Let’s look at Paul
Dave P

Olive Hill, KY

#102 Jan 1, 2014
Anonymous Proxy wrote:
<quoted text>You know where I believe you keep your head. Look back at my post 78. You will see I said with the situation of Elisha that they were not Christians. Duh !!!! it could hardly have anything to do with church discipline could it.
Elisha had asked Elijah if he could have a double portion of his spirit. Afterwards, those youths were making fun of him so he cursed them. He was a prophet. It has nothing to do with church discipline- duh as you so eloquently put it.

The two passages of Matthew 18 and 1 Corinthians 5 are dealing with church discipline; and are under another covenant; and is addressed concerning Christians not the pagans; so that needs to be kept in mind.

I see nothing that requires the death of the offender in 1 Corinthians 5. Nor necessarily the infliction of bodily harm. Excommunication is absolutely in sight here, as the rest of the chapter shows us. I don't see that the Ananias and Sapphira passage really has any involvement in this either.

Nor do I see an apostolic only power here, as Paul tells them they should excommunicate the offending party without his being present there. He states he is with them in spirit, agrees with their judgment, but not there in physical presence. Hence the tie in with Matthew 18.
Dave P

Olive Hill, KY

#103 Jan 1, 2014
Barnsweb wrote:
<quoted text>
How could I have kept them when I was taught to NOT keep them because they were nailed to the cross? How can one keep that which they were not taught to do or believe?
.
You weren't taught that, as just over a year ago you didn't believe it. Read your old posts. Revisionist history on your part.
Dave P

Morehead, KY

#104 Jan 1, 2014
Barnsweb wrote:
The fact from the beginning is that there were those of other nationalities than children of Abraham who came out with Israel from Egypt. They had joined themselves with Israel and partook of the provision of God that day, as they did up to Sinai and through the wilderness and into the land of promise. Look back to Exodus 20. Did they all partake of the manna? Yes. Were they all protected by God while going out of Egypt? Yes. And when they came to Sinai they were all present - Israel and the sojourners. The very opening statement by God is what? "I am Adonai you God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the abode of slavery." Were those of other nations brought out with Israel - so many as went with them? Yes. The Ten Commandments, as with all the open-ended laws given to them, are for both Israel and the sojourners. Then there are laws given to only Israel. Then there are some that apply to both, such as the command that if a sojourner wanted to partake of the Passover with those of Israel, that they had to be circumcised to do so, but that it was a condition for partaking of the Passover, not of necessity, but if they desired to it was required by God. Period. It was clear from the beginning.
Jesus (Y'shua) changed not one of the Commandments of God, except through fulfillment, that the one true sacrifice for sin be accomplished and that through belief and repentance to do whatsoever God wills for them to do in abiding in His words of life, that we find the promised gift of the Holy Spirit given in Acts 2:38,39.
The controversy initiated by Paul was resolved by going right back to the same standards given by God and taught by Jesus Christ throughout His teachings and life example.
This is why those who reject the commandments of God are not even known by the returning King - they rejected being His subjects as they rejected His commandments. "Depart from Me. I never knew you."
And to do this because we think we can't keep those commandments?
Which is too hard to do? Name one.
Read your first line again. They joined themselves with the Israelites and went with them. This was the passover ordinance, when strangers went with them one law of the passover was for all of them. If they stayed with Israel throughout, guess what? They did all of those things. But they were joined with them. The law, the passover, etc was all given to Israel. Those joined with them were involved. But not the nations at large, who were not present nor were part of that covenant given at Sinai.

The covenant with Abraham and the covenant at Sinai are not the same thing. A sojourner WITH Israel and a gentile apart from Israel were not the same thing.
Dave P

Morehead, KY

#105 Jan 1, 2014
Barnsweb wrote:
<quoted text>
You know I've quoted numerous times where Yeshua said the most profound teaching of His ministry - when He said we enter the most intimate relationship He spoke of - that of when He considers us to be His "friends", as well as those He considers personal family.
Both have to do with our love for Him being shown by hearing and doing whatever He commanded and taught.
Do tell - how is the "more excellent way" of Paul better than "the way" taught by Jesus Christ? Hint: Jesus didn't teach in Greek.
Greek has nothing to do with his idea. Can you read English?
The more excellent way Paul said was love. What did Jesus say? "If you love Me, keep my commandments."

