Dispensationalism: Apostasy in the church

[TheSage]

Dispensationalism is a heretical teaching which has crept into most branches of christianity.

It holds jews do not need jesus. This is not what jesus or the early church fathers would have said.

This is not a conspiracy theory, for those of you will undoubtedly want to claim it as such, it is the official teaching of many confused evangelical congregations and the catholic church.




http://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/articles/topic/dispensationalism.html
It can be said that Dispensationalism defines God’s relationship with men in one of two ways due to ethnic identification. If a man is a Jew, God has a particular economy of redemption for that person, and if he is not, God has a different means to the redemption of that person. The use of the term redemption is broad, speaking to the design and implementation of salvation in its consummate usage from beginning to the conclusion of all things. This does not necessarily mean that God has a different soteriological design for Israel from the church, but rather that in the accomplishment of their salvation, God relates to Israel one way and to the church another way. Much has been made of the early charges against classic Dispensationalists; that they define two plans of salvation between God and men. Robert L. Saucy writes, “dispensationalists have more recently been careful to explain that the progression in the dispensations involves no change in the fundamental principle of salvation by grace.”2 This progress in dispensational theology is erasing the early acrimony aroused by overt statements of discontinuity in the plan of God.

Whatever form Dispensationalism takes, it is always distinguishable by this most fundamental presupposition, that it purports an abiding distinction between peoples based upon ethnicity. Historic or classic Dispensationalism held this tenet; neo or revised Dispensationalism affirmed this thought, and progressive Dispensationalism holds this presupposition. Dispensationalism is Dispensationalism because it is built upon this most fundamental presupposition that God relates to ethnic Israel one way and to all other men another.

[Gaffer]

There are lots of christian groups and sects. There's a church in KY that handles rattle snakes as proof of their beliefs and faith. There are thousands of small unaffiliated churches. Just because one group says dispensation is ok doesn't mean they all do.

[TheSage]

There are lots of christian groups and sects. There's a church in KY that handles rattle snakes as proof of their beliefs and faith. There are thousands of small unaffiliated churches. Just because one group says dispensation is ok doesn't mean they all do.

I'm saying "many do". Get over it.

[Dilloduck]

I'm saying "many do". Get over it.

As in millions--

[5stringJeff]

The Bible is clear that anyone living today (or any day after Christ's death and resurrection) would have to accept Jesus as the Messiah to receive salvation. However, the Bible is also quite clear that the Jews (i.e. the descendants of Israel) are still a people with a special covenant with God. I would disagree with classic dispensationalists, who would say that Jews gain salvation by means other than faith in Christ, but I would agree that the Jews are still a covenant people in God's eyes.

[TheSage]

The Bible is clear that anyone living today (or any day after Christ's death and resurrection) would have to accept Jesus as the Messiah to receive salvation. However, the Bible is also quite clear that the Jews (i.e. the descendants of Israel) are still a people with a special covenant with God. I would disagree with classic dispensationalists, who would say that Jews gain salvation by means other than faith in Christ, but I would agree that the Jews are still a covenant people in God's eyes.


Do the "covenant people" need christ for salvation? It seems like you're saying two opposing things, as if it makes sense somehow.

[TheSage]

Even in jesus's day, the jews had turned from god and become a rabbinical, authoritarian racist cult, as it still is to this day.

[Nate]

Jews...

Catholics...

Evangelical Christians...

Is there anyone who you don't harbor an irrational fear towards?

[TheSage]

Jews...

Catholics...

Evangelical Christians...

Is there anyone who you don't harbor an irrational fear towards?

Tell me, nate, what's your attitude towards a global theocracy?

[Nate]

The notion of a worldwide Caliphate is terrifying.

[TheSage]

The notion of a worldwide Caliphate is terrifying.

Yes it is. ANd is also not inconsistent with the noahide vision. Islam is a noahide compliant faith.

[Nate]

Well, yes.

So is Christianity.

No surprise there. All three are Abrahamic, after all.

[TheSage]

Well, yes.

So is Christianity.

No surprise there. All three are Abrahamic, after all.

No. Christianity is not. The official view is that the divinity of christ is an idolatrous belief.

[Nate]

Not all Christians see Jesus as divine.

[TheSage]

Not all Christians see Jesus as divine.
Then, by definition, those aren't christians. They're noahides.

[Nate]

There's a Unitarian Christian church across the street. I'm looking at it as I type this.

[TheSage]

There's a Unitarian Christian church across the street. I'm looking at it as I type this.

yeah. They're a fraud.

[5stringJeff]

Do the "covenant people" need christ for salvation? It seems like you're saying two opposing things, as if it makes sense somehow.

Yes, everyone needs Christ for salvation - that's clear from the Bible. But it's also clear that the Jews are still God's chosen people, which is a covenant He never invalidated. That covenant wasn't/isn't a special source of salvation, it's just a special relationship.

[5stringJeff]

There's a Unitarian Christian church across the street. I'm looking at it as I type this.

Any church that doesn't preach Christ as the source of salvation isn't Christian.

[TheSage]

Yes, everyone needs Christ for salvation - that's clear from the Bible. But it's also clear that the Jews are still God's chosen people, which is a covenant He never invalidated. That covenant wasn't/isn't a special source of salvation, it's just a special relationship.


I disagree. The covenant was cancelled by their rejection of christ. I understand the political pressure to please the jews by deforming your faith, but for christ's sake and your own, resist.

[Nate]

Any church that doesn't preach Christ as the source of salvation isn't Christian.

Well DUH! Obviously only White Protestants like yourself and TheSage are real Christians :rolleyes:

[5stringJeff]

Please show me the Biblical proof that God invalidated His covenant with the Jewish people.

[5stringJeff]

Well DUH! Obviously only White Protestants like yourself and TheSage are real Christians :rolleyes:

Don't take my word for it. Take Jesus' word for it: "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life; no one comes to the Father but through Me."

[Nate]

Don't take my word for it. Take Jesus' word for it: "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life; no one comes to the Father but through Me."

Do you interpret the bible literally?

[TheSage]

Please show me the Biblical proof that God invalidated His covenant with the Jewish people.

I think it's implied since there is a new covenant in christ. I know the jews and their masonic/noahide flunkies don't buy that, but that's my belief. I know you're a dispensationalist, and that that's popular, but that's not what I believe.

[5stringJeff]

I think it's implied since there is a new covenant in christ. I know the jews and their masonic/noahide flunkies don't buy that, but that's my belief. I know you're a dispensationalist, and that that's popular, but that's not what I believe.

First, you don't know that I'm a dispensationalist. In fact, if you would read post #5, you'd see that I disagree with the primary tenet of dispensationalism (that there are more than one ways to salvation). Second, God's covenant of salvation through Christ is exactly that - a covenant of salvation. God's covenant with the Jews was and is not a covenant of salvation. While the Mosiac Laws were no longer needed after Christ's fulfillment of the Law, God never said that He was terminating His covenant with the Jews.

[TheSage]

First, you don't know that I'm a dispensationalist. In fact, if you would read post #5, you'd see that I disagree with the primary tenet of dispensationalism (that there are more than one ways to salvation). Second, God's covenant of salvation through Christ is exactly that - a covenant of salvation. God's covenant with the Jews was and is not a covenant of salvation. While the Mosiac Laws were no longer needed after Christ's fulfillment of the Law, God never said that He was terminating His covenant with the Jews.



