May I ask...

Hoping

Well-known member
Banned
Where does the Law condemn healing on the Sabbath?
It condemns working on the sabbath.
Remember, violating the Sabbath was punishable by the death penalty, according to the law.
The Pharisees couldn't even do that right.
However, God expected His people to intentionally break the Law in certain circumstances when it was called for.
Go read Matthew 12:1-14.
In that passage, Jesus explains that it is lawful to do good on the sabbath. (v12)
Catch that?
"Lawful."
Wow ! And it was way before mid Acts !
Why do you think that? They were James' disciples. Do you think the Apostle James taught them erroneous beliefs?
What in Scripture indicates to you that they were wrong for saying what they said?
Where do you see James preaching circumcision or dietary rules?
Yes. Because keeping the law was required for Israel.
Only OT Israel.
As Jesus had fulfilled the pre-sages, it was no longer necessary to practice them.
Begging the question that the law had been fulfilled, when it hadn't, at least not completely.
It had been fulfilled for those who believed Jesus is the Messiah.
Jesus said to His disciples just before He ascended into Heaven:
"Go and make disciples of all the nations . . . teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you..."
They were obeying Him by keeping the law.
Where did Jesus "teach" circumcision ?
Abstinence from ham ?
Sabbath travel limitations ?
Temple worship ?
Days of atonement ?
Do you think the promises of God are revokable?
Only the "conditional" ones.
 

Idolater

"Matthew 16:18-19" Dispensationalist (Catholic) χρ
Paul's circumcision of Timothy was also mid Acts.
What's your point. There's other things in mid Acts too. So what? How does it connect?
Peter witnessed Jesus "parting from the Law" for three years.
And then just one vision later, he knew what to do.
He didn't keep it secret from the apostles.
I didn't say He did.
Christians don't celebrate pagan holidays.
It's the night before All Saints day, a feast day, a solemnity. "Pagan" smh lol.
Their women don't glorify whoredom with emulation.
"Glorifying whoredom with emulation," that is a powerful image!
What the false church did to me is of no relevance to me now that I have converted to Christianity.
... Unless you're wrong about it being "the false church." So were you confirmed or not?

Here's what you're doing if you deny being confirmed but in fact you were (iow if you lie, which is a sin, Hoping ... just in case you didn't know that). You're hiding evidence deliberately, because you know it supports my view. That's dishonesty, especially in debate.
Though God has equipt me to endure till the end, I still have to endure till the end.
That may be a million temptations away.
So you don't have assurance.

You see what I mean about talking out of both sides of your mouth?

Cos everybody else can.
No, as that "faith" is built on accommodating sin.
Those fanatic Catholics pursue moral purity with zeal, they wish to completely purge every stain and wrinkle from their flesh, in devotion and love and gratitude and satisfaction to God. And they preach to others the rewards for doing it. They try to convert all Catholics to their way of seeing things and living.
Are they not "in Christ" ?
Are they not reborn of God's seed ?
Were they not given the righteousness of Christ ?
Didn't they crucify the flesh with the affections and lusts ?
Apparently not.
This is why you're a sinning ... troll. I mean you're both, a Sinner and a Troll. Like an Officer and a Gentleman, except the ... opposite.
Like false prophets, we can tell from whose seed they are born by their fruit.
We all know what you are Hoping. Hopping around, avoiding bright light so as you can keep pretending to be perfected (something not even the Apostle Paul claimed of himself in Philippians ---- but no, you, Hoping, you've figured it out), leaving little sin droppings everywhere you go. We point out the droppings to you and you ignore them, or act like they're somebody else's, or like they're not really droppings, or even, sometimes, admitting they're droppings, and then, saying, yeah but what's the big deal? Everybody poops. And we're like, "Yeah, so you're going to now confess and admit that you too ... poop?" And then you go on pretending (like Halloween) like this never happened, you never got caught pooping, and you never poop. Because "I'm reborn" from pooping now, I no longer produce any droppings. Even though we just went through with you that you did just leave some droppings, and you did confess that they were yours, you just go on now and pretend like it never happened and like you haven't done that since you "converted to Christianity."

That whole thing is the "troll" part. You're just blatantly and transparently dishonest. Being a sinner isn't unique, we're all sinners. But we're not all trolling like this guy is.
 

JudgeRightly

裁判官が正しく判断する
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Gold Subscriber
It condemns working on the sabbath.

So it doesn't condemn healing on the Sabbath?

In other words, there was no law against healing?

REMINDER: You said:


Everyone who followed Jesus saw the end of the Law and the beginning of grace.

False.

And certain men came down from Judea and taught the brethren, “Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved.”
Acts 15:1

You don't think they saw Jesus healing on the sabbath?


You said that "everyone who followed Jesus saw the end of the Law."

I quoted Acts 15:1 which showed you that everyone who followed Jesus did NOT see the end of the Law. And on top of that, your argument doesn't follow, because your argument was that there was an end to the Law for Jesus' followers, and your reason was "Jesus healed on the Sabbath."

There was no law against healing on the Sabbath. Therefore there couldn't be an end to such a law, because such a law didn't exist to begin with.

You're trying to say "because Jesus healed on the Sabbath, therefore He was doing away with the law." It doesn't follow, logically.

---

Jesus was combatting the laws that Israel had built up around the Law He had given them.

He wasn't doing away with the law.

And the law was still being followed by Jesus' followers long after

And it was way before mid Acts!

What does that have to do with it?

"Lawful" does not mean "grace."

Where do you see James preaching circumcision or dietary rules?

Acts 15:1, which you ignored.

"Men from James" came and told people they had to circumcise.

James is the one who sent them.

James is one of the twelve Apostles to Israel.

It's the ENTIRE REASON for the Jerusalem Council!

They were trying to determine whether Gentiles had to circumcise and keep the law.

Only OT Israel.

Wrong.

Matthew 28:19-20 "Teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you"

Jesus taught the law.

Acts 15:1 "Men from James came down from Judea and taught the brethren, 'Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of moses...'"

The men from James, who was Jesus' Aposle, were taught to keep the law by James. This is all under the New Covenant.

Romans 7:1 "(I speak to those who know the law) ... the law has dominion over a man as long as he lives."

Even Paul recognized that the law was still in effect.

As Jesus had fulfilled the pre-sages, it was no longer necessary to practice them.

There's more to the law than "presages."

It had been fulfilled for those who believed Jesus is the Messiah.

Saying it doesn't make it so.

And I have demonstrated the opposite from Scripture.

Where did Jesus "teach" circumcision?

Jesus was circumcised on the 8th day, according to the law.

Luke 2:21

Abstinence from ham?

Jesus was a Jew. Not eating ham was a given.

Sabbath travel limitations?

Jesus was a Jew. Not traveling on the Sabbath was a given.

Temple worship?

Luke 2:49

Days of atonement?

Please show me in scripture "Days of atonement."

Only the "conditional" ones.

