The prophets tell us that THE SCRIBES HAD CHANGED THE GOD'S LAW

[blueman]

The prophets did not change the law. Jesus established a new convenant for both Jew and Gentile. The law could not save us and did not serve as a formidable solution to overcome our sinful nature. What Christ fulfilled on the cross and through His resurrection served as the ultimate victory over sin and death (i.e., spiritual death).

 

[CMike]

I believe God has stated that the Jews are His people and I haven't seen anything that changes that. Granted they are not the Sons of God becasue that is a designation for those who believe in Jesus as Savior.

Actually G-D said the jews are the sons of G-D. He disagrees with you.

Jesus has nothing to do with the jews. That's the christian god not the jewish one.

 

[blueman]

Actually G-D said the jews are the sons of G-D. He disagrees with you. Jesus has nothing to do with the jews. That's the christian god not the jewish one.

I think the apostle Paul would disagree with you. Was Saul not considered a "Pharisee's Pharisee" and held the law in upmost regard?

 

[Muffled]

Actually G-D said the jews are the sons of G-D. He disagrees with you.

Jesus has nothing to do with the jews. That's the christian god not the jewish one.

I believe that is true but not in the same way.

I believe He does not agree with you.

I believe if you don't have the Christian God then you have an idol.

 

[Robert.Evans]

Actually G-D said the jews are the sons of G-D. He disagrees with you.

Jesus has nothing to do with the jews. That's the christian god not the jewish one.

I thought there was only one

 

[metis]

I think the apostle Paul would disagree with you. Was Saul not considered a "Pharisee's Pharisee" and held the law in upmost regard?

Not if he was persecuting innocent people, which apparently he was.

 

[metis]

The prophets did not change the law. Jesus established a new convenant for both Jew and Gentile. The law could not save us and did not serve as a formidable solution to overcome our sinful nature. What Christ fulfilled on the cross and through His resurrection served as the ultimate victory over sin and death (i.e., spiritual death).

The Abrahamic Covenant is cited in Torah as being "forever" and "perpetual", therefore God promised it would never be removed. However, it is always possible, and I think probable, that God could establish a "new covenant" with other groups.

 

[paarsurrey]

The Abrahamic Covenant is cited in Torah as being "forever" and "perpetual", therefore God promised it would never be removed. However, it is always possible, and I think probable, that God could establish a "new covenant" with other groups.

Abraham was not a Jew so the covenant could not be meant with the Jews, only.

Regards

 

[metis]

Abraham was not a Jew so the covenant could not be meant with the Jews, only.

Regards

Abraham is considered the first Jew by us even though that label evolved, and the evidence of such is the requirement under that Covenant that boys be circumcised on the 8th day after birth, and we are the only people to have that requirement. It is not a requirement in Islam, nor does it have to be done on the 8th day if it's performed at all.

If one takes a panoramic view of Torah, there's a gradual evolution of God's actions from Abraham and through the formation of Judaism as we know it. It is our history that Torah is covering, but if some in other faiths want to follow many of our teachings, they're clearly welcome to do so.

 

[paarsurrey]

Abraham is considered the first Jew by us even though that label evolved, and the evidence of such is the requirement under that Covenant that boys be circumcised on the 8th day after birth, and we are the only people to have that requirement. It is not a requirement in Islam, nor does it have to be done on the 8th day if it's performed at all.

If one takes a panoramic view of Torah, there's a gradual evolution of God's actions from Abraham and through the formation of Judaism as we know it. It is our history that Torah is covering, but if some in other faiths want to follow many of our teachings, they're clearly welcome to do so.

Abraham was never a Jew; Judaism considers him a Jew just to legitimate their wrong claims of land grabbing.

Muslims usually do the circumcision within seven days of the birth of a male child.

Regards

 

[metis]

Abraham was never a Jew; Judaism considers him a Jew just to legitimate their wrong claims of land grabbing.

Well, I let the nonsense above speak for itself.

Muslims usually do the circumcision within seven days of the birth of a male child.

Which are not the requirements established by the Covenant.

 

[blueman]

Not if he was persecuting innocent people, which apparently he was.

All the more reason to examine his conversion? What made him flip the script and become a preacher of the Gospel?

 

[blueman]

The Abrahamic Covenant is cited in Torah as being "forever" and "perpetual", therefore God promised it would never be removed. However, it is always possible, and I think probable, that God could establish a "new covenant" with other groups.

Not sure the Abrahamic covenant has been circumvented at all. God promised he would be the father of many nations and that has certainly come to pass. I was speaking in the context of salvation and redemption. This was facilitated through Jesus.

 

[CMike]

Abraham was not a Jew so the covenant could not be meant with the Jews, only.