Also, how about the greatest commandments? They fulfill all the law. And they are simple. Love God, love thy neighbor. And there is only 2 of them. Why make things more difficult than they have to be?
Dave P

Morehead, KY

#106 Jan 1, 2014
Barnsweb wrote:
Yeshua taught the commandments and word of God is in effect till earth pass away and all things be fulfilled - which includes the Accuser being cast into the lake of fire.
Do you actually believe Him? And regarding this discussion of Paul - from what Paul wrote, Paul didn't believe Yeshua or Moses or God, but instead taught his way as more excellent than the way Yeshua said the Father told Him to tell the original disciples.
That's not what He said, and that's not the correct interpretation of what He said. Twisting scriptures you are.
Anonymous Proxy

Torrance, CA

#107 Jan 1, 2014
Dave P wrote:
<quoted text>
Elisha had asked Elijah if he could have a double portion of his spirit. Afterwards, those youths were making fun of him so he cursed them. He was a prophet. It has nothing to do with church discipline- duh as you so eloquently put it.
The two passages of Matthew 18 and 1 Corinthians 5 are dealing with church discipline; and are under another covenant; and is addressed concerning Christians not the pagans; so that needs to be kept in mind.
I see nothing that requires the death of the offender in 1 Corinthians 5. Nor necessarily the infliction of bodily harm. Excommunication is absolutely in sight here, as the rest of the chapter shows us. I don't see that the Ananias and Sapphira passage really has any involvement in this either.
Nor do I see an apostolic only power here, as Paul tells them they should excommunicate the offending party without his being present there. He states he is with them in spirit, agrees with their judgment, but not there in physical presence. Hence the tie in with Matthew 18.
I hope you get some help. If you know someone you can trust have them read your post and maybe they will help you to realize you have a problem.
Dave P

Dahlonega, GA

#108 Jan 1, 2014
Anonymous Proxy wrote:
<quoted text>I hope you get some help. If you know someone you can trust have them read your post and maybe they will help you to realize you have a problem.
In essence then you are no different from the catholics- "You're wrong"- and nothing else.

You in fact have a problem. You don't what what the truth is, except catholics ain't it. Then you can't explain or defend anything you believe. Or just simply won't.

Sproul manure, proxy manure, all junk and all the same. Clueless you are junior.
Barnsweb

Akron, OH

#109 Jan 1, 2014
Dave P wrote:
<quoted text>
Read your first line again. They joined themselves with the Israelites and went with them. This was the passover ordinance, when strangers went with them one law of the passover was for all of them. If they stayed with Israel throughout, guess what? They did all of those things. But they were joined with them. The law, the passover, etc was all given to Israel. Those joined with them were involved. But not the nations at large, who were not present nor were part of that covenant given at Sinai.
The covenant with Abraham and the covenant at Sinai are not the same thing. A sojourner WITH Israel and a gentile apart from Israel were not the same thing.
Have you ever read all the books of Moses? I was reading Leviticus today noting how many quotes Jesus made from it, noting how many of the directives from God regarded different people - Jew and Gentile sojourner. What you said just isn't so according to what Moses wrote and Jesus and the others, including James noted in Acts.

Related to this is also a consideration of fact of those from all nations are joined with Israel in becoming believers in the One True God. And the covenant with Abraham, the main one, regarded the nations being bless through the seed of Abraham who is the Christ.

Even the commandment to love the stranger in Israel is found to be in Leviticus, as well as the first commandment to love God. Not to mention the command to be holy because God is holy... Name one thing Jesus taught that is not found in the Torah. Help me out. Show me the error of what I've come to believe.

And while you're at it, do show where Jesus had the same disdain for the Torah as Paul had.

Paul didn't even identify the proper verse to deal with the promise of the Messiah through Abraham. Genesis 26:5 was the proper passage.
Barnsweb

Akron, OH

#110 Jan 1, 2014
Dave P wrote:
<quoted text>
Greek has nothing to do with his idea. Can you read English?
The more excellent way Paul said was love. What did Jesus say? "If you love Me, keep my commandments."
Also, how about the greatest commandments? They fulfill all the law. And they are simple. Love God, love thy neighbor. And there is only 2 of them. Why make things more difficult than they have to be?
Jesus taught that without love, what you do is useless. All the instructions in righteousness - there is no righteousness that finds fulfillment without love. Primarily, that we know love requires obedience to the word of God given through Moses, the prophets, Psalms and the Anointed One. He said the instructions from God have to be fastened to love - first love for God, then love for our fellow man as ourselves.

If there are only two, why did He say the rest hang from the two? What you're saying doesn't make any sense if there is nothing to hang from them.....

