I have centuries of agreement by the greater Church body on my side. It's on you to prove that's wrong. So far, your arguments are lacking.
We are not yet in the New Covenant prophecied by Jeremiah and Ezekiel - that is the Millennial reign
- Thread starter DavidIsrael
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
- Status
If that is the case then Jesus was violating the commandment to keep the Sabbath. That's why my explanation is better than yours. Jesus had love for G-d and and was showing love towards him both at the same time when he did not keep the Sabbath and saved the person because he knew that in the heart of G-d, what is more important is a life He created than the commandments He created for man. Going by your logic, Jesus did love G-d but was not showing love to G-d in that specific act because He didn't care about that specific commandment at that moment.
Even in case of people, when I disobey my Dad for a good cause, it is understood that he knows what my intention is. So I am at the same time loving him, showing loving to him and not following his teachings.
I think you're attempting word salad to defend yourself at the moment.
I can use personal attacks if you've strayed away from the discussion using the deflection fallacy and don't give me an explanation as to how I am wrong. Ad hominems are attacks used when I don't have an explanation. I have all the explanations listed above. It's you who hasn't explained yet. Jesus used personal attacks too but they are not ad hominems - "Brood of vipers".
Even when Jesus came, there were 1000s of years of understanding that the Messiah would not be G-d but just a normal person. So ad populum by them and you.
We're dealing with G-d here. And what I love most about G-d is that He loves proving man wrong. Men I must say. "1000s of years of Men".
Again, looking for a good argument against my claim.
I'm not. Jesus never sinned. So anything that gave the appearance that He sinned has to be a perversion of the law. It's actually very simple.
I do recommend the house salad with ranch dressing if you like salad.
A lot of dislikes by the user "selahsays". Now I know why Paul said, "women must keep their mouths shut". Nietzche said "G-d is dead". He was wrong. Philosophy is dead. Why? Because we gave women equality. Men are the philosophical powerhouses of society but there are no longer any real men in society. All just women and effeminate men who follow the popular idea and feel comforted by groupthink and a sense of belonging. When men stopped thinking, women started taking center-stage and society started dying.
I would love to know why she uses the dislike button, BTW. I don't mind the dislikes, just prefer getting a reason for the same.
I would love to know why she uses the dislike button, BTW. I don't mind the dislikes, just prefer getting a reason for the same.
Even I never claimed that Jesus sinned. I said Pikuach Nefesh took precedence to the law. Simple. But you said a person cannot both commit sin and love G-d or show love towards G-d at the same time. That is not true. Even the prophets sinned but they had both love of G-d and showed love.
Jesus affirmed that the Old Testament is true. I don't see any reason why anything beyond that and Jesus' words in the Gospel and Revelation are needed for us to understand what G-d has in mind. Especially now that I am pointing out contradictions between the OT and NT and also there are contradictions between what Jesus said and Paul said as discussed by many people in the past 2000 years.
The Bible is the inspired word of G-d, I agree. But what books constitute the Bible was a decision made by man not G-d. I don't see any proper justification given by the canon deciders as to how every idea written by Paul and Peter and others match up properly to the OT. That's why all this has happened.
G-d did not put misinformation anywhere. G-d allowed people to go with their understanding just as he allowed the Jews to think that the Messiah cannot be G-d. Can you believe that? How come you believe that but not this? Because it's personal to you? That's how the Jews felt too.
Speaking of food and drink, this is an end time prophecy that will come to fulfillment soon, BTW -
Isaiah 28
"Behold, the Lord has a mighty and strong one,
Like a tempest of hail and a destroying storm,
Like a flood of mighty waters overflowing,
Who will bring them down to the earth with His hand.
3 The crown of pride, the drunkards of Ephraim,
Will be trampled underfoot; "
Drunkards and gluttons.
I didn't say that. Read what I posted again. I distinguished between love of God as an emotion and love of God as an act. One can love God from an emotional estate and not do acts of love towards God. But when one commits an act of love towards God, he cannot be transgressing the law. If someone says a loving act towards God is sinful, they have perverted the law.
The same can be applied to a person.
So....conclusion...with respect to an act of love towards God or person, it cannot be sinful. Anyone who considers an act of love sinful has perverted the law.
Oh my. Can you use Scripture to back this up? I am asking because if the above was so obvious, why doesn't dMoses say this at the end of the 10 commandments or so? I do agree with you. But this is an intrepretation we make. It is not written in Scripture that way and I agree that it is common sense. But my point is, there was never such an understanding that the law can be relaxed in such circumstances cause the Bible doesn't talk about it. Jesus does it and then the Talmud talks about Pikuach Nefesh. So another question to you is: if you believe Scripture is the Word of G-d, why do you go for a non-Scriptural explanation of something? You must call Jesus a sinner because he didn't keep it to the dot. But I don't because I believe Scripture is not the only word of G-d. Anything that is truth is the Word of G-d. The challenge for us is to think and understand what is truth and not.
Romans 13:8...love is the fulfillment of the law
Matthew 22:36-40...loving God and loving others...on these 2 commandments hang all the law and the prophets
Using the NT to justify OT commandments? That's like justifying Muhammad using the Quran. Anyone can come later and say things but how do you justify the acts of Jesus using the OT? Imagine yourself in the shoes of the High Priests who see Jesus not keeping the Sabbath. How will you justify Jesus?
I hesitate to reply to any of your posts because there are so many things wrong with them that I don’t even know where to begin. However, regarding your statement that “Jesus was violating the commandment to keep the Sabbath,” do you not know that Jesus is our Sabbath? I guess not. Your lack of knowledge and maturity is astounding. Maybe you should be the one to “shut up” (your words, not mine, Dusty.)
- Status