• Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.

1 corinthians 9:19-23

Correct. Good point, generally ignored by many. Those commands that are specific to "in the land" are easy to identify; He is clear. (Some of us, who point out that both "whoring wives" are in exile 'for cause' are also promised that we will eventually be 'regathered' and return to His land...will "cross that bridge" when we get back there.)
Jacob/Israel prophesied about the regathering. It is to Him (Shiloh) not to a place. How do you reconcile your belief in a return to that land when their continued possession of it was conditional and they did NOT keep the conditions? Yeshua's blood sealed their judgment promised in Jer. 7 a chapter He quoted from cleansing the temple. His final lamentation over Jerusalem was "Your house is left unto you desolate" and that was what YHWH said He would do. Did he ever return to Shiloh after He made it desolate?
 
The Hebrews, before the cross, were required to keep the law of Moses, but now no one is. There is nothing in this chapter that commands gentiles or Hebrews to keep the feasts, or Shabbat, or to be circumcised or to eat ceremonially clean foods. If you continue reading on to the end of the epistle it becomes more obvious that these things are not required. I won’t post the whole thing here, but this passage should clarify it.

14 “I know and am persuaded in the Lord Jesus that nothing is unclean in itself, but it is unclean for anyone who thinks it unclean. 15 For if your brother is grieved by what you eat, you are no longer walking in love. By what you eat, do not destroy the one for whom Christ died. 16 So do not let what you regard as good be spoken of as evil. 17 For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking but of righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit.” Romans 14:14-17 | ESV

In those last chapters Paul tells us what things are pleasing to God and those things all have to do with walking in love towards one another, not food or drink or shabbats or any of those things.
For my understanding about why the cross did not remove the old covenant but renewed it. This post sums up my argument for the renewed covenant.
I've seen a lot of discussion of Old vs. New covenants, but feel like RENEWED covenant is not really referenced at all.

The terms New Testament or New Covenant are used in the Testimony of Yeshua portion of the English Bible in exactly nine places (Matt 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20; 1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6; Heb 8:8, 13; 9:15; 12:24), (With most of the Hebrews verses being italicized and added for translation rather than being in the original texts.)

In the Testimony of Yeshua, there are two Greek words for new: neos and kainos, and each one has a different connotation. Neos more often means “brand new or numerically new,” while kainos means “renewed, refreshed or repaired or qualitatively new.” When you see the term New Covenant or New Testament used, in eight of nine time the authors use kainos. Only in Hebrews 12:24 is neos used in reference to the new covenant.
The Testimony of Yeshua’s preference over using the Greek word for renewed over the word (brand) new is exactly consistent with the author of the Epistle to the Hebrew’s usage of the word in Hebrews 8:8, The author is here quoting directly from Jeremiah 31:31.

Based on this linguistic evidence it seems that the terms new testament or new covenant should be more accurately translated as renewed covenant instead of new (as in brand new) covenant. This was the preference of the apostolic writers, although, it can be clearly demonstrated from Hebrews 12:24 that the term new covenants is acceptable as well.

Thus the case would be made that the New Covenant renews the Old Covenant.
After all, the New Covenant is a separate and New Covenant. At the same time, it is a reworking or refreshing of the Old Covenant, but with two major additions: the blood of Yeshua to wash away the sins of his people once and for all, and the Set-Apart Spirit of Elohim who will write his laws on their hearts, so that they will not only want to obey them, but will have the internal spiritual power to do so.
In reality, Yeshua the Messiah is not really going to make a brand new covenant with his people when he returns to marry his spiritual wife, which is the spiritual body of believers of whom he is the head. Instead, he will repair or renew the former covenants (plural, see Eph 2:12) that ancient Israel broke and that many people are still breaking today by not keeping Yeshua’s Torah-commandments as they should (remember John 14:15?). After all, there was nothing wrong with the covenants themselves. The problem was with the people—they failed to be faithful to the terms of that covenant to which they agreed as Heb 8:8 states. Under the Renewed Covenant, the Abrahamic and Mosaic Covenants will be combined to make this new covenant or what the Bible also refers to as the Everlasting Covenant (Jer 32:40; Ezek 37:26) as well as the Covenant of Peace (Ezek 37:26).

