|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread - 6/9/2008 3:03:17 PM
|
|
|
mcleod
Posts: 750
Joined: 4/4/2006
Status: offline
|
Lapidoth,
quote:
Thanks.
I don't understand your question. Can you clarify? thanks
If I understand you rightly. You seem to think that animal sacrifices will return. If that be the case then, the Son of God died in vain. Or another thought is what Paul wrote to the Corinthians in chapter 15 of the first book. that is what makes us who are called christians believe.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread - 6/9/2008 3:16:21 PM
|
|
|
mcleod
Posts: 750
Joined: 4/4/2006
Status: offline
|
LBolt,
quote:
Hey Mcleod!! I'll just say this very briefly. I do what I can do and I acknowledge those feasts day when they come. You are right, not having a physical Temple building does create varying degrees of applicability. However, I do what I can do and don't sweat the rest. You know what I mean? I'm still learning and acknowledge my deficiencies in my understanding regarding certain things. I believe we all know in part...I think this is where the spirit of the law kicks in. Which always apply.
Romans 12:1 Says in KJV doesn't it state something like your present bodies a living sacrifice holy temple unto the Lord. Or is my memory failing me.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread - 6/9/2008 3:26:18 PM
|
|
|
Lapidoth
Posts: 5731
Joined: 4/13/2005
From: OKLAHOMA
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: mcleod
Lapidoth,
quote:
Thanks.
I don't understand your question. Can you clarify? thanks
If I understand you rightly. You seem to think that animal sacrifices will return. If that be the case then, the Son of God died in vain. Or another thought is what Paul wrote to the Corinthians in chapter 15 of the first book. that is what makes us who are called christians believe.
Animal sacrifices doesn't mean Jesus died in vain.
If we think the slaughter of a lamb or goat brings salvation,
then He did die in vain to us.
He died "once and for all" to bring salvation.
Ezekiel tells us that the Millennial Temple will be built.
After giving the dimensions of the Temple and surrounding compound,
he also gives the instructions for the sacrifices. What am I supposed
to get from that? Do I ignore the prophecies of Ezekiel?
If memory serves me, the "lamb" is missing in the sacrificial list.
Am I to question God if he desires blood sacrifices in the end times?
That's why I asked if you had read Ezekiel. Not to be coy, but if you
had read that information on the Millennial Temple.
Most all sacrifices are remembrances, and there's nothing I can see
wrong about animal sacrifice if it's required. Animal sacrifice was never
required for salvation. Only the death of man could redeem man.
Each of us will pay the death penalty, but only those who accept the
death of the only One who was perfect will be redeemed.
If there is a resuming of a priesthood, they will have to be provided for.
Yahweh did that through sacrifices. Bulls, goats, sheep, grain offerings,
liquor offerings, etc. So, at this point I can see it happening.
If there's no sacrifices, how does the Anti-christ put an end to them?
Anyway, hope that was a better explanation.
_____________________________
Why does He keep quoting Torah? Doesn't He know He's about to abolish it?
http://www.tedpearce.com/Videos/TheForgottenpeople.html
BARUCH HABA BASHEM YAHUAH
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread - 6/9/2008 5:27:53 PM
|
|
|
bjay0801
Posts: 113
Joined: 12/10/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: mcleod
Lapidoth,
quote:
Thanks.
I don't understand your question. Can you clarify? thanks
If I understand you rightly. You seem to think that animal sacrifices will return. If that be the case then, the Son of God died in vain. Or another thought is what Paul wrote to the Corinthians in chapter 15 of the first book. that is what makes us who are called christians believe.
My brother, Jesus is the sacrifice for sin. There were other sacrifices besides sin. Just do the research and by all means, let's study for ourselves.
_____________________________
O that there were such an heart in them, that they would fear me, and keep all my commandments always, that it might be well with them, and with their children for ever!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread - 6/9/2008 5:45:42 PM
|
|
|
bjay0801
Posts: 113
Joined: 12/10/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
quote:
I am still learning Hebrew and what I have learned is like wow. ma pitom! Really, just for yourself ? Nice, that should keep you off the streets and the hair off your head. Or at least they will turn grey. God bless you in your studies. Just don’t stay on the book/course/CD stage too long, this way you will be learning it for a million years before reaching even the beginners level.
Language is like driving a car, cant be learned from a book. Watching tv programs online,radio, etc. helps immensely.
Oh, speaking of sayings – Ivrith is good; but the special branch of it that’s called “Tzahal-ith” military “wisdoms” and slang, rock your world. I wot event start for I wont know where to finish.