So then why did you say:

With the end of the temple, and the priesthood, their standards would change precipitously.

Please show from scripture where the temple, the priesthood, and "their standards" were "conditional."
 

Hoping

Well-known member
Banned
What's your point. There's other things in mid Acts too. So what? How does it connect?
Mid Acts is the location of many biblical events.
I esteem them all equally.
And then just one vision later, he knew what to do.
Yep.
I didn't say He did.
The apostles knew of the end of the Law before Jesus even died for their sins.
It's the night before All Saints day, a feast day, a solemnity. "Pagan" smh lol.
Yep.
Fleshly over-indulgence, in the honor of dead people.
But not by those who have crucified the flesh and walk in the Spirit.
"Glorifying whoredom with emulation," that is a powerful image!
Isn't it though ?
Why would a reasonable dad, or mom, let his daughter dress up like a harlot ?
... Unless you're wrong about it being "the false church." So were you confirmed or not?
I am not wrong about "false churches".
Here's what you're doing if you deny being confirmed but in fact you were (iow if you lie, which is a sin, Hoping ... just in case you didn't know that). You're hiding evidence deliberately, because you know it supports my view. That's dishonesty, especially in debate.
I went through the false church's version of the giving of the gift of the Holy Ghost.
Something they had no right or ability to do.
That is a gift given by God to the repentant of sin.
Another thing they don't do.
So you don't have assurance.
I take one day at a time.
I am sure I am in the correct faith today.
You see what I mean about talking out of both sides of your mouth?
Cos everybody else can.
I take one day at a time.
I am sure I am in the correct faith today.
Those fanatic Catholics pursue moral purity with zeal, they wish to completely purge every stain and wrinkle from their flesh, in devotion and love and gratitude and satisfaction to God. And they preach to others the rewards for doing it. They try to convert all Catholics to their way of seeing things and living.
Wonderful idea, but they don't do what they preach !
This is why you're a sinning ... troll. I mean you're both, a Sinner and a Troll. Like an Officer and a Gentleman, except the ... opposite.

We all know what you are Hoping. Hopping around, avoiding bright light so as you can keep pretending to be perfected (something not even the Apostle Paul claimed of himself in Philippians ---- but no, you, Hoping, you've figured it out), leaving little sin droppings everywhere you go. We point out the droppings to you and you ignore them, or act like they're somebody else's, or like they're not really droppings, or even, sometimes, admitting they're droppings, and then, saying, yeah but what's the big deal? Everybody poops. And we're like, "Yeah, so you're going to now confess and admit that you too ... poop?" And then you go on pretending (like Halloween) like this never happened, you never got caught pooping, and you never poop. Because "I'm reborn" from pooping now, I no longer produce any droppings. Even though we just went through with you that you did just leave some droppings, and you did confess that they were yours, you just go on now and pretend like it never happened and like you haven't done that since you "converted to Christianity."

That whole thing is the "troll" part. You're just blatantly and transparently dishonest. Being a sinner isn't unique, we're all sinners. But we're not all trolling like this guy is.
If we are all sinners, then Jesus died in vain, and satan won the war, and the only thing in front of us is the day of judgement.
Paul wrote..."Awake to righteousness, and sin not; for some have not the knowledge of God: I speak this to your shame." (1 Cor 15:34)
 
Last edited:

Hoping

Well-known member
Banned
So it doesn't condemn healing on the Sabbath?
In other words, there was no law against healing?
None that I know of.
There was however, a law about carrying things, like a bed, on the sabbath. (John 5)
REMINDER: You said:




You said that "everyone who followed Jesus saw the end of the Law."
If they saw Jesus plucking the "corn", or commanding the man to carry a bed, or heal on the sabbath, they saw the end of the Law.
Is that so difficult to understand ?
I quoted Acts 15:1 which showed you that everyone who followed Jesus did NOT see the end of the Law. And on top of that, your argument doesn't follow, because your argument was that there was an end to the Law for Jesus' followers, and your reason was "Jesus healed on the Sabbath."
The Acts 15 men either didn't see it because they were not followers of Jesus when it happened, or they were spies sent in by the unbelieving Jews to sabotage the brotherhood. (Gal 2:4)
There was no law against healing on the Sabbath. Therefore there couldn't be an end to such a law, because such a law didn't exist to begin with.
If the leaders felt healing on a sabbath was a breaking of the Law, don't you suppose their adherents would have felt the same way?
You're trying to say "because Jesus healed on the Sabbath, therefore He was doing away with the law." It doesn't follow, logically.
Carrying the bed may make my point more clearly.
Picking the "corn" too.
Plus, He never mentioned circumcision or dietary rules being necessary for salvation.
Jesus was combatting the laws that Israel had built up around the Law He had given them.
Agreed.
Thanks for recognizing that happening well before Paul was converted.
He wasn't doing away with the law.
Not the big 9.
But neither was Paul.
And the law was still being followed by Jesus' followers long after
The big 9, for sure, and still are !
The little 400 were just, I don't know... force of habit, and there was nothing inherently wrong with doing so.
What does that have to do with it?
Just a point to be taken into consideration.
It happened before Paul was even mentioned.
"Lawful" does not mean "grace."
Not in any Pharisaic way, to be sure.
But God, by His grace, did give the Law to man so they would see just how wicked sin was.
As Paul wrote..."Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.
13 Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful." (Rom 7:12-13)
Acts 15:1, which you ignored.
See above.
"Men from James" came and told people they had to circumcise.
Acts 15 doesn't mention them "coming from James".
Were they, or were they not, telling what James told the to say, or was it from their own wisdom?
Scripture does not say.
James is the one who sent them.
Now you have jumped to Gal 2.
Do we know if those were also "the sect of the Pharisees" ? Like in Acts 15 ?
Being labeled a sect so early in church history shows the sect of the Pharisees were not of the core.
James is one of the twelve Apostles to Israel.
Thank God for him.
It's the ENTIRE REASON for the Jerusalem Council!
They were trying to determine whether Gentiles had to circumcise and keep the law.
If Jesus had ever once ordered a circumcision, it may have been a question.
He didn't.
Wrong.
Matthew 28:19-20 "Teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you"
Jesus taught the law.
He never taught circumcision or even dietary rules.
Or sabbath keeping.
Acts 15:1 "Men from James came down from Judea and taught the brethren, 'Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of moses...'"
You have misquoted the verse..."And certain men which came down from Judaea taught the brethren, and said, Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved." (Acts 15:1)
I doesn't even say they were believers.
Judaizers, more likely.
The men from James, who was Jesus' Aposle, were taught to keep the law by James. This is all under the New Covenant.
Now we are back to Gal 2, which doesn't make it clear what the visitors were going to say regarding circumcision or even who was eating with who.
It just dealt with Peter, who knew better but condescended to visitors instead of being bold.
Romans 7:1 "(I speak to those who know the law) ... the law has dominion over a man as long as he lives."
Thanks be to God the reborn have all died to the Law.
Even Paul recognized that the law was still in effect.
It was, and still is in effect for those who have not "crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts." (Gal 5:24)
There's more to the law than "presages."
For instance ?
Saying it doesn't make it so.
And I have demonstrated the opposite from Scripture.
Did Jesus teach circumcision ?
Jesus was circumcised on the 8th day, according to the law.
Luke 2:21
He never taught circumcision.
Jesus was a Jew. Not eating ham was a given.
Jesus said..."But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.
10 And he called the multitude, and said unto them, Hear, and understand:
11 Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man; but that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man." (Matt 15:9-11)
Jesus was a Jew. Not traveling on the Sabbath was a given.
Didn't Jesus say that the sabbath was made for the man and not man for the sabbath ? (Mark 2:27)
Luke 2:49
So, no.
Temple worship was not commanded by Christ.
 

