Originally posted by ThinkOfOneFlash!!!! Hang on...we're reviewing what our "Book of Secret Codes" says on this. Well get right back with you on this ASAP!!!!!!
This is interesting.
On one side of your mouth, you try to portray me as not being honest because I will not say whether or not I sin.
On the other side of your mouth, you speak of galveston75's assertion that I claimed that I do not sin as an "accusation". As if there is some question as to whether or not galveston75's assertion was true or not.
...[text shortened]... re something in the JW code that prevents you from speaking the truth about a fellow member?
Originally posted by ThinkOfOnefirst off, lets look at the entire passage shall we?
[b]On the matter of the dispute between Christ's words and Paul's words: Noah was a good man for sure, but really only in comparison to the rest of the world, another subtext to that discussion has to do with geebers and isn't relevant to the plot here. Romans says that none are worthy, no not one. Paul is not contradicting Jesus. Jesus could not make the ...[text shortened]... uired to enter the kingdom of heaven.
What do you make of Jesus saying these things?
17 “Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. 18 For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. 19 Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I say to you, that unless your righteousness exceeds the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven.
As I said in my earlier post, The Law before and after Christs atonement are viewed differently. Before the atonement we are judged strictly by the law, and the law must be fulfilled, by that it means if you sin you must be punished. Christ says that he is here to fulfill the law. he came not to change the law, but to make it obsolete buy his atonement. As Paul says "should we therefore continue in sin? no!", but the reality of the human condition is we will sin, the difference between what Christ said before and now, is that we can now be forgiven because if his sacrifice.
On the subject of the law: In Matthew 22 Christ teaches us, "The Greatest Commandment
34Hearing that Jesus had silenced the Sadducees, the Pharisees got together. 35One of them, an expert in the law, tested him with this question:
36"Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?" 37Jesus replied: " 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.' 38This is the first and greatest commandment. 39And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' 40All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments."
All of the Law hangs on these two. It certainly simplifies the process for us doesn't it? This isn't or wasn't a new idea. this is a direct quote from leviticus, the book of laws. These laws were intended to keep a just and orderly society. Like many things good that God has given us, we corrupted it, The Pharisees and the sadducess were promoting man's laws over God's laws, they had nothing to do with the essence of what God desired; which is to love him and to love our nieghbor. In order to correct the injustice of people, God came here in human form and offered himself as a living sacrifice for the atonement of all sin and thusly and rightly fulfills all levitical law, That is the purpose of asking Christ to dwell within us, so that we may be cleansed on the inside by his transforming power, and become born again, new creations, and free from the burden of levitical law, how we use that freedom is a different matter and a different discussion.
BTW: I agree, you never made a claim that you never sin, G75 is wrong there and should cite the thread and post if he believes so, I couldn't find it.
1 edit
Originally posted by duecerThis is my final comment of this as apparently you guys are not listening and I'm waisting my time.
first off, lets look at the entire passage shall we?
17 “Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. 18 For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. 19 Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these ere and should cite the thread and post if he believes so, I couldn't find it.
I've said at least 2 times now that "he never said he didn't sin." I said because of the context of what he was saying, he was implying that he was beyond what the Bible says as in Paul words and kept quoting what Jesus said.
I asked him many times to answer my question if this applied to him and if he no longer sinned. He refused to answer at least 4 times and twice I said that if he didn't answer then it ment this scripture applied to him and that he no longer sinned. And again he never answered saying it didn't apply to him.
What about this do you two not understand?
He should fess up and come clean man! it will be a relief, his tortured soul shall find rest in the knowledge that his sins, no matter how great, can be forgiven. this act of honesty shall restore self esteem, and his conscience may once again rest easy instead of rising up to condemn him! Not only that, others shall be inspired by his honesty and humility, and thus making his example worthy of imitation.
Originally posted by galveston75again, instead of lumping me with him, read my posts. I agree with him that he never made such a claim, but your question is indeed a valid one. I'm not taking sides, just trying to add a little 3rd party light to the subject
This is my final comment of this as apparently you guys are not listening and I'm waisting my time.
