumcision?

I acknowledge that.

When will you acknowledge that physical circumcision and spiritual circumcision are not the same thing?

That's what I was saying from the first. Sorry you missed that. I also said the the circumcision of the heart was in the Mosaic law. Why don't you admit that? I haven't seen that yet. We could probably have a decent conversation if we agreed on that truth.

 

[cfultz3]

Old Covenant: how to remain in covenant with God = do or not do by your flesh.

New Covenant: how to remain in covenant with God = do or not do by your spirit.

We are to die to our flesh as the means by which we use for our walk before God.

We are to become alive to our spirit as the means by which we use for our walk before God.

No one was ever justified by the physical walk (flesh).

We are justified through faith by a walk done spiritually.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

eternally-grateful, it matters not which way you slice, dice and or cube. The Law all Law from God is perfect in and of itself. It is the flesh that is weak
Romans 7:10-14

Living Bible (TLB)

[SUP]10 [/SUP]So as far as I was concerned, the good law which was supposed to show me the way of life resulted instead in my being given the death penalty. [SUP]11[/SUP]Sin fooled me by taking the good laws of God and using them to make me guilty of death. [SUP]12 [/SUP]But still, you see, the law itself was wholly right and good.
[SUP]13 [/SUP]But how can that be? Didn’t the law cause my doom? How then can it be good? No, it was sin, devilish stuff that it is, that used what was good to bring about my condemnation. So you can see how cunning and deadly and damnable it is. For it uses God’s good laws for its own evil purposes.

[SUP]14 [/SUP]The law is good, then, and the trouble is not there but with me because I am sold into slavery with Sin as my owner.


Romans 7:10-14

Authorized (King James) Version (AKJV)

[SUP]10 [/SUP]And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death. [SUP]11 [/SUP]For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me. [SUP]12 [/SUP]Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.
[SUP]13 [/SUP]Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful. [SUP]14 [/SUP]For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.

If this is what Paul was saying, I would agre. It is not. Paul did not say the flesh was weak. he said THE LAW was weak. So why would we TWIST what paul said to make it something else?

 

[cfultz3]

And my first answer was that I would reject a church that did such a thing.

Perhaps, I misunderstood. Sorry.

Why would you reject a church which would demand a physical circumcision to be a member of it? (this is being asked from a brother to a brother)

 

[eternally-gratefull]

EG is simply asking which church you would reject because you simply said "that" church.

The church which would demand a physical circumcision

or

The church which would not demand a physical circumcision.

Thanks. Someone understands what I was asking and why!

 

[eternally-gratefull]

And my first answer was that I would reject a church that did such a thing.

then why did you not just say that to begin with?

 

[cfultz3]

It says that the Law was weak through (channel of an act) the flesh.

That is, because of the flesh, the Law was not able to make us righteous.

Which one then, flesh or Law, was at fault for the Law not being able to make us righteous?

Was it not the flesh which prevented the Law?

 

[Josh321]

you think he and others are denying the Christ as Savior, and I do not see this, as in what I have read as in what is their motive.
Just something to consider whether any one of us are walking by that self-righteous flesh Spirit that is dead. In "I" am right and you are wrong, my way "I" see it or else, man oh man!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

i never said that.. and i back up whatever i'm saying with the scriptures, it's not what i say or think it's what the bible says and im sticking to the word of God

 

[just-me]

Perhaps, I misunderstood. Sorry.

Why would you reject a church which would demand a physical circumcision to be a member of it? (this is being asked from a brother to a brother)

The original question was this

The question should be.

If a 25 y/o male came into their church. And his parents did not circumcize them. And he was circumcized by the hands of God in his heart. would they try to force him to be physically circumcised. And would they consider him to be in sin if he did not. and make it a yes or no answer.

My answer is that I would reject that church.

The way to properly ask the question should have been to say, “would I force physical circumcision when I knew he had been circumcised in the heart, and if he didn’t comply, would I consider him so be a sinner unsaved because he didn't.”

Then I would have said “absolutely not.”

I would reject any church that would force a physical purification ceremony of circumcision on anyone to prove his righteousness, and call it sinful if they didn’t succumb, even after salvation, and heart to show the fruit thereof.

 

[Josh321]

look this honestly should not even be an argument.. in hebrews it states that ISRAEL( by the way the law was only meant for the jews not the gentiles ) did not continue in the covenant made when God brought them out of egypt so he made a new one WITH ISRAEL NOT US, the bible also states that we the gentiles do the things by nature contained in the law BY NATURE( IT'S IN OUR NATURE OF THE FLESH TO DO IT) so that is why the 10 commandments is the schoolmaster for us because it leads us to christ because we cannot follow it, that is why it is written we must be born again, do you even know what born again means? it's a new nature a nature of christ we receive when we are born again that is where righteousness comes from, well then what is there to talk about? alot of people confused the things meant for the jews and the things meant for the gentiles that is where confusion comes from the bible even states that the Jews cannot see pass that which was abolish because God blinded them for our sake so we can come in, if the bible said it is abolish but the jews can't see pass it why can't you see pass it? this shoudn't even be an argument.. gotta stop letting the devil confuse us

 

[just-me]

then why did you not just say that to begin with?

Because you asked me about what the church considered, instead of asking me what I would consider. If the church considered the man was sinful, I would reject the church. Wow!! How long will this continue? I can't answer for others. Would they, or would they not, I don't know?

Originally Posted by eternally-gratefull

The question should be.

If a 25 y/o male came into their church. And his parents did not circumcize them. And he was circumcized by the hands of God in his heart. would they try to force him to be physically circumcised. And would they consider him to be in sin if he did not. and make it a yes or no answer.