Looking forward to any kind answers to Sponge's post, dear friends. Lap did you poull an allnighter torah study for the holiday ?Sorry for ignorance i am not sure if MC doing that or not.
In our congregation, we practice speaking in Hebrew as well as reading. It's pretty cool and when we need help we have a couple of members in our congregation who are Jewish by birth so that definately helps.
Heh, I have a response for Sponge but I think it's the same thing that I and others have said before. I am however trying to word it so I don't come across like I just know it all when I realy don't. I've been saved for neary 30 years and each year i know that I'm still learning more and have more to learn still.
And Our congregation hasn't pulled an all nighter but it's not for lack of trying.  lol I did make a realy good cheesecake though.
_____________________________
O that there were such an heart in them, that they would fear me, and keep all my commandments always, that it might be well with them, and with their children for ever!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread - 6/9/2008 7:21:53 PM
|
|
|
SpongeBlog
Posts: 842
Joined: 12/9/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: bjay0801
...Heh, I have a response for Sponge but I think it's the same thing that I and others have said before. I am however trying to word it so I don't come across like I just know it all when I realy don't. I've been saved for neary 30 years and each year i know that I'm still learning more and have more to learn still.
Yes, very true for all of us because of our faithful Father. But sooner or later a person must get his sails fixed on that one thing that keeps them from being blown 'to and fro by every wind of doctrine', and which carries them forward to the true will of God. And when that happens they spend the remainder of their journey focused on that, resisting any wind of doctrine that would blow them off that course. And Paul talks about the one wind we are to fill our sails up with in Galatians 5:6...
"For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision has any value. The only thing that counts is faith expressing itself through love."
I know you've been taught to not see that Paul is talking about the Mosaic requirement to be circumcised here (the epitome of everything it means to relate to God through laws of external worship), but walking in the character of Christ is what it's all about--peace, patience, long-suffering, gentleness...not the correctness of our days, and months, and seasons, and methods of external worship, no matter how required they used to be under the reign of the written code.
The rewards are waiting for the person who acts like Christ according to the fruit of the Spirit, not the person who is sure they know and perform the correct procedures of worship. And until one gets their sails filled up with that truth they will be tossed to and fro by the 'how, when, and where' of the various doctrines blowing through the Church, none of which can bring us to the true will of God.
And this truth is self evident in the person who really knows it. You can't help but to see who doesn't know this truth by how they act--so sure of the correctness of what they know, but denying the truth by how they act. Chances are good if you're still hammering the 'how, when, and where' of going to Church, you probably don't know the full truth yet. Which I think is what Paul meant when he said...
"No doubt there have to be differences among you to show which of you have God's approval. (1 Cor. 11:19)
How has each of us shown in this thread by our conduct that we really understand the truth about embracing doctrine that leads to character, instead of doctrine that tells us how to go to Church?
_____________________________
"For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking, but of righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit, because anyone who serves Christ in this way is pleasing to God and approved by men." (Romans 14:17,18)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread - 6/10/2008 8:03:56 AM
|
|
|
LoyalGypsy
Posts: 2241
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: SpongeBlog
quote:
ORIGINAL: LoyalGypsy
quote:
ORIGINAL: SpongeBlog
How can a person not participate in Passover, (an observance that only the circumcised can participate in and which is absolutely required) and be saved? Now, tell me if this has changed or not.
Greetings
14 And the uncircumcised male child, who is not circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin, that person shall be cut off from his people; he has broken My covenant." (caused the child to sin)
Who broke covenant here the "Child" or the person “who kept the child” from being circumcised, (believing) in the coming Messiah.
It looks like that principal is still the same in Christ; as Jesus reiterates it almost exactly as it was given to Abraham, in Mt 18:6
"But whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to sin, it would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he were drowned in the depth of the sea.
Where is the principal abolished??
Loyal Gypsy
Greetings
quote:
Not abolished, but fulfilled. Fulfilled one time, for all who believe, and for all time through the indwelling Holy Spirit
quote:
The child in your hypothetical situation will be regarded as though he were circumcised if he believes, and obeys the moral laws of God (Romans 2).
And how was that a hypothetical situation?
Let’s see what the Bible says…
Greetings,
For example in
Ge 17:14 in the NIV reads….
Any uncircumcised male, who has not been circumcised in the flesh, will be cut off from his people; he has broken my covenant."
The passage in the NIV takes away a prophetic key to that passage, giving inclination that a child who is not of age has broken covenant and ....will be cut off from his people.
First of all “a male child” is a specific reference and Any uncircumcised male, is not… >it is to broad a path he is a “male child”….Which means not of age, and not grouped with the any
Therefore the term "will be cut off from his people" takes it one 2 steps further away from the prophetic truth.