Again. I think it's implied that since christ brought a new covenant, anyone who rejects that is not longer covered. What does a covenant mean if it's not "salvific"? Is like a lay away plan? I think you're nuancing your way into noahide servitude.

[5stringJeff]

What does a covenant mean if it's not "salvific"? Is like a lay away plan? I think you're nuancing your way into noahide servitude.

God isn't just concerned about our salvation, although He is quite concerned about that. Nowhere does God say that He only deals with covenants concerning salvation.

And I have no more reason to support noahide anything than I do supporting dhimmi anything.

[TheSage]

God isn't just concerned about our salvation, although He is quite concerned about that. Nowhere does God say that He only deals with covenants concerning salvation.

And I have no more reason to support noahide anything than I do supporting dhimmi anything.


What other kinds of covenants are there?

[avatar4321]

I disagree. The covenant was cancelled by their rejection of christ. I understand the political pressure to please the jews by deforming your faith, but for christ's sake and your own, resist.

I disagree completely. It was the Jewish leaders who made the new covenant with Christ, atleast that's what Matthew implies. Although, they didn't intend to do so.

Also, the Bible itself mentions different dispensations of time. You might not like the concept, but the scriptures are pretty clear that there are different dispensations, even if they don't explain it clearly.

Of course, it doesn't really matter since our friend was banned. But i just cant let things like that go by without saying something.

[avatar4321]

What other kinds of covenants are there?

There are lots of covenants that don't include salvation.

The covenant God made with Abraham for example, wasn't for salvation, but for specific blessings: Land for inheritence, eternal increase in children, that through His seed the world might be blessed, that the Messiah would come through His lineage.

Numerous blessings that had absolutely nothing to do with His salvation.

[5stringJeff]

I disagree completely. It was the Jewish leaders who made the new covenant with Christ, atleast that's what Matthew implies. Although, they didn't intend to do so.

It was actually God who instituted the new covenant, through Christ, with mankind.

[TheSage]

There are lots of covenants that don't include salvation.

The covenant God made with Abraham for example, wasn't for salvation, but for specific blessings: Land for inheritence, eternal increase in children, that through His seed the world might be blessed, that the Messiah would come through His lineage.

Numerous blessings that had absolutely nothing to do with His salvation.

Oh right, worldly blessings for a worldy people, and grace for the people of the "church era". You can't use dispensationalism to justify dipensationalism. You may try, but it will be ultimately ineffective.

[darin]

Dispensationalism is a heretical teaching which has crept into most branches of christianity.

It holds jews do not need jesus. This is not what jesus or the early church fathers would have said.


Well, I've never heard that teaching in ANY church I've frequented. "Most" branches of Christianity? How do you define 'most branches'? It's definaletly not in the major branches I'm familiar with - those branches preach ALL have sinned, and therefore NEED to accecpt Christ as substitutional attonement for their sins.

[TheSage]

Well, I've never heard that teaching in ANY church I've frequented. "Most" branches of Christianity? How do you define 'most branches'? It's definaletly not in the major branches I'm familiar with - those branches preach ALL have sinned, and therefore NEED to accecpt Christ as substitutional attonement for their sins.

What do preachers say about jews in your church? The chosen people with an intact covenant, with a holy purpose on earth?

Christ is becoming secondary in the masonically corrupted noahide movement we call modern christianity.

Jesus repeatedly told the rabbis they were full of it.

[5stringJeff]

Christ is becoming secondary in the masonically corrupted noahide movement we call modern christianity.

Jesus repeatedly told the rabbis they were full of it.

I'll second Darin's question - what churches are saying this??

I'm beginning to think you're full of it.

[TheSage]

I'll second Darin's question - what churches are saying this??

I'm beginning to think you're full of it.


What does your church say about jews? Still the chosen people with a special purpose to bring god's law to the world?

[5stringJeff]

What does your church say about jews? Still the chosen people with a special purpose to bring god's law to the world?

Don't dodge. What churches are preaching your pet dogma of noahidism?

[TheSage]

Don't dodge. What churches are preaching your pet dogma of noahidism?

On the christian side it's called dispensationalism.


Most of them. Even yours. If yours doesn't, kindly tell me what they do teach about jews.

[darin]

What do preachers say about jews in your church? The chosen people with an intact covenant, with a holy purpose on earth?

Christ is becoming secondary in the masonically corrupted noahide movement we call modern christianity.

Jesus repeatedly told the rabbis they were full of it.

The only jews our church preaches about are ethnic-jews...you know....Jesus...Mathew...Peter...some of the pharasees are involved in some of the lessons, too.

Don't get caught up with looking for the devil, that you miss Christ.

IMO, the Jews were Chosen by God to deliver HIS message. From the time of Christ, however, ritualistic sacrifice is no longer required...ANY PERSON who accepts christ is no longer ANYTHING but "Christian". I learned that at church.

[darin]

On the christian side it's called dispensationalism.


Most of them. Even yours. If yours doesn't, kindly tell me what they do teach about jews.



Dude - you can't answer the question. It's up to YOU to prove your claim of 'most'...not up to everyone who calls you on it.

[TheSage]

Dude - you can't answer the question. It's up to YOU to prove your claim of 'most'...not up to everyone who calls you on it.

Dude. Im saying "your church". If your church doesn't teach this crap, then kindly tell me what they do say.

"Most churches" is a legitimate construct. I cannot name most churches. Can we start with yours? What does yours say? I don't attend an organized church, but I'm down with jesus. He was the ultimate rebel.

[darin]

Dude. Im saying "your church". If your church doesn't teach this crap, then kindly tell me what they do say.

"Most churches" is a legitimate construct. I cannot name most churches. Can we start with yours? What does yours say? I don't attend an organized church, but I'm down with jesus. He was the ultimate rebel.

But you have NO idea if it's MOST churches, or TEN Churches.
I Already told you what my Church 'teaches'. They don't specifiy Jews because we have MORE important things to discuss....like how to deal with the ConspiraJews. Jewahides? :D


I bet JESUS would NEVER get banned here.

[Nienna]

I fully disagree with dispensationalism. There is only one Way to be saved from Hell, and that is to believe that Jesus was God's son, that He died in payment for our our sins, and to grow in obedience to God. This applies to everyone in the world.

In looking at God's covenant with Abraham, it says nothing about salvation. God promises Abraham to bless both his sons (Isaac and Ishmael) with many descendents, but He promised to stay faithful to Isaac's descendents, to make Himself know as their God, to give them land, and to bring kings from his descendents. (Note: God did not promise to remain the God of Ishmael's descendents, and now Ishmael's descendent worship Allah.) On Abraham's side, he was to circumcise every male in his household.

Jesus' coming did not cancel any covenant that God made; it fulfilled them. The Jewish people still know that "Ya" is God; however, most of them have rejected the saving power of Jesus. God's covenant is still in effect, because God is known to the Jews. However, this does not mean that all Jewish people will get to Heaven.

