-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
D
You might believe the NT was written in Aramaic or even Klingon but the facts speak for themselves. The NT was written in Greek. The Greek word for Jesus is "Iησοῦς" pronounced as "eeaysoosz". Those who claim Jesus' real name is Yehshua, Y'shua, Yahoshua, etc. are simply pushing their own private agenda.
You are right Praus. I think that Christians follow God, and those who aren't Christian do not follow God. When you teach that we must not listen to scripture, you are not following God. And don't give me that stuff about what you, personally, decide Paul was against teaching. Paul was against teaching rituals as the only way to God. Christ said to obey, and Paul would not teach against Christ. What I think about what God accepts and doesn't makes no difference to the truth. Nor what you think. If God accepts those who do not accept His words, then go to it, tell everyone to not listen to scripture. I would bet the truth is that if you preach to ignore God, God will ignore you.
You have been pointed out by God in scripture, telling of the last days. There will be the lawlessness you promote.
You have been pointed out by God in scripture, telling of the last days. There will be the lawlessness you promote.
On the contrary, I teach that we should follow scripture and I beg your advice in this matter. This has nothing to do with the teachings of the Apostle Paul.
Was king Malkiy-Tsedeq under Mosaic Law or Levitical Law? Or was he under another law? Or was he lawless?
Gen 14:18-20 And Melchizedek king of Salem brought forth bread and wine: and he [was] the priest of the most high God. And he blessed him, and said, Blessed [be] Abram of the most high God, possessor of heaven and earth: And blessed be the most high God, which hath delivered thine enemies into thy hand. And he gave him tithes of all.
Jesus Christ is the High Priest of the order of king Malkiy-Tsedeq.
Heb 6:20 Whither the forerunner is for us entered, [even] Jesus, made an high priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec.
Was king Malkiy-Tsedeq under Mosaic Law or Levitical Law? Or was he under another law? Or was he lawless?
Gen 14:18-20 And Melchizedek king of Salem brought forth bread and wine: and he [was] the priest of the most high God. And he blessed him, and said, Blessed [be] Abram of the most high God, possessor of heaven and earth: And blessed be the most high God, which hath delivered thine enemies into thy hand. And he gave him tithes of all.
Jesus Christ is the High Priest of the order of king Malkiy-Tsedeq.
Heb 6:20 Whither the forerunner is for us entered, [even] Jesus, made an high priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec.
In my opinion Jesus Christ is our sabbath rest, and there is no obligation to observe a day of the week as the sabbath.
My faith tradition (catholic) makes a precept of the church that all catholics have an obligation to attend mass every Sunday and on Holy days of obligation. But even this is not a sabbath as defined in the Old Testament.
I say this, but then we read the Lord's Commandments and He said: Remember the Sabbath "DAY" by keeping it holy, six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is a sabbath to The Lord your God. On it you shall not do any work, neither you or your son or daughter, nor your male or female servant, nor your animals, nor any foreigner residing in your towns.
as an owner of two corporations it would a sin for me to force my employees to labor continually seven days a week giving them no day to rest. And so I believe we should observe the commandment of God to give everyone at least one day a week to rest from their labors. I myself consider everyday holy to The Lord and rest in Christ my sabbath, but I also give my employees two days a week to rest from their labors. I do not believe the church should obligate any believer to observe one day above another as Paul wrote about, but I also respect those who observe a sabbath day be it saturday or sunday or any day of the week.
Just a thought.
My faith tradition (catholic) makes a precept of the church that all catholics have an obligation to attend mass every Sunday and on Holy days of obligation. But even this is not a sabbath as defined in the Old Testament.
I say this, but then we read the Lord's Commandments and He said: Remember the Sabbath "DAY" by keeping it holy, six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is a sabbath to The Lord your God. On it you shall not do any work, neither you or your son or daughter, nor your male or female servant, nor your animals, nor any foreigner residing in your towns.
as an owner of two corporations it would a sin for me to force my employees to labor continually seven days a week giving them no day to rest. And so I believe we should observe the commandment of God to give everyone at least one day a week to rest from their labors. I myself consider everyday holy to The Lord and rest in Christ my sabbath, but I also give my employees two days a week to rest from their labors. I do not believe the church should obligate any believer to observe one day above another as Paul wrote about, but I also respect those who observe a sabbath day be it saturday or sunday or any day of the week.
