Some things about the law that need explaining.

[Magenta]

who said the man was alive?
jesus point was even if they showed the man, let he who has no sin cast the first stone

Who said he wasn't? Did he even exist?

Fact is, we do not know either way.

What we do know is that the teachers of the law were trying to catch Jesus out.

... in order to have a basis for accusing Him.

And also, the fact that the man was not presented at the same time is a glaring omission and contrary to the law.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Who said he wasn't? Did he even exist?

Fact is, we do not know either way.

What we do know is that the teachers of the law were trying to catch Jesus out.

And also, the fact that the man was not presented at the same time is a glaring omission and contrary to the law.

What I am trying to ask, is if they did, would Jesus have told them to stone them. or ask them the same question

notice Jesus said he did not condemn her either, go and sin no more. Jesus knew her guilt they did not have to prove it

 

[Magenta]

So your saying if they brought the man, Jesus would have said stone them both?
say it is not so

What I am trying to ask, is if they did, would Jesus have told them to stone them. or ask them the same question

Jesus' response would have been basically the same...

“Let him who is without sin among you be the first to cast a stone...”

 

[Blackpowderduelist]

Yes

but I do not need the law to tell me this

thats my point

why can’t you comprehend this fact

Because it's not true. If it weren't written in the law you wouldn't know that some of those things are sin.

 

[Yahshua]

So your saying if they brought the man, Jesus would have said stone them both?
say it is not so

I would've said such if that's what I was saying. Don't start putting words in another members mouth when you've called out the very same act earlier, it's hypocritical.

Likewise, the Messiah was pointing out their hypocrisy, showing they had no right to judge on the matter.

The problem wasn't the law. The problem was them.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Jesus' response would have been basically the same...

“Let him who is without sin among you be the first to cast a stone...”

Which was my point, Jesus had instituted grace already. At this point, the law was fading away, he did not demand they follow the law in this instance.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Because it's not true. If it weren't written in the law you wouldn't know that some of those things are sin.

Lol

then brother we are in deep trouble, because we can keep the law perfectly yet still sin

we can know what sin is.

Jesus said the law of love, 2 commands encompasses all

if I do anything, even something commanded by the aw, and not out of love, it is sin, even if the law does not consider it sin

remember, the letter said do not commit adultry, it does not say if you have erotic thoughts of a woman not your wife, you are in sin, yet you are in sin

its dangerous to look at the law for what it sin, it proves you a sinner, not show you all possible means of sin

 

[Magenta]

Which was my point, Jesus had instituted grace already. At this point, the law
was fading away, he did not demand they follow the law in this instance.

They would have all had to kill each other

 

[eternally-gratefull]

I would've said such if that's what I was saying. Don't start putting words in another members mouth when you've called out the very same act earlier, it's hypocritical.

Likewise, the Messiah was pointing out their hypocrisy, showing they had no right to judge on the matter.

The problem wasn't the law. The problem was them.

So you are saying, if they brought the man, Jesu would have told them to stone her?


wow man, like wow.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

They would have all had to kill each other

Yep. and him if they brought him and had witnesses

but I truly believe Jesus would have said the same thing, amd told them both to go and sin no more

 

[Yahshua]

So you are saying, if they brought the man, Jesu would have told them to stone her?


wow man, like wow.

Well the King has a right to judge or pardon as He sees fit. He chose to pardon.

I can tell you for sure that when He returns His garments will be stained with blood. So if the mere possibility of the Messiah judging folks in death shocks you, you might want to read a bit more bible to learn about Him.

 

[Blik]

Blik you have a very confused hermeneutical of the OT. From everything you have said, it seems to me that you believe that because the Old Covenant came first, it is therefore first in importance.

But the New Covenant is not dependent on works, keeping the law or obeying God. Of course, we we do try to do good works as Paul says in Eph. 2:8-10. But works cannot save us. Obeying God cannot save us, although we should always be reaching out to obey God. And we certainly do not have to keep any of the 613 OT laws, for all the people, or just the Levites and priests.