The two main rituals used in the Jewish religion (sacrifice and circumcision) are only foreshadowings of Jesus' fulfillment, done to help people understand what was happening when Jesus finally arrived. Animal sacrifice was done so that people would know that sin deserves death. Circumcision was a casting away of the most intimate flesh. When Jesus arrived in Time, He became the fulfillment of those rituals. He sacrificed Himself unjustly so that we could have Justice satisfied for our sakes. He restored mankind to the possibility of intimacy with God, giving us the power to carve away the disobedience and self-love (flesh) in our hearts.

So... to sum up... God's covenants with the Jews are still in effect. However, this does not mean that they don't need Jesus to be saved from Hell. God favored the Jewish people in bringing the Path of Salvation through them, and giving knowledge of Him FIRST to them. But, each individual is responsible for accepting his OWN relationship with God, or he doesn't get to Heaven. :)

[5stringJeff]

On the christian side it's called dispensationalism.


Most of them. Even yours. If yours doesn't, kindly tell me what they do teach about jews.

You're the one claiming that "most" churches teach dispensationalism. The burden of proof is on you to provide the evidence. Here's a link for you to start learing: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page

[avatar4321]

The scriptures are clear that jews will be restored to the true faith. They are also clear that three are multiple dispensations. Whether this applies to "dispensationalism" as you are articulating, is debatable.

I don't know why you hate jews so much. It's silly really. I don't think Christ was born to Jewish lineage by accident. If you think the Lord is going to forget the covenants He made, think again.

[Nienna]

The scriptures are clear that jews will be restored to the true faith. They are also clear that three are multiple dispensations. Whether this applies to "dispensationalism" as you are articulating, is debatable.

I don't know why you hate jews so much. It's silly really. I don't think Christ was born to Jewish lineage by accident. If you think the Lord is going to forget the covenants He made, think again.

What are the scriptures, please?

[TheSage]

Look you guys, you're a bunch of dispensationalists. It's thoroughly permeated the christian chuch, thanks to masons and other crypto-noahides.

You can;t use dispensationalism to defend dispensationalism. All i see in the bible is jesus telling the jews they're full of crap and getting railroaded for it.

[5stringJeff]

Look you guys, you're a bunch of dispensationalists. It's thoroughly permeated the christian chuch, thanks to masons and other crypto-noahides.

Where's the tinfoil smiley when I need it?? You refuse to back up your claim that "most churches" are dispensationalist, and that somehow makes us dispensationalist?!? :wtf:

[TheSage]

Where's the tinfoil smiley when I need it?? You refuse to back up your claim that "most churches" are dispensationalist, and that somehow makes us dispensationalist?!? :wtf:


What do you believe? The multiple covenants theory? It's a tortured set of arguments to begin with. It's not "clearly stated" anywhere. Jesus was highly critical of how the jews were turning god's words into a justification of elitism and cruelty.

[5stringJeff]

What do you believe?

John 14:6.

[TheSage]

John 14:6.

What will you do when when everyone starts telling you to just obey the noahide laws and forget about jesus, that the whole point of jesus was to bring the gentiles back to rabbi worship?

[5stringJeff]

What will you do when when everyone starts telling you to just obey the noahide laws and forget about jesus, that the whole point of jesus was to bring the gentiles back to rabbi worship?

I'll realize I'm in RWA's fantasy/nightmare world, and wake myself up.

[TheSage]

I'll realize I'm in RWA's fantasy/nightmare world, and wake myself up.

You're in denial. The church is teaching lies to please the jews.




http://jesus-messiah.com/prophecy/dispen-chart.html
3.) Dispensationalism is a complete corruption of the New Testament Scriptures from the plan of salvation all the way to revelation of the Godhead. Dispensationalism is based upon the trinity doctrine of three separate gods being three separate persons: God the Father is married to Israel and is working out the redemption of the Jews, while God the Son is espoused to a Gentile Church and working out the redemption of this accidental mistake. The error is that there is no such thing as two separate gods with separate wives. Another error is the Church was not a mistake that came about because *some* Jews rejected the Kingdom. Even another heresy is that when God the Father could not redeem Israel because the Jews rejected the Kingdom Jesus tried to give them, that God the Father then decided to postpone the Kingdom and allow God the Son to turn to the Gentiles for a people for *his name sake* and thus slip in a new mystery called plan *B* or the Church. These errors and heresies must be accepted and believed before dispensational can appear to be a revelation from God.


Prophet S.J. Mounce claimed the following:

1. "Each Covenant introduces a New Dispensation."

2. The Covenants are: "Edenic Covenant [Dispensation of Innocence]; Adamic Covenant [Dispensation of Conscience]; Abrahamic Covenant [Dispensation of Promise]; Noahic Covenant [Dispensation of Human Government]; Mosaic Covenant [Dispensation of Law]; Davidic Covenant [Dispensation of Grace]; Davidic Kingdom [Dispensation of the NEW COVENANT or Millennial].

Quotes from Mr. Mounce's Dispensationalism follows for your study and review. There are a number of points that need to be brought out.

A: The Scriptures no where hint at or implies the idea of dispensations. In fact, the word dispensation as it occurs it the New Testament, does not refer to marked off periods of time at all. The entire idea is mysticism and spiritualizing Scripture.










http://chrisjesusboy.wordpress.com/2007/01/18/the-blasphemous-heretical-kingdom-offer-of-dispensationalism/
The Erroneous Kingdom Offer


Dispensationalism believes that the purpose of the first advent of Jesus Christ was to offer an earthly Kingdom to the Jews. This Kingdom would reinstate the Old Testament legal system and it’s expansion to the entire world under the Messiah. When the Jews rejected Jesus Christ and His Kingdom offer, plan B went into effect and Christ went to the cross to initiate the dispensation of Grace and the “mystery church”.Had Israel received her King there would have been no cross - and no Gospel! When Jesus came, He made a bona fide offer of the Kingdom and power to the people of Israel.

What then, if the Jews had done their duty and accepted this offer, of the salvation of mankind?

What of the cross - “without shedding of blood there is no remission”?

What of the prophecies pointing to the cross?

How could Christ offer a Kingdom that He could not permit to be established lest there be no salvation of man by His shed Blood?

Dispensationalists attempt to absolve themselves from the concept of making God a liar by claiming He knew no one would call His bluff. They say:


He knew before He came that they would refuse it - knew from all eternity; hence, there are prophets which speak of His coming to die for us.Still, the problem stands. Even if Christ made an earthly Kingdom offer knowing that the Jews would refuse, the offer could not have been redeemed. An offer that is impossible to honor is not a sincere offer but a fraud. Our God makes no insincere offers. Besides, if Christ came to establish an earthly Kingdom for the Jews surely He had opportunity, and the support of the masses -
Therefore when Jesus perceived that they were about to come and take Him by force to make Him king, He departed again to the mountain by Himself alone.
John 6:15



No, Christ came at the set time to die on the cross, to redeem fallen mankind. All true sons of Abraham recognized Him. It is at the Ascension that He received His Kingdom, and He is seated now on His Throne!

[Hugh Lincoln]

racist cult

Best short summary of the Jews going, really. But really brilliant to call yourself a 'religion.' Great cover.

[TheSage]

Best short summary of the Jews going, really. But really brilliant to call yourself a 'religion.' Great cover.

I know. and these brainwashed neocon fascists have no idea what's coming.

I know, I used to be the worst of them. Until the "ports deal".

[5stringJeff]

You're in denial. The church is teaching lies to please the jews.