The fault was with Israel (it wasn’t with YHVH or his Torah-laws—the terms of the covenant), since they failed to keep the terms of the covenant to which they agreed at Mount Sinai. What did Elohim require of them? Simply this: faith in him and obedience to his laws. YHVH Elohim married Israel the first time at Mount Sinai, when they said, “I do” to Elohim three times (Exod 19:8; 24:3, 7). However, they quickly broke their vows when they failed to remain faithful to Elohim and instead worshiped the golden calf (Exod 32 cp. Ezek 16:1–31).The renewed covenant that Jeremiah prophesied that Elohim would make with his people (Jer 31:31, 33) will still have the Torah-law as the terms of the agreement, but this time, YHVH will pour out his Set-Apart Spirit onto his people to soften their hard hearts and write his laws on their hearts. This time, they will want to obey his laws. With Yeshua, the Messiah, the Living Torah-word of Elohim, living in their hearts through the power of Elohim’s Spirit, this time they will be an obedient wife to YHVH instead of a rebellious one. This bride will be made up of both Jewish and non-Jewish believers in Yeshua the Messiah, which Scriptures refers to as “the one new man” (Eph 2:15) or as “the Israel of Elohim” (Gal 6:16).

In Ephesians 2:11–19, Paul talks about the Gentiles coming into a spiritual and covenantal relationship with the Elohim of Israel, becoming part of the nation of Israel, and being brought into a relationship with Elohim through the covenants (plural) of Israel. What were these covenants (plural)? This is the Torah Covenant, which can be subdivided into the Abrahamic and Mosaic (Sinaitic) Covenants, along with the New or Renewed Covenant, which the Tanakh refers to as the Everlasting Covenant (Jer 32:40; Ezek 37:26). The latter was prophesied about by Jeremiah, and came into reality during the time of Yeshua and the apostles. It is the New Covenant that is the spiritually renewed or refreshed Torah Covenant of old that becomes a reality in the lives of born-again, spiritually regenerated believers through a spiritual relationship with Yeshua, the Messiah of Israel. Paul makes this abundantly clear as he relates the Abrahamic Covenant subsection of the Torah Covenant to the salvation of the believer in his epistle to the Romans chapter four. Paul then references the Mosaic Covenant aspect of the Torah Covenant to the life of the believer when he clearly indicates that YHVH’s Torah-law is to be the standard of righteousness for the saints (see Rom 3:31; 7:12, 14, 22; 13:8–10; Act 24:14; 25:8 compare with John 14:15 and Matt 5:19).

So the New, Renewed Covenant is a both a new and separate covenant, yet at the same time, it is a renewed or refreshed form of the Torah Covenant made up of the Abrahamic and Mosaic Covenants. This time the covenant is sealed not with the blood of a sacrificed animal as was the case with the Mosaic Covenant (Exod 24:5–6), but with the blood of Yeshua who once and for all paid for man’s sins (Matt 26:27–28; Heb 9:26, 28; 10:10, 12).

Moreover, those who come to faith in Yeshua are promised the gift of the Set-Apart Spirit to live inside of them, to write YHVH’s laws on their hearts, and to empower them to be a faithful bride and eventual wife of Yeshua as they remain faithful and obedient to him and love him by keeping his Torah-commandments (John 14:12).

