Did Jesus say he was God???

[Shermana]

"Since you have already said you can't separate the Law into parts why don't you tell me how you keep all of it?" - Quite simply, if there's no temple and established Levite and Aaronite priesthood performing them, I can't perform them. Same thing for the Babylonian exiles. Especially in consideration that the Suffering Servant is mentioned as THE Sacrifice for now at least. Now try actually answering my question, what parts of the Law, other than the Sacrifices which are EXPLICITLY said to be only done with a Temple and Priesthood, with the rest of the Law. Do not try to weasel out of this issue by ignoring the scripture which puts conditions on such.

Perhaps you have read where Jesus says he will reward all according to their works?

" As I said I have a Savior who has paid for all my sins, past, present, and future"

So you believe even if you commit murder and adultery, you're still guaranteed to heaven? Does this mean the pastor down the street who got caught with someone else's wife gets out of hell free just for claiming to believe? I highly doubt you have never thought of a woman lustfully, but oh well. Of course I have lusted, hated, stolen (not much) and cheated (at games and things), and of course I have broken the Law. I am not claiming perfection, but I claim to at least believe in repentance and striving for the narrow gate. There will be punishment for all sins.

You totally ignored the gist of Matthew 7:22-23, you act as if its a self-defeating verse, WHO are the ones who call Jesus "Lord", and you AGAIN skipped the issue of the Lukewarm in Revelation.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

And what was the "New Covenant" established with Jeremiah about? What is this new way to relate to God exactly?
The "New Covenant" in Jeremiah's days was more of a "Restored" covenant, since Israel had lost its way, just like how the Pharisees had corrupted the Law and abused their power. The difference of back then is that the Prophets were able to restore Israel away from its idolatrous and false customs whereas Jews have been meshed in Qabala and spurious Midrash for 2,000 years. The "New Covenant" is about restoring the original form like the New Covenant spoken of in Jeremiah. If you read the very prophecies which Jesus came to "fulfill" in the first place, they are about someone who leads the true chosen remnant of Israel back to righteousness.

Which Israel, fleshly or spiritual ?

Peter talks to those of fleshly Israel at Acts [3 vs 12-15] as killing the Prince of Life. In verse 18 they were to not only repent but be converted [converted from the old Jewish faith to the new Christian faith] such as did that great company of priests of Acts 6v7 B.

So the 'Israel of God' [Gal 6v16] means now: spiritual Israel.
Spiritual because according to Gal [4v26] Jerusalem above is now their mother. Heavenly Jerusalem was now the seat of government with Christ as king of God's kingdom. Which would leave fleshy Israel as a national group.

-Romans 2 vs28,29; 1st Peter 2v9; Exodus 19v6; Rev 5 vs9,10; 20v6.

 

[Shermana]

Which Israel, fleshly or spiritual ?

Peter talks to those of fleshly Israel at Acts [3 vs 12-15] as killing the Prince of Life. In verse 18 they were to not only repent but be converted [converted from the old Jewish faith to the new Christian faith] such as did that great company of priests of Acts 6v7 B.

So the 'Israel of God' [Gal 6v16] means now: spiritual Israel.
Spiritual because according to Gal [4v26] Jerusalem above is now their mother. Heavenly Jerusalem was now the seat of government with Christ as king of God's kingdom. Which would leave fleshy Israel as a national group.

-Romans 2 vs28,29; 1st Peter 2v9; Exodus 19v6; Rev 5 vs9,10; 20v6.

Well yes, that's the point of the "Church", or "elect/out-calleds", the true remnant of Israel who obeys the Law correctly, and "wild olive" gentile grafts are welcome if they obey the Law. Nonetheless, Jesus explicitly said he came ONLY for the "Lost sheep of the House of Israel", Peter's vision in Acts 10 was metaphorical to graft Gentiles into Tree of Israel, assuming Acts is legititimate.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Well yes, that's the point of the "Church", or "elect/out-calleds", the true remnant of Israel who obeys the Law correctly, and "wild olive" gentile grafts are welcome if they obey the Law. Nonetheless, Jesus explicitly said he came ONLY for the "Lost sheep of the House of Israel", Peter's vision in Acts 10 was metaphorical to graft Gentiles into Tree of Israel, assuming Acts is legititimate.