And once again, please show me your proof that "most churches" are teaching this. Mine doesn't.

[TheSage]

And once again, please show me your proof that "most churches" are teaching this. Mine doesn't.


The rise of evangelical christians (noahides) tells me this. They're more obsessed with unconditional support for israel than anything regarding the United States. They're insane.

"it is written, it is written" they say. If you feel it's up to you to make prophecy come true, then it's not prophecy, it's a set of marching orders.

[5stringJeff]

The rise of evangelical christians (noahides) tells me this. They're more obsessed with unconditional support for israel than anything regarding the United States. They're insane.

Actually, most evangelicals are obsessing with, well, evangelizing. Imagine that.

[darin]

Actually, most evangelicals are obsessing with, well, evangelizing. Imagine that.

:eek: :eek: :eek:

RUN FOR THE HILLS!

[TheSage]

Actually, most evangelicals are obsessing with, well, evangelizing. Imagine that.


I'm glad they're evangelizing, i just wish they were evangelizing the message of christ, not the tyranny of talmudic legalism.

Matthew 19:16 And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?
17 And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.
18 He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness,
19 Honour thy father and thy mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

Matthew 22:35 Then one of them, which was a lawyer, asked him a question, tempting him, and saying,
36 Master, which is the great commandment in the law?
37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
38 This is the first and great commandment.
39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

Romans 13:8 Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law.
9 For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
10 Love worketh no ill to his neighbour: therefore love is the fulfilling of the law.

[darin]

I'm glad they're evangelizing, i just wish they were evangelizing the message of christ, not the tyranny of talmudic legalism.

Matthew 19:16 And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?
17 And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.
18 He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness,
19 Honour thy father and thy mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

Matthew 22:35 Then one of them, which was a lawyer, asked him a question, tempting him, and saying,
36 Master, which is the great commandment in the law?
37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
38 This is the first and great commandment.
39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

Romans 13:8 Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law.
9 For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
10 Love worketh no ill to his neighbour: therefore love is the fulfilling of the law.

Those verses would be MUCH stronger if they were in proper english :)

[5stringJeff]

I'm glad they're evangelizing, i just wish they were evangelizing the message of christ, not the tyranny of talmudic legalism.

And I'm sure you have it on good authority that Christians are spreading the Good Word of Noahidism, right? :rolleyes:

[TheSage]

And I'm sure you have it on good authority that Christians are spreading the Good Word of Noahidism, right? :rolleyes:


I told you, on the christian side it's called dispensationalism (dispensational premillenialism) and christian zionism. Please keep up.

[darin]

I told you, on the christian side it's called dispensationalism (dispensational premillenialism) and christian zionism. Please keep up.

Yet you can't cite specific examples? Your fears are irrational, RWA. No church I've ever attended preached what you claim is 'widespread'.

[Nienna]

Dude. Im saying "your church". If your church doesn't teach this crap, then kindly tell me what they do say.

"Most churches" is a legitimate construct. I cannot name most churches. Can we start with yours? What does yours say? I don't attend an organized church, but I'm down with jesus. He was the ultimate rebel.

Jesus was NOT a rebel. Jesus' life was a masterpiece of submission.

[Nienna]

What will you do when when everyone starts telling you to just obey the noahide laws and forget about jesus, that the whole point of jesus was to bring the gentiles back to rabbi worship?

Read them the book of Romans.

[jillian]

Jesus was NOT a rebel. Jesus' life was a masterpiece of submission.

Jesus was a radical, actually. He took on the hierarchy of the religious structure of the day. Don't forget him turning over the money-lenders tables in front of the Temple.

[darin]

Jesus was a radical, actually. He took on the hierarchy of the religious structure of the day. Don't forget him turning over the money-lenders tables in front of the Temple.

That had nothing to do with the religious structure of the day; that was him getting pissed off at the greed of the church. Honestly, Christ came into the world to FULLFILL everything the Jewish church had stood for and prepared for. He wanted the Structure of the Church to do what it was set-up to do; bring people into a relationship with God.

[jillian]

That had nothing to do with the religious structure of the day; that was him getting pissed off at the greed of the church. Honestly, Christ came into the world to FULLFILL everything the Jewish church had stood for and prepared for. He wanted the Structure of the Church to do what it was set-up to do; bring people into a relationship with God.

No.. it had everything to do with him taking on the San Hedrin. And there was no Church then, Darin. There was only the Temple. Jews don't go to churches. I know the difference isn't a biggie to you, but trust me, I don't go to Church. :wink2:

On the subject of him wanting a pure Temple, absolutely. But he thought the San Hedrin was corrupting its purity. Being an Essene, he certainly wouldn't have approved of that.

[darin]

No.. it had everything to do with him taking on the San Hedrin. And there was no Church then, Darin. There was only the Temple. Jews don't go to churches. I know the difference isn't a biggie to you, but trust me, I don't go to Church. :wink2:

On the subject of him wanting a pure Temple, absolutely. But he thought the San Hedrin was corrupting its purity. Being an Essene, he certainly wouldn't have approved of that.


Okay - we'll play semantics. The Jewish Leadership - their rituals and history and practice of their faith was set up so Jesus would VALIDATE all that stuff. Jesus is the fullfillment of all they did; If they weren't corrupted by their sin, they may have saw it. :)

[jillian]

Okay - we'll play semantics. The Jewish Leadership - their rituals and history and practice of their faith was set up so Jesus would VALIDATE all that stuff. Jesus is the fullfillment of all they did; If they weren't corrupted by their sin, they may have saw it. :)

Depends on what one believes Jesus was, no? And it isn't semantics to me. Like I said, I understand that isn't something that would be an issue to you.

[darin]

Depends on what one believes Jesus was, no? And it isn't semantics to me. Like I said, I understand that isn't something that would be an issue to you.

No - who Jesus is and was does NOT depend on who people BELIEVE him to be. Jesus IS who he says he IS...period. it's an absolute truth. :)

[TheSage]

Yet you can't cite specific examples? Your fears are irrational, RWA. No church I've ever attended preached what you claim is 'widespread'.


It's widespread. Just talk to most people. Talk to avatar4321.

[TheSage]

Jesus was NOT a rebel. Jesus' life was a masterpiece of submission.

To god maybe, but not to the authority of the sanhedrin and the rabbis, as jillian pointed out. He did unacceptable things like commiserate with lowlifes and prostitutes, work on the sabbath, touch sick people, flip over the tables at the temple where they were commoditizing religion with the temple exchange system.

[Nienna]

Jesus was a radical, actually. He took on the hierarchy of the religious structure of the day. Don't forget him turning over the money-lenders tables in front of the Temple.

LOL! I wasn't talking about submission to PEOPLE. :) His goal was not to defeat the religious hierarchy, or ANY governing body ("Give unto Caesar"). He did occasionally point out the hypocrisy, power-lust, and self-serving attitudes of the Jewish establishment of the day. However, besides the whole thing about dying in payment for our sins, he came as an example to us of one who submitted his own will COMPLETELY to the will of God the Father.

[Nienna]

To god maybe, but not to the authority of the sanhedrin and the rabbis, as jillian pointed out. He did unacceptable things like commiserate with lowlifes and prostitutes, work on the sabbath, touch sick people, flip over the tables at the temple where they were commoditizing religion with the temple exchange system.

