Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 66 (9164 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,481 Year: 3,738/9,624 Month: 609/974 Week: 222/276 Day: 62/34 Hour: 1/4


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   What and Where are the Terms of the New Covenant?
Abshalom
Inactive Member


Message 46 of 94 (114535)
06-11-2004 6:51 PM
Reply to: Message 45 by purpledawn
06-11-2004 6:44 PM


Re: Works of the Law
Question from Message 45: "You mean like the preachers that promise if you tithe enough you will receive back more money or possesions or something to that effect?"
Yeah, but I told Willow that I would be discussing this with y'all next week. I just got back from cardiac rehab to pick up my wife and go home for the weekend. Let's get back on this subject next week. Enjoy your weekend.
Peace. Ab.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by purpledawn, posted 06-11-2004 6:44 PM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 54 by purpledawn, posted 06-14-2004 3:22 PM Abshalom has replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3479 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 47 of 94 (114655)
06-12-2004 9:29 AM
Reply to: Message 42 by Cold Foreign Object
06-11-2004 3:55 PM


Re: Redirect
Again, the point of this thread is not to argue Paul's Gospel.
I do have some questions on items you have mentioned.
quote:
This covenant promised eternal life to anyone who fulfilled it perfectly. Nobody ever did except Jesus Christ...
BUT Jesus fulfilled the O.T. law every "jot and tittle"
Where does the OT state that eternal life is promised to anyone who fulfills the covenant perfectly? By fulfill I am assuming you mean to obey all the rules. Which covenant. There are three. The one with Noah, one with Abraham, and the one with Moses and the people of Israel.
If you are talking about the Mosaic laws and by fulfill you mean to obey all the laws, did Jesus obey every single law or commandment listed in the OT? In other words, was Jesus a good person who just didn't do anything to break any of the laws that pertained to him, or was Jesus tempted to break all of these laws listed and chose not to?
List of the 613 Mitzvot

A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 42 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 06-11-2004 3:55 PM Cold Foreign Object has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 48 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 06-12-2004 3:16 PM purpledawn has replied

  
Cold Foreign Object 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3070 days)
Posts: 3417
Joined: 11-21-2003


Message 48 of 94 (114683)
06-12-2004 3:16 PM
Reply to: Message 47 by purpledawn
06-12-2004 9:29 AM


Re: Redirect
quote:
Again, the point of this thread is not to argue Paul's Gospel
Paul's gospel IS Jesus's gospel. The questions you ask/seek CANNOT be answered without Paul.
God intentionally crafted His word as to not be able to answer the question of this topic without consulting the person He chose to speak for Him. God/Jesus chose Paul - there is no way around it. The Apostle who wrote two thirds of the N.T. MUST be read or your question cannot be answered.
quote:
By fulfill I am assuming you mean to obey all the rules. Which covenant. There are three. The one with Noah, one with Abraham, and the one with Moses and the people of Israel.
I mean both: obey and fulfill. There is a difference but it covers all when you accurately state it this way.
There were TWO and only TWO covenants revealed in the Bible. The Abrahamic and the Mosaic. These two covenants and their jurisdiction upon any individual depends on the individuals status with God.
Status with God is exclusively determined by relationship to the blood of Christ. Unless the blood of Christ is actually appropriated to the individual - until this happens - you/I/we are subject to the curse of the Mosaic covenant: death. The wages of sin is death - the penalty required by Mosaic law. BUT if you/I/or we keep our end of the Abrahamic covenant, which is to "believe God and it was counted as righteousness"; which was Genesis phraseology describing the gospel/way of faith to relate to God through Christ, THEN Mosaic law and its requirements and penalties are abrogate/null/and void.
The Abrahamic covenant of righteousness by faith IS the gospel, which is the New Covenant. When a person is trusting God to keep a promise, God says this is righteousness and the person who is trusting is now released from the jurisdiction of Mosaic law.
quote:
If you are talking about the Mosaic laws and by fulfill you mean to obey all the laws, did Jesus obey every single law or commandment listed in the OT? In other words, was Jesus a good person who just didn't do anything to break any of the laws that pertained to him, or was Jesus tempted to break all of these laws listed and chose not to?
Jesus was the Law Incarnate.
The entire O.T. body of law was a shadow cast by the substance of Christ.
The scripture says He was in all points tempted as we are, He faced every temptation, but, like you say, He chose not to, and by doing so He fulfilled the Mosaic covenant.
When He died on the cross - Mosaic law died with Him BUT the appropriation of this benefit to us is not imparted unless we are performing our part of the Abrahamic covenant. Some people will immediately interpret this as a green light to sin. Nope, it is a green light to escape the curse of Mosaic law and its jurisdiction if we continue in the Abrahamic covenant.
This message has been edited by WILLOWTREE, 06-12-2004 09:48 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by purpledawn, posted 06-12-2004 9:29 AM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 49 by purpledawn, posted 06-12-2004 8:51 PM Cold Foreign Object has replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3479 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 49 of 94 (114736)
06-12-2004 8:51 PM
Reply to: Message 48 by Cold Foreign Object
06-12-2004 3:16 PM