....(Its typical preterist doctrine and patterns; because of the belief that the SC has already occurred; therefore everything is fulfilled; therefore the translation or the word patterns such as removing the prophetic keys and placing it as fulfilled, such as in short…“will be” in the verse above reflects that)...
Therefore… >>any uncircumcised male is too broad of a path because the male child in Ge 17:14 is prophetic picture of receiving the Torah given to Moses; and by the removal of the flesh the child in the reference to the circumcision, is a picture the child coming of age when receiving the principals of God or the Torah, which is translated in the NT as coming to the knowledge of the truth; where in the Law of Moses the flesh was revealed, or exposed for such circumcision .
The correct prophecy is shall be cut off from his people; which is a true prophetic reference as spoken ;where as will be cut off from his people is in the present tense as if fulfilled, and is found no where in the scriptures concerning a child.
The NKJV for example reads in proportion with the prophetic (scriptures) plural!
Ge 17:14
And the uncircumcised male child, who is not circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin, that person shall be cut off from his people; he has broken My covenant."
Now to understand that we need to learn what the procedure was, first of all a male child does not circumcise himself; that was the responsibility of the parent or relatives,
so coming to the age of responsibility is the prophetic theme leading to the Laws of Moses, whereby a man was joined.
Therefore in the 2nd prophetic reference in the same verse meaning; that person means in the NT as one who caused this child who was not of age to be uncircumcised,
Because the sin associated with the uncircumcised in this verse is both prophetic to the Law of Moses and coming of the age by responsibility through the Torah of God and is in like manner prophetic to the NT Gospels; as we come to Jesus (Torah) and is the same as coming the knowledge of the truth;
Therefore Jesus reiterates exactly as it was given to Abraham concerning the circumcisions, in Mt 18:6 "But whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to sin,
This is a direct principal that reflects that person who has broken Gods covenant by causing the child to be uncircumcised in the OT and is the same as keeping them from the knowledge of the truth by causing them to sin in the NT
Therefore the one who causes a child (born again believer) who believes in Jesus to sin ….this whosoever is not leading them to the knowledge of the truth of sin,
Then.... he (the one who causes this) has broken my covenant which was made to Abraham and all his descendants after him in the house of faith. “
Those covenant beliefs seen in the circumcision alone found in the Law by receiving the Torah are one in the same principal in the NT, and of the same Messiah; in which the righteous requirement came forth from the Law or the Law of Christ, being apart from the Law which condemned, ether side of the coin it is the same principal.
And furthermore Jesus gave the sentence for doing so.
"But whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to sin,
…….. it would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he were drowned in the depth of the sea.
Where is that principal abolished by its fulfillment??...
It’s still the same Law or Jesus had no right legally to make such a suggestion against the righteous requirement which is those (who believe in Me)
>Perhaps a good reading of Ezekiel 18 would show how the principal of an eye for an eye and the way it applies and works the same across the plane of the righteous requirement.
quote:
ORIGINAL: SpongeBlog
How can a person not participate in Passover, (an observance that only the circumcised can participate in and which is absolutely required) and be saved? Now, tell me if this has changed or not.
None of the principals have changed by the example above.
You seem to be confused in the respect that there are 2 circumcisions in likeness and the 2 comings of Messiah,
Loyal Gypsy
_____________________________
Ex 19:5 Now therefore, if you will indeed obey My voice
...So the Persians ask that the 300 drop their arms. Leonidas responds; "Persians! Come and get them!"
300 The Movie
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread - 6/10/2008 8:57:10 AM
|
|
|
bjay0801
Posts: 113
Joined: 12/10/2007
Status: offline
|
Hey, Sponge. Understand that walking to the law and the law alone won't help a person much. God did not give His instructions and teaching to us for a bunc of do's and don'ts. I think that's a large misunderstanding on everyone's part. His ways and words are our code of conduct and we do them because we love Him. We can be like the men in Acts 2, devout=torah keepingor legalistic. When Peter preached, soemthing happened that bought something that the Lord said would happen; their hearts were ****ed. In other words, their hearts became circumcised. They had the outward circumcision which was good because the Lord called them devout men. But they were coming to the temple and keeping the feasts because tradition said so not because they had it in their hearts to do so. They were missing the reason for the feast which is Jesus. Now did it nullify the outward circumcision? No. The outward serves as a reminder of what is happening on the inside. I don't do what I do because of legalism. I do because I love the Lord and these things serve as outward reminders of what God has done, is doing and what He is going to do. Now the fruit of the Spirit begins to show. In Acts 20, when Paul reports in, the converts were blessing God and they were zealous for the law. Why? Because they finaly understood why they were doing what they were doing. Paul never said stop keeping the commandments. He kept them and taught why to keep them. In Philipians, Paul introduces himself as a Pharisee of Pharisee and a Hebrews of Hebrews. Not was but IS.