Just a thought.
KohenMatt, you would have us assume that "Saturday" is in the text of the fourth commandment. It is not. All it says is one day in a cycle of sevens. No more. Period. You say that "Sunday is never referred to as the Sabbath." This is fallacious. Matthew 28:1; Mark 16:2, 9; Luke 24:1; John 20:1, 19; Acts 20:7 and 1 Cor. 16:2 all identify "the first day of the week" as "the first of the Sabbatons." This is because "week" in these verses is translated from Sabbaton (see Strong's #4521). The NT, no less than eight times refers to the day we now call Sunday as "the first of the Sabbatons," meaning the chief, the number one, "of the Sabbatons." According to Hebrews 4:9 this is the Sabbath rest that "remaineth." Justin Martyr and other early Christians, in the context of the fourth commandment, identify "the first day of the week (Sabbatons)," this one day in seven, as the New Covenant Sabbath. The vast majority of Christians, for over nineteen hundred years have observed this first, this chief of Sabbaths as applicable to the fourth commandment. So please, stop reading "Saturday" into the text of the fourth commandment, and stop saying "Sunday is never referred to as the Sabbath." The day which came to be known as Sunday, the first of the week [Sabbatons]) is identified as the New Covenant Sabbath no less than eight times in the gospels and epistles.
D
Once again you are wrong. That is not a statement I made, it is a question. That is what a Question symbol, (?) at the end of a sentence means. I was asking Red if she believes that.
Originally Posted by danschance
lawless=not obeying the obsolete laws of the Mosaic laws, right?
lawless=not obeying the obsolete laws of the Mosaic laws, right?
Last edited by a moderator:
But danschance, your applications of "law" lump both ceremonial and moral law together. Then, in the same context you describe both as---"obsolete." And, no matter how many times you are asked, you do not reconcile your opposition to the Law of the Lord with Psalm 1, Psalm 119, Matt. 5:17 and John's reminder that "...sin is the transgression of the law" (1 John 3:4). What do you expect?
D
If you read Historicist's posts, you will see a pattern emerge. He insults people liberally by calling them names such as lawless, anti-nomians, lawless or sinners or simply tells them they are wrong. He posts scripture to slap another in their face. He is an angry person who acts like a troll. He shows no love for fellow christian's in any of his posts that I have seen.
Why even respond to him? So he can just come up with a new insult?
Why even respond to him? So he can just come up with a new insult?
Your "cycle of seven" may sound good on paper, like laying a figure eight on its side and calling it eternity, but it is false. The days, one through seven, are the equivlent of Sunday through Saturday inclusive. There is no argument or discovery in you "cycle" delcaration. The only difference is when the days begin. The solar calendar has days beginning at midnight, while the lunar calendar has days beginning at sunset. No, it is not just a cycle of seven, sorry.
What God says is never obsolete. To say so is denying God.
Even the blood of animals that we are told not to use, but to use the blood of Christ, is not completely obsolete. It is fulfilled with the blood of Christ, only the order to use animal blood is obsolete.
When you say that all of what God tells us about how to live for Christ and God is obsolete, it is a terrible thing to say.
Even the blood of animals that we are told not to use, but to use the blood of Christ, is not completely obsolete. It is fulfilled with the blood of Christ, only the order to use animal blood is obsolete.
When you say that all of what God tells us about how to live for Christ and God is obsolete, it is a terrible thing to say.
So many here are so sure that I am absolutely wrong when I say the law is given for the benefit of those who know Christ, even that given on Mt Sinai. I have checked and rechecked scripture and I still cannot believe that is from God. I have checked to see how lives lived with this idea are working out, and even that tells me it is not of God. It seems to me it is what led the church into not holding fast to God's ways for them.