Re: Redirect
You didn't answer my question.
Where does the OT state that eternal life is promised to anyone who fulfills the covenant perfectly?
BTW, how did Jesus fulfill the laws pertaining to women?

A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 06-12-2004 3:16 PM Cold Foreign Object has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 50 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 06-12-2004 10:45 PM purpledawn has replied

  
Cold Foreign Object 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3070 days)
Posts: 3417
Joined: 11-21-2003


Message 50 of 94 (114751)
06-12-2004 10:45 PM
Reply to: Message 49 by purpledawn
06-12-2004 8:51 PM


Re: Redirect
Once again, your question cannot be answered without Paul. If it can be answered without Paul then I refuse to answer. This stance says I would rather "lose" the point/argument/debate than to proceed without Paul. For the record I am a Protestant Evangelical Paulinist. (And I do recognize that from the outset you requested Paul not to be invoked.)
Your question about women is "rigged" (no offense) since Jesus was male. Technically, He didn't - how could "He" ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by purpledawn, posted 06-12-2004 8:51 PM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 51 by purpledawn, posted 06-13-2004 12:44 PM Cold Foreign Object has replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3479 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 51 of 94 (114839)
06-13-2004 12:44 PM
Reply to: Message 50 by Cold Foreign Object
06-12-2004 10:45 PM


Re: Redirect
It is a fair question since you stated that
quote:
BUT Jesus fulfilled the O.T. law every "jot and tittle"
Therefore your statement is false, since he couldn't fulfill the laws for women.
Plus, unless he was a high priest he couldn't fulfill those laws either.
You were unable to show where God said in the OT that the laws have to be followed perfectly or that one could obtain eternal life if they were followed perfectly. According to you the Hebrews had to wait until Paul gave them that revelation. (How many years?) That would mean that God purposely set the Hebrews up for failure.
Or maybe they just missed the fine print in the contract.

A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 06-12-2004 10:45 PM Cold Foreign Object has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 52 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 06-13-2004 7:31 PM purpledawn has not replied

  
Cold Foreign Object 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3070 days)
Posts: 3417
Joined: 11-21-2003


Message 52 of 94 (114890)
06-13-2004 7:31 PM
Reply to: Message 51 by purpledawn
06-13-2004 12:44 PM


Re: Redirect
quote:
Therefore your statement is false, since he couldn't fulfill the laws for women.
Plus, unless he was a high priest he couldn't fulfill those laws either.
My statement has a source - the Bible. You eliminate Paul who wrote two thirds of the N.T.
My statement is true because I learned it from Paul whom Jesus chose in Acts 9.
You are showing signs of using select passages of Bible to fit a previous belief or bias that you brought into the debate.
Jesus rose from the dead which is what christianity claims which means He did fulfill the law.
To say Jesus wasn't a priest indicates massive ignorance or bias - it doesn't matter. I have lost interest in this topic now that I know you are massively ignorant concerning basic christianity.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by purpledawn, posted 06-13-2004 12:44 PM purpledawn has not replied