Paul never denounced anything in the scriptures and when he had a chance to do so this is what he says in Acts 24 24:13
Neither can they prove * the things whereof they now accuse me.
24:14
But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets:
So, again I say that there were false accusers who wanted to put Paul in jail saying that he was doing away with the law. And they were wrong.
_____________________________
O that there were such an heart in them, that they would fear me, and keep all my commandments always, that it might be well with them, and with their children for ever!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread - 6/10/2008 9:02:18 AM
|
|
|
SpongeBlog
Posts: 842
Joined: 12/9/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: LoyalGypsy
And how was that a hypothetical situation?
The scenario you drew is definately possible (a parent not circumcising their child), but you gave no names to show you were talking about a specific case. That makes it hypothetical.
quote:
ORIGINAL: LoyalGypsy
Those covenant beliefs seen in the circumcision alone found in the Law by receiving the Torah are one in the same principal in the NT, and of the same Messiah; in which the righteous requirement came forth from the Law or the Law of Christ...
...Where is that principal abolished by its fulfillment??...
It’s still the same Law or Jesus had no right legally to make such a suggestion against the righteous requirement which is those (who believe in Me)
Loyal Gypsy, no one has to be literally circumcised anymore to be in covenant with God. Paul plainly teaches us circumcision is circumcision of the heart now.
"...circumcision is circumcision of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the written code. Such a man's praise is not from men, but from God." (Romans 2:29)
Genesis 17 is not a prophecy about Jesus being 'cut off'. But it is a shadow pointing toward the New Covenant when men are circumcised by Christ through the Holy Spirit
"In him you were also circumcised, in the putting off of the sinful nature, not with a circumcision done by the hands of men but with the circumcision done by Christ... (Col. 2:11)
New Covenant circumcision is the indwelling Holy Spirit. Nothing more, nothing less. It isn't literal circumcision. And it isn't law keeping in general. It's the indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit.
Do you need more proof Paul was not teaching literal circumcision?
"Brothers, if I am still preaching circumcision, why am I still being persecuted? (Gal. 5:11)
_____________________________
"For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking, but of righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit, because anyone who serves Christ in this way is pleasing to God and approved by men." (Romans 14:17,18)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread - 6/10/2008 9:23:45 AM
|
|
|
SpongeBlog
Posts: 842
Joined: 12/9/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: bjay0801
...They had the outward circumcision which was good because the Lord called them devout men. But they were coming to the temple and keeping the feasts because tradition said so not because they had it in their hearts to do so. They were missing the reason for the feast which is Jesus. Now did it nullify the outward circumcision? No.
Literal circumcision as a requirement, yes! So many other things are no longer required literally. Why twist scripture and introduce outside thought to make the truth about literal circumcision in Paul's teaching go away?
quote:
ORIGINAL: bjay0801
The outward serves as a reminder of what is happening on the inside. I don't do what I do because of legalism. I do because I love the Lord and these things serve as outward reminders of what God has done, is doing and what He is going to do.
I don't believe you, because you and others say God still wants us to serve Him through the procedures of the literal law. Even though we have several examples of where that is definately not true. You may be doing it gladly, but when you insist the literal is still necessary (not unto salvation) how can you be defending a completely voluntary compliance with those things?. You're still under the law!
If you had adopted it as completely voluntary and came in these threads and just said, "wow, we found a really cool way to experience God, maybe you can too if you haven't found a cool way yourself already" then I'd believe you. But this is not even close to what you and others are defending in this thread. Your insistance is that God insists and wants us to relate to Him through the literal laws of worship in the OT, though he's been patient with a misguided church.
I say that is not true at all. There are too many examples to prove that belief wrong. That's been my whole point through this thread. Why does it keep getting blown off? Why do you ignore the examples that prove my point?...animal sacrifice for sin, circumcision, the one true place of worship, the new Temple, laws of uncleanness....
_____________________________
"For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking, but of righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit, because anyone who serves Christ in this way is pleasing to God and approved by men." (Romans 14:17,18)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread - 6/10/2008 9:59:34 AM
|
|
|
SpongeBlog
Posts: 842
Joined: 12/9/2006
Status: offline
|
Don't you good people see what you are doing? You do not need to make things like literal circumcision come back in order to defend a literal Sabbath or a Festival. You already have the right and privelege to observe those! Nobody in this thread is trying to take that away from you.