way 2 go

Well-known member
It is written..."For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.
17 For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.
18 Whereupon neither the first testament was dedicated without blood.
19 For when Moses had spoken every precept to all the people according to the law, he took the blood of calves and of goats, with water, and scarlet wool, and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book, and all the people,
20 Saying, This is the blood of the testament which God hath enjoined unto you." (Heb 9:16-20)
so we can have a change of dispensation without someone dying , good to know

All Saul did was keep the clothes of the murderers.
As for a mid Acts anything, I am not disposed to celebrating times and seasons.
you're miserable , not an intuitive person and
your best evidence is arguments from silence a logical fallacy
and argument by assertion
I see that as one promise, given twice.
one promise with 2 ways of dispensing it
that's why Paul says this:
[6] I marvel that you so soon are being moved away from Him who called you into the grace of Christ, to another gospel, [7] which is not another,

Enduring faithfully until the end.
no that's the dispensation to the Jews

Not at all, as He had to start somewhere.
He was sent to Israel, as He was of the seed of David, but during His mission also helped some believing Gentiles.

Everyone who followed Jesus saw the end of the Law and the beginning of grace.
The first time Jesus healed on the Sabbath was the split from old to new.
only you see it with your argument from silence

(Acts 21:17-20) [17] And when we came to Jerusalem, the brothers received us gladly. [18] And on the following day Paul went in with us to James, and all the elders were present. [19] And having greeted them, he reported one by one what God did among the Gentiles through his ministry. [20] And when the men heard, they glorified God, having said to him, Thou see, brother, how many thousands there are of the Jews who have believed, and they are all zealots of the law.



Paul wrote about it, that's for sure.
Thanks be to God for the elucidation.
given to Paul

(Acts 11:18-19) [18] And when they heard these things, they relaxed and glorified God, saying, Then God has also granted to the Gentiles repentance to life. [19] Indeed therefore those who were scattered abroad from the persecution that occurred against Stephen passed through as far as Phoenicia and Cyprus and Antioch, speaking the word to none except Jews only.


Eph 3:1 For this reason I, Paul, a prisoner for Christ Jesus on behalf of you Gentiles
Eph 3:2 assuming that you have heard of the stewardship of God's grace that was given to me for you,

as the Jewish believers sold all that they had by the leading of the Holy Spirit in anticipation of Jesus return

Scripture, please.

I think your evaluation of Christian charity and brotherhood besmirches the love shown by the first converts..
why do you ask when you don't believe anything i say
As you have no answer, I will ask again..."What works of the Law did Peter, or Philip, demand of the Gentiles?
Paul went to the gentiles and Peter went to the circumcised .

Gal 2:7 On the contrary, when they saw that I had been entrusted with the gospel to the uncircumcised, just as Peter had been entrusted with the gospel to the circumcised
Gal 2:9 and when James and Cephas and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given to me, they gave the right hand of fellowship to Barnabas and me, that we should go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised.
I am glad to think you are not following some new gospel.

Will liars go to heaven?
Thieves?
If you really feel that telling the truth and buying instead of stealing are "earning" salvation...then get to the work.
I call them the result of being reborn of God's seed.
(Romans 7:15-17) [15] For that which I do, I know not. For what I desire, that I do not do; but what I hate, that I do. [16] If then I do that which I do not desire, I consent to the law that it is good. [17] But now it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwells in me.



All I care about from the Jewish, OT, faith or salvation, are the presages I see fulfilled by Christ Jesus.
the truth doesn't matter to you and it shows
judging by appearance is a sin , not righteous judgement
(John 7:24) Judge not according to appearance, but judge righteous judgment.


If it is a sin for you, than don't do it.
You do need to earn your way into heaven, after all.
"It is permanent, until you"
Does a non-whore dress like a whore?
do you set the standard do you add to the Law.
you who judges by appearance

👇anything less than this a whore ?
Screenshot from 2023-08-06 15-50-33.png


everyone knows the name of a richman but Jesus remembered the name of the poor person
(Luke 16:19-20) [19] And there was a certain rich man; and he was accustomed to don a purple robe and fine linen, making merry in luxury day by day. [20] And there was a certain poor one named Lazarus who had been laid at his porch, being plagued by sores,


And yet, He didn't talk to the Lazarus character...He talked to the rich guy !
your point is ?
If it is a sin for you to believe your eyes, they don't do it.
I would hate for you to find your name blotted out of the book of life on the day of judgement.
your salvation is dependent on you
"It is permanent, until you".

mine is dependent on God
What lie?
look it up
(Romans 7:15-17) [15] For that which I do, I know not. For what I desire, that I do not do; but what I hate, that I do. [16] If then I do that which I do not desire, I consent to the law that it is good. [17] But now it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwells in me

You should look up the use of the "historic present" tense.
Here is the site...https://www.usingenglish.com/reference/historic-present/#google_vignette
The same complaint is probably still being muttered by the OT Jews of today.
Unfortunately, the same excuse for sin is still being used by those who blasphemously call themselves "one-with-Christ" .

It is Paul's self while still living under the Law, and failing.
not possible for reasons you won't address

sorry can't be pre conversion he says dwell
and if was past tense then he is saying he wasn't responsible for his sin

and why was it "no more I" (17,20) indicating it used to be Paul but now its sin that dwells in him , what happened ?