  
Abshalom
Inactive Member


Message 53 of 94 (115098)
06-14-2004 2:41 PM
Reply to: Message 43 by Cold Foreign Object
06-11-2004 4:10 PM


Re: Works of the Law/Entering the Kingdom
Willow:
I'm participating with the understanding that Purple's question generally is "what are the terms of the 'New covenant.'"
I'm also participating under the assumption that the "New Covenant" is an agreement by which one obtains entrance into the "Kingdom" by following the terms of the covenant. Is that what Christians understand the "New Covenant" to be? Is it a key to entering the "Kingdom?"
If it is, then one can understand Purple's question regarding where exactly one finds the terms of the covenant clearly spelled out.
From Message 41, you quote my assumption that one can "refer back to some of the earlier Gospel teachings regarding divesting oneself of material possessions and becoming a pietistic pacifist after entering into the covenant."
Then in Message 43, you say, "You are clearly insinuating that the activities listed above are necessary to comply with the (New?) covenant."
Yes I am. Let me explain regarding divesting oneself of material riches and following the path of Jesus appears to be a "term" of the "Covenant."
Quoting Matthew 19:16 "Now a man came up to Jesus and asked, "Teacher, what good thing must I do to get eternal life?"
17)"Why do you ask me about what is good?" Jesus replied. "There is only One who is good. If you want to enter life, obey the commandments."
18)"Which ones?" the man inquired. 19)Jesus replied, " 'Do not murder, do not commit adultery, do not steal, do not give false testimony, honor your father and mother,' and 'love your neighbor as yourself.'"
These prerequisites for "entering life" are clearly "works of the Law" and here we clearly see that Jesus reemphasises the requirements of the Laws of Moses, just as he did at Matthew 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)I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. 19)Anyone who breaks 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 practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20)For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven."
Now, back to Matthew 19:20, "All these I have kept," the young man said. "What do I still lack?"
21)Jesus answered, "If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me." 22)When the young man heard this, he went away sad, because he had great wealth.
Apparently the young man did not want to trade earthly wealth for entrance into a "Heavenly Kingdom." So can this same young man gain entrance without signing on to the "New Covenant" and does the covenant require divesting oneself of earthly riches? It appears so:
23)Then Jesus said to his disciples, "I tell you the truth, it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. 24)Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God."
Also apparent is that the "New Covenant" requires something more than "works of the Law" as seen in the following passage:
Matthew 18:1) At that time the disciples came to Jesus and asked, "Who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven?" 2)He called a little child and had him stand among them. 3)And he said: "I tell you the truth, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. 4)Therefore, whoever humbles himself like this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven."
Willow, where do we hear this same theme repeated? At the Passover feast in Luke 22?
Luke 22:24) Also a dispute arose among them as to which of them was considered to be greatest. 25)Jesus said to them, "The kings of the Gentiles lord it over them; and those who exercise authority over them call themselves Benefactors. 26)But you are not to be like that. Instead, the greatest among you should be like the youngest, and the one who rules like the one who serves. 27)For who is greater, the one who is at the table or the one who serves? Is it not the one who is at the table? But I am among you as one who serves."
Pretty much exactly the same theme as in Matthew 18:1, huh? And how is it tied directly to the "New Covenant?" Well, scroll up in Luke 22:
Luke 22:14) When the hour came, Jesus and his apostles reclined at the table. 15)And he said to them, "I have eagerly desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer. 16)For I tell you, I will not eat it again until it finds fulfillment in the kingdom of God."
17)After taking the cup, he gave thanks and said, "Take this and divide it among you. 18)For I tell you I will not drink again of the fruit of the vine until the kingdom of God comes." 19)And he took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to them, saying, "This is my body given for you; do this in remembrance of me." 20)In the same way, after the supper he took the cup, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which is poured out for you."
Again, I ask: "Is the 'New Covenant' an agreement by which one obtains admittance to the 'Kingdom of Heaven' by following the specified commandments given in detail in passages attributed to Jesus?"
Willow, in Message 43, you say, "the New Covenant is based upon the blood of Christ." That's apparent from Luke 22:20.
You also say, "The blood of Christ is appropriated to the individual by faith alone." And to that I can only answer that in the passages quoted above, it appears that "works of the Law" and "actions in accordance with the Teaching" are required in addition to "blind faith" in order to fulfill the terms of the covenant.
Willow, you conclude Message 43 with a rather stern, unyielding statement that my "insinuation is a misinterpretation of things demonstrated and taught by Jesus. You wrongly assume that those things are absolutely necessary to the New Covenant."
Willow, I have provided examples of what I think Jesus specified as works of the Law and other personal commitments and actions that are prerequisites to enter the Kingdom via the New Covenant. Please show me where, in Jesus's own words, that Jesus negates the specific actions he clearly lays out as required for entry into the Kingdom, and substitutes "faith" as the only requirement.
Peace. Ab.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 06-11-2004 4:10 PM Cold Foreign Object has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 56 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 06-14-2004 3:58 PM Abshalom has replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3479 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 54 of 94 (115108)
06-14-2004 3:22 PM
Reply to: Message 46 by Abshalom
06-11-2004 6:51 PM


