Sheshbazzar

Of course being righteous is possible, Hearing YHWH's WORD, they that hear His WORD, know that it is the RIGHT thing to obey His WORD.
The Nations (ha' Goyim) that believe on Him are saved by faith, and believing on Him, are circumcised with that circumcision that is not made with hands.
These through belief and faith, are those whose circumcision is of the heart, and of the eyes, and of the ears, and of the lips.
And whose circumcision is the doing of YAH Himself, there were "righteous" men before the circumcision of foreskins was ever instituted.
Noah, a righteous man in his day, "found "grace" (favor) in the eyes of YHWH", and YAH-YHWH both Saved and Delivered him without any requirement for a bloody foreskin, Indeed Scripture shows that YHWH's people had no such requirement nor custom until YHWH instituted it with Abraham, and that Abraham walked in the favor ("grace"), blessings and council of YHWH until he was 99 years of age, being found righteous, without any circumcision in the foreskin of his flesh, and his righteousness was not by The Law, or by any reading of Holy writ, but only by the hearing of the voice that spoke with him in the way, and it is recorded that "Abraham believed YHWH, and He accounted it to him for righteousness." (Gen. 15:6) while yet in uncircumcision.

And Moses, as you now confess, "got a temporary pass from Yahweh", both him and the millions that were with with him, that followed The WORD regarding NOT obeying The Laws of circumcision.
No, noah, I did not forget that part, and in fact I was the first to mention that fact in an earlier post in this same thread.
So Zipphorah the Midianite, the wife of Moses demanded and performed the circumcision that Moses himself would not do . (being a blood relative, she would have been enjoined and instructed in the tradition instituted with Abraham)
But Moses, whom did he ever circumcise in the foreskin of the flesh? Scripture records not one single instance, and even when it was in his power to circumcise or cause to be circumcised, millions he stayed every hand, resisting both The Law and The Tradition.
Because there was with him a WORD greater than the sum of all of The Law, which WORD he heard and obeyed, and worked on circumcising the foreskins of their stony hearts, and the foreskins of their closed ears, and the foreskins covering and blinding their eyes, and the foreskins of their lips, that prevented them from giving YHWH the praise due his Name.
And in doing this Moses was righteous, but if he had not heard and hearkened unto that WORD to do as He spoke, but had only done according to what was written in The Book of The Law, then ALL of Israel would have died in that wilderness.

I did not, and do not, create any rule or law regarding YHWH's chosen.
It is YHWH Himself whom has in His abundant mercy, and according to all the the promises He has made, Made His exception (-exemption-) to become both the RULE and The Law for ALL of them whom He intends to save and deliver out of this wilderness of Sin; Multitudes out of every Nation and kindred and tongue, even all who believe on Him, and are not condemned.

Thank you for this repeated compliment noah, The Scriptures do also say a few things regarding them that preach. Are you as versed in those sayings as you are those of the Law?
The Law is brutal and unmerciful, but The WORD of which I speak is kind, and merciful, and forgiving.
This WORD requires none of the rigmarole and rituals of the old, arcane, and poorly understood customs and traditions written down in old books, but only that a man love his Maker with all of his heart, mind, and strength, and love his neighbor as himself. maintaining a clear conscience in all that he says and does.
For The Deliverance comes not by the means of him that wills, or by the means of him that works, But is the free gift from Him that promises, and the belief of the heart is accounted as righteousness. (not the works of, or mutilations of the flesh)
I do not, and never have "complained" about the Law being "burdensome and brutal", more accurately I have said;
The Scriptures were written for our learning, and to get understanding, and all that befell The Fathers, Moses, Israel, and the prophets was for our edification (else would have been left unrecorded)
That Moses and the millions of his followers were -exempted- from a need to be obedient to the foremost requirement of The Law, a requirement that by its very nature, would EXCLUDE them from any further requirement of That Law, then that entitlement would be no small or insignificant matter.
If I follow The Voice that Moses followed, and OBEY The WORD that Moses obeyed, I am likewise entitled to break The Law, being under the Self-same WORD of -exemption- as he and his followers were.
Or on a simpler level, as a follower of Moses, it is only natural that I should do what he by his own example and results, has shown to be the right course and the right thing to do.
Moses withstanding the commandment of The Law,was not just any "someone else".
We are all to learn, both from his words, and from his doings, The Way that IS acceptable to YHWH.
YHWH raised up The Nation of Israel, with the greater goal that through them, He would in the fullness of time, redeem all of those of the Nations to whom He had not formerly spoken, nor made partakers in His Covenants, nor His Laws.

Sheshbazzar

As Moshe, as I, as he, as me; OUR Elohim isYHWH

Spincracker

I've read the arguments enough that I don't have to sift through the entire thread....in fact...it's proven by the scripture I posted...instead of actually responding to the scripture it is brushed off with, "it doesn't really say that." Please.

Btw, a "Law" is not equitable to the Old Covenant.

RPS

I simply reported traditional Christian thinking, around for centuries. You're free to think it ridiculous if you like.

You're entitled to think so. But Acts 10 reports God telling Peter otherwise (for example).

Quit the ridiculous equivocating. If you want to rely upon literalist scriptural interpretation, fine, you're entitled. But if you're arguing to Christians, then use all the Christian scriptures -- you can't duck Paul (or anything else).

For Christians, Paul's epistles have the same authority that the OT does -- no more; no less.

What you're really saying is Pay attention to the parts of the Bible I think are important and ignore the rest. You're entitled.

Excellent question.

Paul, Peter and two millennia of Christian theology disagree. Oh, and even Jesus says otherwise -- Mt. 12:1ff. and parallels. So maybe He is a blathering idiot or maybe He meant something different from your interpretation.