(Romans 7:18-20) [18] For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh) dwells no good thing. For to will is present with me, but how to perform that which is good I do not find. [19] For I do not do the good that I desire; but the evil which I do not will, that I do. [20] But if I do what I do not desire, it is no more I working it out, but sin dwelling in me.
I have the gift of the Holy Ghost, the seal of the inheritance.
I have no assurance that I will still have it tomorrow.
I know that I will never be tempted to commit a sin that I cannot resist, thanks to 1 Cor 10:13.
So my future is in my hands.
And God has equipt me to see it thru till the end.
your salvation is dependent on you as a legalist

(Matthew 5:17-20) [17] Do not think that I have come to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I have not come to destroy but to fulfill. [18] For truly I say to you, Till the heaven and the earth pass away, not one jot or one tittle shall in any way pass from the law until all is fulfilled. [19] Therefore whoever shall break one of these commandments, the least, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of Heaven. But whoever shall do and teach them , the same shall be called great in the kingdom of Heaven. [20] For I say to you that unless your righteousness shall exceed that of the scribes and Pharisees, you shall in no case enter into the kingdom of Heaven.
Well thanks for sharing.
Who was Paul talking/writing to when he wrote Gal 5:19-21 ?..."Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,
20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,
21 Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God."
Wasn't it to Christian believer ?
Does mid Acts dispensationalism negate these commands ?
(Galatians 5:16) I say, then, Walk in the Spirit and you shall not fulfill the lusts of the flesh.

the Law is for the flesh , the spirit is for walking by faith

(Romans 7:14-20) [14] For we know that the law is spiritual, but I am carnal, sold under sin. [15] For that which I do, I know not. For what I desire, that I do not do; but what I hate, that I do. [16] If then I do that which I do not desire, I consent to the law that * it is * good. [17] But now it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwells in me. [18] For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh) dwells no good thing. For to will is present with me, but * how * to perform * that which is * good I do not find. [19] For I do not do the good that I desire; but the evil which I do not will, that I do. [20] But if I do what I do not desire, * it is * no more I working it out, but sin dwelling in me.
you admit to judging by appearance which is a sin ergo you admit to sinning

If it is a sin for you, don't do it.
so sins you commit you just pretend they're not sins
you have flesh in which sin dwells ergo you sin and it's not counted against you
but you think it is

"It is permanent, until you"

I rejoice that the Lord showed me the answers to Paul's plaints of Rom 7.
Rom 7:23 is answered in Rom 8:2.
Rom 7:24 is answered in Rom 6:6.
don't blame God for what you erroneously came up with

(Romans 7:23) but I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin being in my members.
(Romans 8:2) But the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has made me free from the law of sin and death.

"It is permanent, until you" so your not free from the law of sin and death


(Romans 7:24) O wretched man that I am ! Who shall deliver me from the body of this death
(Romans 6:6) knowing this, that our old man is crucified with Him in order that the body of sin might be destroyed, that from now on we should not serve sin

you think you don't sin is still laughable

(Romans 7:18-20) [18] For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh) dwells no good thing. For to will is present with me, but how to perform that which is good I do not find. [19] For I do not do the good that I desire; but the evil which I do not will, that I do. [20] But if I do what I do not desire, it is no more I working it out, but sin dwelling in me.

"My" flesh is His flesh now.
notice you didn't quote that verse, argument by assertion
 

Hoping

Well-known member
Banned
so we can have a change of dispensation without someone dying , good to know
The scriptures were about testaments.
Are you starting a new topic ?
one promise with 2 ways of dispensing it
that's why Paul says this:
[6] I marvel that you so soon are being moved away from Him who called you into the grace of Christ, to another gospel, [7] which is not another,
The promise had already been made to Abraham.
As I look at it some more, the first promise was for an heir, and the second was for a nation.
Th second promise came with the circumcision clause.
no that's the dispensation to the Jews
If you don't feel like remaining faithful until the end, why be faithful now ?
only you see it with your argument from silence
(Acts 21:17-20) [17] And when we came to Jerusalem, the brothers received us gladly. [18] And on the following day Paul went in with us to James, and all the elders were present. [19] And having greeted them, he reported one by one what God did among the Gentiles through his ministry. [20] And when the men heard, they glorified God, having said to him, Thou see, brother, how many thousands there are of the Jews who have believed, and they are all zealots of the law.
Is there something wrong with that?
Much of the Law didn't apply to those who had converted to Christianity.
Can't you see the men's statement as a generality ?
given to Paul
(Acts 11:18-19) [18] And when they heard these things, they relaxed and glorified God, saying, Then God has also granted to the Gentiles repentance to life. [19] Indeed therefore those who were scattered abroad from the persecution that occurred against Stephen passed through as far as Phoenicia and Cyprus and Antioch, speaking the word to none except Jews only.
The "good news" had to spread eventually, as it had with the Grecian widows of Acts 6, and then by Philip, Peter, and John at Samaria in Acts 8.

why do you ask when you don't believe anything i say
I am hoping the Lord hasn't closed your heart.
Paul went to the gentiles and Peter went to the circumcised .
Yet their paths crossed at times.
the truth doesn't matter to you and it shows
Is that the truth Jesus said could free us from committing sin...in John 8:32-34 ?
"It is permanent, until you"
do you set the standard do you add to the Law.
you who judges by appearance
What is written in my heart is from God.
👇anything less than this a whore ?
It is to some, but I know the way Christian women dress, and it is in line with the modesty and submission demanded by God.
They don't dress like whores.
your point is ?
If that Lazarus was a real person, why wasn't he mentioned after his name was cited ?
your salvation is dependent on you
Yes, as I will be the one judged for my actions.
I was the one supplied with all I need to remain loving and charitable and free from sin.
It is up to me to use what I have been given.
mine is dependent on God
As God certainly won't cause you to commit any sins, you "have it made".
sorry can't be pre conversion he says dwell
and if was past tense then he is saying he wasn't responsible for his sin
Not is the "historical" tense he was using.
It was a narrative of his past life.
and why was it "no more I" (17,20) indicating it used to be Paul but now its sin that dwells in him , what happened ?
Paul was leading us through the progression of his past faith.
(Romans 7:18-20) [18] For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh) dwells no good thing. For to will is present with me, but how to perform that which is good I do not find. [19] For I do not do the good that I desire; but the evil which I do not will, that I do. [20] But if I do what I do not desire, it is no more I working it out, but sin dwelling in me.
That was about the bottom of the barrel for him during his past while still walking in the flesh.
your salvation is dependent on you as a legalist
It is dependent on me, as I will be the one to suffer for any lapses in my faith.
But circumcision and dietary Laws have nothing to do with it.
the Law is for the flesh , the spirit is for walking by faith
Agreed
Thanks be to God for allowing the destruction of the flesh at our crucifixion with Christ. (Rom 6:6)
so sins you commit you just pretend they're not sins
If I committed any sins, they would be real sins.
don't blame God for what you erroneously came up with
Blame Him ?
I thank Him !!!!!
(Romans 7:23) but I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin being in my members.
(Romans 8:2) But the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has made me free from the law of sin and death.
"It is permanent, until you" so your not free from the law of sin and death
I don't know how you arrived at that idea.
Like Paul, the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has eclipsed the law of sin and death in my life.
(Romans 7:24) O wretched man that I am ! Who shall deliver me from the body of this death
(Romans 6:6) knowing this, that our old man is crucified with Him in order that the body of sin might be destroyed, that from now on we should not serve sin
you think you don't sin is still laughable
You thinking there is sin in Christ Jesus is lamentable.
(Romans 7:18-20) [18] For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh) dwells no good thing. For to will is present with me, but how to perform that which is good I do not find. [19] For I do not do the good that I desire; but the evil which I do not will, that I do. [20] But if I do what I do not desire, it is no more I working it out, but sin dwelling in me.
Are not you glad Paul had already asserted his freedom from the flesh in Ro 7:5 ?..."For when we were in the flesh, ..."
notice you didn't quote that verse, argument by assertion
Which verse ?
Rom 8:9..."But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his."
Eph 5:30..."For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones."
Eph 5:31-32..."For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh.
32 This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church.