Examine your hearts. The only reason you need to twist scripture and introduce outside thought to make these literal observances come back is in order to compel others to conform to your convictions. Why do you want to do that? I've provided tons of evidence to prove to you that your convictions (which you are completely entitled to) are to be yours alone.
I'm from the charismatic movement. I know about the temptation to assume everybody else is doing it wrong and that's why they don't experience God the way you yourself do. A big step of maturity for me was to realize how dead wrong it is to think God visits you because you conduct your meetings in a more 'Biblical' way. Even Paul asks the Galatians, 'does God give you His Holy Spirit and do miracles among you because you obey the law?' The answer is no, of course!
_____________________________
"For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking, but of righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit, because anyone who serves Christ in this way is pleasing to God and approved by men." (Romans 14:17,18)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread - 6/10/2008 10:08:58 AM
|
|
|
LoyalGypsy
Posts: 2241
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Lapidoth
We did have one confrontation over an argument about what version
we are to use in our corporate studies. Some want Hebrew, like you
say really isn't the Hebrew they think it is. Some want a mixture.
English but much in Hebrew words.
One day I read from one that pretty much fit the bill.
I looked up and everyone had the "deer in the headlight" look.
I asked, "Does it read that much different?" They all said, Yes.
Greetings,
Where ya been??
Are you paying attention? 
quote:
One day I read from one that pretty much fit the bill.
I looked up and everyone had the "deer in the headlight" look.
I asked, "Does it read that much different?" They all said, Yes.
And the problem with translation is like when the HS comes in like the wind, and Jesus said that the wind blows where it wishes, and no one knows from where it comes and where it goes. 
In the likeness of those differences in the translations when it was bought to their attention....as you mentioned above; with the one you read that fit the bill ...
In like manner when it goes many times a problem arise…. As Jesus said....when addressing Nicodemus ….that being a teacher of Israel and him not knowing these things,
So I guess the HS was understood in the old news,
Such as when revealed to those above… by the likeness of their surprise, In like manner those who profess to walk in the Spirit in the NT can be in the likeness of Nicodemus who could not discern when the Spirit had left the building!!
LG
_____________________________
Ex 19:5 Now therefore, if you will indeed obey My voice
...So the Persians ask that the 300 drop their arms. Leonidas responds; "Persians! Come and get them!"
300 The Movie
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread - 6/10/2008 10:22:18 AM
|
|
|
Odeliya
Posts: 3106
Joined: 8/10/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
you really seem like a sweet young lady
"Sweet" you said ? hm...That is one person I managed to fool
quote:
I pray YAH will bless you at the right time with a humble gentleman who loves YAH and loves you! Enjoy your single season and live it up to the fullness
May God hears you! Wise advice. Yes, I still hope to have a few years to go.. :)
But I like the list of goods! Humbly, loving , godly..,+ baking cheesecakes, BJ said he does and knows how to fix stuff, if possible, too. ( my dad now would say – or make up your mind or marry 4 times, mamellah…)
quote:
Lap:
Was sponge asking questions? Or, baiting his trap again. lol.
sorry, couldn't resist.
I think it's time to feed "Gary" again.
If I wasn’t a wise donkey myself when it comes to smart alec answers I would be tempted to try to pull the specks out of your eye right about here:)
Of course he did ask questions. While Sponge has more of a deeper theological debate , I am curious ,firstly, to know from a common sense standpoint: if we all in agreement that the laws in question are not required to be kept in order to obtain salvation, then what are they for? Can some kind soul summarize the reasons, in sort of idiot proof, simple way?
_____________________________
Don't tell me what to do and I won't tell you were you should go.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread - 6/10/2008 10:53:30 AM
|
|
|
mcleod
Posts: 750
Joined: 4/4/2006
Status: offline
|
Lapidoth I don't know what books you have been reading. But Ezekiel saw that vision in the twenty-fifth year of them being in exile in Babylon.
If I recall Nebuchadnezzar army completely destoryed Jerusalem, which would include the temple. Because when he destoryed the city he brought back temple treasures. So the vision could be the next or the second temple built. During Ezra time period the second temple was built. Then Herod had it remodeled during his time on earth. So the vision that he saw could be the second temple.
In Revelation again there is no mention of temple except in Revelation 21:22; there it states that in the new city of Jerusalem. The author saw none because the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb( meaning Son Of God are it's temple.
If you think that we reverse our thinking and go back to animal sacrifices which was for our sins. Then the shedding of the Son of God's blood for our sins Romans 3:21-26 sin was and is total in vain in your eyes.