Yes, Jesus gave 'first choice', so to speak, to natural Israel branches.
But did they accept his offer?
That 'grafting' illustration was highlighted by Paul at Romans [11 vs17-24]
because Paul likened the gentile Christians, who became a grafted part of the seed of Abraham, to the branches of a wild olive tree grafted into a cultivated tree to replace the broken off unproductive branches [the removed natural Jewish members from that symbolic olive tree] for lack of faith. Gal 3 vs28,29


-Matt 3v10; John 15 vs1-10; Zech 4 v3,11-14; Rev 11 vs3,4

 

[InChrist]

Okay, so you don't believe any effort is involved and you can live however you want, that's the exact opposite message of Paul considering he constantly castigates bad behavior. Are you saying there is no penalty for bad behavior?

As for Matthew 7:22-23, who do you suppose are all the people who call Jesus "Lord" in that passage? Who are the "Lukewarm" in Revelation?

I don't believe I can live however I want. I believe in living a life submitted to Christ. I desire to live in His will to please Him, my Savior whom I love. The effort, if you want to call it that is in keeping this proper perspective and living with my focus on Christ and off self. There is plenty of reading material in the scriptures on this subject. When I display bad behavior God in His mercy and love brings chastening into my life.

[FONT=&quot]It says in Rev. 3:17-20 who the lukewarm are: Because you say, ‘I am rich, have become wealthy, and have need of nothing’—and do not know that you are wretched, miserable, poor, blind, and naked— I counsel you to buy from Me gold refined in the fire, that you may be rich; and white garments, that you may be clothed, that the shame of your nakedness may not be revealed; and anoint your eyes with eye salve, that you may see. As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten. Therefore be zealous and repent. Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears My voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and dine with him, and he with Me.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot][/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]It is those who are in a church or practice a religion, thinking they are rich and in need of nothing, but do not have a relationship with Christ, do not listen to Him and do not care about His counsel or guidance. It is similar to the passage in Matthew where people call Jesus Lord, but they do not really know, love, trust, or serve Him. Many people talk about Jesus, but they do not believe in Him enough to completely trust and submit to Him. Or they believe in a fake Jesus. It is to those Jesus Christ will say in that day, “Depart from Me I never knew you.”[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]But I fear, lest somehow, as the serpent deceived Eve by his craftiness, so your minds may be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ. For if he who comes preaches another Jesus whom we have not preached, or if you receive a different spirit which you have not received, or a different gospel which you have not accepted—you may well put up with it! 2 Cor. 11:2-4[/FONT]

 

[Shermana]

3:17 is the beginning of a different but related attack on the Church of Laodecia, they are included AFTER the Luke warm are mentioned. They are not necessarily the only people who are "lukewarm" since you seem to be taking it out of its original context of 3:15-16, but that's a nice try. The lukewarm are simply the Lukewarm. Verse 17 may EXPAND on reasons why, but to imply that's the ONLY reason the whole church is Lukewarm, is not quite right. Even if so, apparently their behavior is a matter of concern.

3:19 Those whom I love I rebuke and discipline. So be earnest, and repent

Be earnest and repent? Uh oh, apparently they have unrighteousness to account for.

church in Laodicea write:These are the words of the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the ruler of God’s creation. 15I know your deeds, that you are neither cold nor hot. I wish you were either one or the other! 16So, because you are lukewarm—neither hot nor cold—I am about to spit you out of my mouth.

Verse 16 ends the sentence, verse 17 is a new one. He is calling them Lukewarm regardless. It is possible to be called "Lukewarm" for behavioral issues. In this case, neglecting the poor, as proscribed in the Law. What does it mean they will be spat out? Apparently their salvation is dependent on their behavior and whether they repent or not, hopefully you acknowledge this.

You still haven't answered who you think those who will be rejected in Matthew 7:22-23 are.

 

[earlwooters]

Jesus never said "I AM GOD". Why do you keep on?

 

[idav]

I AM GOD!!

OMG look I found a quote!

 

[earlwooters]

My apologies. Iwas wrong.

 

[InChrist]

3:17 is the beginning of a different but related attack on the Church of Laodecia, they are included AFTER the Luke warm are mentioned. They are not necessarily the only people who are "lukewarm" since you seem to be taking it out of its original context of 3:15-16, but that's a nice try. The lukewarm are simply the Lukewarm. Verse 17 may EXPAND on reasons why, but to imply that's the ONLY reason the whole church is Lukewarm, is not quite right. Even if so, apparently their behavior is a matter of concern.
Be earnest and repent? Uh oh, apparently they have unrighteousness to account for.

Verse 16 ends the sentence, verse 17 is a new one. He is calling them Lukewarm regardless. It is possible to be called "Lukewarm" for behavioral issues. In this case, neglecting the poor, as proscribed in the Law. What does it mean they will be spat out? Apparently their salvation is dependent on their behavior and whether they repent or not, hopefully you acknowledge this.