Just as there is no darkness/sin in God, neither is there sin in those in God.
 

way 2 go

Well-known member
The scriptures were about testaments.
?
Are you starting a new topic ?
what topic would that be ?
The promise had already been made to Abraham.
As I look at it some more, the first promise was for an heir, and the second was for a nation.
Th second promise came with the circumcision clause.
Jesus had a plan for gentiles but kept it a mystery until the Mid Acts Dispensation Rom. 16:25

Gen 15:5 And he brought him outside and said, "Look toward heaven, and number the stars, if you are able to number them." Then he said to him, "So shall your offspring be."
Gen 15:6 And he believed the LORD, and he counted it to him as righteousness.

Gen 17:5 No longer shall your name be called Abram, but your name shall be Abraham, for I have made you the father of a multitude of nations.
Gen 17:6 I will make you exceedingly fruitful, and I will make you into nations, and kings shall come from you.
Gen 17:7 And I will establish my covenant between me and you and your offspring after you throughout their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be God to you and to your offspring after you.



(Romans 4:7-11) [7] saying, Blessed are those whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered. [8] Blessed is a man to whom the Lord does, no, not impute sin. [9] Is this blessedness therefore upon men of circumcision, or also upon men of uncircumcision? For we say, Faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness. [10] How then was it reckoned? When he was in circumcision, or in uncircumcision? Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision. [11] And he received the sign of circumcision, as a seal of the righteousness of his faith during uncircumcision, for him to be father of all those who believe during uncircumcision (for righteousness to also be imputed to them),

If you don't feel like remaining faithful until the end, why be faithful now ?
It's a gift
(Ephesians 2:8) For by grace you are saved through faith, and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God,

Faith is the hypostasis (substance) of things hoped for, so it is the means of our hypsotatic union with Christ.

This is a problematically difficult thing to grasp for most anti-sacramental Protestants. Faith isn’t believING, it’s the thing given to man that does the believing.
only you see it with your argument from silence
(Acts 21:17-20) [17] And when we came to Jerusalem, the brothers received us gladly. [18] And on the following day Paul went in with us to James, and all the elders were present. [19] And having greeted them, he reported one by one what God did among the Gentiles through his ministry. [20] And when the men heard, they glorified God, having said to him, Thou see, brother, how many thousands there are of the Jews who have believed, and they are all zealots of the law.


Is there something wrong with that?
Much of the Law didn't apply to those who had converted to Christianity.
Can't you see the men's statement as a generality ?
argument from silence is a logical fallacy .
if they were proselytes it did .
can't you see we're not zealots for the Law , um maybe you are , but not those of us who walk by the spirit by faith
The "good news" had to spread eventually, as it had with the Grecian widows of Acts 6, and then by Philip, Peter, and John at Samaria in Acts 8.
It was kept a mystery until Paul \Mid Acts Dispensation

(Romans 16:25-26) [25] Now to him that is of power to establish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began, [26] But now is made manifest, and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, made known to all nations for the obedience of faith:

and Jesus didn't preach that

(I Corinthians 2:7-8) [7] But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world to our glory: [8] Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.
All I care about from the Jewish, OT, faith or salvation, are the presages I see fulfilled by Christ Jesus.
Is that the truth Jesus said could free us from committing sin...in John 8:32-34 ?
argument by assertion
(John 8:32) And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.

Jesus meant for his disciples to keep the Law and that he would be the atonement

(Matthew 5:18-19) [18] For truly I say to you, Till the heaven and the earth pass away, not one jot or one tittle shall in any way pass from the law until all is fulfilled. [19] Therefore whoever shall break one of these commandments, the least, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of Heaven. But whoever shall do and teach them , the same shall be called great in the kingdom of Heaven.

Paul on the other hand 👇
(Romans 4:7-11) [7] saying, Blessed are those whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered. [8] Blessed is a man to whom the Lord does, no, not impute sin. [9] Is this blessedness therefore upon men of circumcision, or also upon men of uncircumcision? For we say, Faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness. [10] How then was it reckoned? When he was in circumcision, or in uncircumcision? Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision. [11] And he received the sign of circumcision, as a seal of the righteousness of his faith during uncircumcision, for him to be father of all those who believe during uncircumcision (for righteousness to also be imputed to them),

"It is permanent, until you"
do you set the standard do you add to the Law.
you who judges by appearance


What is written in my heart is from God.
no it's just your opinion
or should we canonize everything you say ?

anything less than this a whore ?

It is to some, but I know the way Christian women dress, and it is in line with the modesty and submission demanded by God.
They don't dress like whores.
"It is permanent, until you"

you love the Law while you break it , whats that called


(John 7:24) Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment.

If that Lazarus was a real person, why wasn't he mentioned after his name was cited ?
(Luke 16:24-25) [24] And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me and send Lazarus so that he may dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, for I am tormented in this flame. [25] But Abraham said, Son, remember that you in your lifetime received your good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things. But now he is comforted and you are tormented.

(Luke 16:27) And he said, I beg you therefore, father, that you would send him to my father's house,

your salvation is dependent on you

Yes, as I will be the one judged for my actions.
I was the one supplied with all I need to remain loving and charitable and free from sin.
It is up to me to use what I have been given.
"It is permanent, until you"
As God certainly won't cause you to commit any sins, you "have it made".

(Romans 4:13-15) [13] For the promise, that he should be the heir of the world, was not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through the righteousness of faith. [14] For if they which are of the law be heirs, faith is made void, and the promise made of none effect: [15] Because the law works wrath: for where no law is, there is no transgression.
Not is the "historical" tense he was using.
It was a narrative of his past life.

Paul was leading us through the progression of his past faith.

That was about the bottom of the barrel for him during his past while still walking in the flesh.
no ,try again

if was past tense then Paul is saying he wasn't responsible for his sin
and he also said "no more" indicating something changed

(Romans 7:18-20) [18] For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh) dwells no good thing. For to will is present with me, but how to perform that which is good I do not find. [19] For I do not do the good that I desire; but the evil which I do not will, that I do. [20] But if I do what I do not desire, it is no more I working it out, but sin dwelling in me.
It is dependent on me, as I will be the one to suffer for any lapses in my faith.
But circumcision and dietary Laws have nothing to do with it.
(Matthew 5:18-19) [18] For truly I say to you, Till the heaven and the earth pass away, not one jot or one tittle shall in any way pass from the law until all is fulfilled. [19] Therefore whoever shall break one of these commandments, the least, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of Heaven. But whoever shall do and teach them , the same shall be called great in the kingdom of Heaven.
Agreed
Thanks be to God for allowing the destruction of the flesh at our crucifixion with Christ. (Rom 6:6)
metaphorically speaking
(Romans 6:11) Likewise reckon you also yourselves to be dead indeed to sin, but alive to God through Jesus Christ our Lord
If I committed any sins, they would be real sins.
yes you do sin , but you're not under the Law

(Romans 4:13-15) [13] For the promise, that he should be the heir of the world, was not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through the righteousness of faith. [14] For if they which are of the law be heirs, faith is made void, and the promise made of none effect: [15] Because the law works wrath: for where no law is, there is no transgression.