The Old Covenant has to be read through the eyes of the New Covenant. That means the OT has to be read with a firm foundation of faith in Christ, because he delivered us from sin and death, which fulfills not just the law, but all the OT prophecies.

You have it all wrong!! You lay a foundation in the law, and second comes Jesus. I believe your faith in Christ is enough! God always gives us the right amount of faith. But then you have added all this confusing mess of the OT, confusing everyone, including yourself.

At no point does the Bible urge NT believers to go back to the law. The Old Covenant has been washed away. I plead you to study the NT, and when you read the OT, to do it through the eyes of a born again believer, who puts Christ first, and interprets the OT in light of Jesus, and how he broke the power of sin and death.

One of the things that drew me to Christ was realizing that I could not keep the law, and I was a sinner going to hell. I was fortunate, in that so many people reached out and told me the gospel, their testimonies were many, but no one said I had to obey the law. We do have to repent. But boiling a goat in his mother's milk, or wearing a blend of cloth, or not sacrificing a lamb or a bird means I am going to be tempted with, or will send me to hell. Jesus set me free from my former wicked and sinful self. The Holy Spirit made me a new creature in Christ. I praise him for that.

No law or following it saved me. You are espousing a heresy. You have changed the gospel from
1 Corinthians 15, to one of your own making.

Plus, I hope you have noticed that not one person in this forum who know their Bible agree with you. I've read the OT from cover to cover over 50 times. God shows me something new every time I read it. The last couple of years, God has shown me Jesus in the OT. I guess I am looking for him more, too! I'm sure you have also read the OT many times. But you have not been listening and you are not hearing from the Holy Spirit, but some enemy leading you astray.

I'm praying for you to find your way back to the real gospel. And please take care of yourself during COVID.

What I believe about the old covenant is that the new one is much better because the law is given in our hearts. What I don't believe is that the new covenant cancelled the promises of good for us when God gave us the better covenant. The old covenant taught using physical commands to help them understand the spiritual, the new covenant speaks directly to our hearts so the old commands are obsolete.

I also believe the old testament is scipture and truth. I don't think it is right to criticize the Lord for giving commands that we are not obliged to keep with the new covenant, rather I think we are to learn from those commands. I also believe that our modern day church has labeled some of the commands obsolete that the Lord has not labeled osolete. However, I believe these are not important for our salvation, only that it would be to our good in our earthly living if we agreed with how the lord means scripture.

I am banking on that the Lord is with me as I study scripture, I cannot pretend to believe in such as criticizing the Lord's word. I believe in scripture, not the teaching that is only man teaching. I die to self every day, I live through Christ. 1 Corinthians 15 explains my beliefs better than I am doing.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Well the King has a right to judge or pardon as He sees fit. He chose to pardon.

I can tell you for sure that when He returns His garments will be stained with blood. So if the mere possibility of the Messiah judging folks in death shocks you, you might want to read a bit more bible to learn about Him.

You failed to answer my question

you walked around it,

 

[Yahshua]

You failed to answer my question

you walked around it,

By your last sentence it was clear you had a full dialogue with yourself: you posed the question and supplied the answer you wanted. I didn't want to impose.

 

[Magenta]

I also believe that our modern day church has labeled some of the commands obsolete that the Lord has not labeled obsolete. However, I believe these are not important for our salvation, only that it would be to our good in our earthly living if we agreed with how the lord means scripture.

Hebrews 8:13
By calling this covenant “new,” He (Jesus) has made the first one
obsolete; and what is obsolete and outdated will soon disappear.

 

[Yahshua]

The original promise was to become a nation of priests...


Exodus 19:5-6
Now therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people: for all the earth is mine: 6 And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation. These are the words which thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel.


What are priests meant to do?


Acts 13:47
For so hath the Lord commanded us, saying, I have set thee to be a light of the Gentiles, that thou shouldest be for salvation unto the ends of the earth


How?


Zechariah 8:23
Thus saith the LORD of hosts; In those days it shall come to pass, that ten men shall take hold out of all languages of the nations, even shall take hold of the skirt of him that is a Jew, saying, We will go with you: for we have heard that God is with you.


