Posted on 12/19/2014 1:30:26 PM PST by SeekAndFind
If you didn’t recognize it that was scripture I posted not interpretations from some Jewish wanna be working for the enemy.
It is your erroneous interpretation of those scriptures that is the problem.
Yeah, let's just ignore Matthias, who accompanied us during all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, beginning from the baptism of John until the day when he was taken up from us—one of these must become a witness with us to his resurrection”
.
And, in any case, I already showed that not to be the case.
>> “I was quite plain in Post 181 that the self-perceived state of being in his hand could well be self-deception.”
>
> More likely in your case it is observer wishful thinking deception.
Ah, interesting, because I might get something wrong in my understanding I am not saved.
It's good to know that my salvation is not based on the work of my savior, but instead the perfect understanding of the Theological.
[/sarc]
If only I had a perfect High Priest who can sympathize with my weaknesses and is full of mercy… Oh, wait, I do!
Jesus the Great High Priest
(Hebrews 4:14-16)
Since, then, we have a great high priest who has passed through the heavens, Jesus, the Son of God, let us hold fast to our confession. For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who in every respect has been tested as we are, yet without sin. Let us therefore approach the throne of grace with boldness, so that we may receive mercy and find grace to help in time of need.
Show me which part of post 192 was my interpretation.
As I showed you in Post 192
The nature of the law was your interpretation.
You constantly try to use scripture outside of its intent.
Do you think Yeshua’s brother James had a clue?
He called Torah “the perfect law of liberty.”
Jesus said to follow the commandments not the law of Moses.
Do not make this thread “about” individual Freepers. That is also a form of “making it personal.” Discuss the issues all you want, but do not make it personal.
Here's the law James was talking about.
Romans 3:27 Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith.
Those who are under the law of works are cursed.
Galatians 3:10 for as many as are of works of law are under a curse, for it hath been written, 'Cursed is every one who is not remaining in all things that have been written in the Book of the Law -- to do them, 11 and that in law no one is declared righteous with God, is evident, because 'The righteous by faith shall live;''
The New Testament is the law of faith not the law of works.
The man’s tagline makes it “about” Freepers, lol:
“Freepers: Not as smart as I’d hoped they’d be”
Please show where James called Torah the perfect law of liberty.
This article is written by an Evangelical Protestant who is lamenting that Protestants have so many varied interpretations of Scripture. In the article the author, either purposely or wrongly provides false information about the Catholic doctrine of Indulgences.
I pointed that out. Since then it’s been several individuals thoughts and opinions on the Church.
Since the Protestant author is pointing out that folks can’t agree and he lists his own ‘doctrines’ about getting along, who is to say who is right and who is wrong when it comes to interpreting scripture?
My stance is, since Christ Himself guaranteed that the gates of Hell would not prevail over His Church, the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church, it is the only authority on matters of faith.
There can be only one truth, there can be only one Church. Otherwise no man’s opinion is better than any other man’s opinion on the interpretation of Scripture.
And that is why we see the mess (evidently as does the author of this article) we see today.
The topic that Jesus most spoke about was "The Kingdom of God," His Church.
The biblical imagery is clear. Jesus is the King of the eternal, redeemed Davidic kingdom, who holds the "key of David," (Rev. 3:7) representing the office of the vice-regent (Isaiah 22:15-25) --an office which He bestows on Peter (Mat 16:19). Mary is the Queen Mother (1 Kings 2:19) of the eternal, redeemed Davidic Kingdom (Rev. 12:1-5)--the Kingdom of God.
"If he won't listen to the Church, treat him as a pagan or tax collector." --Jesus
“Since then it’s been several individuals thoughts and opinions on the Church.”
Which is all it ever can be on an Internet forum, with no formal debate structure (except “Don’t make it ‘about’ other FReepers”). I’m fine with that, but you can only take it so far.
People have a huge investment in their understanding of Christ and His Church, and carry around within their own SUMMA THEOLOGICA. One does not lightly defend such.
You appear to be in some kind of game playing mode.
All of Torah is “The Law of Moses” not just parts of it.
.
You’re still working your strawman.
It has nothing to do with your strawman “justification by works,” and there has never been cause to bring it up.
It is a smoke screen to cover the holes in your man made theology.
Obedience is not works, but Love.
No obedience, no love.
“Those that Love me keep my commandments.”
.
I can't imagine that you see it as a game. Searching scripture for truth is surely not a game to me.
>>All of Torah is “The Law of Moses” not just parts of it.<<
I showed you specifically from scripture that God considers the law of Moses and the ten commandments differently and does NOT hold them to the same degree.
You showed nothing of the kind; you gave us your man made private interpretation.
Galatians 3:10 for as many as are of works of law are under a curse, for it hath been written, 'Cursed is every one who is not remaining in all things that have been written in the Book of the Law -- to do them, 11 and that in law no one is declared righteous with God, is evident, because 'The righteous by faith shall live;
Now why did you change to "justification"?
>>Obedience is not works, but Love.<<
The Holy Spirit through Paul distinctly differentiated between the "law of faith" and the "law of works" as I showed in post 209. He called it the "law of works". He also said "for as many as are of works of law are under a curse". Why would you attempt to put people under that curse?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.