Re: Works of the Law
quote:
cardiac rehab
I hope all is well on the home front!
Are you staying above water level down south?
We had one small town under water and a few roads around us were flooded.

A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by Abshalom, posted 06-11-2004 6:51 PM Abshalom has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 55 by Abshalom, posted 06-14-2004 3:48 PM purpledawn has replied

  
Abshalom
Inactive Member


Message 55 of 94 (115116)
06-14-2004 3:48 PM
Reply to: Message 54 by purpledawn
06-14-2004 3:22 PM


Re: Works of the Law
Everything is fine. I had surgery in April and now have to go to rehab 3 days a week 'cause I'm too lazy to do the required 30 minutes sustained exercise on my own, and they're gonna drive me to do it.
The flood crest is past down here, but it still rains in buckets about every other day it seems.
I think Willow has jumped ship on us cynics. Oh, well.
I couldn't find any references in the Hebrew bible to a "Kingdom of Heaven," "Eternal Life," or "Paradise." Seems those concepts come about after 400 - 200 BCE or so. The first references to any such concept in the canonized Bible appears to be in Matthew.
Prior references seem to be worded along the lines of "go to be with your fathers," etc., which could be a reference to "gathered together with the bones of your fathers" which is a common reference thought by some to have come from the Canaanite practice of letting the most recently deceased lay on the stone ledge in a tomb until the next deceased family member needed that space, at which time the bones of the preceeding family member were swept up and tossed under the bench with the other "bones of the fathers." Hardly a heavenly kingdom or paradise.
I also found only references to guarantees for eternal earthly kingdoms as a reward for honoring the Abrahamic and Mosaic covenants. So it appears that heavenly kingdoms pertain only to the "New Covenant," and I will wait and see if Willowtree agrees or offers additional references.
Peace. Ab.
This message has been edited by Abshalom, 06-14-2004 02:49 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by purpledawn, posted 06-14-2004 3:22 PM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 58 by purpledawn, posted 06-14-2004 5:30 PM Abshalom has not replied

  
Cold Foreign Object 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3070 days)
Posts: 3417
Joined: 11-21-2003


Message 56 of 94 (115119)
06-14-2004 3:58 PM
Reply to: Message 53 by Abshalom
06-14-2004 2:41 PM