The WHOLE point of the Christian life is that Jesus did not do these things in rebellion. He did EVERYTHING in his life in obedience to the will of the Father. Christians are NOT called to rebellion; they are called to absolute obedience to God. God may use His people to criticize or punish those who go against Him. If Christians fight, we had better make good and sure it is GOD'S battle we are fighting, not our own agenda. We are to do nothing out of selfish ambition, but, in humility, consider others as better than ourselves, to love our enemies, and pray for those who curse us.

[jillian]

LOL! I wasn't talking about submission to PEOPLE. :) His goal was not to defeat the religious hierarchy, or ANY governing body ("Give unto Caesar"). He did occasionally point out the hypocrisy, power-lust, and self-serving attitudes of the Jewish establishment of the day. However, besides the whole thing about dying in payment for our sins, he came as an example to us of one who submitted his own will COMPLETELY to the will of God the Father.

As opposed to Abraham? :)

And, you'll forgive me, I obviously don't believe the whole dying for our sins thing. But his teachings were wonderful. Just a shame when they're misused.

[Nienna]

As opposed to Abraham? :)

And, you'll forgive me, I obviously don't believe the whole dying for our sins thing. But his teachings were wonderful. Just a shame when they're misused.

You are of course, entitled to your beliefs. Abraham did not submit his ENTIRE will to God, although he did a pretty darned good job. Isaac? I don't think I would have passed that test! :eek2:

[jillian]

You are of course, entitled to your beliefs. Abraham did not submit his ENTIRE will to God, although he did a pretty darned good job. Isaac? I don't think I would have passed that test! :eek2:


Don't know that I'd have passed that test either. :)

Truth is, the old and new testament are both filled with illustrations of people's submission to G-d's will and the rewards gained for that submission. They are also full of examples of disobedience and the punishment received by the wrongdoer for that disobedience. That's the whole point... to teach people to live a certain way.

[Nienna]

Don't know that I'd have passed that test either. :)

Truth is, the old and new testament are both filled with illustrations of people's submission to G-d's will and the rewards gained for that submission. They are also full of examples of disobedience and the punishment received by the wrongdoer for that disobedience. That's the whole point... to teach people to live a certain way.

Yep, that's pretty true. :)

[darin]

As opposed to Abraham? :)

And, you'll forgive me, I obviously don't believe the whole dying for our sins thing. But his teachings were wonderful. Just a shame when they're misused.


Why would you think wonderful the teachings of somebody you consider a liar? Either Christ was who he said he was/is...or he's a liar. (shrug).

[TheSage]

The WHOLE point of the Christian life is that Jesus did not do these things in rebellion. He did EVERYTHING in his life in obedience to the will of the Father. Christians are NOT called to rebellion; they are called to absolute obedience to God. God may use His people to criticize or punish those who go against Him. If Christians fight, we had better make good and sure it is GOD'S battle we are fighting, not our own agenda. We are to do nothing out of selfish ambition, but, in humility, consider others as better than ourselves, to love our enemies, and pray for those who curse us.


He rebelled against the men holding themselves up as THE only allowed interpreters of god. It's Submission to god but rebellion against people who pretend to be god's only authority, and who abuse that authority. Christians are called to rebellion against evil. I know it's hard for you to take a stand against things, but it wasn't so for jesus.

[jillian]

No - who Jesus is and was does NOT depend on who people BELIEVE him to be. Jesus IS who he says he IS...period. it's an absolute truth. :)

No. It's what you believe... and your faith is a good thing if it brings you comfort and peace. It's your expectation that everyone else should believe it that's kinda hinky.

[TheSage]

No. It's what you believe... and your faith is a good thing if it brings you comfort and peace. It's your expectation that everyone else should believe it that's kinda hinky.

So how about this stuff about how all people are noahides and must be forcibly brought under the noahide laws? Is that right or wrong?

[jillian]

So how about this stuff about how all people are noahides and must be forcibly brought under the noahide laws? Is that right or wrong?

Wouldn't know about that Jason. It's in your mind along with the widdle teeny men who live in your head and tell you all the things the weally, weally bad people do. ;)

[TheSage]

Wouldn't know about that Jason. It's in your mind along with the widdle teeny men who live in your head and tell you all the things the weally, weally bad people do. ;)

No jillian. It's true. For arguments sake, if there were people who believed everyone who worshipped a different god or many gods should be beheaded, would you approve?



http://www.cephas-library.com/nwo/nwo_noachide_judge_and_courts_will_replace_ours.ht ml
Noachide Judges and Courts will Replace the
Existing Court System of Each Country



[Upon seizing the reins of government, the new Noachide leaders will move quickly to implement a full agenda of reform. ... Full support will be given to Israeli forces to reinvade PLO-controlled areas, with military assistance offered where necessary. Jewish courts ... will be granted full legal sovereignty over Jewish citizens within each country, who will no longer be subject to the authority of gentile courts.

The pre-existing Noachide judges and courts will replace the existing court system of each country, and the legal code will be drastically rewritten to conform to halacha.... .... And law and order will be fully restored through the establishment of internal security measures, again in accordance with Torah law. — Committee for Israeli Victory]

[Nienna]

He rebelled against the men holding themselves up as THE only allowed interpreters of god. It's Submission to god but rebellion against people who pretend to be god's only authority, and who abuse that authority. Christians are called to rebellion against evil. I know it's hard for you to take a stand against things, but it wasn't so for jesus.

Not true, Jason. I am taking a stand right now... against YOU! :D

I guess I just see it this way: Jesus had GOD'S authority. In order to rebel, one must oppose an entity which has power over one. Jesus was not rebelling against the Jewish leaders; he was disciplining them. The Jewish leaders were subject to HIM, because He had God's authority. In the same way, I cannot rebel against my children. I can oppose them, discipline them, but this is not rebellion, because I have authority over them.

Jesus was not a rebel.

[TheSage]

Not true, Jason. I am taking a stand right now... against YOU! :D

I guess I just see it as this way: Jesus had GOD'S authority. In order to rebel, one must oppose an entity which has power over one. Jesus was not rebelling against the Jewish leaders; he was disciplining them. The Jewish leaders were subject to HIM, because He had God's authority. In the same way, I cannot rebel against my children. I can oppose them, discipline them, but this is not rebellion, because I have authority over them.

Jesus was not a rebel.

If you buy your own sloppy word games, so be it. He rebelled against men who claimed to have authority, but was still submissive to god. If you cannot differentiate between man and god, that's your problem.

[Nienna]

If you buy your own sloppy word games, so be it. He rebelled against men who claimed to have authority, but was still submissive to god. If you cannot differentiate between man and god, that's your problem.

It isn't a word game. Jesus did not come to institute rebellion.

But he DID come to die for EVERYONE'S sins, including the Jews'.

[TheSage]

It isn't a word game. Jesus did not come to institute rebellion.

But he DID come to die for EVERYONE'S sins, including the Jews'.


It is a word game. he was a rebel. He rebelled against the rabbis of his day. And he preached rebellion against perversion of god's word. Why are you so hung up on denying this obvious truth?

[Nienna]

It is a word game. he was a rebel. He rebelled against the rabbis of his day. And he preached rebellion against perversion of god's word. Why are you so hung up on denying this obvious truth?