Okay, if you want me to focus only on verses 15 and 16, then I will. Although I do think isolating verses apart from those surrounding them is taking scripture out of context. I have no disagreement with you that one’s deeds matter and in this case the deeds of those in the church at Laodicea were deeds or behaviors that did not reflect Christ. They were spiritually lukewarm, content with themselves and their worldly wealth and rather than passionately seeking to live for the Lord. I see no specific reference here that that the issue was their neglect of the poor. They were the ones who were spiritually wretched, miserable, poor, blind, and naked because they did not see or want what the Lord had to offer them…. white garments to cover their shame (in other words the righteousness of Christ).Their wrong deeds or behavior was the result of being satisfied with themselves and rejecting the Lord. This is the reason He would spit them out or reject them. Yet, He still let them know He was chastening them and giving them the opportunity to repent because He loved them. As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten. Therefore be zealous and repent.(verse 19)

You still haven't answered who you think those who will be rejected in Matthew 7:22-23 are.

[/quote]

I did answer who I thought would be rejected in Matthew 7:22-23, but I will try to be more specific. I think it will be false prophets who presumptuously claim things in the name of the Lord which are not true, those such as Benny Hinn or Harold Camping.

“Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves. You will know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes from thornbushes or figs from thistles? Even so, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Therefore by their fruits you will know them. “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven. Many will say to Me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?’ And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!’ Matthew 7:15-23

 

[buklodcs]

in John 8:40, Jesus clearly says that he is MAN...

 

[InChrist]

"Since you have already said you can't separate the Law into parts why don't you tell me how you keep all of it?" - Quite simply, if there's no temple and established Levite and Aaronite priesthood performing them, I can't perform them. Same thing for the Babylonian exiles. Especially in consideration that the Suffering Servant is mentioned as THE Sacrifice for now at least. Now try actually answering my question, what parts of the Law, other than the Sacrifices which are EXPLICITLY said to be only done with a Temple and Priesthood, with the rest of the Law. Do not try to weasel out of this issue by ignoring the scripture which puts conditions on such.

I don't think anyone can actually keep any of the law perfectly as you have already admitted you haven't or can't yourself. Even if one were to keep it outwardly, they may be sinning and breaking the law in their heart and thoughts, as Jesus pointed out...to hate someone is murder.

Perhaps you have read where Jesus says he will reward all according to their works?

Yes, the works that are done in the Spirit, not by one's own effort to impress or earn points with God.

So you believe even if you commit murder and adultery, you're still guaranteed to heaven? Does this mean the pastor down the street who got caught with someone else's wife gets out of hell free just for claiming to believe? I highly doubt you have never thought of a woman lustfully, but oh well. Of course I have lusted, hated, stolen (not much) and cheated (at games and things), and of course I have broken the Law. I am not claiming perfection, but I claim to at least believe in repentance and striving for the narrow gate. There will be punishment for all sins.

No. I believe that if someone is a true born-again follower of Christ they would have no desire to commit such sins. It may be that the pastor caught in adultery was a Christian in name only. But in God's eyes all sin is sin, so if one who is born-again does sin they would feel convicted, be truly sorry. and confess to receive the Lord's forgiveness. God knows the sincerity of a person's heart. Since you keep the law and you admit you aren't doing it perfectly, then I agree you will be punished for your sins no matter how hard you strive. I have a Savior who took the punishment for my sins on the cross. He is the narrow gate which I go through.

You totally ignored the gist of Matthew 7:22-23, you act as if its a self-defeating verse, WHO are the ones who call Jesus "Lord", and you AGAIN skipped the issue of the Lukewarm in Revelation.

[/quote]

I did address both these passages a few posts back.

I assume you kept the Sabbath this week. What do you do on the Sabbath?

 

[Shermana]

Yes you did address the verses, my apologies.

What I do on Sabbath is I read and I sleep mainly.

Not all sin is sin, James equates murder and adultery which are two death penalty Capital sins, stealing a candy bar is not axe murder. There are different degrees of penalty for each sin. Jesus did not suffer the penalty for all the sins you commit, that is a false understanding, why do you suppose James says you should correct your brothers so you can "cover over a great deal of your own sins?"

You misunderstand what the "Narrow gate" means. Jesus is the Door, but the "Narrow Gate" is something the believer has to go through. What do you suppose "Strive for the narrow gate" means? What does it mean to "Strive"?

 

[URAVIP2ME]

What I do on Sabbath is I read and I sleep mainly.