Re: Works of the Law/Entering the Kingdom
Hi Ab !
quote:
I'm participating with the understanding that Purple's question generally is "what are the terms of the 'New covenant.'"
Yes, but Purple has plainly stated that he wants the question answered without invoking Paul. The question cannot be answered without citing Paul.
quote:
I'm also participating under the assumption that the "New Covenant" is an agreement by which one obtains entrance into the "Kingdom" by following the terms of the covenant. Is that what Christians understand the "New Covenant" to be? Is it a key to entering the "Kingdom?"
Yes it is.
However, the Kingdom and ones entrance begins in this life - NOW.
"Today if you hear His voice harden not your heart" says Hebrews.
The only issue or dispute is HOW to enter, and HOW to remain in the Kingdom.
quote:
If it is, then one can understand Purple's question regarding where exactly one finds the terms of the covenant clearly spelled out
Absolutely. It is the entire reason for being of the New Testament. My only qualm with Purple is his insistence to not deal with Paul.
THEN you reiterate what Jesus told the rich young ruler about his possessions. Let me go further with this. You are essentially selecting this passage and saying a person must do likewise or they cannot be saved/make it into the Kingdom. You are saying that to not sell all that you have and give it to the poor is a violation of the New Covenant.
In order to understand what the New Covenant is we must define the Old Covenant. The Old Covenant was instituted by God and these were the terms:
Obey and never violate any O.T.law, to the person(s) who does this God will grant you eternal life. Violate one law one time and your portion is death eternal.
The New Covenant is the gospel which means "good news". What's the good news ?
God will accept faith directed at Christ in place of the Old Covenant way of relating to Him by unattainable law.
The New Covenant is HOW a person OBTAINS Christ and His benefits. IF a person walks by faith and faith alone the requirements of the Old Covenant are abrogate/null/and void.
What Jesus told the rich young ruler was the one thing He knew he wouldn't actually do. What Jesus said in the Sermon on the Mount were things NOBODY could do EXCEPT HIM. This is the point: Jesus preached an impossible standard - the O.T. law - a law that He was in the process of fulfilling. Jesus demanded 100 % and only recognized expressions of 100 % because this was His committment: 100 %.
All of these things; give all your possessions; lust not in your heart; fast and pray; hate not your brother; love your neighbor AS YOURSELF are all Old Covenant law standards - Divine standards that is intended to make one conclude "I cannot do it", which is then intended to drive you to the ONE thing you can do: the Gospel/way of faith to relate to God - the New Covenant.
The New Covenant contained in the New Testament is:
Anytime Jesus says to believe in Him or any variation of this (faith).
Which is contrasted with Christ's impossible presentaion of O.T. law.
This is the choice layed out by Christ:
Impossible law or "believe in Him".
This message has been edited by WILLOWTREE, 06-14-2004 03:10 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by Abshalom, posted 06-14-2004 2:41 PM Abshalom has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 57 by Abshalom, posted 06-14-2004 4:10 PM Cold Foreign Object has replied

  
Abshalom
Inactive Member


Message 57 of 94 (115124)
06-14-2004 4:10 PM
Reply to: Message 56 by Cold Foreign Object
06-14-2004 3:58 PM


Re: Eternal Life vs Eternal Death
Willow:
In Message 56 you say that the terms of the old covenant essentially are "obey and never violate any O.T.law, to the person(s) who does this God will grant you eternal life. Violate one law one time and your prtion is death eternal."
I cannot find any reference in the Hebrew bible to "eternal life." Can you provide me with a chapter or verse other than the Christian Bible where "eternal life" is promised?
Also, in Message 53, I asked for specifics (in words directly attributed to Jesus) where he says that works of the Law and following specific directions He gave throughout Matthew and Luke are no longer requirements for entry into the Kingdom (as cited in the passages I provided).
While I'm not yet ruling out any discussion of Paul's teachings, I would first like you to respond to my questions and points regarding Jesus's teachings specifically on the terms of entry into the Kingdom as cited above (Message 53) in passages from Matthew and Luke.
Peace. Ab.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 06-14-2004 3:58 PM Cold Foreign Object has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 61 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 06-14-2004 10:46 PM Abshalom has not replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3479 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 58 of 94 (115152)
06-14-2004 5:30 PM
Reply to: Message 55 by Abshalom
06-14-2004 3:48 PM