I don't know how you arrived at that idea.
Like Paul, the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has eclipsed the law of sin and death in my life.
this is you 👇
(Matthew 5:18-19) [18] For truly I say to you, Till the heaven and the earth pass away, not one jot or one tittle shall in any way pass from the law until all is fulfilled. [19] Therefore whoever shall break one of these commandments, the least, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of Heaven. But whoever shall do and teach them , the same shall be called great in the kingdom of Heaven.
(Romans 7:24) O wretched man that I am ! Who shall deliver me from the body of this death
(Romans 6:6) knowing this, that our old man is crucified with Him in order that the body of sin might be destroyed, that from now on we should not serve sin
you think you don't sin is still laughable

You thinking there is sin in Christ Jesus is lamentable.
you're not Jesus
Are not you glad Paul had already asserted his freedom from the flesh in Ro 7:5 ?..."For when we were in the flesh, ..."
argument by assertion
Paul made a distinction between his spirit and his flesh

(Romans 7:15-17) [15] For that which I do, I know not. For what I desire, that I do not do; but what I hate, that I do. [16] If then I do that which I do not desire, I consent to the law that it is good. [17] But now it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwells in me.
Which verse ?
Rom 8:9..."But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his."
Eph 5:30..."For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones."
Eph 5:31-32..."For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh.
32 This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church.

Just as there is no darkness/sin in God, neither is there sin in those in God.
neither is there sin in those in God because we are made righteous by faith

(Romans 4:2-8) [2] For if Abraham were justified by works, he has whereof to glory; but not before God. [3] For what said the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him for righteousness. [4] Now to him that works is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt. [5] But to him that works not, but believes on him that justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness. [6] Even as David also describes the blessedness of the man, to whom God imputes righteousness without works, [7] Saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered. [8] Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin.
 

Hoping

Well-known member
Banned
?
what topic would that be ?
I posted about testimonies and you responded with covenants.
Jesus had a plan for gentiles but kept it a mystery until the Mid Acts Dispensation Rom. 16:25
Your mystery had been know since Isaiah 11:10..."And in that day there shall be a root of Jesse, which shall stand for an ensign of the people; to it shall the Gentiles seek: and his rest shall be glorious."
And Isaiah 42:1,6..."Behold my servant, whom I uphold; mine elect, in whom my soul delighteth; I have put my spirit upon him: he shall bring forth judgment to the Gentiles."
Isa 42:6...I the Lord have called thee in righteousness, and will hold thine hand, and will keep thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people, for a light of the Gentiles;"

It's (faithfulness) a gift
(Ephesians 2:8) For by grace you are saved through faith, and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God,
Faith is the hypostasis (substance) of things hoped for, so it is the means of our hypsotatic union with Christ.
This is a problematically difficult thing to grasp for most anti-sacramental Protestants. Faith isn’t believING, it’s the thing given to man that does the believing.
As the grace of God, and even faith, can be seen as gifts, isn't it the faithless, graceless, who commit sins ?
Argument from silence is a logical fallacy .
if they were proselytes it did .
can't you see we're not zealots for the Law , um maybe you are , but not those of us who walk by the spirit by faith
I am zealous of loving God and my neighbors, as God commanded.
Aren't you ?
It was kept a mystery until Paul \Mid Acts Dispensation
(Romans 16:25-26) [25] Now to him that is of power to establish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began, [26] But now is made manifest, and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, made known to all nations for the obedience of faith:
The ways-and-means may have been a mystery, but not its eventual accomplishment.
and Jesus didn't preach that
He didn't preach about driving into oncoming traffic either.
I don't advise you to risk it.
(I Corinthians 2:7-8) [7] But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world to our glory: [8] Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.
Haters of God wouldn't see it if were written with stars overhead.
(John 8:32) And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free
Thank God for not keeping that secret from us !
Jesus meant for his disciples to keep the Law and that he would be the atonement
Is that an argument from assertion ?
(Matthew 5:18-19) [18] For truly I say to you, Till the heaven and the earth pass away, not one jot or one tittle shall in any way pass from the law until all is fulfilled. [19] Therefore whoever shall break one of these commandments, the least, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of Heaven. But whoever shall do and teach them , the same shall be called great in the kingdom of Heaven.
Amen to that !
Thank you Jesus for your fulfillment !
Paul on the other hand 👇
(Romans 4:7-11) [7] saying, Blessed are those whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered. [8] Blessed is a man to whom the Lord does, no, not impute sin. [9] Is this blessedness therefore upon men of circumcision, or also upon men of uncircumcision? For we say, Faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness. [10] How then was it reckoned? When he was in circumcision, or in uncircumcision? Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision. [11] And he received the sign of circumcision, as a seal of the righteousness of his faith during uncircumcision, for him to be father of all those who believe during uncircumcision (for righteousness to also be imputed to them),
Thank God for making repentance from sin and rebirth from God's seed available so we Gentiles could also turn from, and remain free of, sin.
no it's just your opinion
or should we canonize everything you say ?
It is already canonized.
Will you now just say "that was meant for Jews only?
"It is permanent, until you"
you love the Law while you break it , whats that called
Those that love God don't break His 2 commandments.
It's a gift !
(John 7:24) Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment.
"But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man." (1 Cor 2:15)
(Luke 16:24-25) [24] And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me and send Lazarus so that he may dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, for I am tormented in this flame. [25] But Abraham said, Son, remember that you in your lifetime received your good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things. But now he is comforted and you are tormented.
(Luke 16:27) And he said, I beg you therefore, father, that you would send him to my father's house,
Ooops...he was mentioned, just not involved with the moral of the story.
(Romans 4:13-15) [13] For the promise, that he should be the heir of the world, was not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through the righteousness of faith. [14] For if they which are of the law be heirs, faith is made void, and the promise made of none effect: [15] Because the law works wrath: for where no law is, there is no transgression.
Thanks be to God for allowing us to be dead to the Law of Moses.
no ,try again
No need to, as I understand it.
if was past tense then Paul is saying he wasn't responsible for his sin
and he also said "no more" indicating something changed
(Romans 7:18-20) [18] For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh) dwells no good thing. For to will is present with me, but how to perform that which is good I do not find. [19] For I do not do the good that I desire; but the evil which I do not will, that I do. [20] But if I do what I do not desire, it is no more I working it out, but sin dwelling in me.
All part of his narrative, of his past; failing to keep the Law.
(Matthew 5:18-19) [18] For truly I say to you, Till the heaven and the earth pass away, not one jot or one tittle shall in any way pass from the law until all is fulfilled. [19] Therefore whoever shall break one of these commandments, the least, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of Heaven. But whoever shall do and teach them , the same shall be called great in the kingdom of Heaven.
If you really feel that circumcision and dietary rules are necessary for salvation...then you better stick to them.
But Jesus has fulfilled what was necessary to forgo the presages.
No more walking in the flesh, and separation from this world...thanks be to God .
metaphorically speaking
(Romans 6:11) Likewise reckon you also yourselves to be dead indeed to sin, but alive to God through Jesus Christ our Lord
Actually speaking.
It is the only way of fulfillment of the old Law of circumcision.
yes you do sin , but you're not under the Law
I don't sin, because I obey God.
2 commandments are all there are.
you're not Jesus
Does it matter who I am ?
He is in me and I am in Him.
argument by assertion
Paul made a distinction between his spirit and his flesh
Argument from Rom 7:5..."For when we WERE in the flesh..."
Yes, does that mean you now understand Rom 7 ?
(Romans 7:15-17) [15] For that which I do, I know not. For what I desire, that I do not do; but what I hate, that I do. [16] If then I do that which I do not desire, I consent to the law that it is good. [17] But now it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwells in me.
Thank God he cleared that problem up when he was converted and crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts.
neither is there sin in those in God because we are made righteous by faith
As you know, only the faithless, graceless, commit sin.
 

