Why Do Christians Ignore Most of the Old Testament Rules?

[TMS]

Why Do Christians Ignore Most of the Old Testament Rules?

One reason is because of the false teaching called "dispensationalism".

 

[throughfaith]

The Lord said I have not come to abolish the Law..but to fulfill it....

therefore we must believe Moses....that which God spoke in the beginning ....the great commandment...
To obey

the Gospel is the descent of Lord.....with the same utterance...the Holy Father speaks
yet man does not perceive....

as The Lord said..you diligently seek the scriptures yet you refuse to come to me that you may have life...
such is the nature of man...unbelief....
everyone is arguing in the dark about things they do not understand....
only in the light is the treasure made visible

diligently seek the scriptures yet you refuse to come to me that you may have life..." Is referring to
¶And therefore did the Jews persecute Jesus, and sought to slay him, because he had done these things on the sabbath day.
17But Jesus answered them, My Father worketh hitherto, and I work.
18¶Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God.

 

[throughfaith]

Why Do Christians Ignore Most of the Old Testament Rules?

One reason is because of the false teaching called "dispensationalism".

Or its because Jesus Died ,was buried and rose again on the third day . Amen . Let's notice what changes.

 

[Naomi123]

H

diligently seek the scriptures yet you refuse to come to me that you may have life..." Is referring to
¶And therefore did the Jews persecute Jesus, and sought to slay him, because he had done these things on the sabbath day.
17But Jesus answered them, My Father worketh hitherto, and I work.
18¶Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God.

hence what we discussed...the division between mankind..

God calls all...few believe

 

[tribesman]

Actually, there are two ways to read John 6:29, and both are legitimate in and of themselves. One is what you describe; the other is, “The work that God requires/accepts is this: to believe in the One He has sent.” The latter does put the onus on the human.

If you put the onus on the human, then what you get is humanism. Jesus said it was impossible for men to achieve salvation, yet you think that could be read as there's somehow a burden on man to take himself by the collar and work up some faith? It has to be philosophy of men who take you to such conclusions, not scripture.

While it is reasonable to say that unbelievers are condemned for their sin, saying that they are condemned for their unbelief while simultaneously claiming that they are completely unable to do anything else, is simply illogical. You would make God a monster.

Ya, to your logic, maybe. It is more "logic" to think that God expect a dead person to work something? Paul likens salvation as to resurrection from the dead in Ephesians 2. So, did Lazarus have a say in being raised from the dead? He "responded positively to the calling out of his own free will"?

See, once you get that God does not owe any man anything, you are more likely to understand this.

If you believe in Jesus, then it's God's doing that you do so. Not your own doing.

 

[tribesman]

There is no conflict between John 1:9 And John 1:13. Man must choose when God calls. Adam chose in the garden and we must choose here in the present.

Choosing is not causing salvation but receiving Gods gift of salvation. No man can be saved against his will. God will not force a man to be saved. God's love does not work that way.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

So you are saying Adam before the fall had no advantage to us?

Was Lazarus raised from the dead against his will? Did Jesus ask him to "make a decision" to get raised from the dead?

Do you let scripture interpret scripture? Do you really read scripture or do you read things into scripture?

 

[tribesman]

I reckon there be christians among the free-will crowd. It's not that, it's just that free-willism is a man-made, man-centered philosophy that doesn't give glory to Jesus. Oh, btw also the Roman-Catholics as well as the Jehovah's witnesses believe in free-willism.

I cause the unlearned to study up more on predestination and election. Predestination and election. Have a nice day.

To God ALONE be the glory.

 

[notuptome]

So you are saying Adam before the fall had no advantage to us?

Adam was without sin before the fall.

Was Lazarus raised from the dead against his will? Did Jesus ask him to "make a decision" to get raised from the dead?

Would any believer refuse to serve Christ?

Do you let scripture interpret scripture? Do you really read scripture or do you read things into scripture?

Do you insult believers as a matter of your usual conversation?

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[tribesman]

Adam was without sin before the fall.

My point exactly. So in that state he had an advantage over sinners.

Would any believer refuse to serve Christ?

No. That is not what we are discussing though.

Do you insult believers as a matter of your usual conversation?

There have been no insults from me. My intention is to make folks wake up, hence an alarm. Other than that I am just kinda tired of this free-will thingy. It's unbiblical. Adds to the pot too.

Now, back on-topic?

 

[notuptome]

My point exactly. So in that state he had an advantage over sinners.

Yet Adam chose to sin against God.

No. That is not what we are discussing though.

No one can possibly know what Lazarus thought about being raise from physical death.

There have been no insults from me. My intention is to make folks wake up, hence an alarm. Other than that I am just kinda tired of this free-will thingy. It's unbiblical. Adds to the pot too.

Now, back on-topic?

When you infer that another does not read their bible you are insulting them.

The sovereignty of God is not threatened by man having the ability to choose between light and darkness. Election does not save any more than works save.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[tribesman]

Yet Adam chose to sin against God.