Why are you so hung up on FIGHTING? I am AGREEING with the main point of your thread? :(

[darin]

Why are you so hung up on FIGHTING? :(


I feel he's MUCH more concerned with BEING RIGHT than he is with The Truth.

[TheSage]

Why are you so hung up on FIGHTING? I am AGREEING with the main point of your thread? :(


Are you? Are you asking me what you're in agreement with?

Jesus definitely rebelled againt the pharisees of his day. That's kind of the main narrative element of chrisitianity. He was not a good little jew, he was a rebel.

One can rebel against some things, yet submit to others.

It takes two to tango, by the way.

[TheSage]

I feel he's MUCH more concerned with BEING RIGHT than he is with The Truth.
What's the Truth that you're referring to here? Jews are our spiritual masters? You can believe that, but that's not christ's teaching.

[darin]

What's the Truth that you're referring to here? Jews are our spiritual masters? You can believe that, but that's not christ's teaching.

The truth is - VERY FEW people are preaching what you're afraid of. I've NEVER been to a church - and I've been to probably over 100 in my life - who taught what you consider to be 'widespread'. The truth is, the conspiracy you LIVE to promote probably does NOT exist, except in the minds of people who WANT it to exist for the sheer DRAMA of it.

I believe people create conspiracy theories to make themselves feel better - ellite...because they become somehow 'special' - chosen? one of the FEW who "know what's going on"

[Nienna]

Are you? Are you asking me what you're in agreement with?

What I inferred was that you are trying to a) make people aware of the philosophy of dispensationalism, and b) claim that it is a false teaching. If I was wrong about your points, I really do apologize. I am in full agreement with the two above points.


Jesus definitely rebelled againt the pharisees of his day. That's kind of the main narrative element of chrisitianity. He was not a good little jew, he was a rebel.

One can rebel against some things, yet submit to others. Jesus was a VERY good Jew. He fulfilled all the requirements of Jewish law. He made sacrifices, went to Temple, observed feast days. But, when he came, he came to show that people can follow rules and still be in love with their OWN authority (Pharisees). Thus following Jewish law becomes a way of promoting the SELF, instead of living in obedience to God. This was what Jesus put down, the self-serving, praise-loving attitudes of those who thought too well of themselves and too little of God's sovereignty.

THIS is the main element of Christianity: the surrender of OUR wills to God. All the stories, the battles, the passionate words... they ALL point to living in obedience to Abba.

One can only rebel against something if one accepts that entity's authority. A Christian only accepts the authority placed over him by God. If a Christian opposes a governing entity, it is done without reference to SELF. It is done because God wills him to do a job. A person cannot live in the Spirit if he is filled with rebellion.


It takes two to tango, by the way.
Jason.... :(

[TheSage]

Jesus was a VERY good Jew. He fulfilled all the requirements of Jewish law.


No he wasn't. No he didn't. He was constantly saying how the laws they had created had perverted the intentions of god.



http://www.thestoryofjesus.com/part6_76.html

76. Scribes Criticize Jesus

Jesus returned to Galilee where he continued his ministry. But he did not return to Judea because the Jews were determined to kill him.

A group of Pharisees came from Jerusalem and joined some scribes. They began to question Jesus. They had seen some of Jesus’ disciples eat their food with unwashed hands. They considered this a defilement and rebellion against the tradition of the elders.

The Pharisees and the scribes asked Jesus:

Why don’t your disciples follow the traditions of the elders?

Jesus told them:

Why do you disobey the commandment of God? Because of your traditions? You hypocrites. The prophet Isaiah was right about you when he said:

This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me.

They worship me in vain, teaching instead the precepts and principles of men.

You push away the commandments of God and hold fast the traditions of men. You would rather obey man than obey God.

For God, through Moses, said:

Honor your father and your mother, let anyone who speaks evil of his father or mother be put to death.

But you have undone the clear intention of Gods law with your own traditions.

You refuse to support your parents in their old age by calling the money that should be used for your parents a special gift to God.

That allows you to keep the gift for yourself instead of using it to support your parents.

In this way you insult God and create a tradition that undoes God’s purpose that you should support your parents in their old age.

This is just one example of the ways you subvert the true intentions of God’s commands with your own traditions.

Jesus called the crowds of people to him.

Jesus said to them:

It is not what goes into a man’s mouth that corrupts or defiles him, it is what comes out of his mouth that corrupts and defiles.

Jesus then entered into the home where he was staying. His disciples came to him and said:

Did you know that you greatly offended the Pharisees by what you said?

Jesus said:

Every plant that my heavenly Father has not planted will be rooted up. Leave the Pharisees alone; they are blind guides. The blind guides and the blind who they lead will both fall into a pit.

Peter said to Jesus:

Tell us the meaning of what you said to the Pharisees.

Jesus said:

You don’t understand that it is not the outside things that defile a man but the things that are in his heart.

If a man eats meat, it goes into his stomach and through his digestive system and is then flushed out of his system. It does not go through the heart of a man.











He made sacrifices, went to Temple, observed feast days. But, when he came, he came to show that people can follow rules and still be in love with their OWN authority (Pharisees). Thus following Jewish law becomes a way of promoting the SELF, instead of living in obedience to God.



This was what Jesus put down, the self-serving, praise-loving attitudes of those who thought too well of themselves and too little of God's sovereignty.



This "putting down " of the jewish law because it's self promoting is what I'm calling rebellion. It was a serious rebellion in the society of that time. The pharisees considered it rebellion. It was rebellion. If you can't admit it, that's fine. You're only hindering your own perception of reality.



THIS is the main element of Christianity: the surrender of OUR wills to God.

I also think we should remain vigilant and stand against the very same self serving laws jesus stood against is his day, The Jewish laws.



All the stories, the battles, the passionate words... they ALL point to living in obedience to Abba.

Dancing queen?



One can only rebel against something if one accepts that entity's authority.

Some consider that non acceptance of the entity's authority to be rebellion. Again, you're just playing word games.


A Christian only accepts the authority placed over him by God. If a Christian opposes a governing entity, it is done without reference to SELF.

What do you mean? Can he not say "I choose to follow god, and not the self serving rules of men"? That's exactly what jesus did. Is he a bad example?



It is done because God wills him to do a job. A person cannot live in the Spirit if he is filled with rebellion.



I disagree. Sometimes the spirit is WHY people rebel against illegitimate authorities.




Jason.... :(
Don't sadface me. Be an adult. You're fighting too, and poorly.

[TheSage]

http://www.sullivan-county.com/news/mine/jesus.htm
To Jewish leaders, Jesus was a troublemaker, a subversive who was undermining respect for the Sabbath and religious rites, an arrogant man who claimed that he above all other men was favored by God, another in a long line of messiahs who had been condemned and executed. To the Romans who ruled Palestine, Jesus was a political agitator who could ignite Jewish messianic expectations into a revolt against Rome. (It is likely that several of Jesus' early followers were Zealots, and the Romans may have viewed Jesus as a Zealot leader.) After Jewish leaders turned Jesus over to the Roman authorities, the Roman procurator, Pontius Pilate, sentenced him to death by crucifixion.