Have you ever read Matthew with the mind to find the imperatives He taught as commandments, precepts, judgments, promises and necessary beliefs? They are all instructions in righteousness. If He gave them as imperatives, are they commandments, or what term would you use instead? Doctrines? Teachings? Faith? Testimony? Truth?
Barnsweb

Akron, OH

#111 Jan 1, 2014
Dave P wrote:
<quoted text>
That's not what He said, and that's not the correct interpretation of what He said. Twisting scriptures you are.
Then what did He say here? Mt. 5:

17 “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. 20 For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.
Dave P

Dahlonega, GA

#112 Jan 1, 2014
Barnsweb wrote:
<quoted text>
Have you ever read all the books of Moses? I was reading Leviticus today noting how many quotes Jesus made from it, noting how many of the directives from God regarded different people - Jew and Gentile sojourner. What you said just isn't so according to what Moses wrote and Jesus and the others, including James noted in Acts.
Related to this is also a consideration of fact of those from all nations are joined with Israel in becoming believers in the One True God. And the covenant with Abraham, the main one, regarded the nations being bless through the seed of Abraham who is the Christ.
Even the commandment to love the stranger in Israel is found to be in Leviticus, as well as the first commandment to love God. Not to mention the command to be holy because God is holy... Name one thing Jesus taught that is not found in the Torah. Help me out. Show me the error of what I've come to believe.
And while you're at it, do show where Jesus had the same disdain for the Torah as Paul had.
Paul didn't even identify the proper verse to deal with the promise of the Messiah through Abraham. Genesis 26:5 was the proper passage.
Leviticus. What does it mean? "Pertaining to Levites". Who were the Levites?

Speaking of the books of Moses, I noted today also how many verses read in this manner:
These be the words which Moses spake unto all ISRAEL; or Now therefore hearken, O ISRAEL, unto the statutes and the judgments; or These are the words of the covenant, which the Lord commanded Moses to make with the CHILDREN OF ISRAEL; or Even all nations shall say, Wherefore hath the Lord done thus unto this land? What meaneth the heat of this great anger? Then men shall say, because they have forsaken the covenant of the Lord God of THEIR fathers, which He made with THEM when He brought THEM forth out of the land of Egypt.

Do you notice the thread here?\

And the covenant with Abraham, the main one, regarded the nations being bless through the seed of Abraham who is the Christ.

Yes. That is correct. It is NOT from the law of Moses.

PS- you didn't notice what James said about "perfect obedience" to the law? Or that James quoted the same passage as Paul about God counting Abraham as righteous?

The law of Moses was given to ISRAEL, NOT all the nations of the world.
Dave P

Morehead, KY

#113 Jan 1, 2014
Barnsweb wrote:
<quoted text>
Then what did He say here? Mt. 5:
17 “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. 20 For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.
Didn't we do this already?

But to fulfil - To complete the design; to fill up what was predicted; to accomplish what was intended in them. The word “fulfill” also means sometimes “to teach” or “to inculcate,” Colossians 1:25. The law of Moses contained many sacrifices and rites which were designed to shadow forth the Messiah. See the notes at Hebrews 9. These were fulfilled when he came and offered himself a sacrifice to God,

“A sacrifice of nobler name.

And richer blood than they.”

The prophets contained many predictions respecting his coming and death. These were all to be fulfilled and fully accomplished by his life and his sufferings.
Verse 18

Verily - Truly, certainly. A word of strong affirmation.

Till heaven and earth pass - This expression denotes that the law never would be destroyed until it should be all fulfilled. It is the same as saying everything else may change; the very earth and heaven may pass away, but the law of God shall not be destroyed until its whole design has been accomplished.

This next paragraph is also good.

The laws of the Jews are commonly divided into moral, ceremonial, and judicial. The moral laws are such as grow out of the nature of things, and which cannot, therefore, be changed - such as the duty of loving God and his creatures. These cannot be abolished, as it can never be made right to hate God, or to hate our fellow-men. Of this kind are the ten commandments, and these our Saviour has neither abolished nor superseded. The ceremonial laws are such as are appointed to meet certain states of society, or to regulate the religious rites and ceremonies of a people. These can be changed when circumstances are changed, and yet the moral law be untouched. A general in an army may command his soldiers to appear sometimes in a red coat and sometimes in blue or in yellow. This would be a ceremonial law, and might be changed as he pleased. The duty of obeying him, and of being faithful to his country, could not be changed.
Dave P