Not all sin is sin,

At birth every parent knows its child's leanings will be toward imperfection.
Would you agree there is a difference between deliberate sin and unintentional sin? Premeditated or willful sinning on purpose,
and sinning by mistake or accident due to our inherited imperfection?
-Hebrews 10v26

Do you agree Sabbath was Not given prior to Moses [Deut 5 vs1-3, 12-14]
and the Law was just given to the nation of Israel as a sign between God [YHWH] and the sons of Israel [Ex 31 vs16,17; Psalm 147 vs19,20]

Paul wrote [ Rom 10v4] Christ is the end of the law.
The law [Heb 10v1] being just a 'shadow' of the good things to come...
Paul put emphasis on turning back by observing days at Gal. 4 vs9-11

If the weekly Sabbath is to be now kept on the same day everywhere, then countries to the west of the international date line are one day ahead of the countries to the east of the idl.

When Sunday in Fiji and Tonga, its Saturday in Samoa and Niue.
Sabbath kept on Fiji Saturday, in Samoa [ just about 700 miles away]
would be a working Friday.
Tonga Sabbath would be Sunday if kept same time as Samoa [just about 500 miles away], but less than 500 miles away in Fiji would not be resting because its Sunday.

 

[Shermana]

Sabbath is for YOUR location, YOUR time zone, not Jerusalem's or England's or Fiji's. Why would the artificial "international date line" have any bearing?

Willful sin and unintentional sin are of two different weights, the former far more severe.

If Sabbath was not known before Moses, was the Distinction between clean and unclean animals known before Noah? If God rested on the 7th day of Creation, does that mean he followed his own Sabbath and thus the Sabbath was in place?

Why do you suppose even the gentiles are supposed to obey when in the LAND of Israel? Even the stranger among us in the Holy Land must obey, so its not just purely a Tribal thing. We are the "Light of the nations", meant to teach gentiles the Torah, though Judaism lost its Prosletyzing spirit after the destruction of the Temple.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

And what was the "New Covenant" established with Jeremiah about? What is this new way to relate to God exactly?

The "New Covenant" in Jeremiah's days was more of a "Restored" covenant, since Israel had lost its way, just like how the Pharisees had corrupted the Law and abused their power. The difference of back then is that the Prophets were able to restore Israel away from its idolatrous and false customs whereas Jews have been meshed in Qabala and spurious Midrash for 2,000 years. The "New Covenant" is about restoring the original form like the New Covenant spoken of in Jeremiah. If you read the very prophecies which Jesus came to "fulfill" in the first place, they are about someone who leads the true chosen remnant of Israel back to righteousness.

Jeremiah stated the 'new covenant' would NOT be like the Law covenant which Israel broke. -Jer 31 vs31-34.

Parties of the new covenant would be God [YHWH] and the 'spiritual' Israel of God. [Heb 8v10; 12 vs22-24; Gal 6 vs15,16; 3 vs26-28; Rom 2 vs28,29]

The true chosen remnant of Israel would relate or be: spiritual ones
1] We know the promise to Abraham includes all nations. Gen 22vs17,18.
2] The natural nation of Israel sprang from Abraham
3] But the majority of natural Israelites did not accept Jesus as Messiah
4] Jesus is the primary 'seed' of Abraham's seed with others that are to be given the privilege to also become part [remnant] of Abraham's seed.
-Gal 3vs16,29

Natural Israel had the first prospect of producing a kingdom of priests.
-Ex 19vs5,6
Jesus says those that rule with him would serve as: both priests and kings.
-Rev 14vs1-4
They are spoken of as sons of Israel at Rev 7vs4-8.

So, to start with the nation of Israel had the exclusive prospect of being that holy nation [Romans 9vs4,5]
Since the majority of 1st-century Jews rejected Jesus that meant the opportunity ceased to be exclusively theirs.

Right-hearted Jews accepted following Christ at Pentecost to become a kingdom of priests. [form a heavenly kingdom of priests. Rev 5 vs9,10]

Romans [11vs12,25] all who spring from natural or fleshy Israel are Not really 'Israel' [spiritual Israel]
Romans [9vs6,8] Not that God's Word failed to take effect because not all Israel are of Israel. Just being children of flesh are not Children of God.
So, just by physical natural descent was no longer a requirement.

This is where or why Paul relates in Romans chapter eleven about that symbolic olive tree. Those that become part [remnant] of Abraham's seed are compared to branches on that symbolic olive tree. -Rom 11v21

That symbolic olive tree relates or represents how God's purpose connects to the promise to Abraham or Abrahamic covenant.