...
Missionaries of this dissenting Christian movement within Judaism were called Apostles-those sent out to preach the gospel, or good news, about Christ. They addressed themselves to Jews and to converts to Judaism who, because they did not adhere fully to Mosaic Law, were not wholly accepted by the Jewish community. Before Christianity could realize the universal implications of Jesus' teachings and become a world religion, as distinct from a Jewish sect, it had to extricate itself from Jewish ritual, politics, and culture.
....



Don't get pulled back in.

[Nienna]

No he wasn't. No he didn't. He was constantly saying how the laws they had created had perverted the intentions of god. Are you saying he did not observe the feast days, get circumcised, make sacrifices, etc? He obeyed the laws, until GOD told him to do otherwise. He did nothing on his own authority.

The reason that the Law perverted God's intentions was that it put something between Him and man. Thus man felt he didn't need to look to God, depend on God, be grateful to God, as long as he obeyed the rules. The rules in themselves weren't necessarily bad. It was the people who had become perverted because they ONLY followed the rules, and no longer sought to make sure that the rules were in accordance with God's will.


This "putting down " of the jewish law because it's self promoting is what I'm calling rebellion. It was a serious rebellion in the society of that time. The pharisees considered it rebellion. It was rebellion. If you can't admit it, that's fine. You're only hindering your own perception of reality.

But JESUS was not in rebellion. The PHARISEES were in rebellion. It was they who had perverted God's intentions. The Jewish leaders of the time considered it to be rebellion because they considered themselves to be the authorities. Yet, they couldn't even see that they were the ones in rebellion, and Jesus was the one who remained faithful.


You don’t understand that it is not the outside things that defile a man but the things that are in his heart.

This is exactly what I meant. The Jewish leaders were grasping for power in their hearts. They wanted to subvert obedience to God in favor of their OWN set of rules. In contrast, there was no rebellion in Jesus' heart. He came only to do the will of the One who sent him, and he succeeded. He did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, but took the form of a slave. That is NOT rebellion. He held onto none of his rights, took no power for himself, not even power or rights that he DESERVED. There was NO rebellion in Jesus.

This is NOT a minor point, and I am not simply quibbling over words. Unless God builds the house, he labors in vain who builds the house. Unless the battle is God's battle, it is useless, and perhaps even detrimental to fight.


I also think we should remain vigilant and stand against the very same self serving laws jesus stood against is his day, The Jewish laws.

We can certainly work to make sure that no Talmudic government is set up over us.


Dancing queen?
lol! I never got into that band.


Some consider that non acceptance of the entity's authority to be rebellion. Again, you're just playing word games. I am not concerned with what some consider. There is a chain of authority, instituted by God. If, for instance, my husband counteracts God's way, I am not longer bound by my husband's authority, because he is in rebellion against the higher authority. My opposition to his rebellion is not rebellion, itself.


What do you mean? Can he not say "I choose to follow god, and not the self serving rules of men"? That's exactly what jesus did. Is he a bad example? What I mean is that I am not choosing this path on my OWN authority, but out of obedience to God. I do not oppose "self-serving rules"; those rules are in opposition to me, because I am in Christ. I do not rebel.


I disagree. Sometimes the spirit is WHY people rebel against illegitimate authorities.

There is a time to fight, a time to stand in opposition to some earthly authorities. But again, these actions are done out of obedience, not out of rebellion, because "Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, he who rebels against authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment upon themselves." (Romans 13:1-2) God may use His people as tools to bring down ungodly authorities, but we are to act with respect, not in rebellion and with disdain for those who are in power over us.

You have to believe me on this... I have walked this line for YEARS.


Don't sadface me. Be an adult. You're fighting too, and poorly.
I am disagreeing with you on this point, but I bear you no ill will.

[TheSage]

Are you saying he did not observe the feast days, get circumcised, make sacrifices, etc? He obeyed the laws, until GOD told him to do otherwise. He did nothing on his own authority.

He obeyed some of the laws, but he also REBELLED against some, and that was considered REBELLIOUS as one might imagine, considering the religious laws at that time were not considered a "pick and choose" situation.



The reason that the Law perverted God's intentions was that it put something between Him and man. Thus man felt he didn't need to look to God, depend on God, be grateful to God, as long as he obeyed the rules. The rules in themselves weren't necessarily bad.

No. THe rules themselves were bad. They fostered elitism and guaranteed the perpetuation of an elite class.


It was the people who had become perverted because they ONLY followed the rules, and no longer sought to make sure that the rules were in accordance with God's will.



But JESUS was not in rebellion. The PHARISEES were in rebellion.

It really depends on your point of view, but I understand what you mean. You're still just playing word games.




It was they who had perverted God's intentions. The Jewish leaders of the time considered it to be rebellion because they considered themselves to be the authorities. Yet, they couldn't even see that they were the ones in rebellion, and Jesus was the one who remained faithful.



This is exactly what I meant. The Jewish leaders were grasping for power in their hearts. They wanted to subvert obedience to God in favor of their OWN set of rules. In contrast, there was no rebellion in Jesus' heart. He came only to do the will of the One who sent him, and he succeeded. He did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, but took the form of a slave. That is NOT rebellion. He held onto none of his rights, took no power for himself, not even power or rights that he DESERVED. There was NO rebellion in Jesus.

This is NOT a minor point, and I am not simply quibbling over words. Unless God builds the house, he labors in vain who builds the house. Unless the battle is God's battle, it is useless, and perhaps even detrimental to fight.



We can certainly work to make sure that no Talmudic government is set up over us.


lol! I never got into that band.

I am not concerned with what some consider. There is a chain of authority, instituted by God. If, for instance, my husband counteracts God's way, I am not longer bound by my husband's authority, because he is in rebellion against the higher authority. My opposition to his rebellion is not rebellion, itself.

Nice word games. But jesus was still in rebellion against the pharisees, even if you will not allow yourself to use the word, which is descriptive and accurate.



What I mean is that I am not choosing this path on my OWN authority, but out of obedience to God. I do not oppose "self-serving rules"; those rules are in opposition to me, because I am in Christ. I do not rebel.


I believe it's fair to say you're in rebellion against the self serving rules. That word describes the situation.



There is a time to fight, a time to stand in opposition to some earthly authorities. But again, these actions are done out of obedience, not out of rebellion, because "Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, he who rebels against authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment upon themselves." (Romans 13:1-2) God may use His people as tools to bring down ungodly authorities, but we are to act with respect, not in rebellion and with disdain for those who are in power over us.

You have to believe me on this... I have walked this line for YEARS.

I just think you're being stubborn.

I don't know why you have a hangup about using the right words for things, but I am glad you're against a talmud based theocracy.

[Nienna]

He obeyed some of the laws, but he also REBELLED against some, and that was considered REBELLIOUS as one might imagine, considering the religious laws at that time were not considered a "pick and choose" situation.
Please give an example of a law against which Jesus rebelled.


It really depends on your point of view, but I understand what you mean. You're still just playing word games
No, it doesn't depend on any PERSON'S point of view. GOD establishes authority, and allows authorities their power.

Nice word games. But jesus was still in rebellion against the pharisees, even if you will not allow yourself to use the word, which is descriptive and accurate.
I used the word 14 times just in the last post.


I just think you're being stubborn.
I HAVE been accused of that before. :D


I don't know why you have a hangup about using the right words for things, but I am glad you're against a talmud based theocracy.
:shaking head: LOL!

