Results 261 - 280 of 4232
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: kalos Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
261 | Must we observe the law of God? | Bible general Archive 2 | kalos | 125798 | ||
Ray: Thanks for your reply. Grace and shalom, kalos |
||||||
262 | Which one are we not going to keep? | Bible general Archive 2 | kalos | 125870 | ||
Theo-Minor: I will gladly read your previous thought on the other thread. If you will provide the ID# of that post, I will go to it and read it. Thank you. Grace to you, kalos |
||||||
263 | Which one are we not going to keep? | Bible general Archive 2 | kalos | 125884 | ||
"Not an iota...will pass from the Law." Country Girl: I am glad to hear you say we should comply with or obey all the commands of the NT, including those nine commandments carried over from the OT. Not one word of the Bible is disposable. I do not see any portion of the NT as disposable. Neither do I see any portion of the OT as disposable. Jesus said: "not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law." Matthew 5:17-19 (ESV) "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. [18] For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished. [19] Therefore whoever relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven." Grace to you, kalos |
||||||
264 | Which one are we not going to keep? | Bible general Archive 2 | kalos | 125889 | ||
Is the Law altogether invalid? [Country Girl: Properly understood, Bible Christianity and Bible Judaism are not in conflict with each other. Rather, true Christianity is the fulfillment, not the abolition, of true Judaism. The New Covenant does not replace the Old, but instead renews it. I could not possibly answer all your questions in one Note. It will take a series of posts to adequately answer the questions you ask. Please be patient. I will begin the series by reposting the following Note. Grace to you, kalos] 'Is the Law altogether invalid? Matt 5:19 AMPLIFIED Matthew 5:19 Whoever then breaks or does away with or relaxes one of the least [important] of these commandments and teaches men so shall be called least [important] in the kingdom of heaven, but he who practices them and teaches others to do so shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. The Law under the New Covenant. 'The law cannot be altogether invalid since the New Testament affirms its abiding applicability. "All Scripture is … useful" (2 Tim 3:16-17), including Old Testament laws. Jesus came not to abolish the law, but to fulfill it (Matt 5:17-20). The law is the embodiment of truth that instructs (Rom 2:18-19). It is "holy" and "spiritual, " making sin known to us by defining it; therefore, Paul delights in it (Rom 7:7-14,22). The law is good if used properly (1 Tim 1:8), and is not opposed to the promises of God (Gal 3:21). Faith does not make the law void, but the Christian establishes the law (Rom 3:31), fulfilling its requirements by walking according to the Spirit (Rom 8:4) through love (Rom 13:10). 'When Paul states that women are to be in submission "as the Law says" (1 Cor 14:34) or quotes parts of the Decalogue (Rom 13:9), and 'when James quotes the law of love (2:8 from Lev 19:18) or condemns partiality, adultery, murder, and slander as contrary to the law (2:9, 11; 4:11), and 'when Peter quotes Leviticus, "Be holy, because I am holy" (1 Peter 1:16; from Lev 19:2), 'the implication is that the law, or at least part of it, remains authoritative. (...) 'The New Testament writers also apply the principles in the law. 'From Deuteronomy 25:4 ("Do not muzzle an ox while it is treading out grain"), Paul derives a principle that workers ought to be rewarded for their labors and applies that principle in the case of Christian workers (1 Cor 9:9-14). 'In 1 Timothy 5:18, Paul again quotes Deuteronomy 25:4, this time in parallel with a saying of Jesus (Matt 10:10) as if both are equally authoritative. 'Likewise, the principle of establishing truth by two or three witnesses (Deut 19:15), originally limited to courts, is applied more broadly to a church conference (2 Cor 13:1). 'The principle that believers are not to be unequally yoked together with unbelievers is derived from a law concerning the yoking of animals (2 Cor 6:14; cf. Deut 22:10). 'In 1 Corinthians 5:1-5, 13, Paul affirms on the basis of Leviticus 18:29 that incest, a capital offense in the Old Testament, is immoral and deserves punishment. A person practicing incest in the church must be excommunicated to maintain the church's practical holiness. Paul maintains the law's moral principle, yet in view of the changed redemptive setting, makes no attempt to apply the law's original sanction.' ____________________ Bibliography. G. Bahnsen, Theonomy in Christian Ethics; W. S. Barker and W. R. Godfrey, eds., Theonomy: A Reformed Critique; H. J. Boecker, Law and the Administration of Justice in the Old Testament and the Ancient Near East; U. Cassuto, A Commentary on the Book of Exodus; D. A. Dorsey, JETS 34/3 (Sept. 1991): 321-34; H.