Salvation is faith, but blood is so that I may have peace and fellowship with God.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread - 6/10/2008 11:06:09 AM
|
|
|
mcleod
Posts: 750
Joined: 4/4/2006
Status: offline
|
Say Spong we seem to keep asking the same questions to them and getting a responce back that certain laws or rituals will make a great come back. As a person I know would say that it's in the Bible some where. Which is kind a cute for over thirty some years I'm still looking for a verse a person said was in the Bible which is "God helps those who help themselves."
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread - 6/10/2008 11:37:15 AM
|
|
|
Lapidoth
Posts: 5731
Joined: 4/13/2005
From: OKLAHOMA
Status: offline
|
quote:
still looking for a verse a person said was in the Bible which is "God helps those who help themselves."
That you will never find. Those are called "chimney scriptures."
quote:
Greetings,
Where ya been??
Are you paying attention?
Being the honest person I am I have to say , No, I'm not paying attention. lol.
and I know my honesty will be used against me in about five posts. lol.
quote:
If you think that we reverse our thinking and go back to animal sacrifices which was for our sins.
This keeps proving you aren't listening to a word that is being said.
Animal sacrifices which was for our sins.
Those are words and the mindset your camp keep throwing out there.
No one is using this mindset. How about examining yourself before we continue? lol.
_____________________________
Why does He keep quoting Torah? Doesn't He know He's about to abolish it?
http://www.tedpearce.com/Videos/TheForgottenpeople.html
BARUCH HABA BASHEM YAHUAH
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread - 6/10/2008 11:41:01 AM
|
|
|
Lapidoth
Posts: 5731
Joined: 4/13/2005
From: OKLAHOMA
Status: offline
|
mcleod,
Can you show me how the Ezekiel Temple has the same footprint all the others do?
I think you do as I have done for years, Okay, these are like the begats, I'll just skim over them.
Nothing of importance to be learned. I could be wrong, but your say so or sponge's say so doesn't
make me wrong. The context of the "whole counsel of God is what we have to go by."
Each of us continue to use isegesis. sometimes on purpose, sometimes from the ignorance still
lurking in each of us. The more I learn, the more ignorance I find. The ignorance is a good thing.
It means we have so much to learn.
_____________________________
Why does He keep quoting Torah? Doesn't He know He's about to abolish it?
http://www.tedpearce.com/Videos/TheForgottenpeople.html
BARUCH HABA BASHEM YAHUAH
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread - 6/10/2008 11:45:01 AM
|
|
|
Lapidoth
Posts: 5731
Joined: 4/13/2005
From: OKLAHOMA
Status: offline
|
quote:
If I recall Nebuchadnezzar army completely destoryed Jerusalem, which would include the temple. Because when he destoryed the city he brought back temple treasures. So the vision could be the next or the second temple built. During Ezra time period the second temple was built. Then Herod had it remodeled during his time on earth.
In a nutshell:
Tabernacle in the Wilderness (Moses' Tabernacle)
Then David's Tabernacle.
Then the Temple of Solomon.
Then the Temple of Zerubbable (sp.)
Rededicated by the Maccabbees.
Remodeled by Herod.
Then there will be the Temple when Yeshua returns.
Then there will be the Temple not built by hands.
Then there will be the New Heaven and New Earth [no temple; yet is a temple]
Did I cover all the bases?
Of course, I'm leaving out the "spiritualization" that goes on in any conversation.
< Message edited by Lapidoth -- 6/10/2008 11:53:08 AM >
_____________________________
Why does He keep quoting Torah? Doesn't He know He's about to abolish it?
http://www.tedpearce.com/Videos/TheForgottenpeople.html
BARUCH HABA BASHEM YAHUAH
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread - 6/10/2008 11:49:52 AM
|
|
|
Lapidoth
Posts: 5731
Joined: 4/13/2005
From: OKLAHOMA
Status: offline
|
quote:
Say Spong we seem to keep asking the same questions to them and getting a responce back that certain laws or rituals will make a great come back.
Enjoy your smuggness, I know I do mine. lol.
_____________________________
Why does He keep quoting Torah? Doesn't He know He's about to abolish it?
http://www.tedpearce.com/Videos/TheForgottenpeople.html
BARUCH HABA BASHEM YAHUAH
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread - 6/10/2008 11:53:15 AM
|
|
|
mcleod
Posts: 750
Joined: 4/4/2006
Status: offline
|
Well Paul mentions that we are the temple of the Lord. And one other thing I made a mistake in was that there are more than on mention of the temple in Revelation. Yet the temole is metion that it is in Heaven not here on earth.
quote:
That you will never find. Those are called "chimney scriptures."