Re: Works of the Law
Good to hear you are OK.
Yes WT has bailed out on me. This is usually the response I get in Bible study groups.
I try to get Christians to back up their catch-phrases from the OT or at least Jesus.
Example: God is constant and never changes, but then you bring in Paul. His writings don't seem to be consistant with the teachings of Jesus and the OT or can't be found in either one. Besides the fact that Paul's writings are letters and we only have one side of the conversation. We don't seem to have anything written on what he actually taught when he visited these churches.
The covenant study made such a big deal out of the covenant being a contract. They went through all the parts of the contract: terms, agreement, sealing, etc.
The OT is clear in the contracts. In the NT we have no specific terms defined by Jesus before the supposed sealing (last supper). What people present as terms are the same as the Jewish teachings of the time. Not anything new.
Then you have Paul's gospel which when presented by WT is even more mind boggling.
Willowtree writes:
Obey and never violate any O.T.law, to the person(s) who does this God will grant you eternal life. Violate one law one time and your portion is death eternal.
But again the statements cannot be reconciled with the OT.
In another thread someone said that God never breaks his promises. But if the new covenant, as Paul suggests, ends the Mosaic covenant; then God broke his promise.
See how the constant and never changing part is really falling apart?
Now the teachings of Jesus were consistant with the Jewish teachings of the time and he said he was not there to end the law. I think he was trying to trim the fencing a bit and get people to remember the individuals needs. Priests got just as obsessed with money and power as many clergy do today. As you mentioned they forgot about the not gathering wealth on earth. Unfortunately we don't have all of what Jesus taught either.
The disciples of Jesus seemed to remain true to the Jewish laws.
So from what I can tell by the posts so far, Jesus presented nothing truly new. He may have actually been renewing the "old" covenant.
The destruction of the Temple did away with the sacrificial system.
Paul seems to be the one who set up the terms of the new covenant.
As you've seen we have many variations on what those terms are.
If the Mosaic covenant ended with Jesus, then God set the Hebrews up for failure; since God supposedly knew about the Messiah from the beginning.
quote:
I couldn't find any references in the Hebrew bible to a "Kingdom of Heaven," "Eternal Life," or "Paradise." Seems those concepts come about after 400 - 200 BCE or so.
I agree, I haven't been able to find them in the five books of Moses. Isn't that about the time they came back after the exile?
Have an excellent week!

A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 55 by Abshalom, posted 06-14-2004 3:48 PM Abshalom has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 59 by wmscott, posted 06-14-2004 6:07 PM purpledawn has replied

  
wmscott
Member (Idle past 6270 days)
Posts: 580
From: Sussex, WI USA
Joined: 12-19-2001


Message 59 of 94 (115159)
06-14-2004 6:07 PM
Reply to: Message 58 by purpledawn
06-14-2004 5:30 PM


Re: Works of the Law
Dear Purpledawn;
It seems that I have been having a somewhat parallel discussion with Willowtree and I posted on the subject of the New Covenant or the Law of the Christ.
EvC Forum: What is a True Christian? see message 135.
The scriptures I cited maybe what you were looking for.
Wm Scott Anderson

This message is a reply to:
 Message 58 by purpledawn, posted 06-14-2004 5:30 PM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 60 by purpledawn, posted 06-14-2004 9:45 PM wmscott has replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3479 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 60 of 94 (115191)
06-14-2004 9:45 PM
Reply to: Message 59 by wmscott
06-14-2004 6:07 PM


Re: Works of the Law
Looks like you didn't have any better luck.
He's like dogma with a bone!
quote:
I will put my laws in their hearts, and in their minds I shall write them
So isn't it the Mosaic laws that God will put in our hearts?
Many of them have become a part of our society anyway.
No one wants to answer that question.

A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 59 by wmscott, posted 06-14-2004 6:07 PM wmscott has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 62 by wmscott, posted 06-15-2004 5:33 PM purpledawn has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024