Regards

Your very silly.

 

[CMike]

Abraham was never a Jew; Judaism considers him a Jew just to legitimate their wrong claims of land grabbing.

Muslims usually do the circumcision within seven days of the birth of a male child.

Regards

Even sillier.

 

[metis]

All the more reason to examine his conversion? What made him flip the script and become a preacher of the Gospel?

I really don't know what led to his conversion. His account may well have been a vision, and the belief back then was that dreams often were visions. Either way, either he was not that familiar with Torah or just overlooked many of the passages found within. Remember, back then, people did not have Bibles at their personal disposal.

 

[metis]

Not sure the Abrahamic covenant has been circumvented at all. God promised he would be the father of many nations and that has certainly come to pass. I was speaking in the context of salvation and redemption. This was facilitated through Jesus.

I certainly can accept "the father of many nations", but you need to remember that "nations" back then often meant something different than how we use the term today.

"Redemption" and "salvation" are Jewish principles found within Torah and Tanakh. If you have a concordance, look up "forgive" and its variations and you'll see what I mean. Contrary to the popular belief of some, the Temple sacrifices were only one source of forgiveness.

 

[Porque77]

The prophets did not change the law. Jesus established a new convenant for both Jew and Gentile.

The prophets tell us that the scribes had changed the Law of God, and Jesus confirmed what the prophets said when He abolished many commandments of the Old Testament because they were precepts of men. To verify what I say, you can read the following verses:

Matthew 5:31-48, Matthew 12:1-8, Matthew 20:25-28, John 5:8-11, John 5:16-18, John 8:3-11 and the whole context of the Gospel.

The law could not save us and did not serve as a formidable solution to overcome our sinful nature.

The false laws written in the Old Testament about death sentences and slavery do not save anyone, but the Law that Jesus Christ teaches us in the gospel is the true Law of God and is the Law that saves the world, because Jesus says: "if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments"

What Christ fulfilled on the cross and through His resurrection served as the ultimate victory over sin and death (i.e., spiritual death).

That's a philosophy from "paulinism" but not the Gospel ..., because the final victory of Jesus Christ was that He gave his life for teach the true commandments of God.

The prophets said that the Jewish scribes had changed the Law of God, and Jesus Christ came to teach us again the true commandments of God. And this was his victory, and this was our salvation.

The false doctrine called "paulinism" about faith without Christ's commandments, is completely against what commands the Gospel, because the Gospel commands us that if we want to enter into life, we must keep the commandments of Jesus Christ:

"if thou wouldest enter into life, keep the commandments. He saith unto him, Which? And Jesus said, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Honor thy father and mother; and, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. The young man saith unto him, All these things have I observed: what lack I yet? Jesus said unto him, If thou wouldest be perfect, go, sell that which thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, follow me. But when the young man heard the saying, he went away sorrowful; for he was one that had great possessions" (Matthew 19: 16-2)

These are the commandments of the Gospel, which are very different to the commandments of the Old Testament, for all the commandments of the Gospel are merciful, but many commandments of the Old Testament commanded death sentences, wars and slavery. And those commandments weren't really God's Law.

Jesus Christ preached us the true God's Law, but Roma's emperors (emperor Constantine, IV century) don't wanted the Gospel's Law and they imposed the Old Testament's laws saying these laws were the God's commandments. Since then, the Gospel's Law was unknown to the christian people as the only God's Law and the God's true Law.

 

[Porque77]

I would like to see the churchs's sell off their billions of dollars and give it to the poor. Maybe they should follow that "commandment from jesus".

Those with great wealth and not distribute among the poor, are not true Christians.

It's obviously totally rediculous. Without rich people, there aren't the resources to build schools, give money to charities, help the needy, etc.

That's not true. If those who have great wealth, distribute their wealth among the poor, and if all the produce of the land was distributed to meet the needs of all, there would be no poor or needy in the world.

Rich kept in misery to the poor and they make that there are many poor people in the world.

If everything would be shared equally and there were no rich or poor, then that would signal that the world is obedient to what Jesus commanded. And then would come the paradise of God and every body would have everything .

The scripture says: Do as I command, see if I do not raining blessings on earth.

 

[outhouse]

The prophets tell us that the scribes had changed the Law of God, and Jesus confirmed what the prophets said when He abolished many commandments of the Old Testament because they were precepts of men.

Jesus said or did, no such thing.

He was a Galilean Jew, fighting Hellenistic corruption in the temple. A pious Jew.


He never intended his message to be taken to his enemies. The gospel authors were far removed from his Jewish life, and what they wrote reflects only the Helleistic movement in the Diaspora.


In no way would Jesus talk down to the OT.