Lapitdoth,
I know I will never find it. But I would lay a bet that person still believes that scripture is in there somewhere. My point on that is you can't always say well this is the thousand year temple periods when in that writings doesn't say so.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread - 6/10/2008 12:09:21 PM
|
|
|
Lapidoth
Posts: 5731
Joined: 4/13/2005
From: OKLAHOMA
Status: offline
|
quote:
Lapitdoth,
I know I will never find it. But I would lay a bet that person still believes that scripture is in there somewhere. My point on that is you can't always say well this is the thousand year temple periods when in that writings doesn't say so.
If it were true I could agree 100%.
But, if it's just each of our own slants compared to each other slants,
then I can only say . . . .
Whatever!
_____________________________
Why does He keep quoting Torah? Doesn't He know He's about to abolish it?
http://www.tedpearce.com/Videos/TheForgottenpeople.html
BARUCH HABA BASHEM YAHUAH
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread - 6/10/2008 12:39:26 PM
|
|
|
bjay0801
Posts: 113
Joined: 12/10/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
I don't believe you, because you and others say God still wants us to serve Him through the procedures of the literal law. Even though we have several examples of where that is definately not true. You may be doing it gladly, but when you insist the literal is still necessary (not unto salvation) how can you be defending a completely voluntary compliance with those things?. You're still under the law!
Well, my brother, you don't have to believe me. You're not arguing with me. I'm only saying what scripture says. And as far as being "under the law" goes; we've hit that one before. God's directions and instructions are not my master, HE IS! Who do you think spoke those things in the first place? You have stated what YOU think is true or untrue by your opinion and saying that your opinion is fact. I'm only following scripture. I know that I may not be 100% correct but at least I am trying to do what the word says. All I can say is we will find out eventualy.
_____________________________
O that there were such an heart in them, that they would fear me, and keep all my commandments always, that it might be well with them, and with their children for ever!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread - 6/10/2008 1:54:45 PM
|
|
|
SpongeBlog
Posts: 842
Joined: 12/9/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: bjay0801
...I'm only saying what scripture says. And as far as being "under the law" goes; we've hit that one before.
We did...that is up until I challenged the definition of that, then the forums went silent. No one seems to want to touch the issue of bodily discharges (pun intended) as proof that being 'under the law' means more than just being enslaved by the sin nature and the law of punishment that grates against that sin nature. Why am I the bad guy for bringing up evidence and questions that no one wants to address????
quote:
ORIGINAL: bjay0801
...God's directions and instructions are not my master, HE IS! Who do you think spoke those things in the first place?
But that's the whole point. God's instructions have changed. I've proven it to you all by the example of animal sacrifice for sin, circumcision, etc... The idea is to now move on from there and see how it applies or doesn't apply to the things you defend, but nobody seems to want to. I'm not baiting anybody. I've made it clear that I want to break the ground out from under the basic beliefs you all hold on to in order to show you how little of a foundation you have for defending the literal observances that you do. I'm showing you this is nothing more than personal conviction and denominational preference. Which you are most certainly entitled to have. But to make it the foundation of a relationship with Christ and separate yourselves into your various factions is where you are going dead wrong.
If you taught and emphasized what really counts you wouldn't have people getting offended by what you think and separating themselves from you into their own little camps. And you'd be building the foundation for what really unifies the Church--the calling we all share alike without exception or difference--godly character as seen in the fruit of the Spirit, not what day of the week we should be going to church on (or whether baptism is immersion or sprinkling, or...you get my point).
quote:
ORIGINAL: bjay0801
You have stated what YOU think is true or untrue by your opinion and saying that your opinion is fact. I'm only following scripture. I know that I may not be 100% correct but at least I am trying to do what the word says. All I can say is we will find out eventualy.
We're all entitled to our opinions. And I've challenged everyone's politely and respectfully (this is a forum for discussion, right?). And in return I get insulted and attacked personally by some instead of having my actual argument addressed in the same manner I presented it. Or I've had to endure sarcastic and empty comebacks that clearly say to me the points I bring up are being avoided.
I'm actually surprised you all came back. I really thought this thread was over for this group of participants. I'm still smiling, are you? Don't be upset, if you are. There's no reason to be.
I'd really like to see you just explain why the opinions I've formed are wrong? Especially on this circumcision thing. Paul makes clear reference to the circumcision of the 'written code'. Why isn't anyone directly challenging that evidence I've produced? Backing all the way up to your original broad sweeping argument is not helpful (thus the going around in circles). You have to directly address my specific and direct challenge, like why 'written code' in regard to circumcision doesn't mean the law of circumcision given through Moses. If not, that's fine. I'll spend some time in the community folder or something. Just don't attack me for bringing it up.
