God did away with some of His own sayings

[just-me]

This is something that many who desire certain parts of God's word to disappear really don't like to acknowledge. All that Jesus taught before His death was Old Testament truth. Hebrews 9:17

Oh my goodness!! Really?

 

[eternally-gratefull]

I am not a sinless perfectionism and I do not preach on sinless perfection !!!

What I do state and speak on is from the word of God that by the Holy Spirit we will learn to sin less and less, as He will help us overcome that sinful nature.

I agree with you

If you think a person still continues to walk the same way in the flesh (sinful style) after being born again then you will have to do away with over half the NT to make that true.

I agree with you. In fact John says a person born of God can not do this, if they have, they have never known God, or even seen him (never been saved)

From Jesus to John in the NT it is repeated over and over again we are to abstain from sinning, as in putting off our former self to no longer walk as we use to.

Agree here also. But how do we do this> By following some law. or a set of commands, or learning to love as Jesus loved and serving others?

I am not better than Paul or anybody else that is a believer, but I speak as he spoke and Romans 7 is not his current and all time stance in the faith. If you or anybody else believe it is then you are saying Paul was condemning himself because he called himself carnal sold under sin in 7, but Romans 8 said he could no longer walk that way and was now walking by the Spirit.

No you not correct. and this is where you start to falter in your belief system.

In romans 7 paul spoke of his current struggle between the flesh and spirit. Before paul was born, he had no struggle. he could never do anything good. He realised that, and even said such in romans 3.
Paul was not condemning himself. he was sharing a truth, We all struggle with the flesh, What we want to do , we can not (by our own power ) do. what we do not want to do. we have no problem doing (because it is in our nature, the flesh)

A child of God is given the power of God. but God does not force our flesh to just disapear. nor do we become superchristians the moment we are saved, we will all struggle. Proven by the fact we still sin.

Romans 8 was pauls answer the romans 7. Do not try to do good. you will fail, for it is not in YOUR NATURE, but instead, rely on the power of God (set your minds on the things of the spirit)

Making Romans 7 current makes the gospel message one of lewdness, and that is showed to be a false gospel by doing that !!!

In my opinion, That is nothing but pride coming forth.

The standard of god is perfection. If you are not perfect. you are not living up to gods standard (able to save yourself)

John said if we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves and their is no truth in us, We sin because of romans 7. The way to sin less is romans 8.

If we as chilren of God do not realise we all partake in romans 7, we will remain babes in Christ and never grow (because why bother trying when you continually fail) or we will decieve ourselves into thinking we are more holy than we really are. or at worst case senerio, we will fall for a gospel of works, which is no gospel at all. and think we are saved because we do good. and others are lost, because they rely on faith alone in the finished work of the cross. and the security of the cross and seal of the spirit which saved forever the one who is being sanctified in Christ.

which sadly, I feel you have fallen into

 

[atwhatcost]

This is not the point the op is trying to portray though.

WHile your right the law that says do not rape is still valid. The law itself is NEVER going to prevent someone from raping someone else. It is far for complicated that that. The law CAN give a punishment to those who break it, but it is totaly helpless when it comes to showing someone how to do it.

Where these lawyers get things so screwed up is they say it can. and we who disagree are saying Gods word is meaningless. which is not true.

No one in this room is denying that even the ten commands are no longer laws which should not be broken. We are saying, they never could tell us how to be righteous people to begin with, all they could ever do is prove we are sinners, and need Christ (thus they point to Christ) not so we could live righteous lives.

Actually Notmebuthim's point is the same as Just-Me's point, but your so busy rushing to your own conclusions you don't take the time to notice.

Thus your prove-a-point trumps all, whether it really does or not. (And it doesn't.) This is what you do all the time. You don't read. You respond with your heart. Your heart ain't good enough. That which you clearly miss.

 

[atwhatcost]

Well think what you will.

He is a legalist. And you can not have read everything he has said and think otherwise. unless you too are a legalist. So I guess it is up to you to decide what you are.

do you feel we are bound to follow Gods law today. Or do you understand the law was given to lead us to Christ, but after we have come to Christ, God has a much better way to show us how to be holy set apart people?