-H. Esser, NIDNTT2:438-51; M. Greenberg, Yehezkel Kaufmann Jubilee Volume, pp. 3-28; idem, Studies in Bible: 1986, pp. 3-28; idem, Religion and Law, pp. 101-12, 120-25; H. W. House and T. Ice, Dominion Theology: A Blessing or a Curse?; W. C. Kaiser, Jr., Toward Old Testament Ethics; idem, JETS33/3 (Sept. 1990): 289-302; G. E. Mendenhall, Religion and Law, pp. 85-100; Dale Patrick, Old Testament Law; V. Poythress, The Shadow of Christ in the Law of Moses; R. J. Rushdooney, The Institutes of Biblical Law; R. Sonsino, Judaism33 (1984): 202-9; J. Sprinkle, A Literary Approach to Biblical Law: Exodus 20:22-23:19. Baker's Evangelical Dictionary of Biblical Theology. Edited by Walter A. Elwell, 1996 by Walter A. Elwell. Published by Baker Books. (http://bible.crosswalk.com/Dictionaries/BakersEvangelicalDictionary/) matt517 |
||||||
265 | Which one are we not going to keep? | Bible general Archive 2 | kalos | 125896 | ||
Country Girl: "until heaven and earth pass away..." Have heaven and earth passed away? No, they have not. Neither has an iota nor a dot passed from the Law. You ask: "what WAS to be accomplished and do away with the Law and the Prophets?" I ask you: Where in the Bible does it SAY that something (or anything) will do away with the Law and the Prophets? Jesus Himself said in Matthew 5:17 (ESV), "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them...". ("but to fulfill them". Obviously, fulfill does not mean abolish. If it did, then Jesus would have been saying, "I have not come to abolish, but to abolish.) As for the rest of your question(s) in the previous Note, I could not provide a better answer than the one posted by "following him", the one that begins "Country Girl Christ has not fulfilled..." Grace to you, kalos matt517 |
||||||
266 | Which one are we not going to keep? | Bible general Archive 2 | kalos | 125903 | ||
"the enmity occasioned by the Torah" Ephesians 2:15 (The Complete Jewish Bible) by destroying in his own body the enmity occasioned by the Torah, with its commands set forth in the form of ordinances. He did this in order to create in union with himself from the two groups a single new humanity and thus make shalom, 'What is the grammatical significance of Sha'ul's (Paul's) placing "the Torah" in apposition with "the enmity"? If he means that the enmity is identical with the Torah, then when Yeshua (Jesus) abolished the enmity, he necessarily abolished the Torah too, in contradiction with his own statement at Mt 5:17. This makes little sense; and in fact, no one seriously considers the Torah to be enmity. ...although the Torah is itself "holy" (Ro 7:12), it occasions sin (in this case enmity between Jews and Gentiles) by stimulating the people's sinful propensities.' ____________________ (Jewish New Testament Commentary, David H. Stern, Jewish New Testament Publications, Inc., 1992). |
||||||
267 | Which one are we not going to keep? | Bible general Archive 2 | kalos | 125905 | ||
"deliberately, knowingly, and habitually" In the passage in 1 John 3, the key words are: "[deliberately, knowingly, and habitually] practices sin" and "he cannot practice sinning." This phrase once again conveys the idea of habitual sinning (see 1 John 3:4,6). The emphasis here is on the first part of v. 9: "No one born (begotten) of God [deliberately, knowingly, and habitually] practices sin". [8] If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. [9] If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. [10] If we say we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us. 1 John 1:8-10 (ESV) 1 John 3:6-10 (Amplified) 6 No one who abides in Him [who lives and remains in communion with and in obedience to Him—deliberately, knowingly, and habitually] commits (practices) sin. No one who [habitually] sins has either seen or known Him [recognized, perceived, or understood Him, or has had an experiential acquaintance with Him]. 7 Boys (lads), let no one deceive and lead you astray. He who practices righteousness [who is upright, conforming to the divine will in purpose, thought, and action, living a consistently conscientious life] is righteous, even as He is righteous. 8 [But] he who commits sin [who practices evildoing] is of the devil [takes his character from the evil one], for the devil has sinned (violated the divine law) from the beginning. The reason the Son of God was made manifest (visible) was to undo (destroy, loosen, and dissolve) the works the devil [has done]. 9 No one born (begotten) of God [deliberately, knowingly, and habitually] practices sin, for God’s nature abides in him [His principle of life, the divine sperm, remains permanently within him]; and he cannot practice sinning because he is born (begotten) of God. 10 By this it is made clear who take their nature from God and are His children and who take their nature from the devil and are his children: no one who does not practice righteousness [who does not conform to God’s will in purpose, thought, and action] is of God; neither is anyone who does not love his brother (his fellow believer in Christ). |