[TheSage]

Jesus taught that the entire "tradition of the elders" or Oral law, what became the talmud basically, is entirely unnecessary. This was in direct rebllion against the Pharisee temple power structure of the time.

Rebel. Rebellion. Rebellious. Reba.

[Nienna]

Jesus taught that the entire "tradition of the elders" or Oral law, what became the talmud basically, is entirely unnecessary. This was in direct rebllion against the Pharisee temple power structure of the time.
"I have not come to abolish the Law, but to fulfill it." No rebellion.


Rebel. Rebellion. Rebellious.
love joy peace patience kindness goodness gentleness faithfulness self-control


Reba.
one of the Midianite chiefs slain by the Israelites in the wilderness... now HE was a rebel. :)

[TheSage]

"I have not come to abolish the Law, but to fulfill it." No rebellion.


love joy peace patience kindness goodness gentleness faithfulness self-control


one of the Midianite chiefs slain by the Israelites in the wilderness... now HE was a rebel. :)



Yes rebellion, against what he did not consider necessary law, the oral law or traditions of the elders. He openly violated these. He openly violated certain cleanliness laws. And he introduced the notion of breaking the law if the situation warranted it according to one's own personal jugement, which was not the prevailing view of the pharisees who were much more strict.

[Nienna]

Yes rebellion, against what he did not consider necessary law, the oral law or traditions of the elders. He openly violated these. He openly violated certain cleanliness laws. And he introduced the notion of breaking the law if the situation warranted it according to one's own personal jugement, which was not the prevailing view of the pharisees who were much more strict.

That's the part that's wrong.

[TheSage]

That's the part that's wrong.
SO jesus was wrong? Jesus believed in using an element of reason to determine if the true INTENTION was to evil or not, instead of mindlessly following the letter of the law. Of course, elite priesthood types don't like people to think for themselves in any cirucumstance. They like mindless followers. The pharisees were such people, and jesus rebelled against the notion of them as unquestioned authority figues.

[Nienna]

SO jesus was wrong? Jesus believed in using an element of reason to determine if the true INTENTION was to evil or not, instead of mindlessly following the letter of the law. Of course, elite priesthood types don't like people to think for themselves in any cirucumstance. They like mindless followers. The pharisees were such people, and jesus rebelled against the notion of them as unquestioned authority figues.

Jesus wasn't wrong, but he didn't use his own authority to decide whether or not he was going to obey the letter of the Law at the time.

[TheSage]

Jesus wasn't wrong, but he didn't use his own authority to decide whether or not he was going to obey the letter of the Law at the time.


Yes. He used his reason to evaluate whether what the pharisees were saying (oral or rabbinic tradition as we know it today) was really in accordance with the tanach or old testament. He rejected these teachings. It was considered (and was in actuality) a rebellion.

[Nienna]

Yes. He used his reason to evaluate whether what the pharisees were saying (oral or rabbinic tradition as we know it today) was really in accordance with the tanach or old testament. He rejected these teachings. It was considered (and was in actuality) a rebellion.

Uncle.

[TheSage]

Other stuff on mosaic vs. new covenant. Good essay here.





http://www.davesexegesis.com/category/biblical-theology/

In Galatians 3-4, Paul focuses on the purpose of the Mosaic Covenant in light of the New Covenant. He is trying to remind the Galatians very forcefully that no one will be justified by the works of the Law (3:11). In other words, no one can please God escatologically by trying to execute their duties as prescribed by the Law of Moses. The reasons for this are because no one is truly able to execute this covenant so we are cursed in trying to do so (3:10), and the purpose of the Law was to make transgression fully visible and never to offer eternal life (3:18-19). This covenant came to bring us into slavery and imprisonment so that we could be rescued by Christ (vs.23-24). So Paul is setting up two different covenantal strands that find their culmination in the allegory of Hagar and Sarah in 4:21-31. Hagar corresponds to the slavery that exists under the Mosaic Law and is demonstrated in the contemporary Judaism that is visible in Jerusalem (vs.25). Sarah corresponds to the freedom that exists under the New Covenant and is demonstrated in the promises God offers His people in the New (spiritual) Jerusalem (vs.26-28). So the Mosaic Covenant existed to serve as a physical template that would anticipate the spiritual realities to come in the new age that has been inaugurated in the death and resurrection of Christ. Thus, in order to partake of this inaugurated Covenant, we need to believe in what Christ accomplished on our behalf and so cast out the “slave woman” (the Mosaic Covenant) (vs.29-31).

In light of these passages, I think it is evident that the Mosaic/Old Covenant was an external code which does and can only demand. God designed it this way in order to magnify sin in Israel, as Israel is simply Adam on a corporate/national scale (Hosea 6:7). Neither Adam nor Israel could ever have kept, executed, or complied to the Law given to them. Even if they could have, there was no promise for eternal life. It wasn’t the function of the Law given to them. But, both Adam and Israel’s failure have become the canvas for God to promise grace in the death of Jesus. The death of Jesus ratified the New Covenant which does and can only promise eternal life. In the New Covenant there is no code to keep or demand upon us, but the promise of life in Christ itself produces faith in us which will result in us keeping the law of God/Christ, which is essentially loving God and loving our neighbors.

Categories: Biblical Theology, Theology

[5stringJeff]

It's widespread. Just talk to most people. Talk to avatar4321.

If it's widespread, why are all the Christians on this thread telling you it's not?

BTW, Avatar is LDS, which is fundamentally different from Christianity.

[TheSage]

If it's widespread, why are all the Christians on this thread telling you it's not?

BTW, Avatar is LDS, which is fundamentally different from Christianity.


Because they're in denial.

[5stringJeff]

Because they're in denial.

Or you just don't know what the hell you're talking about.

[TheSage]

Or you just don't know what the hell you're talking about.

Or maybe you don't. Did you think of that Jeffy von jeffjeff-a-mundo?

[5stringJeff]

Or maybe you don't. Did you think of that Jeffy von jeffjeff-a-mundo?

I hate to sound arrogant, but seeing as how I've been to a couple dozens churches in my life and study theology, I think I probably have a bit more of a grasp of modern Christian thought than you.

[TheSage]

I hate to sound arrogant, but seeing as how I've been to a couple dozens churches in my life and study theology, I think I probably have a bit more of a grasp of modern Christian thought than you.

WHat are you? Bingo champ?

[eighballsidepocket]

Not all Christians see Jesus as divine.

Nate: Specifically to be a Christian is to accept Jesus and his Apostles teachings found in the New Testament. Christian or "Christ One".

Anyway, throughout the N.T. the divinity of Jesus is a "given", supported by myriads of scripture verses.

The very definition of being a Christian is to accept all that Christ is, and all that Christ is, is contained in the bible.

To accept that Christ is not devine is to place ones'self in the category of, "non Christian".

Simply a duck is a duck. Put a chicken suit on a duck and you still have a duck. There's some unchangeable things in life. Christianity is wholly based upon the bible. Any Jesus belief based on anything other than the bible is not Christianity, yet calling itself Christianity defines it as a cult, or possible a Christian cult........

Some Christian cults are:

1. Mormonism
2. Apostles of Christ churches
3. Unitarian Churches
4. Unity Village

Some non-Christian cults are:

1. Scientology
2. Watch Tower/Jehovah's Witnesses
3. Bahai'
.........