One has to remember, Noah was considered a righteous and just person. How could he if the law was not yet given to him?

we can be just as holy and righteous as noah was without the law. By learning what it is that made Noah holy.

The law will never make you righteous (justified or holy) it was never intended to do that. People were holy before the law.

Dear child! Let me clarify a little reality on you. I do not get just two choices because you decree but two choices on me. Sort of like saying you either have to like blue or red the best. Just asinine assumption. (And yet you played that game more than once in the same post. Go figure.)

As for the rest? All you do is keep proving you don't read what people say before you start writing your response.

Want proof? There are at least five people on this thread that agree with Just-me. Name them!

 

[KennethC]

1 John 3:18-19

My little children, let us not love in word, neither in tongue; but in deed and in truth.

And hereby we know that we are of the truth, and shall assure our hearts before Him.

 

[atwhatcost]

Maybe he doesn't realize that that is exactly what he is saying.

Maybe you can read what he DID say to figure it out yourself. Sure beats Free's merry-go-round ride.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Actually Notmebuthim's point is the same as Just-Me's point, but your so busy rushing to your own conclusions you don't take the time to notice.

Thus your prove-a-point trumps all, whether it really does or not. (And it doesn't.) This is what you do all the time. You don't read. You respond with your heart. Your heart ain't good enough. That which you clearly miss.

again, if you think this, you have not read just-mes past threads or do you understand what he teaches.

Thats the point, I DO READ, thats why I KNOW WHAT HE IS SAYING, because I HAVE READ WHAT HE HAS POSTED IN THE PAST TIME AND TIME AGAIN.

 

[atwhatcost]

You keep assuming and you're going to make a butt out of the both of us. lol There was no skimming on my part, but very well may have been done on your part to miss the implications of the thoughts expressed in the OP. You should give it another read and see what it means to consider all of what God has said and that all of it applies to us. If all applies to us, then Law applies to us. That is the logical outflow of such thought and is false. We are not under Law.

Let's see. He never said following law saves us nor does he believe we're stuck "under the law." You keep saying he did and swear we're not under the Law (as if that defines anything whatsoever other than simplifying really doesn't work.) What did I miss?

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Dear child! Let me clarify a little reality on you. I do not get just two choices because you decree but two choices on me. Sort of like saying you either have to like blue or red the best. Just asinine assumption. (And yet you played that game more than once in the same post. Go figure.)

As for the rest? All you do is keep proving you don't read what people say before you start writing your response.

Want proof? There are at least five people on this thread that agree with Just-me. Name them!

lol.. They agree with just me? or just what Just me seems to be saying here?

There is a huge difference my friend. Me and just me are old buddies. we have hashed this out before. It is not something knew.

You ever have someone you discussed things with over and over, and you know what they are saying, but they continue to deny it.

Yeah I am sure you do. we have all dealt with people like that. This is one of those cases.

So do you feel we should still be observing all the OT rituals of the law?

Do you believe one can not covet just by the words (do not covet) *ie the words do not covet show us how to not covet) Because that is what Just me believes, how do I know? Because I have asked him before. He got mad at me for even asking such a question. Because as he put it, why else would God say do not covet unless it could help us not covet..

And these are just a few points of all the law obeying principles just me has trie to shove down our throats the past year or two.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Let's see. He never said following law saves us nor does he believe we're stuck "under the law." You keep saying he did and swear we're not under the Law (as if that defines anything whatsoever other than simplifying really doesn't work.) What did I miss?

Because he has said time and time again that following the law does make us closer to God and more holy (righteous) people. even as far as saying we should follow many or all of the ceremonies of the law. and if we do not. we are not following God will and are removing part of Gods words. (what do you think he is trying to say here, and why do you think we are trying to confront him as to what he means)

 

[BenFTW]

This is something that many who desire certain parts of God's word to disappear really don't like to acknowledge. All that Jesus taught before His death was Old Testament truth. Hebrews 9:17

Oh my goodness!! Really?

Pick a side. Hopefully that side is truth but you keep going back and forth. What a mess, of doctrine. Also that verse is speaking of the new, of Jesus being that shed blood for the covenant. This post is somewhat accurate, however some of what Jesus said was OT truth to people under Law prior to His death and resurrection. Somethings hinted at post-cross truths.

