RE: SPIRITUAL FOOD 4 THOUGHT - HOW COME JESUS DIDN'T GET THE MEMO?
I use the entire Bible equally as GOD intended when he inspired it:
2 Timothy 3:16,17 states that "All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
If you follow Christ, the entire Bible is the Word of GOD. I do not place less emphasis on New Vs Old testaments they are all lifeblood for the soul!
That said, the Bible does NOT use the term Mosaic law, but rather it describes that law as the rituals and ordinances written in a book by the hand of Moses; Mosiac law is just easier to say:
2 CHRON. 35:12 And they removed the burnt offerings, that they might give according to the divisions of the families of the people, to offer unto the LORD, as it is written in the book of Moses. And so did they with the oxen.
it is also called the book of the lawand it is specifically located in this verse:
DEUT. 31:26 Take this book of the law, and put it in the side of the ark of the covenant of the LORD your God, that it may be there for a witness against thee.
This verse , actually places a time limit on this ceremonial law, triggered by the life of Christ (the seed):
GAL. 3:19 Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.
This does NOT challenge the devine source of these laws (nor their importance), but respects the devine time-line GOD himself placed on these specific laws, according to his devine plan. I have not originated this time limit, GOD did! My job is to follow him, to the limit of my ability; it is as simple, and as complex as that.
Be Blessed!
:)>
Your perceived time limit of Paul's writings goes against the time frame set by Yeshua himself. Yeshua said not a single letter would pass from the law til Heaven and earth pass away. If you believe the "ceremonial law" is done away with then you believe a whole lot of letters have passed from the law, therefore your belief is contrary to the words of the Messiah himself.
Further more ascribing Galations being the very words of God based on 2 Timothy 3 would be like me declaring as scripture 3 letters I wrote to my 3 pastor cousins about issues they were having in their churches in Aurora, Il, Pittsburgh, Pa and Hobocan, NJ. If you would not consider my 3 letters to my cousin's as scripture because in them I said all scripture is breathed of God, then on what basis would you consider Paul's letters to be scripture?
We have reached an impasse. I believe in the devine accuracy of the Bible, including the Torah. You do Not. My Bible make a distinction, which I must follow. The laws projecting Messiah, are a treasure to me too.
Although we agree that GOD's LAWS are Immutable, I can Not dismiss Christ's Sacrifice on the cross, nor can I dismiss the New Testament either.
Your letters to your cousin, though they would be interesting to read, hardly reach the level of being inspired by GOD.
I will watch the film you recommended, I am interested, but I can tell you that since you do Not recognize the full Bible, we are at a dead end. I can not accept the limited bible you use, and you will Not accept the Bible I use.
Celebrate what we agree on, sadly we can not debate on what we do not agree on, because we can not agree on the text we base our different religions upon. Your view will remain wrong to me, and mine to you.
But we both worship on the Sabbath, and follow GODs dietary restrictions. We follow the Ten Commandments, as well as we can.
Be Blessed.
:)>You are incorrect in your assumptions of my beliefs. I believe the New Testament is great but other than one singular verse from one of the others of the NT itself, you have no basis to say it's "scripture". If you take Paul's own words of "all scripture is breathed of God" and you apply that to his own writings and also to other writings not written yet at that time, then you would be hypocritical to not accept my letters to my cousin's. I love the NT but I do not base doctrines on it's writings without it first being back by the OT. In the OT God makes no distinction between his laws. To God there's no such thing as ceremonial law or dietary law or moral law. It's all his law and none of it is Moses law.
Sorry if I misundersttod where you are! Question, the scripture that was fufiilled when Christ arrived, must still be used to project his future arrival (even though he already came here!) in some undetermined future time that already happened?
You Can NOT filter GOD's scripture. This part is important, but this part is not as important. So you claim belief in the New Testament, but only to a point. You must not believe Revelations either, as it is only tagged on the end of the real Bible.
When you begin dismissing specific scriptures, so what is left of the Bible will say what you want it to say, sometimes you might miss things....
IT MUST BE TOTALLY RIGHT, cover to cover, or it is Totally Wrong! The liberals know this, so if they can remove ONE verse, it all can be attacked from that verse. They begin with the Ten Commandments, because GOD wrote them, so they hate them the most!
I have read some writings from the same time frame, that are interesting, but do not carry the weight of Scripture. The Apocrypha is one good example, interesting, but not inspired! Shortly after that was the quran of which I have read some, but it is also not inspired, and scary in places.
I would not have spent so much time on you, but you are Papa-pepper's friend so you are worth the effort. I suspect we have more similarities than differences! I am not starting a Holy War here, but I would like to keep in touch.
:)>Let me be clear, in proper context when Paul wrote all scripture is breathed of God he was not referring to the New testament. What Paul considered to be scripture was what we call the old testament.
We actually agree on that, and I study the Old Testament, including the Torah. But I do Not dismiss the New Testament either.
:)>So you agree that Paul was talking about the OT when he wrote 2 Tim 3 but then you go ahead apply it to the NT? Thats not good.
When the cannon of scripture was closed in Revelations, The existing New Testament was included. You can either believe it, or reject it, but you can Not filter it! It is all or nothing, not "I will have four of these, and two of those"....
:)>The "cannon" of what you hold as "scripture" was decided several centuries later by men. The western protestant Bible has the least amount of books in it of all the Bibles on the earth. The Catholic Bible has 8 or 10 books more in it than the protestant Bible and the Ethiopian Orthodox Bible, the oldest Bible on Earth has 81 books in it versus the 66 in the Protestant Bible. there are books in that Ethiopian Orthodox Bible that I would consider scripture that you would not because they were originally in what we call the Old Testament but men decided to remove them.
it's really plain and simple, what the Messiah and all the apostles had that they considered to be scripture was what we call the Old Testament which would include some of the books that are now in the Apocrypha, THAT is the biblically endorsed definition of scripture and in all of what is deemed scripture there is no where that God himself said any part of the law would come to an end until heaven and Earth themselves come to an end. You can take paul's writings and twist them to have him contradicting the Messiah, but then you would be falling into the trap that Peter warned us about.