Yes. But that does not mean that sinners have the same choice as Adam did. They don't.

No one can possibly know what Lazarus thought about being raise from physical death.

And we have no scripture telling us that Lazarus was raised from the dead as a result of him "accepting an offer" from Jesus of being raised from the dead.

When you infer that another does not read their bible you are insulting them.

I do question if they read their bibles much enough. That's all.

The sovereignty of God is not threatened by man having the ability to choose between light and darkness. Election does not save any more than works save.

Have you read Romans 8 and 9? If you have, and you believe what it says there, then that ought to be sufficient for you. If you cannot rely on what these plain scriptures tells you about what election means and what it brings, then you won't change because you discuss that with me or any other man.

To God ALONE be the glory.

 

[notuptome]

Yes. But that does not mean that sinners have the same choice as Adam did. They don't.

All men choose to sin just like Adam.

And we have no scripture telling us that Lazarus was raised from the dead as a result of him "accepting an offer" from Jesus of being raised from the dead.

We do have scripture telling us that Lazarus responded to the call of Jesus. In fact if Jesus had not called him by name all of the dead would have come forth.

I do question if they read their bibles much enough. That's all.

No more acceptable than questioning their salvation even in the face of great evidence.

Have you read Romans 8 and 9? If you have, and you believe what it says there, then that ought to be sufficient for you. If you cannot rely on what these plain scriptures tells you about what election means and what it brings, then you won't change because you discuss that with me or any other man.

To God ALONE be the glory.

How I read it and how you read it can differ greatly. It does not change the fact that election does not save. The Calvinist reasoning on the matter is distorted.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[Dino246]

If you put the onus on the human, then what you get is humanism. Jesus said it was impossible for men to achieve salvation, yet you think that could be read as there's somehow a burden on man to take himself by the collar and work up some faith? It has to be philosophy of men who take you to such conclusions, not scripture.

That's because you are stuck in black-and-white thinking. Nowhere have I implied that humans can save themselves.

Ya, to your logic, maybe. It is more "logic" to think that God expect a dead person to work something? Paul likens salvation as to resurrection from the dead in Ephesians 2. So, did Lazarus have a say in being raised from the dead? He "responded positively to the calling out of his own free will"?

Can an unsaved person choose which flavour of ice cream to eat? Yes. In your world, unsaved people can't even choose whether to get out of bed in the morning.

See, once you get that God does not owe any man anything, you are more likely to understand this.

If all you can do is throw shade, I see no reason to continue the discussion.

 

[tribesman]

That's because you are stuck in black-and-white thinking. Nowhere have I implied that humans can save themselves.

That's what free-willism eventually boils down to. All hangs on you and your almighty "decision".

Can an unsaved person choose which flavour of ice cream to eat? Yes. In your world, unsaved people can't even choose whether to get out of bed in the morning.

Oh, how relevant!

If all you can do is throw shade, I see no reason to continue the discussion.

We can agree not to continue the discussion. Fine with me.

 

[tribesman]

All men choose to sin just like Adam.

Are you saying that men are born sinless and then later choose to sin? Unbiblical. Adam's sin affected all mankind. Men are born in sin. And they are spiritually dead in their sin. Eph.2 is very clear on the state of lost man.

We do have scripture telling us that Lazarus responded to the call of Jesus. In fact if Jesus had not called him by name all of the dead would have come forth.

He called him by his name, but where does it say that Lazarus was raised from the dead as a result of him "responding to an offer" from Jesus to be raised from the dead, out of his "free will"? Where does it say that Jesus asked Lazarus if He would like to be raised from the dead and then awaited a yes or no? If you got any such scriptures, then present those. Else you are just arguing with what the text actually says.

No more acceptable than questioning their salvation even in the face of great evidence.

Don't know why bring such things up when I have not mentioned it. I said I question their Bible reading and that's all.

How I read it and how you read it can differ greatly. It does not change the fact that election does not save. The Calvinist reasoning on the matter is distorted.

You say "fact" when it's not a fact. You say election does not save, when scripture says it does. You do not argue either with calvinism or me, but the word of God. You cannot read the Bible very well.

To God ALONE be the glory.

 

[notuptome]

Are you saying that men are born sinless and then later choose to sin? Unbiblical. Adam's sin affected all mankind. Men are born in sin. And they are spiritually dead in their sin. Eph.2 is very clear on the state of lost man.

Adam had the capacity to sin.

He called him by his name, but where does it say that Lazarus was raised from the dead as a result of him "responding to an offer" from Jesus to be raised from the dead, out of his "free will"? Where does it say that Jesus asked Lazarus if He would like to be raised from the dead and then awaited a yes or no? If you got any such scriptures, then present those. Else you are just arguing with what the text actually says.

Lazarus responded to the call. Unsaved folks respond to the gospel call. You read into the texts suppositions based on your bias.

Don't know why bring such things up when I have not mentioned it. I said I question their Bible reading and that's all.