Sigh... atwhatcost, you're so accusatory and your tone is horrendous towards eternally-gratefull. Chill out.

 

[atwhatcost]

Oh yes the gospel is simple. If only we could remember how simple it was when the Holy Spirit convicted our hearts of sin, righteousness and judgment. If only we remembered it was the hearing of Gods word that brought us to Christ.

It never ceases to amaze me how we all become great theologians after we are saved. We add rituals and rites fashioning a grand religion that surely must impress God Himself. We lose sight of the bloody old Roman cross and see only a golden palace as the eternal abode for those who are righteous. Like we deserve anything that God has given us.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

As a child, I followed my earthly dad because he knew exactly what I feared the most and promised that as my punishment.

As an adult, I followed him as much as I could because I love him. I still knew his rules. They're still part of who he is. (I still won't walk on his grass. Not because I might damage the grass, but because he doesn't like people walking on his perfect grass. lol)

I follow God-Dad because his rules are perfect and show who he is and what he expects of me. I don't follow his rules perfectly, but he loves me. He gave me those rules so I can see him, because he doesn't literally hold my hand for me to follow. When all is right in my world, I know he is ahead of me if I do as he says. He's there to pick me up, when I fall. He's there to remind me not to turn left right there because rule number X tells what happens if I turn left there, what trouble I can fall into, and what happens to me when I turn from him. He's clearer in his understanding then my earthly father ever was. His rules make sense. His rules tell me who he is and what he wants from me.

AND he loves me.

THAT'S what his rules have done for me. THAT's why OT IS NT. Jesus fulfilled those rules because we won't. Jesus is those rules because he is God. So absolutely not! I am not turning from those rules to satisfy those who think I'm busy thinking those rules are "rituals and rites." I saw how much God loves me. It was on that bloody cross because that's his rule too!

 

[atwhatcost]

again, if you think this, you have not read just-mes past threads or do you understand what he teaches.

Thats the point, I DO READ, thats why I KNOW WHAT HE IS SAYING, because I HAVE READ WHAT HE HAS POSTED IN THE PAST TIME AND TIME AGAIN.

It took you a full two minutes between reading what I wrote and responding.

Nope! You don't read! You skim always waiting to pounce with your opinion ASAP.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

It took you a full two minutes between reading what I wrote and responding.

Nope! You don't read! You skim always waiting to pounce with your opinion ASAP.

Oh is that so? so tell me how I misread you? you wrote 5 lines of words. What you wrote was not very complicated. nor deep that one needed to carefully see what you were saying, if it took me more than two minutes to respond. I have more issues that you can fathom.

and by the way, why is it you never seem to answer any of my responses. with actually content, but only seem to wish to judge or assume you know what I mean (a strawman)

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Pick a side. Hopefully that side is truth but you keep going back and forth. What a mess, of doctrine. Also that verse is speaking of the new, of Jesus being that shed blood for the covenant. This post is somewhat accurate, however some of what Jesus said was OT truth to people under Law prior to His death and resurrection. Somethings hinted at post-cross truths.

Sigh... atwhatcost, you're so accusatory and your tone is horrendous towards eternally-gratefull. Chill out.

I am used to it. She does that to me alot. I guess she thinks that is going to change my mind? glad someone can see it though,.

as for your first part. amen. We can post scripture all day, it does not mean scripture supports what we are trying to say, or says what we are trying to make it say.

 

[atwhatcost]

Because he has said time and time again that following the law does make us closer to God and more holy (righteous) people. even as far as saying we should follow many or all of the ceremonies of the law. and if we do not. we are not following God will and are removing part of Gods words. (what do you think he is trying to say here, and why do you think we are trying to confront him as to what he means)

Yes and no. He did say some of that. He didn't say other. (Well, he did, but had you bothered to keep reading without that hair up your bum, you would have found out he was kidding, knowing full well some people -- say YOU -- would really believe that.) Like I said. You don't read. You skim forever arming yourself with you're next prove-a-point.

Tenth grade reading level here plus a degree in Communications/Sec. Ed. (Tenth grade sounds bad, but the truth is you don't need a higher level unless you read academia and I'm anti-academia, so intentionally didn't learn higher than 10th grade. That and most of what is written today is at a 7th grade reading level.) You're really going to keep trying to tell someone who actually learned how to spot reading comprehension problems enough to get my degree into buying that you don't have one?