There can be arguments made whether this New Renewed covenant is fully in affect now, or if it will not fully be so until Yeshua returns. This new renewed covenant being like the Abrahamic covenant which had a delay in being promised and fulfilled completely. Furthermore, the original Mosaic Covenant was bilateral (had the approval of both parties) but the renewed covenant is mono-lateral (similar to Abrahamic). In other words, a Yahweh only Covenant, who freely offers the renewed Covenant to all that are willing to accept it and keep it, everyone under the same terms.
When it comes to Romans I am going to introduce perspective of who and what Paul was trying to address with his letter into context. The controversy that Paul was addressing by writing to the Romans was the topic of eating meat/food which had been sacrificed to idols. It was not an argument to nullify the rules for unclean and forbidden animals/foods. At that time food sacrificed to idols was often eaten without knowledge or purchased in the market without knowing. This caused those who were being overly cautious with their fences to eat only vegetables. Paul was making the point that food sacrificed to idols (as long as it was not unclean according to Torah) was clean to eat and should not be something to divide the believers.

As believers we need to focus first on what unites us. Belief in Yeshua as our Messiah. Faith by grace and not works which save us. I don't judge or condemn anyone for having different beliefs than I do on these things. As we each walk our own spiritual path we are led to do what we feel is pleasing to Yahweh more and more. We need to be united in our love for Him, and through Him each other.

I'm curious, since I believe you mentioned in a post earlier in the discussion Matthew 22: 37-40
37 Jesus said to him, “‘You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind.’ 38 This is the first and great commandment. 39 And the second is like it: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ 40 On these two commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets.”

What is your understanding of this passage? For me it means that the entire 10 commandments and all of Torah proceed from love of our Creator and through Him a love for our neighbor.
Since you believe the cross did away with the law/covenant with Moses do you believe the 10 commandments no longer need to be followed?
 
Since you believe the cross did away with the law/covenant with Moses do you believe the 10 commandments no longer need to be followed?
I don't wish to reply for @Asforme&myhouse, but I would point out the passage you quoted above, from Matthew 22:37-40, already answers your question. Romans 13:10 says the same thing; Love does no harm to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfillment of the law. If we wholeheartedly love God and love our neighbour we will fulfill all God's commandments.
 
Last edited:
I don't wish to reply for @Asforme&myhouse, but I would point out the passage you quoted above, from Matthew 22:37-40, already answers your question. Romans 13:10 says the same thing; Love does no harm to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfillment of the law. If we wholeheartedly love God and love our neighbour we will fulfill all God's commandments.
How does one love?

"If ye love me, keep my commandments" - John 14:15
 
Shabbat Shalom Love and Blessings beloved in MessiYAH

For the Son of man is Lord even of the sabbath day. — Matthew 12:8 KJV
Therefore the Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath. — Mark 2:28 KJV
And he said unto them, That the Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath. — Luke 6:5 KJV
 
And then on top of all that we have God, the Word made flesh violates the sabbath command. And leads his disciples to also violate Torah Laws.

Just for clarification, Jesus did not violate the law of Moses. He completely spurned the Tradition of the Elders, but that was a separate body of work that the pharisees held to be on the same level as Scripture. Jesus upholds a sola scriptura position. If He broke the law he wouldn’t have been the perfect sacrifice.

For my understanding about why the cross did not remove the old covenant but renewed it. This post sums up my argument for the renewed covenant.

The Sinai covenant was a temporary covenant, as Hebrews and Galatians tell us. If by renewed you are referring to the covenant God made with Abraham then yes, sort of, in a way, maybe. I think to state it more clearly, it is the fulfillment of God’s promise to Abraham to his seed (Christ).

What is your understanding of this passage? For me it means that the entire 10 commandments and all of Torah proceed from love of our Creator and through Him a love for our neighbor.
Since you believe the cross did away with the law/covenant with Moses do you believe the 10 commandments no longer need to be followed?