I have been told to just read Galatians, so I not only read it, I did everything I could to understand that chapter, but I felt that if one scripture disagrees with another, I was not understanding because there is absolute unity in God. It is a hard statement made in that chapter, it is true, and we have to understand. Christ said the law was good, Galatians says the law of Moses isn't necessary for salvation. They had to agree. I went into history and found the Hillel the Rabbi had made a ruling that if gentiles joined the church they must become Jews. That ruling was known be everyone as the law of Moses. Now Paul agrees with Christ, they say the same.
Now I had to work out the "old" and the "new" and how God saw that. I found that the old and the new agreed, as all of God agrees and is a unit. There was an old way of the temple and a new way. An old way of blood and a new way. An old way of atonement and a new way of salvation. It included so many things that it took months to track every single change down, but always, the new was built on the old. By seeing the old clearly, it pointed to how the new was better.
I found that even law was like that. In the old, it was difficult to find that God directed law to have spirit and truth, that is mostly found in Isaiah. Christ's teaching made that up front, basic teaching. But again, I can't find that the old is wiped out by the new.
I've tried to understand all these "old is gone and dead" "don't listen to that old stuff" people, and it seems to me it simply isn't a godly teaching.
And more and more what sets my teeth on edge is "the law won't save" as meaning the law is no good. Never has there been a scripture I have found that said it ever could. It wasn't given for that, it can't be used for that, and because it can't be used for salvation is no reason to toss it out. It has many uses, but it won't work at all for salvation, never has.
I've tried, but I just can't read scripture to find I am wrong, even with the awful things I am told about this thinking.
I have been told to just read Galatians, so I not only read it, I did everything I could to understand that chapter, but I felt that if one scripture disagrees with another, I was not understanding because there is absolute unity in God. It is a hard statement made in that chapter, it is true, and we have to understand. Christ said the law was good, Galatians says the law of Moses isn't necessary for salvation. They had to agree. I went into history and found the Hillel the Rabbi had made a ruling that if gentiles joined the church they must become Jews. That ruling was known be everyone as the law of Moses. Now Paul agrees with Christ, they say the same.
Now I had to work out the "old" and the "new" and how God saw that. I found that the old and the new agreed, as all of God agrees and is a unit. There was an old way of the temple and a new way. An old way of blood and a new way. An old way of atonement and a new way of salvation. It included so many things that it took months to track every single change down, but always, the new was built on the old. By seeing the old clearly, it pointed to how the new was better.
I found that even law was like that. In the old, it was difficult to find that God directed law to have spirit and truth, that is mostly found in Isaiah. Christ's teaching made that up front, basic teaching. But again, I can't find that the old is wiped out by the new.
I've tried to understand all these "old is gone and dead" "don't listen to that old stuff" people, and it seems to me it simply isn't a godly teaching.
And more and more what sets my teeth on edge is "the law won't save" as meaning the law is no good. Never has there been a scripture I have found that said it ever could. It wasn't given for that, it can't be used for that, and because it can't be used for salvation is no reason to toss it out. It has many uses, but it won't work at all for salvation, never has.
I've tried, but I just can't read scripture to find I am wrong, even with the awful things I am told about this thinking.
I saw in a pasted part of a post, "lawless=not obeying the obsolete laws of the Mosaic laws, right?" Lawless is mentioned in the New Testament in reference to the evil one to come. Lawless means breaking laws with intent. All who are living in grace obey all the laws, but when they falter, there is no worry because they live in grace.
Obeying God should not be a burden to any who claim to be saved. The new spirit indwelling makes obedience our nature, though we do have times when we are tried, and there may be times when we fail, it is the attitude of love and grace that keeps us all in Yeshua. It is not saying we are free of the law because it is abolished; this is false, only the curse of the law is abolished, but those who cannot see and those who will not hear cannot understand.
It is always the correct choice to obey our Father, just as children, good children that is, in this age obey their Father..and Mother.....
Obeying God should not be a burden to any who claim to be saved. The new spirit indwelling makes obedience our nature, though we do have times when we are tried, and there may be times when we fail, it is the attitude of love and grace that keeps us all in Yeshua. It is not saying we are free of the law because it is abolished; this is false, only the curse of the law is abolished, but those who cannot see and those who will not hear cannot understand.
It is always the correct choice to obey our Father, just as children, good children that is, in this age obey their Father..and Mother.....