I've said at least 2 times now that "he never said he didn't sin." I said because of the context of what he was saying, he was implying that he was beyond what the Bible says as in Paul words and kept quoting what Jesus said.
I asked him many times to ...[text shortened]... ever answered saying it didn't apply to him.
What about this do you two not understand?
1 edit
Originally posted by duecerWhile what you've posted here may seem sound on the surface, it unravels upon closer inspection. I hope you try to read the following with an open mind and an open heart.
first off, lets look at the entire passage shall we?
17 “Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. 18 For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. 19 Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these ere and should cite the thread and post if he believes so, I couldn't find it.
As I said in my earlier post, The Law before and after Christs atonement are viewed differently. Before the atonement we are judged strictly by the law, and the law must be fulfilled, by that it means if you sin you must be punished. Christ says that he is here to fulfill the law. he came not to change the law, but to make it obsolete buy his atonement. As Paul says "should we therefore continue in sin? no!", but the reality of the human condition is we will sin, the difference between what Christ said before and now, is that we can now be forgiven because if his sacrifice.
If you look closely, you'll notice that when Jesus is speaking of the law being fulfilled, He does not speak of "atonement" but of "righteousness". Specifically of the righteousness required to enter the kingdom of heaven. The righteousness required to fulfill the law. The law will be fulfilled by those who DO and teach the commandments. Does it make sense that Jesus speaks of fulfilling the law through righteousness if He believes it will be "made obsolete by his atonement"?
17 Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. 18 For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. 19 Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I say to you, that unless your righteousness exceeds the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven.
These laws were intended to keep a just and orderly society. Like many things good that God has given us, we corrupted it, The Pharisees and the sadducess were promoting man's laws over God's laws, they had nothing to do with the essence of what God desired; which is to love him and to love our nieghbor. In order to correct the injustice of people, God came here in human form and offered himself as a living sacrifice for the atonement of all sin and thusly and rightly fulfills all levitical law
I agree with your assessment that the law was corrupted by man. Jesus cites several examples of how the law has been corrupted in the text immediately following what you quoted from the Sermon on the Mount. These examples are prefaced with, "For I say to you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven" and are capped off with, "Therefore, you are to be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect." Jesus is speaking of the standard of righteousness required to enter the kingdom of heaven. The standard of righteousness required to fulfill the law.
In the other passage I cited earlier, Jesus plainly states that if you are truly a disciple, you will be made free from the slavery of committing sin. This indicates that Jesus believes that man IS capable of the righteousness required to fulfill the law. Note that Jesus says that the slave, i.e., everyone who commits sin, does not "remain in the house forever", but the son, i.e., the true disciple, "does remain forever".
"Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who commits sin is the slave of sin. The slave does not remain in the house forever; the son does remain forever. ...If you continue in My word, then you are truly disciples of Mine; and you will know the truth, and the truth will make you free."
1 edit
Originally posted by galveston75I've said at least 2 times now that "he never said he didn't sin." I said because of the context of what he was saying, he was implying that he was beyond what the Bible says as in Paul words and kept quoting what Jesus said.
This is my final comment of this as apparently you guys are not listening and I'm waisting my time.
I've said at least 2 times now that "he never said he didn't sin." I said because of the context of what he was saying, he was implying that he was beyond what the Bible says as in Paul words and kept quoting what Jesus said.
I asked him many times to ever answered saying it didn't apply to him.
What about this do you two not understand?
Sorry, but this is phrased too awkwardly for me to make sense of all of it. I only found one place where you said, "he never said he didn't sin" and that was followed by "but it implys that". There was no such implication as I showed in a previous post. Your assertion was false as I made no such claim. Your assertion was a lie and you know it.
I asked him many times to answer my question if this applied to him and if he no longer sinned. He refused to answer at least 4 times and twice I said that if he didn't answer then it ment this scripture applied to him and that he no longer sinned. And again he never answered saying it didn't apply to him.
Is this supposed to be your justification for asserting that I claimed that I no longer sinned. It reads like a scene from elementary school:
"Mary Smith said that you said that you love Margie Simpson. Is that truuue?"
"If you don't say if it's true, then that means that you do love her."
"You didn't say so that means you do."
Seriously g75, do you really think that this constitutes a "claim" of any sort?
