noah

By the way why are you citing Hebrews when it was wrong about Jesus being sinless? If you can't trust Hebrews here, why trust it anywhere?

Sheshbazzar

Yes noah, never let the context get in the way of your argument, You carefully ignore all of the contents of the preceding post, to selectively quote my final words out of that context.
As you continuously do the same thing to all of The Scriptures that you quote, it really is no surprise.
I did not say, nor even so much as imply that I am Moses now, my reference was directly to that WORD of commandment, and liberty, which Moses, and ALL of his millions of followers had, to NOT obey the letter of The Law,
And it is further evident by the context, that the only claim I was making, was the availing myself of that Self-same commandment and liberty. (as any person who is a believer also may)
That is only your opinion.
In this case, when one of those "two people" is Moses himself, Yahweh's chosen Leader of all of the Hosts of Israel,
It is a far better thing to follow the teaching and the example of Moses, who acted under YHWH's authority, than give heed to the worthless opinions of a Scripture twisting atheist.

Oh but I have provided abundant Scriptural evidence for the torah I am preaching, that you still choose to evade all of that evidence, and not face up its implications, is a living and self-revealing commentary on the uncircumcision of your heart.

What then is this big difference between them that make a boastful claim to "keep" and "obey" The Law, yet are to be found in violation of law after law, and those who for the sake of a clear conscience, will not make any such claim?
The one making the claim, has transgressed the Law along with the one NOT making the claim, whom he despises, and condemns.
If any are to be excused, pardoned, or forgiven, would justice prefer the testimony of a braggart who lists all that he has done according to The Law, while omitting to confess to all that he has neglected to do under that self-same Law,
Or would justice not rather have mercy and compassion upon the one who confessed unto all, saying I am a sinner, have mercy upon me.
If we confess our sins (transgressions of The Law) He is just to forgive them.

Nuwanda

Noah, sorry that my defense of scripture is making you impatient, but there is one issue in which I'm begining to lose respect for you on. You seem to ignore any specific laws withing the law books. They are not all the same nor can you treat them all the same (nor did the Jews treat them all the same). To blanket the entire scope of the law as commands with no regard to context or specifics concerning the laws makes your arguments nearly pointless.

Here's a second chance at an example I gave earlier, lets see if you will consent to analyzing one law in context, if not then this is a worthless pursuit for me to continue this debate.

Ex: the tithe. By law the tithe can only be a food offering, it can only be offered to Levitical priests, it can only be produce grown or raised in the land of Israel, and it can only be given in the land of Israel. Though the modern church employs the tithe (though they shouldn't) the tithe was never meant to be observed by non-Israelite, non-Israel dwelling people.

RPS

If you think you're right and centuries of interpretation wrong you'll have to do a better job of demonstrating it. I suggest you begin with your hermaneutical methodology and why it's to be preferred and only then move to your interpretational claims if you wish to be taken seriously, but do what you want.

Not really. That's what interpretation is all about. Oh, and by the way, why are the robes in Rev. 22:14 relevant? Remember to look at the better translations if you wish to play.

Perhaps. Or perhaps you're misreading and misinterpreting. Ya think?

I already did. If Christian scripture is the standard you can't ignore Paul.

Where exactly does the Bible say that the one citing the most number of verses, especially erroneously, wins? Remember, being able to use the search engine at Bible Gateway isn't exactly the best research vehicle.

If you assume that the whole Bible is consistent and authoritative, the idea is to interpret the whole thing. You demand consistency among others but refuse to even seek it yourself. I leave it to the lurkers to decide for themselves where the sophistry resides.

Christianity disagrees. Now maybe you're smarter and more able in Greek and Hebrew than Augustine, Anselm, Aquinas, Calvin, Barth, et als., but you haven't demonstrated that so far.

You're entitled to your opinion, no matter how silly.

Not if He has fulfilled the Law as Lord of the Sabbath.

Only if it was a violation, and you haven't demonstrated that.

Before it was tennis analogies, now it's chess. Clearly, you're playing games. But just as clearly you're clueless about which one.

If I ever deem it necessary, I'll let you know. But don't hold your breath waiting.

noah

Nice try Nuwanda. Are you arguing that the vagaries, the particulars, of this one Law are the reason you disobey all your God and Saviour's commands?
Was Jesus wrong when he said: Mathew 5:17-19
Was he wrong when he said his word lasts forever (Matt. 24:35)
?

You are commanded to obey all of God's commands. It is not up to me to decide how you do that. It's not my responsibility. Although I do appreciate what I assume is your unintended exaltation, Jesus is in fact your God. His Father Yahweh is your God. Their Laws are eternal and perfect. If they're perfect, you will find an answer to your question. If they're not perfect, you have an imperfect flawed God and that's also not my concern. How you square that circle is yourproblem.