The law of Moses contains aspects of God’s perfect righteous nature. The 10 commandments are among those, and they are all carried over because of that. Shabbat in Israel was a type and foreshadow of the spiritual rest that believers in Messiah would have in Him. Now one esteems one day above the others and another man esteems them all the same, both do so unto the Lord because we are not under the law of Moses. For believers in Yeshua, He is our Sabbath rest. Hebrews compares Moses and Christ in this way in Hebrews 3:5-6

[5] “And Moses verily was faithful in all his house, as a servant, for a testimony of those things which were to be spoken after; [6] But Christ as a son over his own house; whose house are we, if we hold fast the confidence and the rejoicing of the hope firm unto the end.“

It shows and differentiates between the two covenants and shows that we are of the house of Christ if we hold fast the confidence and the rejoicing of the hope firm unto the end. Hebrews makes all kinds of comparisons in order to show us which covenant we are a part of.

To your comment about Romans, I don’t have time to address that right at the moment, but I will as soon as I get the chance. Shalom
 
Shabbat Shalom Love and Blessings beloved in MessiYAH

For the Son of man is Lord even of the sabbath day. — Matthew 12:8 KJV
Therefore the Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath. — Mark 2:28 KJV
And he said unto them, That the Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath. — Luke 6:5 KJV
How does one love?

"If ye love me, keep my commandments" - John 14:15

And yet, if you use the Gregorian calendar to mark your Sabbaths, you have been missing almost all of them. No, this is not about Sunday vs. Saturday. Do you really want to follow the Torah to the letter? Then burn your house down if you find mildew in it. Take your child outside the city and stone him to death for dishonoring you. I mean, it's keeping His commandments, and that is love, right? That's what y'all have devolved into saying here. Don't just talk the talk. Go to your boss and tell him you will need time off to observe the real Sabbath. If you have love, that is. Don't tell me you're another cherry-picking Torah keeper.

Surely the truth would set you free. But as it is, you want to proclaim to be bound while also being free. You remind me of kinksters with their bondage play. I think you guys get off to the Torah. You get some carnal rush from observing certain parts, but inwardly you know it's just pretend and you can quit at any point you like with your safeword. You don't have to actually keep the whole thing, but you pride yourself on drawing YOUR line deeper into the pain than someone else, and they are a detestable xtian.

*edit: This is a sarcastic response and way over the top to show you how ridiculous you are sounding. I, too, believe there is good in following the Law. There are blessings inherently built in. You have been set free, and so you may pick and choose as you and everyone in this forum has been doing their whole lives. Just quit pretending you actually know what you are doing or are keeping anything on the whole. That is laughable.
 
Last edited:
Since you believe the cross did away with the law/covenant with Moses do you believe the 10 commandments no longer need to be followed?
That is, in fact, taught by "many" denominations of the 'Whore Church STILL in Exile for Cause':
(your numbering may vary, BUT...)
- idols, like images of You-Know-Who on a stick are NOT forbidden as "graven images," but those, and others, can be made part of a 'shrine', because "new covenant trumps His Olde one." And they have 'apostolic authority' to rewrite what He got wrong to begin with anyway. Like His Sabbaths. (oh, yeah - that's another.)

I've even heard the asinine twisting that the only parts of the Ten that still matter are those that got specifically RE-ITERATED in the Replaced Testament.

And let's not forget, "adultery" no longer means what IT did back in Old days, too. NOW it's the act of a man even TAKING another wife. Because, after all, who "licenses" that anyway? (Which is why "fornication" is a New Law. It didn't exist before the 'Church' ADDED it.)

Which makes this a good place to point out what I, and others who observe His Instruction, have pointed out elsewhere: Matthew 5:27-28, "as twisted." Yahushua wasn't ADDING TO His own Word, as the 'done-away-with' claim, but CLARIFYING what He Wrote, "with Authority." (Matthew 7:29)

Here, even the "words in red" get twisted by poor translation reflecting bogus doctrine:
"Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery:
But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart." (KJV)


He is NOT "adding to" His own Word, or "raising the bar," He is teaching "as Written." Anyone here should be able to spot the fallacies (multiple!) by now:
The Hebrew word isha can and is CONFLATED by translation, and must be understood in context. While "woman" is OK sometimes, the word is "WIFE" when the context is adultery! (As any 'tzadik,' or student of His Instruction would know.)

