thanks for the answer
if the beef has touched a dead dog, will eating it make a person unclean?
it is not what goes into the mouth that defiles a person, but what comes out of the mouth; this defiles a person (Matt 15:11)
thanks for the answer
if the beef has touched a dead dog, will eating it make a person unclean?
it is not what goes into the mouth that defiles a person, but what comes out of the mouth; this defiles a person (Matt 15:11)
From what I have read in their posts,and I am not sure if they even realize it,they seem to see Jesus as a catalyst for law obedience.From the Glossary Intro at JGIG, written in 2008:
Language. Powerful stuff. If you can control the language, define the terms, manipulate the paradigm of a thing – you exercise great power. [par·a·digm – A set of assumptions, concepts, values, and practices that constitutes a way of viewing reality for the community that shares them, especially in an intellectual discipline.]
As this illustration demonstrates, having an incorrect paradigm can change the picture of a thing quite a lot! Is it any wonder that those in the Hebrew Roots Movement have claimed the area of language as their primary pillar of “expertise” as they purpose to lure Christians away from the canon of Scripture to a more “enlightened” way of reading/interpreting Scripture and discerning doctrine? It’s a seductive way to change a Christian’s paradigm, and ends up in a set of beliefs and practices that is not supported by Scripture. It turns Christianity as inside out as the above illustration turns the concept of the solar system inside out. The picture is recognizable, but is totally false and unworkable when measured by reality.
I’m no linguist, but I’m no dim bulb, either, and it’s been amazing, disturbing, and somewhat amusing to discover how those in the HRM have determined to re-define terms and doctrines as well as pseudo re-translate the New Testament.
I’ve written this before but it’s worth repeating here – One of the things that is really important to be aware of regarding this and other heretical movements is that they engage in the re-definition of terms. Once that is accomplished, those re-defined terms become fields in which seeds of questionable doctrine can be cultivated.
And it’s the perfect set up for the same thing cults do: Convince you that what you know isn’t true, or is “incomplete”, then come in with fresh revelation based on previously “hidden” information.At HRM websites and in HRM teaching materials a consistent technique is employed to bring the reader to where the writer wishes them to go, and I can’t stress this enough:
Faulty definitions, examples, analogies and reasonings are constructed, then those same faulty definitions, examples, analogies and reasonings are built upon as FACT to take the reader to the next doctrinal place the writer wishes the reader to go.
I have seen the same technique over and over in articles and teachings on HRM websites and in discourse with those who hold to Law keeping doctrine from all points on the spectrum.
This is what we see over and over from BibleGuy and others here at CC who mix Law an for believers in Christ.
-JGIG
Sabbath breaking is deliberate working on the day of the sabbath and is breaking Gods commandments.
Eating unclean creatures is breaking Gods commandments.
Fornication (any sexual immorality) is breaking Gods commandments.
Witchcraft , stubbornness, sorcery and necromancy is breaking Gods commandments.
Not loving and correcting your neighbor is breaking Gods commandments.
These are some simple commandments from the law among many commandments.
cue groan from bibleguyBeen packing and will be on the road shortly - be back as I can. At St. Jude's this week.
Grace and peace, Y'all,
-JGIG
cue groan from bibleguy
Hello fredoheaven,
You wrote: "The Great Commission set forth in Matthew 28:20 is not a pre-cross teaching. It is after cross teaching."
My response: Of course. BUT! The post-cross Great Commission APPLIES the pre-cross teachings to disciples of all nations! (the very thing JGIG opposes...)
SO you choose...
Apply Jesus' pre-cross Torah-teachings teachings (e.g., Mt. 4:4; Mt. 5:19; Mt. 7:21-23; Mt. 13:41-42; Mt. 23:2-3,23,34, Lk. 10:25-28, etc.) to disciples of all nations....as Jesus COMMANDS (Mt. 28:20).
Or be like JGIG who ignores these pre-cross commands/teachings (this violating our Lord's command in Mt. 28:20).
You choose.
best...
BibleGuy
You wrote: "Torah keeping does nothing of the eternal life."
My response: Have you not read Lk. 10:25-28?
You wrote: " If ever the Law (TORAH) keeping is for eternal life then there is NO NEED for Christ. "
My response: Those who obey Torah in faith likewise obey Dt. 18 which requires obedience to the Messiah which requires obedience to even Paul who says we are saved by grace through faith, leading to eternal life.
It's consistent, not contradictory.
Let's not pretend that those who obey Torah in faith do NOT also experience salvation by grace through faith leading to eternal life.
best...
BibleGuy
Hi, BibleGuy, not so sure of feeling “guilty of falling for the bait”. I post independently.Hello again fredoheaven,
Why are you defending your rejection of my premises?
Remember?
JGIG's methodology requires that we infer that you are GUILTY of FALLING FOR THE BAIT and GETTING SUCKED INTO A CHILDISH GAME.