Smile!
< Message edited by SpongeBlog -- 6/10/2008 2:02:04 PM >
_____________________________
"For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking, but of righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit, because anyone who serves Christ in this way is pleasing to God and approved by men." (Romans 14:17,18)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread - 6/10/2008 1:56:01 PM
|
|
|
Lapidoth
Posts: 5731
Joined: 4/13/2005
From: OKLAHOMA
Status: offline
|
I didn't post this for debate, but feel free to do so.
I just lifted it from a website to be read with a couple of opinions
as to Ezekiel.
Shalom.
quote:
Sacrifices, Millennium: Do you believe that there will be animal sacrifices during the Millennial Kingdom? If so, would these sacrifices be an affront to the final sacrifice of the Messiah?
Ezekiel chapters 40-44, speaking of the Millennial Temple, tell us that there will be animal sacrifices during the Messianic Age. Ezekiel 44:10-11 describes the Levites in the Millennial Temple performing animal sacrifices:
“But the Levites who went far from Me when Israel went astray, who went astray from Me after their idols, shall bear the punishment for their iniquity. Yet they shall be ministers in My sanctuary, having oversight at the gates of the house and ministering in the house; they shall slaughter the burnt offering and the sacrifice for the people, and they shall stand before them to minister to them.”
Many Christian prophecy teachers, who we would describe as being against the validity of the Torah for Believers today, even recognize the reality of animal sacrifices being performed by Levites during the Millennium. Tim LaHaye states in his Prophecy Study Bible, commenting on Ezekiel 43:15-27, that “The offerings will be memorial and retrospective, looking back to Christ’s finished work on the cross, instead of looking forward to Christ” (p 885). These same sentiments are repeated by John F. Walvoord, former chancellor of Dallas Theological Seminary, in his book Israel in Prophecy:
“A number of Scriptures also describe the temple worship which will characterize the millennial kingdom. According to Ezekiel, a magnificent temple will be built, and a system of priesthood and memorial sacrifices will be set up…Some have felt it impossible to have a system of animal sacrifices subsequent to the one sacrifice of Christ on the cross in light of New Testament passages stating that the sacrifice of Christ makes other sacrifices unnecessary. Though varied explanations have been given for Ezekiel 40-48 which unfolds these details, no satisfactory explanation has been made other than that it is a description of millennial worship. In any case, it is clear that the sacrifices are not expiatory, but merely memorials of the one complete sacrifice of Christ. If in the wisdom and sovereign pleasure of God the detailed system of sacrifices in the Old Testament were a suitable foreshadowing of that which would be accomplished by the death of His Son, and if a memorial of Christ’s death is to be enacted, it would not seem unfitting that some sort of a sacrificial system would be used” (pp 125-126).
Any animal sacrifices restored to the Temple in Jerusalem during the Millennium will be a memorial of Yeshua’s final sacrifice for us. As pre-millennialists, we all believe the Lord will be there in person to explain to us the exact significance of what these sacrifices mean.
_____________________________
Why does He keep quoting Torah? Doesn't He know He's about to abolish it?
http://www.tedpearce.com/Videos/TheForgottenpeople.html
BARUCH HABA BASHEM YAHUAH
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread - 6/10/2008 4:30:13 PM
|
|
|
Lapidoth
Posts: 5731
Joined: 4/13/2005
From: OKLAHOMA
Status: offline
|
Moses led to Canaan.
The Law led to Christ.
Christ leads to eternal "rest" (sabbath).
-----------------------------------------------
quote:
Heb. 4:9 [Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary]
"therefore-because God "speaks of another day"
"Moses, the representative of the law, could not lead Israel
into Canaan: the law leads us to Christ, and there its office ceases,
as that of Moses on the borders of Canaan: it is Jesus, the antitype
of Joshua, who leads us into the heavenly rest."
"This verse indirectly established the obligation of the Sabbath still;
for the type continues until the antitype supersedes it: so legal sacrifices
continued till the great antitypical Sacrifice superseded it, As then the
antitypical heavenly Sabbath-rest will not be till Christ, our Gospel Joshua,
comes, to usher us into it, the typical earthly Sabbath must continue till then.
The Jews call the future rest 'the day which is all Sabbath.'"
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_____________________________
Why does He keep quoting Torah? Doesn't He know He's about to abolish it?
http://www.tedpearce.com/Videos/TheForgottenpeople.html
BARUCH HABA BASHEM YAHUAH
|
|
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
 Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts |
|
|
Forum Tools
Printable Version