||||||
268 | Which one are we not going to keep? | Bible general Archive 2 | kalos | 125906 | ||
Break it or do it? No third alternative in this passage. Matthew 5:19 (KJV) Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. Heard on Christian radio: In this verse Jesus is saying a man either BREAKS the commandments and teaches others to do the same or he DOES them and teaches others to do the same. He is saying there are some people who break the law of the book. And they not only break it, they teach other people to break it. Then there are some people who do the law and teach other people to do it. What is Jesus putting primary emphasis on? It is this: Are you going to BREAK it or are you going to DO it? Because whether you break it or you do it, you're teaching somebody, aren't you? You take this book and you break the law, you will teach somebody by breaking it that you don't believe in it. [Heard on David Jeremiah's radio broadcast on 07-13-2004 (www.oneplace.com/Ministries/Love_Worth_Finding/) and (www.lwf.org/)] |
||||||
269 | Which one are we not going to keep? | Bible general Archive 2 | kalos | 125907 | ||
'Is the Law altogether invalid? Matt 5:19' If the Old Testament is gone, then why are you still carrying it around with you? That is, assuming you carry the entire Bible, and not just a copy of the New Testament. If the Old Testament is gone, then perhaps you should go through your New Testament and white out all the OT quotations. AMPLIFIED Matthew 5:19 Whoever then breaks or does away with or relaxes one of the least [important] of these commandments and teaches men so shall be called least [important] in the kingdom of heaven, but he who practices them and teaches others to do so shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. The Law under the New Covenant. 'The law cannot be altogether invalid since the New Testament affirms its abiding applicability. "All Scripture is … useful" (2 Tim 3:16-17), including Old Testament laws. Jesus came not to abolish the law, but to fulfill it (Matt 5:17-20). The law is the embodiment of truth that instructs (Rom 2:18-19). It is "holy" and "spiritual, " making sin known to us by defining it; therefore, Paul delights in it (Rom 7:7-14,22). The law is good if used properly (1 Tim 1:8), and is not opposed to the promises of God (Gal 3:21). Faith does not make the law void, but the Christian establishes the law (Rom 3:31), fulfilling its requirements by walking according to the Spirit (Rom 8:4) through love (Rom 13:10). 'When Paul states that women are to be in submission "as the Law says" (1 Cor 14:34) or quotes parts of the Decalogue (Rom 13:9), and 'when James quotes the law of love (2:8 from Lev 19:18) or condemns partiality, adultery, murder, and slander as contrary to the law (2:9, 11; 4:11), and 'when Peter quotes Leviticus, "Be holy, because I am holy" (1 Peter 1:16; from Lev 19:2), 'the implication is that the law, or at least part of it, remains authoritative. (...) 'The New Testament writers also apply the principles in the law. 'From Deuteronomy 25:4 ("Do not muzzle an ox while it is treading out grain"), Paul derives a principle that workers ought to be rewarded for their labors and applies that principle in the case of Christian workers (1 Cor 9:9-14). 'In 1 Timothy 5:18, Paul again quotes Deuteronomy 25:4, this time in parallel with a saying of Jesus (Matt 10:10) as if both are equally authoritative. 'Likewise, the principle of establishing truth by two or three witnesses (Deut 19:15), originally limited to courts, is applied more broadly to a church conference (2 Cor 13:1). 'The principle that believers are not to be unequally yoked together with unbelievers is derived from a law concerning the yoking of animals (2 Cor 6:14; cf. Deut 22:10). 'In 1 Corinthians 5:1-5, 13, Paul affirms on the basis of Leviticus 18:29 that incest, a capital offense in the Old Testament, is immoral and deserves punishment. A person practicing incest in the church must be excommunicated to maintain the church's practical holiness. Paul maintains the law's moral principle, yet in view of the changed redemptive setting, makes no attempt to apply the law's original sanction.' ____________________ Bibliography. G. Bahnsen, Theonomy in Christian Ethics; W. S. Barker and W. R. Godfrey, eds., Theonomy: A Reformed Critique; H. J. Boecker, Law and the Administration of Justice in the Old Testament and the Ancient Near East; U. Cassuto, A Commentary on the Book of Exodus; D. A. Dorsey, JETS 34/3 (Sept. 1991): 321-34; H.-H. Esser, NIDNTT2:438-51; M. Greenberg, Yehezkel Kaufmann Jubilee Volume, pp. 3-28; idem, Studies in Bible: 1986, pp. 3-28; idem, Religion and Law, pp. 101-12, 120-25; H. W. House and T. Ice, Dominion Theology: A Blessing or a Curse?; W. C. Kaiser, Jr., Toward Old Testament Ethics; idem, JETS33/3 (Sept. 1990): 289-302; G. E. Mendenhall, Religion and Law, pp. 85-100; Dale Patrick, Old Testament Law; V. Poythress, The Shadow of Christ in the Law of Moses; R. J. Rushdooney, The Institutes of Biblical Law; R. Sonsino, Judaism33 (1984): 202-9; J. Sprinkle, A Literary Approach to Biblical Law: Exodus 20:22-23:19. Baker's Evangelical Dictionary of Biblical Theology. Edited by Walter A. Elwell, 1996 by Walter A. Elwell. Published by Baker Books. (http://bible.crosswalk.com/Dictionaries/BakersEvangelicalDictionary/) matt517 |