I'm not merely saying that as a person. I'm diagnosing you as someone with the degree to diagnose this one. If I had you as a student, you'd get a D most of the time. You skim the material because you think you can guess where it's going all the time. There is innate ability in you to guess above average on a true/false test, but clearly not enough ability in you to Ace a true/false test just by reading the beginning and guessing the answer. After half a year of you playing this game with me as a teacher, I'd keep failing you until you finally realize you have to sit back and really read to understand what was said vs. what you assume it will say.

Warning: Occasionally, when going to a social networking site about any topic, you're going to run into people who truly understand odd things. "Experts," if you will. (Although I hesitate to use that one, since the real experts keep going with their education to define themselves as experts. Still, I do know this subject more than most on this site and was trained to spot reading problems.) It's just plain silly to call them on stuff they truly do know to prove you don't know it at all.

 

[atwhatcost]

Pick a side. Hopefully that side is truth but you keep going back and forth. What a mess, of doctrine. Also that verse is speaking of the new, of Jesus being that shed blood for the covenant. This post is somewhat accurate, however some of what Jesus said was OT truth to people under Law prior to His death and resurrection. Somethings hinted at post-cross truths.

Sigh... atwhatcost, you're so accusatory and your tone is horrendous towards eternally-gratefull. Chill out.

And this isn't accusatory? Kettle, meet pot.

Seriously dude? You assume there are two sides. Which two sides. OT vs. NT? Just Me picked a "side." It's called the whole of the Bible.

 

[atwhatcost]

I am used to it. She does that to me alot. I guess she thinks that is going to change my mind? glad someone can see it though,.

as for your first part. amen. We can post scripture all day, it does not mean scripture supports what we are trying to say, or says what we are trying to make it say.

I'd go with changing your reading style first. I think the rest would actually come to you as a "Duh now! Of course I agree with THAT" moment, if you ever changed your reading style.

 

[just-me]

These instigated law arguments are pretty old and shows a disdain for certain parts of God's word. Guess who else hates the word of God and takes bits and pieces of God's word out of context in order to deceive? "And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:"

Let's see if we can divert some attention to the prophets instead of the law. That's part of God's spoken word also.

Son of man, prophesy against the shepherds of Israel, prophesy, and say unto them, Thus saith the Lord God unto the shepherds; Woe be to the shepherds of Israel that do feed themselves! should not the shepherds feed the flocks? Ezekiel 34:2

What have the shepherds done? Have they actually taught that disobedience is tolerable in the New Covenant with Christ so now we have the freedom to reject certain parts of God's spoken words?

Therefore, ye shepherds, hear the word of the Lord;As I live, saith the Lord God, surely because my flock became a prey, and my flock became meat to every beast of the field, because there was no shepherd, neither did my shepherds search for my flock, but the shepherds fed themselves, and fed not my flock;Ezekiel 34:7-8

So what is the end result for those who teach that certain parts of God's spoken word are bad or not needful for Christians?

Therefore, O ye shepherds, hear the word of the Lord;Thus saith the Lord God; Behold, I am against the shepherds; and I will require my flock at their hand, and cause them to cease from feeding the flock; neither shall the shepherds feed themselves any more; for I will deliver my flock from their mouth, that they may not be meat for them. Ezekiel 34:9-10

We talk pretty lofty against the Old Covenant as if God took it upon Himself to abolish it when it was man who broke it. Just because we are unable keep it doesn't give us the right to say it's bad. Ya think God didn't know that was coming? Get real!

"And an angel of the Lord came up from Gilgal to Bochim, and said, I made you to go up out of Egypt, and have brought you unto the land which I sware unto your fathers; and I said, I will never break my covenant with you." Judges 2:1

For all those wise people that say things have changed with Christ. Who on earth do you think was talking to Israel in the above verse? Was it a simple angel of the Lord, or was it actually our Lord Jesus Christ being the epitome of God Almighty?
John 14:9

 

[pottersclay]

Ok got to get into this .......a post said that he (God) gave us the physical then Jesus gave us the spiritual?