Prey to them if you truly seek an answer to this question.


Your next problem here is the integrity of your argument. You just said that some xians do take this command seriously. Don't you see how this one backfires on you. At least they're trying! As your God says, trying is better than wanton disobedience.
Deuteronomy 4:2
By the way please not one xian telling us that another xian, in this case the Catholic Church, is wrong or that they are not being xians properly. Do they not see how absurd this is? And they think they have even the slightest credibility when they argue points of doctrine or try to tell us how xianity is the one true faith.
Folks xianity is whatever the believer wants it to be.
The irony here is these xians here keep trying to pick way at my credibility!

Nuwanda

Okay Noah, I relent. There is no New Covenant; Jesus' "good news" was 'work even harder and maybe you'll be liked by God'; none of the prophets of old prophesied a Christ and a New Covenant; there are no differences within the law codes, they're all the same; Paul was a lieing hijacker; Jesus' real name is "JC"; the world is flat; and we never landed on the moon. Got it. Sorry dude, I'm just tired of hearing you repeat points that have already been properly disputed. Plus, you don't believe anything you're saying is true, you've already admitted a dozen times that you don't believe a word of the Bible anyway, so debating you is utterly pointless.

Later.

Weltall

Hey, you got that last one right! Can you say 'shoehorning by later writers'?
What's your point? You don't have to believe in something to debate about it. All it takes to debate a topic is a little research (ok, sometimes a lot of research), something you seem uninterested in.

Nuwanda

Here's the Reader's Digest version (from my perspective).

Most of the laws contained in the Torah (the 1st 5 books of the Bible) were written for the nation of Israel during their time in the Exodus from Egypt. The laws, by and large, were giving to set the Hebrews apart from all the other nations. Stuff like circumcision, dietary laws, burnt offerings, etc, were specifically given to the Jews, not the "heathen" nations. Hence, if you're not a Jew living in Israel, and under the Levitical priesthood - most of the laws are impossible for you to keep. That's the super digest version.

The 10 commandments are considered to be principle laws, laws that all should abide by. That is until Jesus. Jesus did what no man could do - He kept the whole law perfectly thereby fulfilled God's perfect standard and thus fulfilled the old covenant. His death was the perfect sacrifice needed to remove sin from mankind. The gospel (good news) is that Jesus paid the price that mankind should have paid, and now Christians do not look to the old law to find out what God expects from them, they look to the mercy and grace of Christ.

God desires mercy not sacrifice (Hos 6:6)

Why is it difficult to understand? Because we are thousands of years separated from the culture, language, traditions, lifestyles, etc from those in OT times. It's hard for most people to related to those just 100 years ago.

And, the reason 10 different Christians will give 10 different answers is because of their own traditions. Most Christians I know have never read the Bible cover to cover (same with unbelieving critics). That's what they get for taking some mans word for it.

I hope that helps.

Nuwanda

No, you don't. But, his point is not to disprove the New Covenant. If you listen close, his real argument is that the Bible is all myth. So, even if you address his argument a dozen times, which I have, all you do is fight a smokescreen. That's why its pointless.

And what's with the personal attack?

sunspark

Ehehe, sorry, my bad.

So your argument is, then, that the Law (still) applies to Jews, but not to Christians? Or something else?

The point being made, which was said to you already by "noah" (which you brushed off, not the other way around), is that nowhere in scripture does it talk about the Law one day becoming obsolete. Rather, it repeats again and again the notion of it being forever, and that one day it would be written upon the hearts and minds of believers. It is not until certain New Testament writings (Pauline epistles and Hebrews) that this idea of Law no longer applying shows up. That doesn't appear suspect to you?

Wrong. It was also given to Widows and the poor. It was the means of providing for those who could not provide for themselves.

The Law doesn't command that anywhere I'm aware of, that's just the reality of where the people were: they could hardly hike to Egypt and bring it back with them.

I don't see how that follows.

And you're free to think it isn't, but that kind of appeal to authority is not a valid argument. The authority being accepted in this discussion is what Scripture says about itself, not what tradition says.

Well, these last few quotes are illuminating.

Way to show common decency and respect. If you disrespect the other members of this discussion so much, why are you posting at all? That doesn't help your argument, it just illuminates that you really aren't interested in discussion. You've shown you have real antagonism towards those who disagree with you, and you take it too far by, among other things, being unrepentantly rude, preachy and accusatory.

This is a forum for non-theists. If it's "pointless" and "worthless", why are you here? I'd suggest you re-evaluate your atttitudes and motives, but that'd be "worthless" and "pointless", right?