Sounds like you are opposing JGIG's methodology. (good!)
Now, regarding Premise 5 you wrote: "No. It was the written Law of Moses that included Deut.8:3."
My response: Of course the written Torah includes Dt. 8:3. But, this fact does NOT entail that Dt. 8:3 does not refer to that which INCLUDES the written Torah of Moses.
So, you haven't proven that your statement entails the contradiction of Premise 5.
Moreoever, Premise 5 simply logically flows from Premises 1 and 4 (NEITHER of which have you given any good reason for us to dispute).
So again, your opposition to Premise 5 stands unjustified.
And, regarding Premise 8, you wrote: "Nop. It is not the “Rhema” but the which was written (grapho) in the Law of Moses which was cited in Matthew 4:4"
My response: You don't even understand the meaning of Premise 8. Premise 8 does not deny that Dt. 8:3 is contained in the written Torah of Moses. Rather, Premise 8 simply notes that the Greek term "rhema" in Mt. 4:4 is simply a Greek quotation of the Greek term "rhema" in the Greek LXX (Dt. 8:3).
So, your criticism of my Premise 8 shows that you have not appreciated this meaning.
But thank you for at least engaging the premises!
That's MORE than JGIG is willing to do...
She won't even tell us which premise she rejects!
She won't even tell us WHY she rejects a specifically numbered premise!
She won't even PERMIT us to test her position against the criticism I've brought forth.
Thus, her position FAILS the test...
best...
BibleGuy
From previous posts back and forth between me and Bibleguy he believes that we become a Jew once we are saved. That is why he posts what he does.
- II Corinthians 3:13-16 States Moses, which put a vail over his face, that the children of Israel could not stedfastly look to the end of that which is abolished: But their minds were blinded: for until this day remaineth the same vail untaken away in the reading of the old testament; which vail is done away in Christ. But even unto this day, when Moses is read, the vail is upon their heart. Nevertheless when it (the heart) shall turn to the Lord, the vail shall be taken away.
The Jew in part has been blinded during this age because they will not accept that the Lord Jesus Christ fulfilled the law. He became that perfect sacrifice accepted by the Father for our sins imputing us HIS righteousness through the death, burial, and Resurrection.
Until Bibleguy turns his heart towards the Lord his vail will remain over his heart, being blinded to the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ. We can and have refuted every point that bibleguy makes but he will not see that until he turns to the Lord. We must remember this when posting back to bibleguy that we cannot remove the vail he must do it by turning to the Lord Jesus Christ. That is why we must not get frustrated or insult bibleguy, but continue to use scripture to refute his position and help young Christians (i dont mean age) avoid being led back under the law.
God Bless
(hi fredoheaven,
the part about
'And, none of JGIG’s fans has bothered to come here (to her rescue) and explain to us which of the eleven premises we should reject (or why).'
was written by BibleGuy)
I'm in favor of proving all things, but not always proving all things to someone else.
From previous posts back and forth between me and Bibleguy he believes that we become a Jew once we are saved. That is why he posts what he does.
- II Corinthians 3:13-16 States Moses, which put a vail over his face, that the children of Israel could not stedfastly look to the end of that which is abolished: But their minds were blinded: for until this day remaineth the same vail untaken away in the reading of the old testament; which vail is done away in Christ. But even unto this day, when Moses is read, the vail is upon their heart. Nevertheless when it (the heart) shall turn to the Lord, the vail shall be taken away.
The Jew in part has been blinded during this age because they will not accept that the Lord Jesus Christ fulfilled the law. He became that perfect sacrifice accepted by the Father for our sins imputing us HIS righteousness through the death, burial, and Resurrection.
Until Bibleguy turns his heart towards the Lord his vail will remain over his heart, being blinded to the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ. We can and have refuted every point that bibleguy makes but he will not see that until he turns to the Lord. We must remember this when posting back to bibleguy that we cannot remove the vail he must do it by turning to the Lord Jesus Christ. That is why we must not get frustrated or insult bibleguy, but continue to use scripture to refute his position and help young Christians (i dont mean age) avoid being led back under the law.
God Bless
So then nobody will be saved, because nobody can practice keeping the comandments!
If i am not wrong you mean with torah the 5 books of mose. Them to hold is not taught in the NT.
Convert? Convert to whom ore what?
A "renewed" covenant? It looks like Jesus our Lord had no idea about this "renewed" covenant.
Luke 22:20 (NASB)
[SUP]20 [/SUP] And in the same way He took the cup after they had eaten, saying, "This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in My blood.
Here is the definition of the Greek word "new" that Jesus used in Luke. 22:20
denotes "new," of that which is unaccustomed or unused, not "new" in time, recent, but "new" as to form or quality, of different nature from what is contrasted as old.
Vine's Expository Dictionary of Old Testament and New Testament Words.
So, you have sold your house and given it to the elders in your city?