Morehead, KY

#114 Jan 1, 2014
Barnsweb wrote:
<quoted text>
If there are only two, why did He say the rest hang from the two? What you're saying doesn't make any sense if there is nothing to hang from them.....
Have you ever read Matthew with the mind to find the imperatives He taught as commandments, precepts, judgments, promises and necessary beliefs? They are all instructions in righteousness. If He gave them as imperatives, are they commandments, or what term would you use instead? Doctrines? Teachings? Faith? Testimony? Truth?
That's the entire point. You keep those two, the greatest- the rest fall into place naturally. I love God, my neighbor as myself, I will not covet his goods or wife, kill him, etc. Those two control all the rest.

Let's not confuse "imperatives" or commands given by Christ with "keeping the law"; and let's not equate His commands in the gospels with the law given by Moses.

Language issues- BW, when you say keep God's commands, it seems you include all from Genesis to Revelation. Some of those things are not directed to us today. Some are to individuals, some to the nation of Israel, some to all. This is where you get so much backlash from people.
Barnsweb

Akron, OH

#115 Jan 2, 2014
Dave P wrote:
<quoted text>
That's the entire point. You keep those two, the greatest- the rest fall into place naturally. I love God, my neighbor as myself, I will not covet his goods or wife, kill him, etc. Those two control all the rest.
Let's not confuse "imperatives" or commands given by Christ with "keeping the law"; and let's not equate His commands in the gospels with the law given by Moses.
Language issues- BW, when you say keep God's commands, it seems you include all from Genesis to Revelation. Some of those things are not directed to us today. Some are to individuals, some to the nation of Israel, some to all. This is where you get so much backlash from people.
Then who changed the Sabbath to Sunday? The fourth commandment was specifically identified by Paul to be of no effect any more - abolished - made to be a matter of personal conscience and conviction and not per the commandment of God.

Yeshua taught repentance to turn and do the will of God, and that His teachings are the will of God. He said to "follow Me" and in another place, "arise, let us go from here." Mary said "Do whatever He tells you to do." Even the Father said "Hear Him." None of the twelve did anything but elevate His example and word and fulfillment of prophecy.

It's particularly interesting to me that there is a prophesy that the Messiah would cause the Gentiles to keep the commandments of God - and that "Christians" reject the commandments of God today tells me that the time of the Gentiles is all but up - over - done with - as they reject the truth of God, the commandments of God, and teach others to also reject them as the dung of Paul, who said they were nailed to the cross...

This generation of Gentiles most perfectly fits the prophecy of those who claim Y'shua as their "Lord! Lord!", and at the same time reject the whole of His teachings and pretend He said nothing about repenting to DO the will of God or that the Spirit was sent by God to write His Torah (instructions in righteousness) that we be careful to do what He said from our hearts.

Just doesn't seem to add up to Catholic, Western Orthodox, Protestant, Evangelical, Pentecostal, SDA, LDS or CoC doctrine.
Barnsweb

Akron, OH

#116 Jan 2, 2014
I will admit not knowing why rounding ones hair/beard? has to do with being in the same category as sexual deviants.... that does have me puzzled.
Barnsweb

Akron, OH

#117 Jan 2, 2014
Dave P wrote:
<quoted text>
That's the entire point. You keep those two, the greatest- the rest fall into place naturally. I love God, my neighbor as myself, I will not covet his goods or wife, kill him, etc. Those two control all the rest.
Let's not confuse "imperatives" or commands given by Christ with "keeping the law"; and let's not equate His commands in the gospels with the law given by Moses.
Language issues- BW, when you say keep God's commands, it seems you include all from Genesis to Revelation. Some of those things are not directed to us today. Some are to individuals, some to the nation of Israel, some to all. This is where you get so much backlash from people.
The standards of what God wants us to believe and do that apply to us today are the ones I'm looking at. The standards of right and wrong - according to God - not the sacrificial system of the Levites. But if we are called to be a kingdom of priests today as Christ's disciples - the 'priesthood of believers', are we called to be holy because God is holy? Isn't that one of the teachings of Jesus Christ? And where do we find instruction regarding this?
(I look to the word of the Christ - most look to the words of Paul)
Dave P

Olive Hill, KY

#118 Jan 2, 2014
Barnsweb wrote:
<quoted text>
The standards of what God wants us to believe and do that apply to us today are the ones I'm looking at. The standards of right and wrong - according to God - not the sacrificial system of the Levites. But if we are called to be a kingdom of priests today as Christ's disciples - the 'priesthood of believers', are we called to be holy because God is holy? Isn't that one of the teachings of Jesus Christ? And where do we find instruction regarding this?
(I look to the word of the Christ - most look to the words of Paul)
Yes. We have common ground here. BW, there is not one poster on here past or present who would disagree with your statement above. The sacrificial system of the Levites, the religious system and ceremony is what Christ fulfilled and what has passed away. The standard of right and wrong has not.

