Profess Jesus yet follow Moses

My Language Cop commission is in the English Language, not the Greek. :tongue3:
In Greek, I have to fight my way through, word by word, phrase by phrase, to understand anything in that language.

And FTR, I'm not all that learned, and by no means a scholar. I'm a small time 'dirt farmer', and some time off and on taxi driver, both of which I've been for over 35 years.

Ed

 

GE: Meet Mr Nobody!
Everybody like us understands English well enough. The KJV is old English but it's possible to understand literally. Matthew 28:1 being the ONLY Bible text that minutely gives the time and day of Jesus' resurrection -- it says, "Late in the Sabbath dawn towards the First Day ...". It defines the meaning of the only word here, that now-adays might be ambiguous -- "dawn", namely as the last part of the Sabbath before the First Day began. Like the 'dawn of the twenty first century' was the last part of the twentieth centuty.
Now what is not understandable for the like of us ordinary people?

But more important : The Sabbath is described in the OT as the Day of God's Rest, and God's Rest He entered upon in the rising of the Son. The whole of any Sabbath-Scripture of the OT breaths the "exceeding greatness" of God's deed in raising Jesus from the dead. So it ought to have happened that Jesus would be raised from the dead "In the fulness of the Sabbath's Day" ... just a more literal rending of the Greek.

The Church went wrong the day it chose for the Day of the sun instead of the Day of the Son. It did so through disobedience and for the sake of compromise with the world. It today goes on on its wanton way. Many are misled to follow the lie and to forsake the truth --- is the bare facts.

 

Stanley - you score high marks on "pronouncing stuff" and low marks in terms of integrity with the Word of God, logic, reason and common sense.

"Chain gangs" do not consist of "voluntary labor" groups. It is not a public works project dealing with poverty. It is involuntary labor.

No question about it.

There is NO "anxiety" from Moses about having to stand up for God's Law in scripture. He never hesitates - but he DOES plead for mercy. He stands "between the living and the dead" in some cases as would Christ.

There is NOTHING in the Bible about all Christian groups agreeing with you on the subject of slavery in Moses' day OR on the subject of prison systems putting inmates to productive work rather than having them remain idle for year after year.

In Christ,

Bob

 

So, when someone disagrees with you, they're not a Christian?
Since you are the self-appointed "steward of King Jesus" does that give you authority over us?

You are indeed bizarre. (note the clever use of wiktionary here)

 

Scoring again "HIGH on pronouncements" and "LOW" on Bible fact. To follow that kind of authority-is-me reasoning is to create a cult.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Funny, that is not what Jesus said. Jesus told the Jewish leaders that if they truly believed Moses, the they would also believe him (Jesus) because Moses wrote of Jesus.

The ten commandments were written on the stone tablets by the finger of God - they are his commandments. Jesus also said that whoever would teach others to break the least of his commandments is the least in the kingdom.

Hogwash. Paul wrote that all scripture is inspired by God (literally, God-breathed) and is useful to all christians. Paul quoted the OT and used it to prove what he was saying in his letters to the churches.

Means just what is says and has absolutely nothing to do with the ten commanments. Context, context, context.

 

Glad to hear that I don't qualify as a pc type, of anything, actually. Some particular thing I believe or say may, in fact, be pc, but I assure all that would not be why I may have stated the same. Actually, the next time I'm accused of being 'pc' will be the first time! :laugh: :laugh:

As to Moses not being in the "family lineage" of Jesus, there is a reason for that. The lineage of the Lord Jesus Christ was through the tribe and line of Judah, as far as David, the king. From David, it 'splits' into two lines, with the 'regal' line via Solomon and through Jeconiah, who was 'written childless', in that no seed of his would ever sit on the throne of 'his father', David, yet the regal rights continued through that line to and through Joseph, the legal and 'family' father of Jesus, whence the 'right' to the throne continues. Jesus had to be both the seed of David, and the son of David. He also had to be the son of Jeconiah, but could not be the seed of the same. And in short, Mary's line through Nathan and Heli, who was the 'father-in-law' of Joseph, is the line of the seed, hence fulfilling the requirement, as well, of the seed of David.

As to who was the father, not only of Moses, but also of Aaron and Miriam, that would be Amram, who actually married his own aunt, incidentally, Jochebed.
(Ex. 6:14-26) So Scripture tells us exactly the lineage of Moses, as well. But as Jesus was of the tribe and lineage of Judah, so Moses, Aaron, Eleazer and Amram were of the tribe and lineage of Levi, which was the 'priestly' tribe, even as Judah was the 'royal' tribe. And neither Matthew nor Luke are concerned with any other 'lines' per se, than that of the Lord Jesus Christ, presenting Him as the sovereign son of David, and the perfect Son of Man, respectively.

Ed

 

GE:
StanleyG' I, Gerhard Ebersoehn, for one, don't want to and never will discuss anything with you! Please, never! The reason why not shouts for itself.

 

Hey, brother in Christ, Bob Ryan, let's reason together --- these holy spirits give me the creeps!

 

what is a "pc christian"?

 

Amen to that!

 

I believe I catch your thought. But if your not careful, one could mistake your meaning for sinless perfection.

 

I think this is the Scripture he had his eye on.

Col 2:14 Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;
Col 2:15 And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it.

 

No, there is a sin and there is a sin unto death. You will find that I believe in a lot better man than most that post on this board. I do believe the Commandments are still good. I have been shocked by the comments on here that a child of God could kill, commit adultery, lie, steal and kill, worship idols, etc, you name it and still be saved person. I don't believe that kind of doctrine and we will withdraw from such an evil one and no longer fellowship them.

 

GE:
Then I apologise, and also do not apologise. When Christ's hour of Christ's humiliation had begun, He declared, Now the Father will be glorified! Christ's abasement is also described as His being "lifted up". So when Jesus became the scandalon of the cross He never in divine sense had become scandalous; even when He had "become sin for us" is was "for us", and not for Himself who is "the Righteousness namely, of God" for ever and always. Thus with God's Law; even while in Christ being crucified it was being crucified the HOLY Law of God. We must be more carefull, NEVER to abase the Law of God. Paul wonderfully brings out the 'degradation' of the Law, saying its "GLORY" was as no "GLORY" against the glory of Christ's. I think it to one's own damnation when he treats the Law of God as something inferior and unworthy man's greatest respect. Gos shall take vengeance upon such as do so, as sure as He lives and shall judge everyone according as he has done in the flesh -- measured against His LAW. Such men will not have Christ to advocate for them before the Father; they shall have to appear in the presence of God in their own haughtiness and folly.

 

GE:
Another aspect of this issue, if reference was made to these Scriptures.
Reference is here made in the first place to the direct and circumstantial, namely to those "principalities and powers" "of the world" (as throughout the Letter), that actually "issue summons" for what they reckoned violation of the "ordinances" as if it were against themselves. "Handwriting of ordinances" simply meant subpoena.
In the second place I believe Paul had the Law of God in mind - "the letter of the law" even the 'moral law' of Ten Commandments, with the words, "handwriting of ordinances against us".

Now Paul says of BOTH these: "He took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross ... having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it (His resurrection from the dead)." Not even the 'Moral Law' of God can touch the forgiven, what the world's scribling on paper!
In other words: BECAUSE WE ARE FORGIVEN OUR TRESPASSES AND IN JESUS ARE MORE THAN CONQUERORS, AND BECAUSE HE TRIUMPHED IN BEING RAISED FROM THE DEAD, "THEREFORE, DO NOT YOU LET YOURSELVES BE JUDGED BY ANY OF THE WORLD IN FEASTING SABBATHS' FEAST!"