JudgeRightly

裁判官が正しく判断する
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Gold Subscriber
Your mystery had been know since Isaiah 11:10...

So Paul was lying?

Now to Him who is able to establish you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery kept secret since the world began but now made manifest, and by the prophetic Scriptures made known to all nations, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, for obedience to the faith— to God, alone wise, be glory through Jesus Christ forever. Amen.

Your position is contrary to Scripture.

Scripture is not wrong. That means your position is in error.

"But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man." (1 Cor 2:15)

So Jesus was wrong to say, "Do not judge according to appearance," because Paul said "He that is spiritual judges all things"?

Do not judge according to appearance, but judge with righteous judgment.”

Your argument makes Jesus out to be wrong for saying what He said.

Jesus was not wrong, therefore your position is in error.
 

Idolater

"Matthew 16:18-19" Dispensationalist (Catholic) χρ
Mid Acts is the location of many biblical events.
I esteem them all equally.
Plain. Non-responsive. Par for the course. For trolls.
Yep.

The apostles knew of the end of the Law before Jesus even died for their sins.
In the same way that they knew of the Death, Burial and Resurrection before it happened, in that, they didn't grasp it completely until later.
Yep.
Fleshly over indulgence, in the honor of dead people.
They're not dead. You see how your own theology seeps into how you see and judge the world? What if your theology's wrong. Bud. Then what are you doing? Judging righteously? Naw. That's not righteous. That's wicked.

If you're wrong.

If you're wrong.
But not by those who have crucified the flesh and walk in the Spirit.

Isn't it though ?
Why would a reasonable dad, or mom, let his daughter dress up like a harlot ?
People have no sense!
I am not wrong about "false churches".
And in the same way, nobody plans to go to jail. (That's not a part of any criminal's plan, is to commit a crime and then get caught and go to jail, so none of the men in jail are there because this was all part of their plan; they all planned to "get away with it.") The same way that you are "not wrong" about theology, these men were all "not planning" to go to jail. But they're all in there nonetheless.
I went through the false church's version of the giving of the gift of the Holy Ghost.
Something they had no right or ability to do.
That is a gift given by God to the repentant of sin.
You have an advantage. Ephesians 1:13; 4:30; 2nd Corinthians 1:21-22
Another thing they don't do.

I take one day at a time.
I am sure I am in the correct faith today.
So is that a yes or a no?
I take one day at a time.
I am sure I am in the correct faith today.
Plain.
Wonderful idea, but they don't do what they preach !
AMR. Yes they do. That's the whole gig.
If we are all sinners, then Jesus died in vain, and satan won the war, and the only thing in front of us is the day of judgement.
Paul wrote..."Awake to righteousness, and sin not; for some have not the knowledge of God: I speak this to your shame." (1 Cor 15:34)
Well, you're a sinner.

Now what?
 

Hoping

Well-known member
Banned
So Paul was lying?
I hope not !
Now to Him who is able to establish you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery kept secret since the world began but now made manifest, and by the prophetic Scriptures made known to all nations, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, for obedience to the faith— to God, alone wise, be glory through Jesus Christ forever. Amen.
I rejoice with all that get to take part in the de-mystification of the promised inclusion of Gentiles into the kingdom of God.
Scripture is not wrong. That means your position is in error.
How do you see my "position" ?
What error have I made...exactly ?
So Jesus was wrong to say, "Do not judge according to appearance," because Paul said "He that is spiritual judges all things"?
Jesus is warning all men to be sure of the facts before jumping to conclusions.
Paul is saying the "spiritual man" does just that.
Do not judge according to appearance, but judge with righteous judgment.”
Your argument makes Jesus out to be wrong for saying what He said.
How so ?
Jesus was not wrong, therefore your position is in error.
Of course He wasn't wrong.
As He spoke in a limited context, it is on us with the gift of the Holy Ghost to rightly divide both His intentions and targeted audience.
Does a man with the gift of the Holy Ghost ignore obvious signs of danger or corruption just because Jesus says not to judge by appearance ?
Only the Pharisaic would do such a thing.
 

Hoping

Well-known member
Banned
In the same way that they knew of the Death, Burial and Resurrection before it happened, in that, they didn't grasp it completely until later.
Not really, as the apostles had seen Jesus break the letter of the Law, but had not seen His sufferieng and death.
They're not dead. You see how your own theology seeps into how you see and judge the world? What if your theology's wrong. Bud. Then what are you doing? Judging righteously? Naw. That's not righteous. That's wicked.
I thought we were talking about holloween ?
Celebrating dead folks...for some reason.
People have no sense!
Agreed, as there is no "sense" outside of Christ.
And in the same way, nobody plans to go to jail. (That's not a part of any criminal's plan, is to commit a crime and then get caught and go to jail, so none of the men in jail are there because this was all part of their plan; they all planned to "get away with it.") The same way that you are "not wrong" about theology, these men were all "not planning" to go to jail. But they're all in there nonetheless.
Sorry, but I can't make any connection from that to my post.
You have an advantage. Ephesians 1:13; 4:30; 2nd Corinthians 1:21-22
Yes, thanks be to God.
So is that a yes or a no?
i have the assurance of the Holy Ghost within me...the down payment on what I will eventually receive if I keep faithfully obedient.
AMR. Yes they do. That's the whole gig.
They have, as Peter writes in 1 Peter 4: 1 "ceased from sin" ?
They hadn't yet when I was with them.
Well, you're a sinner.
Now what?
Were your judgement true, I would need to repent of sin and get baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of my past sins.
This would provide for me the death of the old man and rebirth from God's seed, so I could henceforth walk in the Spirit instead of in the flesh.
 