Because you are inferring that folks who see the bible with perhaps greater clarity than you need to read their bibles in the same bias as you read your bible.

You say "fact" when it's not a fact. You say election does not save, when scripture says it does. You do not argue either with calvinism or me, but the word of God. You cannot read the Bible very well.

To God ALONE be the glory.

Scripture does not say that election saves. The saved are elect in Christ. God foreknows and predestines those who will believe in Christ but each soul must come to Christ in faith to become the beneficiaries of grace. You place the cart before the horse. If you have not submitted your will to the will of God you are not saved. God does not force a man to be saved against man's will.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[tribesman]

Adam had the capacity to sin.

Have I said otherwise?

Lazarus responded to the call. Unsaved folks respond to the gospel call. You read into the texts suppositions based on your bias.

Are you saying that Lazarus was raised because he "responded to the call" while dead?

What is your doctrinal tradition and fellowship? Are you by any chance free-will baptist or methodist?

Because you are inferring that folks who see the bible with perhaps greater clarity than you need to read their bibles in the same bias as you read your bible.

LOL! "Clarity"? Do you think that you possess clarity in these matters? You are in error, and this is very likely because of poor Bible reading. "BIAS"? What a hypocritical statement. You do Eisegesis all along, read things into scripture that just aren't there, then you talk about BIAS? And then you still sit here and argue with me. It's scripture you argue with. Can I get that into your head? You wrestle and ain't getting anywhere because your pride to read in things, coming from your own self, into the scriptures blocks your understanding. This pride is what also makes you contentious.

Scripture does not say that election saves. The saved are elect in Christ. God foreknows and predestines those who will believe in Christ but each soul must come to Christ in faith to become the beneficiaries of grace. You place the cart before the horse. If you have not submitted your will to the will of God you are not saved. God does not force a man to be saved against man's will

SHM. Look, I told you, Romans 8 and 9 are clear on the matter. So is Ephesians 2 about the nature of man. Yet you still argue with me.

All glory to God, none to man.

 

[notuptome]

Have I said otherwise?

That is exactly what your position requires.

Are you saying that Lazarus was raised because he "responded to the call" while dead?

If Jesus had not called Lazarus by name all of the dead would have come forth. All would have responded to Christ without exception.

What is your doctrinal tradition and fellowship? Are you by any chance free-will baptist or methodist?

Calv-armin-bible-protestant

LOL! "Clarity"? Do you think that you possess clarity in these matters? You are in error, and this is very likely because of poor Bible reading. "BIAS"? What a hypocritical statement. You do Eisegesis all along, read things into scripture that just aren't there, then you talk about BIAS? And then you still sit here and argue with me. It's scripture you argue with. Can I get that into your head? You wrestle and ain't getting anywhere because your pride to read in things, coming from your own self, into the scriptures blocks your understanding. This pride is what also makes you contentious.

SHM. Look, I told you, Romans 8 and 9 are clear on the matter. So is Ephesians 2 about the nature of man. Yet you still argue with me.

All glory to God, none to man.

Well if you believe you are saved by election then I should probably consider you unregenerate and unable to comprehend anything in Gods word above the gospel message. A man must first be saved to receive anything beyond sufficient light to know of his lost estate.

Did you have a John 16:8-10 meeting with Christ?

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[tribesman]

That is exactly what your position requires.

And, your point is? You seem to be a very confused man with problems to engage in rational conversations.

If Jesus had not called Lazarus by name all of the dead would have come forth. All would have responded to Christ without exception.

*sighs* It's the second time you told me this same thing, but you have not yet replied to my questions to you on this matter. Nobody, not even you I guess, would like to continue such a conversation. You are perhaps just trolling.

Calv-armin-bible-protestant.

LOL! Total oxymoron. I take it that you are a private person just cooking up your own private thinking, and it's a confused mess.

Well if you believe you are saved by election then I should probably consider you unregenerate and unable to comprehend anything in Gods word above the gospel message. A man must first be saved to receive anything beyond sufficient light to know of his lost estate.

And there we have it. You accused me of questioning people's salvation and now you say you "should probably consider" me as unregenerate - because I do not buy into your private made sophistries. Again, you show your hypocrisy, which is certainly not a good sign on your own behalf.

Your ignorance about what election/predestination means as to salvation, is certainly another not good sign. Add to this the fact that you believe in a false gospel conditioned on the sinner. Then Rom.10:1-4 applies.

Did you have a John 16:8-10 meeting with Christ?

Positive. But do not worry about me or others, worry about yourself instead and the grave confusion you hold on to.

You do argue with the Word of God, not me.

We are done talking.

To God ALONE be the glory.

 

[Magenta]

That's what free-willism eventually boils down to. All hangs on you and your almighty "decision".

I prefer the term "self will" since man's will is constrained by many factors.

However, we are asked/exhorted to choose to believe and have faith.

If man has no choice in the matter, why would God punish those who do not choose to believe in Him?