||||||
270 | Why ask Why? Why ask Where? | Bible general Archive 2 | kalos | 126103 | ||
Tim: Seriously, I also hold myself to the same standard that you use. Occasionally I give my opinion. But, when I do, I try to remember to label it as my opinion, and not as doctrine or dogma. As I've said many times before, Everyone has the right to his opinion. But no one has the RIGHT to be WRONG in his facts. Moreover, opinion that is not based on fact is worthless. And opinion about biblical matters that is not biblically based is worse than worthless. It is nothing more than mere speculation masquerading as fact. Grace to you, kalos |
||||||
271 | Scriptural Support? | Bible general Archive 2 | kalos | 126115 | ||
Rowdy: God the Son did not come to start a new religion that is opposed to and in conflict with the religion of God the Father. Properly understood, Bible Christianity and Bible Judaism are not in conflict with each other. Rather, true Christianity is the fulfillment, not the abolition, of true Judaism. The New Covenant does not replace the Old, but instead renews it. If the Old Testament is dead and buried, then why are you still carrying it around with you? That is, assuming you carry the entire Bible, and not just a copy of the New Testament. If the Old Testament is not relevant, then perhaps you should go through your New Testament and white out all the OT quotations. kalos |
||||||
272 | Why ask Why? Why ask Where? | Bible general Archive 2 | kalos | 126142 | ||
Angel: Good post. May I just point out one thing? The Pharisees' problem was not the text of the Law. Their problem was the attempt to follow their traditions instead of God's Law. The Pharisees' problem was not Law, but Legalism. Legalism does not mean keeping the Law of Moses. Legalism is keeping man-made [religious] rules and regulations, adding to the Law. Grace to you, kalos |
||||||
273 | Why ask Why? Why ask Where? | Bible general Archive 2 | kalos | 126153 | ||
Theo-Minor: Why is this topic still being debated? That's what I would like to know. "It takes unacceptable theological legerdemain to conclude that when God writes the Torah (law) on hearts he changes it into something other than the Torah" (Restoring the Jewishness of the Gospel, David H. Stern, Jewish New Testament Publications, Inc., 1988)! NASB Hebrews 8:10 "FOR THIS IS THE COVENANT THAT I WILL MAKE WITH THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL AFTER THOSE DAYS, SAYS THE LORD: I WILL PUT MY LAWS INTO THEIR MINDS, AND I WILL WRITE THEM ON THEIR HEARTS. AND I WILL BE THEIR GOD, AND THEY SHALL BE MY PEOPLE. Grace to you, kalos |
||||||
274 | WHAT DOES GOD SAY ABOUT DIVORCE. | Bible general Archive 2 | kalos | 126199 | ||
Recognize the progress of revelation Leslie N: You raise a good point when you write: "Does a latter command rule out an earlier one. Jesus Christ said don't preach to the Gentiles, then to Paul, He said yes." Matthew 10:5 These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not: 6 But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. Matthew 28:18 And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. 19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: 20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen. God had the authority to add or even change in one era what He had given in another. What God revealed as binding in one period may be rescinded in another, not by man but by God Himself. "Recognize the progress of revelation. Remember that the Bible was not handed down all at once as a complete book but that it came from God through many different writers over a period of about 1,600 years. This means that in the progress of revealing His message to man, God may add or even change in one era what He had given in another. "The New Testament adds much that was not revealed in the Old. Furthermore, what God revealed as binding in one period may be rescinded in another...This is most important; otherwise, the Bible would contain apparently unresolvable contradictions (as Matt 10:5-7 compared with 28:18-20)" (Ryrie Study Bible, Moody, 1978). Grace to you, kalos |
||||||
275 | Why ask Why? Why ask Where? | Bible general Archive 2 | kalos | 126203 | ||
