Did Jesus ever tell us that we no longer need to keep the law of Moses?

  • 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.

posthuman

Senior Member
Jul 31, 2013
36,530
13,098
113
Abraham did nothing but believe? You call packing up the family, moving to parts unknown nothing? You call demonstrating a willingness to kill your own son nothing? Genesis 28:5because Abraham obeyed me and did everything I required of him, keeping my commands, my decrees and my instructions."
re-read Romans 4:1-3 please.
 
Jan 12, 2019
7,497
1,399
113
look,dude. it's not an universally applicable logical construct. i have proven it in the abstract, and i have given you two definite counterexamples. look up De Morgan's rules: your error in Mark 16:16 is because you are not negating the intersection correctly. or, if you'd rather use philosophical pseudo-logic, you are affirming the consequent.

trying to impress with latin phrases does not make up for being poor at math.
if my math is wrong, point it out.
if not being a woman really implies that you are not an human, please explain why men are not people.
Since you already stated you never heard of modus tollens, this debate has already concluded. Thanks for clarifying.
 

posthuman

Senior Member
Jul 31, 2013
36,530
13,098
113
Genesis 28:5because Abraham obeyed me and did everything I required of him, keeping my commands, my decrees and my instructions."
that's 26:5. you made typo.
read 26:4 -- God gives him the land because of this.

but read Genesis 15:6. Abraham believed, and that belief -- apart from works -- was credited as righteousness.

Abraham was saved whether he ever inherited the land or not.
 

posthuman

Senior Member
Jul 31, 2013
36,530
13,098
113
Since you already stated you never heard of modus tollens, this debate has already concluded. Thanks for clarifying.
rofl

since you have no argument, and your mouth is shut, but you still want to talk, you say 'because this guy didn't waste his time in philosophy classes learning fancy lingo, i win'

wow dude. way to shoot your credibility in the foot.
here i am spitting out all kinds of specialized mathematical jargon - a whole other language - and you think you have some kind of intellectual superiority because you learned some vocabulary word in an easy-A course in the liberal arts department. :ROFL:


if you don't understand the math in post #1546 i will be happy to explain it to you in simpler terms without the mathematical terms and symbology.
it's just way easier to write the other way - and IMO set notation & operations are very valuable things to know.
 
May 1, 2019
1,336
744
113
Since you already stated you never heard of modus tollens, this debate has already concluded. Thanks for clarifying.

I think you were being "Gaslighted"...You were wise to back away. You were not confused or confusing, but if you kept up long enough you might have questioned yourself
 

DeighAnn

Banned Serpent Seed Heresy
Jun 11, 2019
2,436
760
113
rofl

since you have no argument, and your mouth is shut, but you still want to talk, you say 'because this guy didn't waste his time in philosophy classes learning fancy lingo, i win'

wow dude. way to shoot your credibility in the foot.
here i am spitting out all kinds of specialized mathematical jargon - a whole other language - and you think you have some kind of intellectual superiority because you learned some vocabulary word in an easy-A course in the liberal arts department. :ROFL:


if you don't understand the math in post #1546 i will be happy to explain it to you in simpler terms without the mathematical terms and symbology.
it's just way easier to write the other way - and IMO set notation & operations are very valuable things to know.
Ok. I think I might get the very first picture, maybe. I hope we have a long time because I once had someone try to teach me how the "order of operations" is that something? goes because the way I did math always ended up with me being owed money and that wasn't right, but I thought it was
 
Jan 12, 2019
7,497
1,399
113
rofl

since you have no argument, and your mouth is shut, but you still want to talk, you say 'because this guy didn't waste his time in philosophy classes learning fancy lingo, i win'

wow dude. way to shoot your credibility in the foot.
here i am spitting out all kinds of specialized mathematical jargon - a whole other language - and you think you have some kind of intellectual superiority because you learned some vocabulary word in an easy-A course in the liberal arts department. :ROFL:


if you don't understand the math in post #1546 i will be happy to explain it to you in simpler terms without the mathematical terms and symbology.
it's just way easier to write the other way - and IMO set notation & operations are very valuable things to know.
Actually once you debate long enough on the Internet, you will realize that people very rarely change their minds about issues.