JudgeRightly

裁判官が正しく判断する
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Gold Subscriber
I hope not!

So then you're wrong, because you said:

Your mystery had been know since Isaiah 11:10..

Care to retract your claim?

I rejoice with all that get to take part in the de-mystification of the promised inclusion of Gentiles into the kingdom of God.

Gentiles had always been welcome in God's Kingdom, provided they followed the laws.

Not a mystery.

How do you see my "position"?
What error have I made...exactly?

Supra.

Jesus is warning all men to be sure of the facts before jumping to conclusions.
Paul is saying the "spiritual man" does just that.

Indeed.

Yet you, Hoping, say that you judge according to appearance, which goes against what Jesus AND Paul says to do.

Would you like to admit your error?


Did you already forget what you were responding to with that verse?

W2G said:

(John 7:24) Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment.

You responded with:

"But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man." (1 Cor 2:15)

As if to pit scripture against scripture.

Do you think Paul was correcting Jesus?

Your arguments so far give the impression that you do.

Of course He wasn't wrong.

Then you are wrong, because you say "DO judge according to appearance, in direct contradiction to what Jesus says.

As He spoke in a limited context,

Saying it doesn't make it so.

it is on us with the gift of the Holy Ghost

From I've seen so far, you are wrong to use "us."

to rightly divide

You can't even rightly divide the word of God. What makes you think you can discern who is a Christian and who is not?

both His intentions and targeted audience.

Christ's intentions were to go to the cross to save not only Israel, but the entire world through them.

His target audience was the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

Does a man with the gift of the Holy Ghost ignore obvious signs of danger or corruption just because Jesus says not to judge by appearance?

Recognizing threats is not what we're talking about.

We're talking about your judging based on appearances, when Jesus says not to.

Only the Pharisaic would do such a thing.

At least you recognize your own behavior...

... Is what I would say, but you can't even do that much.
 

Hoping

Well-known member
Banned
So then you're wrong, because you said:
Care to retract your claim?
That I hope he wasn't lying ?
Of course not.
I rejoice with all that get to take part in the de-mystification of the promised inclusion of Gentiles into the kingdom of God.
The promise was there for a long, long, time.
Jesus provided Paul with its de-mystification.
Gentiles had always been welcome in God's Kingdom, provided they followed the laws.
Not a mystery.
Agreed, though sort of a side-track of the topic we are discussing.
Yet you, Hoping, say that you judge according to appearance, which goes against what Jesus AND Paul says to do.
Would you like to admit your error?
What error ?
Jesus Himself judged on appearance, and Paul writes that spiritual men judge all things.
Seeing something amiss is just the first step to drawing any conclusion of wickedness...which is what we are still discussing I hope.
Did you already forget what you were responding to with that verse?
W2G said:
You responded with:
As if to pit scripture against scripture.
Perhaps if you looked at the context of Jesus' words you would be able to understand.
Jesus was responding to men who judged Him for healing on the sabbath.
"Judge not on appearance !"
It isn't a blanket "shut your eyes before deciding if something is fit to eat".
Do you think Paul was correcting Jesus?
Nope.
Your arguments so far give the impression that you do.
Well, as Jesus said...don't judge on appearance !
Then you are wrong, because you say "DO judge according to appearance, in direct contradiction to what Jesus says.
I hope you never have to decide if the ice is thick enough to walk on...by sight.
The Pharisees must be guiding you LOL
From I've seen so far, you are wrong to use "us."
I hope you never have to decide if the ice is thick enough to walk on...by sight.
The Pharisees must be guiding you. LOL
You can't even rightly divide the word of God. What makes you think you can discern who is a Christian and who is not?
Sometimes just looking at someone wearing an "I HATE GOD" t-shirt is all I need to know.
Christ's intentions were to go to the cross to save not only Israel, but the entire world through them.
I am glad you can see that.
His target audience was the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
Agreed.
But He wasn't going to let any other faithful people languish in their sins.
Recognizing threats is not what we're talking about.
We're talking about your judging based on appearances, when Jesus says not to.
Don't be so Pharisaic.
God gave us eyes to see.
Use them in righteous judgement !
 

JudgeRightly

裁判官が正しく判断する
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Gold Subscriber
That I hope he wasn't lying ?

You seem incapable of following this discussion. I recommend you go back and read what I was responding to, and try again.

The promise was there for a long, long, time.

What promise?

Jesus provided Paul with its de-mystification.

Scripture says the mystery was not revealed until Paul's conversion on the road to Damascus, having been kept secret since the foundation of the world.

You said it was revealed in Isaiah.

Who's right, you or scripture? It cannot be both.

Agreed, though sort of a side-track of the topic we are discussing.

It's completely relevant.

What error?

You seem to be having a hard time following this discussion. Please go back and read what I was responding to, and try again.

Jesus Himself judged on appearance,

So Jesus was being a hypocrite?

and Paul writes that spiritual men judge all things.

Judging all things does not necessitate judging according to appearances.

Perhaps if you looked at the context of Jesus' words you would be able to understand.

That's rich, you telling me to read the context.

I'm FULLY AWARE of the context of John 7:24.


Then why did you quote Paul in response to W2G's quote of Jesus?

Well, as Jesus said...don't judge on appearance !

Talking out of both sides of your mouth, you make Jesus out to be a hypocrite!

I hope you never have to decide if the ice is thick enough to walk on...by sight.
The Pharisees must be guiding you LOL

I hope you never have to decide if the ice is thick enough to walk on...by sight.
The Pharisees must be guiding you. LOL

Hypocrite.

Sometimes just looking at someone wearing an "I HATE GOD" t-shirt is all I need to know.

Is it, though?

What if just around the corner there was someone preaching the gospel, and the person got saved, and hadn't yet had an opportunity to take off that shirt?

Hence, "do not judge according to appearances."

Don't be so Pharisaic.

Hypocrite.

God gave us eyes to see.
Use them in righteous judgement!

And don't use them to judge according to appearances.

Which you do.
 

JudgeRightly

裁判官が正しく判断する
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Gold Subscriber
The difference is... "righteous" judgement.

Being a hypocrite is not "judging with righteous judgement," Hoping.

You can't have it both ways.

Either Jesus practiced what He preached, or He did not and we shouldn't trust Him.

Which is it?
 

Hoping

Well-known member
Banned
Being a hypocrite is not "judging with righteous judgement," Hoping.

You can't have it both ways.

Either Jesus practiced what He preached, or He did not and we shouldn't trust Him.

Which is it?
Jesus did practice what He preached.
He righteously judged the Pharisees by their dress.
Something He saw.
 
Top