1 edit
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneHebrews 7: 11If perfection could have been attained through the Levitical priesthood (for on the basis of it the law was given to the people), why was there still need for another priest to come—one in the order of Melchizedek, not in the order of Aaron? 12For when there is a change of the priesthood, there must also be a change of the law. 13He of whom these things are said belonged to a different tribe, and no one from that tribe has ever served at the altar. 14For it is clear that our Lord descended from Judah, and in regard to that tribe Moses said nothing about priests. 15And what we have said is even more clear if another priest like Melchizedek appears, 16one who has become a priest not on the basis of a regulation as to his ancestry but on the basis of the power of an indestructible life. 17For it is declared:
While what you've posted here may seem sound on the surface, it unravels upon closer inspection. I hope you try to read the following with an open mind and an open heart.
[b]As I said in my earlier post, The Law before and after Christs atonement are viewed differently. Before the atonement we are judged strictly by the law, and the law must be fulfill s of Mine; and you will know the truth, and the truth will make you free."
"You are a priest forever,
in the order of Melchizedek."[a]
18The former regulation is set aside because it was weak and useless 19(for the law made nothing perfect), and a better hope is introduced, by which we draw near to God.
20And it was not without an oath! Others became priests without any oath, 21but he became a priest with an oath when God said to him:
"The Lord has sworn
and will not change his mind:
'You are a priest forever.' "[b] 22Because of this oath, Jesus has become the guarantee of a better covenant.
23Now there have been many of those priests, since death prevented them from continuing in office; 24but because Jesus lives forever, he has a permanent priesthood. 25Therefore he is able to save completely[c] those who come to God through him, because he always lives to intercede for them.
26Such a high priest meets our need—one who is holy, blameless, pure, set apart from sinners, exalted above the heavens. 27Unlike the other high priests, he does not need to offer sacrifices day after day, first for his own sins, and then for the sins of the people. He sacrificed for their sins once for all when he offered himself. 28For the law appoints as high priests men who are weak; but the oath, which came after the law, appointed the Son, who has been made perfect forever.
notice verse 7, "if perfection could have been obtained". perfection is impossible. Aclose examination of the Book of Hebrews lays out the case for Christ fulfilling Levitical law because we as human beings are unable to. by your thinking, no one would recieve salvation, as no one is capable of satisfying the law requirements.
1 edit
Originally posted by duecerI think I understand your position regarding "sin" and "salvation".
Hebrews 7: 11If perfection could have been attained through the Levitical priesthood (for on the basis of it the law was given to the people), why was there still need for another priest to come—one in the order of Melchizedek, not in the order of Aaron? 12For when there is a change of the priesthood, there must also be a change of the law. 13He of whom these no one would recieve salvation, as no one is capable of satisfying the law requirements.
What I'd like to understand is what you do with the words of Jesus.
For example, what do you think is Jesus saying here?
"Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven."
If no one can keep the commandments, then won't everyone be in the group of those who "shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven"?
If no one can keep the commandments, then why does Jesus speak of this other group of "whoever does [the commandments] and teaches them" that "shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven"?
To me Jesus is speaking of two groups: those who don't keep all of the commandments and those who do. It seems simple and straight-forward.
What do you think Jesus is saying here? Why is He telling people this if it's not possible for anyone to be in the second group?
Originally posted by ThinkOfOne🙄
[b] I've said at least 2 times now that "he never said he didn't sin." I said because of the context of what he was saying, he was implying that he was beyond what the Bible says as in Paul words and kept quoting what Jesus said.
Sorry, but this is phrased too awkwardly for me to make sense of all of it. I only found one place where you said, "he n ...[text shortened]... usly g75, do you really think that this constitutes a "claim" of any sort?[/b]
Originally posted by robbie carrobieRobbie..where is our friend Raj?
He should fess up and come clean man! it will be a relief, his tortured soul shall find rest in the knowledge that his sins, no matter how great, can be forgiven. this act of honesty shall restore self esteem, and his conscience may once again rest easy instead of rising up to condemn him! Not only that, others shall be inspired by his honesty and humility, and thus making his example worthy of imitation.