Theo-Minor: You write: "We are not under the Law." What do you mean by that? I know the Bible says that, but what do you take that to mean? How does it apply to us? Grace to you, kalos |
||||||
276 | Why ask Why? Why ask Where? | Bible general Archive 2 | kalos | 126208 | ||
Theo-Minor: I appreciate your taking the time to answer my question. I can see that a lot of careful thought has gone into your reply. I now think I understand your position better than I did before. Grace and shalom, kalos |
||||||
277 | Why ask Why? Why ask Where? | Bible general Archive 2 | kalos | 126211 | ||
Two different ways of being saved? [Theo-Minor: I am reposting a Note that I had posted earlier. Here I disucss the false idea some have that "we are no longer saved by keeping the law." I do not mean that this is what you think. I merely bring it up because whenever the subject of not being under the Law comes up, this is what many are thinking. Again, you have not said any such thing. So this is no criticism of you. It is merely a point I believe is worthy of consideration in the discussion of the Law. Grace to you, kalos] The law was not given as a way to be saved in the first place. So why do people [but not you, Theo] keep arguing that since in the NT era we are not saved by keeping the law, it must then be invalid or abolished? This argument is meaningless. I am not aware that I have ever said we are saved by keeping the law. No one was ever saved by keeping the law. "Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness." (See Rom 4:3; Gal 3:6; James 2:23.) The just shall live by faith Habakkuk 2:4 (KJV) Behold, his soul which is lifted up is not upright in him: but the just shall live by his faith. No man is justified by the law Galatians 3:11 (KJV) But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith. Galations 3:11 (New Living Translation) Consequently, it is clear that no one can ever be right with God by trying to keep the law. For the Scriptures say, "It is through faith that a righteous person has life." Two different ways of being saved? Not according to the Bible. Since the law was never given as a way to be saved, why do people keep arguing that in the NT era we are not saved by keeping the law? No one was ever saved by keeping the law. Not in the OT. Not in the NT. Not today. And not in the future. |
||||||
278 | Why ask Why? Why ask Where? | Bible general Archive 2 | kalos | 126219 | ||
Theo-Minor: I agree with you and am happy to see that we are indeed close to being on the same page. We keep the moral law contained in the Ten Commandments not as a way of BEING saved (redeemed), but because we ARE saved (redeemed). Kenneth Wuest, in his "Word Studies in the Greek New Testament", wrote: The law says, Do this and you will live. Grace says, You live, so do this. (See Luke 10:28 and Lev. 18:5). Grace to you, kalos |
||||||
279 | Why ask Why? Why ask Where? | Bible general Archive 2 | kalos | 126273 | ||
IBLONG2GOD: You write: "We are not saved by keeping the law." I agree. In fact, that is what I posted at 11:21 am today. I say again: Two different ways of being saved? The law was not given as a way to be saved in the first place. So why do people keep arguing that since in the NT era we are not saved by keeping the law, it must then be invalid or abolished? This argument is meaningless. I am not aware that I have ever said we are saved by keeping the law. No one was ever saved by keeping the law. "Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness." (See Rom 4:3; Gal 3:6; James 2:23.) The just shall live by faith Habakkuk 2:4 (KJV) Behold, his soul which is lifted up is not upright in him: but the just shall live by his faith. No man is justified by the law Galatians 3:11 (KJV) But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith. Galations 3:11 (New Living Translation) Consequently, it is clear that no one can ever be right with God by trying to keep the law. For the Scriptures say, "It is through faith that a righteous person has life." Two different ways of being saved? Not according to the Bible. No one is ever saved by keeping the law. Not in the OT. Not in the NT. Not today. And not in the future. Grace to you, kalos |
||||||
280 | Order of occurance | Bible general Archive 2 | kalos | 126441 | ||
A man convinced against his will DocTrinsograce: Your grandfather's quote reminds me of one I used to hear from a dear friend and teacher of mine, now deceased. He used to quote: A man convinced against his will Is of the same opinion still. This has stayed with me all my life. And, oh how many times it has come to mind since I've been a forum participant!* Grace to you and to Theo-Minor and to all those of like precious faith (2 Peter 1:1), kalos * I have been a forum member since 02/26/01, approx. nine days after StudyBibleForum.com first went online. (That together with one dollar and 29 cents plus tax will get me a small Coke at Hardee's. :-)) |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 ] Next > Last [212] >> |