So when he okayed the disciples harvesting grain on the Sabbath and claimed to be Lord of the Sabbath He didn't really mean it?

You're entitled to think so, but Christianity begs to differ.

Nuwanda

Noah, with all due respect, your replys are only short when you have no argument.

Isa 56:1-7 is illustrating that the holy place before God will be opened to the foreigner. What would have been sure death under the old covenant - someone other than a priest offering burnt sacrifice - is now accepted due to the new covenant.

Isa 51:4-8 speaks of trusting in "Gods arm" not trusting in mans arm for salvation.

2 Tim 3:16 oops, we're not allowed to use Paul's writings according to you, so forget this one.

Psalm 18:30 says God is a shield for all who trust Him (not their own works).

Ecclesiastes 12:13 written to Jews under the old covenant. Christians can still profit from it because Christ's law is to love/fear God and love others as yourself, this keeps His law and His commands.

What else you got?

noah

Really? Prove it.

Nice try. The passage states that all God's Laws are given as the key to salvation for all peoples. Rewriting the verse with no scriptural support doesn't change what it means.
There is no Old Covenant. Your God's New Covenant as he imparted it in Jer.31-34 has yet to be realized.
Tell me about this New Covenant of yours. Who issued it? Was he a member of the Trinity? DId your God approve it? If so where? You know, Book/Chapter/Verse

What? I never said the issue was trusting in man's arm. Helloooooo! Just for your info the verse makes clear that your God's Laws are for all people
Read the verse for cryin' out loud:
Lazy sophistry. Paul is your man. If you believe him in Romans then you believe him here. Game. Set. Match. You don't get to pick and choose. Utter misreading of the verse. The passage is an exaltation of the shelter your God's Laws provided David Ecclesiastes 12:13 written to Jews under the old covenant. Christians can still profit from it because Christ's law is to love/fear God and love others as yourself, this keeps His law and His commands.

A lot of impatience waiting around for you to make an argument you can support.

noah

You haven't proven anything by scripture. You need scripture to support your position. I haven't brushed it off. I have given verse after verse of your God's utterances which disprove your claim. If you want to debate the issue you have to do more than repeat your point and misrepresent what I and other have said.

Whatever this means. Care to explain this statement?

noah

Oh really so you're Moses now? Is that your point? If you're trying to say you get out of obeying your God's Laws because you think someone else did, you're wrong. Two people breaking the Law does not make the law breaking right. You have yet to supply any scriptural support for your disobedience of your God's laws.

Dark Virtue

Would someone mind giving me the Reader's Digest version on the differences between laws (ceremonial, etc) and covenants and all that?

What's the difference between the 10 commandments, the festivals, etc?

And why, oh why, is all of this so difficult. Shouldn't understanding God's laws, will, intentions be SIMPLE?

Ask 10 different Christians the same question and you'll get 10 different answers, all apparently supported by scripture and inspired by God. It's confusing enough as a Christian, but even moreso for those of us on the outside looking in.

noah

Nothing like handing down misinformation from century to century. The facts and the word of your God be darned. It's truly something to behold.
Well then you have a number of problems don't you. Jesus said obey all his commandments that they were the key to salvation; see Mathew 5:17-19 Matthew 19:17 and Revelations 22:12 for example. While you're there check out Revelations 22:14

He also said his word lasts forever (Matt. 24:35). Forever means it applies as is eternally. Like his Laws it never changesYour move.

Jesus must have told James something different. James seems to think you have to obey your God's commandments and that doing or thinking otherwise is an act of self-deception:

James 1:22-25
James 2:10
Ridiculous? Equivocating? Prove it. Book/Chapter/Verse. I mean prove it without misrepresenting what I have said.

I'm using a lot more verses than you disobeyers of your God's laws are. I at least am using the Pentateuch, Ecclesiastes, Psalms, the Four Major Prophets, the Gospels, James and the Book of Revelation to prove my argument. What are you using? Oh right, Paul.

Sophistry. You can't give equal weight to books that cancel each other out and in this case books that defy the word of your God as written in almost every book in the bible. Paul is flatly contradicted by Jesus and his Father Yahweh and you can't do anything about that except choose sides. You have gone with Paul and that's fine but don't call yourself a Christian. Call yourself a Paulinian. Your selectivity alone discredits you and your religion and there's nothing you can do to change that.

Actually, no. If you read my post you will see that I am saying that your God contradicts your man Paul. You can't change that. You can only choose sides.
If you say you don't ignore (the rest of) your God's word,then tell me about your observance of your God's commands. Do you give yourself Saturdays off?

Actually it's not. It's quite a mundane question. Why because
a)JC already tod us he has not come to destroy the Law.
b) He then tells us that observing his commandments gets you into heaven.All in that same verse.
c) He tells us elsewhere that he and his Father are one. That means he wants everyone to obey his Laws. You see?
Game. Set. Match.

Great. Now you've shown JC is a lawbreaker. Good for you. You now have created a set of new problems for yourself. Heb 7:26 and Heb 4:14-15 state JC was without sin. Guess what? Wrong. And that's not the only place JC violates his Father's Laws. Do you take your cue from lawbreakers?
Tell me how your search for your new god is coming sometime.

Obviously not. But that merely exposes Jesus as a fraud. Violation of Torah is instant disqualification for position of expected messiah.

It also renders Hebrews worthless as book of refuge for Pauline xians since JC's violation of Torah discredits Heb 4:14-15 and Heb 7:26. Checkmate.

As I said, let me know how your search for your new God goes.
Yeah. Sure. Don't let the facts get in the way of your religion... whatever it is