Who is a Jew?


Romans 2:27-29 [brackets mine]
27 And shall not uncircumcision which is by nature [i.e. gentiles], if it fulfil the law, judge thee [i.e. natural Jews], who by the letter and circumcision dost transgress [i.e. break] the law?

28 For [i.e. because] he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God


1) Note that the uncircumcised can fulfill the law just like the Messiah did, as far as Paul says in the passage above.

2) Those who fulfill the law, are Jews (inside).

3) They will judge even the natural Jew who breaks the law.


But what does "fulfill the law" mean? Does it mean to destroy or abolish it?


Matthew 5:17
Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the Prophets. I have not come to abolish, but to fulfill.


Romans 13:10
Love worketh no ill to his neighbour: therefore love is the fulfilling of the law.


Love your neighbor enough not to...

- covet their spouse, property, position
- lie to them or about them
- commit adultery or sexual perversion
- kill them or hate them
- steal from or defraud them

...and love the Almighty enough to...

- always honor your parents & leaders
- keep the Sabbath day holy
- never take His name in vain
- never idolize anything created
- never have any other gods in His face


Do we love our neighbors enough?
Do we love the Almighty enough?


After being justified, we weigh our hearts against the standard to gauge our level of love, showing us where we're strong in love and where we're weak and in need of more help through fasting and prayer and confession, as we train to walk in the righteousness we've been given at conversion; to do better and better each day, until we are like the Messiah. Until we are complete.


Notice, at no point was mentioned any death (neither death of the believer who stumbles in sin or sacrifice of an animal for sin) because the law was changed from those elements (Hebrews 7:12).

Changed, not ended. Amended. Just like an amendment to The USA Constitution.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

By your last sentence it was clear you had a full dialogue with yourself: you posed the question and supplied the answer you wanted. I didn't want to impose.

No i asked you if they brought the man wouod Jesus have told the crowd to stone them, or would he have said let he who has no sin cast the first stone

 

[Ahwatukee]

Was the law only given to Israel or did the Lord want the gentiles to listen and accept Him? Did Jesus change the law when He came? Can a Jew ask for forgiveness, as he does every day, when he hasn’t recognized Christ? Does the grace he believes in allow him to be forgiven under the symbolic Christ?
Did the new covenant cancel any guidance the Lord gives us through telling of His law?

"What then will we say? That the Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, have obtained it, a righteousness that is by faith; but Israel, who pursued a law of righteousness, has not attained it. Why not? Because their pursuit was not by faith, but as if it were by works.

They were and still are, trying to obtain righteousness through the works of the law.

There also be many so-called Christians who will have been trusting in their own efforts, but will not be able to enter into the kingdom of God:

"Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of My Father in heaven. Many will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?’

Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you workers of lawlessness!’

The will of the Father is for us to believe in His Son whom He sent. The people in the scripture above are citing their own works as the reason why they should be able to enter into the kingdom of God. They will have trusted in their own works. The correct response would have been, "Lord, Lord, did you not shed your blood for us." Of course, if that was their attitude in the first place, they would not be there for the Lord to tell them to depart from Him. Unfortunately, there will be many who will have trusted in their own efforts, instead of looking to Christ as the author and finisher of their faith.

"Let us fix our eyes on Jesus, the author and perfecter of our faith, who for the joy set before Him endured the cross, scorning its shame, and sat down at the right hand of the throne of God.

Those who will be counting on their own efforts for salvation, are not trusting Christ as the One who paid the penalty for our sins.

Good works are the result of our faith and the indwelling of the Spirit and that for the glory of God, not for our salvation. The Lord also said that by our good works we are building up our treasures in heaven, but we are not saved by them.

 

[echoChrist]

Welcome to CC. Funny how you being new come in attacking people you do not even know.

I don’t attack I defend don’t accuse me.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

I don’t attack I defend don’t accuse me.

You have not even had time to defend. You came in attacking

this is a discussion forum, not a defend my belief forum