1] The 'root' feeds and keeps the tree alive so that root is God [YHWH]
-Romans 11v16; Isaiah 10v20
2] The 'trunk' would be Jesus because Jesus is the main or primary part of Abraham's 'seed'.
3] Collectively the 'branches' would be the full number comprising that 'seed'.
Under the Law, natural Israel could not produce just a kingdom of priests because the kings could not become priests nor due the duties of a priest.
- 2nd Chron 26vs16-21

Those original 'branches' rejected the 'trunk', and by doing so they were rejecting Jesus. Those that rejected Jesus are likened to broken-off olive tree branches.- Rom 11v17

John the Baptist warns them that God [YHWH] could raise up children [seed] to Abraham from stones. -Luke 3v8

The grafting in of wild olive tree branches on to the cultivated olive tree would replace those broken-off branches.- Rom 11vs17,18

The way was opened up at the time of Pentecost to become a 'spiritual Jew'.
-Rom 2vs28,29

People [gentile nations] could now relate to being God's people.
-1st Peter 2vs7-10

So, contrary to what was natural or by nature [Rom 11vs23,24]
would now have an unnatural or unusual grafting of branches to the original cultivated tree.
A spiritual nation that would produce God's fruit.
-Matt 21v43; Acts 10 vs44-48
That spiritual nation would be made up of both Christianized Jews and Christianized Gentiles or converted people of the nations.
From the time of Cornelius gentiles were now capable of producing and being grafted into that symbolic olive tree. So those that rule with Christ [Rev 20v6] during his thousand year reign over earth will bring benefits and rewards to earthly subjects.
-Gen 22v18; Rev 22v2; Psalm 72v8

 

[Shermana]

Well yes, the Nazarene Jews are the Melchezdiek Priesthood, but they are the keepers of the "Stump" of the tree, the Wild Olive Gentile grafts have to conform to the stump, the stump doesn't conform to the Graft. The Law never changes, if the Gentiles want to be priests, they have to follow the same rules.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Sabbath is for YOUR location, YOUR time zone, not Jerusalem's or England's or Fiji's. Why would the artificial "international date line" have any bearing?
Willful sin and unintentional sin are of two different weights, the former far more severe.
If Sabbath was not known before Moses, was the Distinction between clean and unclean animals known before Noah? If God rested on the 7th day of Creation, does that mean he followed his own Sabbath and thus the Sabbath was in place?
Why do you suppose even the gentiles are supposed to obey when in the LAND of Israel? Even the stranger among us in the Holy Land must obey, so its not just purely a Tribal thing. We are the "Light of the nations", meant to teach gentiles the Torah, though Judaism lost its Prosletyzing spirit after the destruction of the Temple.

We do know when a person wants to be a citizen of a country that person agrees to follow the laws of that land. Follow in a relative position to God's absolute authority. In other words, if the law of the land wanted you to lets say steal from another then one should obey God as ruler rather than man.
Does an ambassador or envoy take part in all things or do they remain politically neutral while in another land ?

What passage mentions clean and unclean animals before: Noah?
Gen [9 vs3,4,16] is part of the everlasting covenant or rainbow covenant.

Yes, God rested from his creative works on the seventh 'day'
[that 'day' has No close as the other six creative days].
In the apostle Paul's day, God's seventh day was still ongoing according to Hebrews 4 vs4-10.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Well yes, the Nazarene Jews are the Melchezdiek Priesthood, but they are the keepers of the "Stump" of the tree, the Wild Olive Gentile grafts have to conform to the stump, the stump doesn't conform to the Graft. The Law never changes, if the Gentiles want to be priests, they have to follow the same rules.

Sounds only logical that if anyone is to be priest [Rev 5 vs9,10] would follow the same rules.

First of all, wasn't the sworn oath [king/priest] of Psalm [110v4] made only with one person?
A covenant made only between God [YHWH] and Messiah alone.
Paul applies that to Christ at Hebrews 7 vs1-3, 15-17.

The sitting on priestly thrones was another covenant made between Jesus and starting with his apostles. [Luke 22 vs28-30; 2 Tim 2v12] Then that covenant or promise included or was extended to spiritual Jews. [Rev 3v21; 1 vs4-6;20v6]

That covenant started on Pentecost [Phil 3v10; Col 1v24]. So, that covenant remains in operation between Christ and his associate king/priests. Rev 22v5

 

[Shermana]

As long as by "Spiritual Jews" you mean "those who obey and guard the Torah", we're not in much disagreement, this Covenant still includes the same rules as the last one, if not tighter so to apply to Priestly conditions.