Don't blame Paul when it is others who misunderstand what he was saying; who reinterpret his words to make a cheap system of salvation. Paul did place high value in God's law and standards of righteousness- it was the system, and thinking the system made us holy, that he was arguing against.

Evangelicalism/Protestantism has done many people a great injustice by simply declaring that the law was nailed to the cross, without specifying and clarifying what they meant. Or, by hiding what their true intentions were.
Dave P

Olive Hill, KY

#119 Jan 2, 2014
Barnsweb wrote:
<quoted text>
Then who changed the Sabbath to Sunday? The fourth commandment was specifically identified by Paul to be of no effect any more - abolished - made to be a matter of personal conscience and conviction and not per the commandment of God.

It's particularly interesting to me that there is a prophesy that the Messiah would cause the Gentiles to keep the commandments of God - and that "Christians" reject the commandments of God today tells me that the time of the Gentiles is all but up - over - done with - as they reject the truth of God, the commandments of God, and teach others to also reject them as the dung of Paul, who said they were nailed to the cross...
This generation of Gentiles most perfectly fits the prophecy of those who claim Y'shua as their "Lord! Lord!", and at the same time reject the whole of His teachings and pretend He said nothing about repenting to DO the will of God or that the Spirit was sent by God to write His Torah (instructions in righteousness) that we be careful to do what He said from our hearts.
No one changed the sabbath to Sunday. Many have unofficially turned Sunday into their Sabbath, but it did not change. The reason Paul said the sabbath was a shadow fulfilled by Christ is because the sabbath is part of the Levitical system. God may have hallowed the sabbath at creation, but it was not made known to man until it was revealed to Israel in the wilderness. It very much became part of the Levitical system, not one of the moral principles that are timeless.

Paul didn't destroy the sabbath- Christ fulfilled it, and the sabbath was a shadow designed to pass away. Amos prophesied the end of the sabbath in Amos 8, which seems to occur at the crucifixion.

Are you sure most reject the commandments of God? Or do they reject the ceremonial aspects of the Levitical priesthood, or laws intended for civil purposes in early OT Israel?
How many believe "thou shall not kill" is no longer in force? Very few.
Barnsweb

Akron, OH

#120 Jan 2, 2014
Dave P wrote:
<quoted text>
No one changed the sabbath to Sunday. Many have unofficially turned Sunday into their Sabbath, but it did not change. The reason Paul said the sabbath was a shadow fulfilled by Christ is because the sabbath is part of the Levitical system. God may have hallowed the sabbath at creation, but it was not made known to man until it was revealed to Israel in the wilderness. It very much became part of the Levitical system, not one of the moral principles that are timeless.
Paul didn't destroy the sabbath- Christ fulfilled it, and the sabbath was a shadow designed to pass away. Amos prophesied the end of the sabbath in Amos 8, which seems to occur at the crucifixion.
Are you sure most reject the commandments of God? Or do they reject the ceremonial aspects of the Levitical priesthood, or laws intended for civil purposes in early OT Israel?
How many believe "thou shall not kill" is no longer in force? Very few.
Guess I need to jump up to Amos 8 and see what it says....
Barnsweb

Akron, OH

#121 Jan 2, 2014
Not that I saw. Sounded like condemnation of those who didn't want to observe the Sabbath because it interfered with doing business and making money - not a prophecy the Sabbath would be done away with... If you see it otherwise, you'll have to present a case/explain that to me... or at least how you see it that way.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Bassett Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
dr.joel smithers Feb 20 YEPP 4
the church of Christ insider discussion boards (Aug '10) Jan 28 William 10
My girl Jan '17 The wonderer 1
Is there anything to do here??? Bored..... Jan '17 ATTheWizard85 1
I like to get on some buttseckz.. I aint gay.. ... (Jun '16) Dec '16 Waldo Jones 2
i gotta doo doo!!! (Jul '16) Dec '16 Orphelius Pontiac 2
Church of Christ rules and principles (Apr '13) Dec '16 Credal Drone 305

Bassett Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Bassett Mortgages