What if God had written IN STONE?

[The_Watchers_2017]

Modern English would imply a distinction (difference) where 'and' is used here, but Old English does not.

'And' in the Old English is often like using 'indeed'.

There are many verses in the Bible that say God and the Father, etc.

I call folly on this assertion.

God's Law IS the 10 Commandments.

No, it's not a difference between modern and old English, it's the fact the creator of the Textus Receptus documented it is JUNK, NOTHING THAT SHOULD BE TAKEN AS FACT, and that Erasmus admitted he was FORCED into doing this.

And he documented it.

Look it up...

 

[The_Watchers_2017]

well Galatians is quite explicit whether the Law is a doctrine of works or not, saying, the law is not of faith, because it says "do this and live"

so you just have the objection that the Ten Commandments are not law.

which imo is pretty weird, ha!

i am thinking if i ask any random Jew if the decalogue is part of the Law i will get laughed at to my face...

But to test, i will go ask random orthodox Jews.
back in a few days...


prost!

Glad you brought up Paul:

In Romans 13 Paul shows us the Commandments are Moral Laws that can be fulfilled by LOVE.

NOTICE, HE only mentions 10 Commandments as being the Moral Laws.

I mentioned 1 of the other Laws,do not have sex with Animals.

How could Love fulfill that type of Law? It can't. Hate towards the idea of having sex with Animals fulfills the type of Mosaic Law.

But Paul, says specifically Commandments and mentions them individually as can be fulfilled by LOVE, because this is the 10 Moral Laws, separated from the Mosaic Laws.

Thank God for Paul explaining this.

 

[Braweh]

you use it with authority when it is literally the worst ever translated Bible.

Not sure how you've convinced yourself of this, but it doesn't effect me in the least.

I've been at this for close to 15 years diligently and you haven't uncovered an entire history of Biblical origins that I just happened to overlook.

God bless you and the contentions you hold that support your personal opinions, but you're not any authority on anything to me.

If you believe that you can take a single verse from Scripture that says "Commandments and Laws" and build an entire doctrine around that single, unsupported verse, your knowledge of how the Bible works is very childish. No offense.

God built many security measures into His Word that override much of the tampering man can, and has, done. I've studied many of the earliest Bibles and my beliefs and understanding are solid.

Believe what you like though.

God bless.

 

[The_Watchers_2017]

I’m not interested in denominational peculiarities. I asked for evidence for your assertion.

I asked you 10 times for the same thing. I also have it ready to offer you. But, why should I do for you that you refused me 10 times?

Do you think people are that Stupid?

 

[The_Watchers_2017]

Not sure how you've convinced yourself of this, but it doesn't effect me in the least.

I've been at this for close to 15 years diligently and you haven't uncovered an entire history of Biblical origins that I just happened to overlook.

God bless you and the contentions you hold that support your personal opinions, but you're not any authority on anything to me.

If you believe that you can take a single verse from Scripture that says "Commandments and Laws" and build an entire doctrine around that single, unsupported verse, your knowledge of how the Bible works is very childish. No offense.

God built many security measures into His Word that override much of the tampering man can, and has, done. I've studied many of the earliest Bibles and my beliefs and understanding are solid.

Believe what you like though.

God bless.

You clearly never researched Erasmus. If you had, you choose the act of denial by using your kjv like it was truly inspired by God.

The Red X and the reply of personal opinion without proof tells me you didn't research looking for the truth about the kjv.

 

[The_Watchers_2017]

I think aligning with the Baptist about the 10 Commandments being the set of Moral Laws can be classified as Correct understanding.

Paul says they can be fulfilled by LOVE where Yeshua was the Only ONE who could fulfill the Mosaic Laws and we are able to fulfill the Moral Laws ourselves.

The Baptist have this Correct!!

 

[The_Watchers_2017]

I do disagree about the 10 Commandments being a Works Doctrine though

 

[The_Watchers_2017]

That separates the 10 Commandments from the Mosaic Law by the fact we can never fulfill the Mosaic Law, only Yeshua could do that...but, we are able to fulfill the Moral Laws by ourselves.

That is a big difference between who can fulfill what.

And that also proves the Separation between the TWO.

 

[Cameron143]

That separates the 10 Commandments from the Mosaic Law by the fact we can never fulfill the Mosaic Law, only Yeshua could do that...but, we are able to fulfill the Moral Laws by ourselves.

That is a big difference between who can fulfill what.

Adam couldn't keep 1 law. You believe you keep 10?

 

[The_Watchers_2017]

Adam couldn't keep 1 law. You believe you keep 10?

Paul says Love can fulfill them.

Are you saying you cannot Love God or Your neighbors in moments required to fulfill the Moral Laws?

You are saying you have no Morals?

That Adam had no Morals?

 

[The_Watchers_2017]

As a child I had no morals because I didn't understand what that was.

As an adult, I understand what that is.

When you understand, how is it now suddenly impossible to fulfill?

 

[The_Watchers_2017]

With knowledge and understanding, fulfilling the Moral Laws are easier to do.

 

[Dino246]

I sincerely doubt the Baptist in this Thread are even aware they adhere to what I have been saying for past 7 pages.

smh
unreal

attacking me but following same viewpoint.

Crazy!

Your assumption that any of your critics are Baptists is completely without foundation. You’re assuming causation only on the basis of very loose correlation.

 

[Cameron143]

Paul says Love can fulfill them.

Are you saying you cannot Love God or Your neighbors in moments required to fulfill the Moral Laws?

You are saying you have no Morals?

That Adam had no Morals?

I'm saying you would have to not only keep every aspect of the law, but keep it continually, and to the utmost. The only way to do this is to walk in the Spirit and have Christ live in and through you. No individual can do so in their own strength, apart from Christ.

 

[Dino246]

I asked you 10 times for the same thing. I also have it ready to offer you. But, why should I do for you that you refused me 10 times?

Do you think people are that Stupid?

I did. I told you that the matter is well established in Galatians and Hebrews.

 

[The_Watchers_2017]

Your assumption that any of your critics are Baptists is completely without foundation. You’re assuming causation only on the basis of very loose correlation.

I've debated several whom I already know from their admittance.

I remember who I converse with so I know who and what their background is for why the post I read is saying what it does.

If you haven't been able to do that in YOUR many years here, no one has anything to offer in order to help you with that. That seems like a natural thing to be able to do.

 

[The_Watchers_2017]

I'm saying you would have to not only keep every aspect of the law, but keep it continually, and to the utmost. The only way to do this is to walk in the Spirit and have Christ live in and through you. No individual can do so in their own strength, apart from Christ.

Why?

That's a load of horses bunk.

Why do I need the food laws to understand the Moral Testimony of the 10 Commandments?

Makes no sense to think that way.

 

[The_Watchers_2017]

I did. I told you that the matter is well established in Galatians and Hebrews.

Do you have multiple accounts because someone did post that but I never saw it come from the Dino account?

 

[The_Watchers_2017]

No, I'm not responsible for your needs; you are. I am only obligated to provide evidence supporting my assertion that you are wrong.

I don't care about your unbiblical division of the Law. It's entertaining (hence the popcorn comment) but irrelevant as the Law itself is obsolete for believers in Christ. That's well established in Galatians and Hebrews, and that's where you and Brahweh are both wrong.

Now, to your personal animosity towards me, take a chill pill. The derision does nothing to support your position.

I see it

 

[The_Watchers_2017]

I did address it with Romans 13.