To me, once I can understand the thinking behind why one would believe the things he do, I am contented. :)

There is no need to be so agitated and start criticizing your opponents, we are just fellow believers here.
 

posthuman

Senior Member
Jul 31, 2013
36,530
13,098
113
Since you already stated you never heard of modus tollens, this debate has already concluded. Thanks for clarifying.

you are committing what is called "genetic fallacy"

proposing that anything post says is invalid because it came from post.

this is compounded with "
group think fallacy"

you propose that only people who know certain fancy latin phrases can construct logical arguments.


in latin, for all you really smart types, that's "fallacia geneticae" and "videtur coetus" :D
((but there may be fancier more formal phrases for it, that's just literal translation lol -- i'm not smart))
 
U

UnderGrace

Guest

DeighAnn

Banned Serpent Seed Heresy
Jun 11, 2019
2,436
760
113

posthuman

Senior Member
Jul 31, 2013
36,530
13,098
113
There is no need to be so agitated and start criticizing your opponents, we are just fellow believers here.
uh yeah, agree, so why you doing that to me?

i'm pointing out that you're being obtuse.


look again at the examples i gave you -- schwinn bicycles have two wheels, but not everything that isn't a schwinn isn't a bicycle. all women are human but not everyone who isn't a woman isn't a human. look up de morgan's law and look at the notation i gave for Mark 16:16. look at the diagrams and the proof that shows modus tollens is not applicable to sets which are not mutually proper subsets.

if you think my math is wrong, prove it. prove modus tollens for the sets i diagrammed, if you can. i'm not incapable of mistakes, but i don't see any flaw in what i've shown you. if you find what you think is one, show me. '
modus tollens by fiat!!!!' is not a proof.

i'm going to bed. in the morning, if i have to, i will give a full proof of modus tollens failure. tho i should write something for DeighAnn, too - if i am up early enough, i'll do both in one.
 

posthuman

Senior Member
Jul 31, 2013
36,530
13,098
113
you are committing what is called "genetic fallacy"

proposing that anything post says is invalid because it came from post.

this is compounded with "group think fallacy"

you propose that only people who know certain fancy latin phrases can construct logical arguments.

in latin, for all you really smart types, that's "fallacia geneticae" and "videtur coetus" :D
((but there may be fancier more formal phrases for it, that's just literal translation lol -- i'm not smart))

forgive me if i have gone too far in poking at you :)
 
K

Karraster

Guest

Mii

Well-known member
Mar 23, 2019
2,058
1,320
113
uh yeah, agree, so why you doing that to me?

i'm pointing out that you're being obtuse.

look again at the examples i gave you -- schwinn bicycles have two wheels, but not everything that isn't a schwinn isn't a bicycle. all women are human but not everyone who isn't a woman isn't a human. look up de morgan's law and look at the notation i gave for Mark 16:16. look at the diagrams and the proof that shows modus tollens is not applicable to sets which are not mutually proper subsets.

if you think my math is wrong, prove it. prove modus tollens for the sets i diagrammed, if you can. i'm not incapable of mistakes, but i don't see any flaw in what i've shown you. if you find what you think is one, show me. 'modus tollens by fiat!!!!' is not a proof.

i'm going to bed. in the morning, if i have to, i will give a full proof of modus tollens failure. tho i should write something for DeighAnn, too - if i am up early enough, i'll do both in one.
I read "I'm not capable of mistakes" was like!!!!!!!!!!!!

but I digress, if you could explain it to me what you are talking about it sounds rather interesting in regards to the thread. I wiki'd what modus tollens is so hopefully I'll be able to follow. Logic applied to scripture is helpful because I find myself following random bits of the law and then struggling with "I'm a gentile" excuse for others when I get to legalistic about it.
 
U

UnderGrace

Guest
even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace; Isn't the "contained in the ordinances" part kinda important
Here is your preferred translation

King James Bible
Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;
 

DeighAnn

Banned Serpent Seed Heresy
Jun 11, 2019
2,436
760
113
?
Here is your preferred translation

King James Bible
Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;
is the law of commandments contained in ordinances Matt 15: 6-9 or col 2:13,14 or something else?
 
U

UnderGrace

Guest
?

is the law of commandments contained in ordinances Matt 15: 6-9 or col 2:13,14 or something else?
There are many places where the ten commandments are referred to as statutes and/or ordinances, if you are trying to make a case for separating them out.
 
U

UnderGrace

Guest
That's half of it, but what was the issue? The issue was circumcision of the flesh....not the entire law.
The issue was the entire law;) .... the gentiles were not given the law