And what about others? He is clearly referring to the commandment not to "covet" a neighbor's isha. IF the translators had put the same word in there as used in THAT commandment, no one would be able to claim He was "doing away with" His own Word.

There are more "twistings of the Ten," too. All you have to do is apply the simple razor that He Wrote 'em, and He taught 'em.
 
Quick Crock Debunk Time:
And yet, if you use the Gregorian calendar to mark your Sabbaths, you have been missing almost all of them. No, this is not about Sunday vs. Saturday.
Most of us who study Scripture as Written figured THAT out long ago. The "day" begins at sundown. (thus, we know, for example, that He was put in the tomb on a "Wednesday", not "good friday," etc.) And while the RCC may have hidden some aspects of the calendar He actually kept (so there is argument) - it's clear it wasn't pope Gregory's. VOLUMES can be written on this one.

Do you really want to follow the Torah to the letter? Then burn your house down if you find mildew in it.
Ask someone who lives in the south, especially after a hurricane, what they do if Black Mildew shows up. Well, that or die horribly...

Take your child outside the city and stone him to death for dishonoring you.
There's a reason that is called the "mitzvah that has NEVER been done." It's an example, a threat. And it serves a purpose. (And it's not just to enable people to call Him a "liar".) Again, been there, done that. Have the T-shirt. And actually UNDERSTAND the lesson!

I mean, it's keeping His commandments, and that is love, right? That's what y'all have devolved into saying here. Don't just talk the talk. Go to your boss and tell him you will need time off to observe the real Sabbath.
Long before you were here on this site, I DID that. And, when I later took a different job, it was a condition I made clear up front. ALL of 'em.

PS> (And, yes, this is an 'edit' that has nothing to with the Carly Simon wannabe)
If you took the "poison poke" because your boss said you "had to," and are vain enough to tell me you're NOT...
...another cherry-picking Torah keeper....
I'll point out that "suicide by lethal self-injection" is PROBABLY a violation of His Instruction, too. But some will argue even that.
 
Last edited:
And yet, if you use the Gregorian calendar to mark your Sabbaths, you have been missing almost all of them. No, this is not about Sunday vs. Saturday. Do you really want to follow the Torah to the letter? Then burn your house down if you find mildew in it. Take your child outside the city and stone him to death for dishonoring you. I mean, it's keeping His commandments, and that is love, right? That's what y'all have devolved into saying here. Don't just talk the talk. Go to your boss and tell him you will need time off to observe the real Sabbath. If you have love, that is. Don't tell me you're another cherry-picking Torah keeper.

Surely the truth would set you free. But as it is, you want to proclaim to be bound while also being free. You remind me of kinksters with their bondage play. I think you guys get off to the Torah. You get some carnal rush from observing certain parts, but inwardly you know it's just pretend and you can quit at any point you like with your safeword. You don't have to actually keep the whole thing, but you pride yourself on drawing YOUR line deeper into the pain than someone else, and they are a detestable xtian.

*edit: This is a sarcastic response and way over the top to show you how ridiculous you are sounding. I, too, believe there is good in following the Law. There are blessings inherently built in. You have been set free, and so you may pick and choose as you and everyone in this forum has been doing their whole lives. Just quit pretending you actually know what you are doing or are keeping anything on the whole. That is laughable.
Let's keep this civil and our conversation seasoned with grace, easy to be entreated. Let our discussions be full of love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, temperance.
 
Just for clarification, Jesus did not violate the law of Moses. He completely spurned the Tradition of the Elders, but that was a separate body of work that the pharisees held to be on the same level as Scripture. Jesus upholds a sola scriptura position. If He broke the law he wouldn’t have been the perfect sacrifice.
Bravo. And you were off (finally!) to such a good start...
The Sinai covenant was a temporary covenant, as Hebrews and Galatians tell us.
IF you just ignore that guy - who wouldn't have been a 'perfect sacrifice' and thus the Truth not in Him - Who said something UTTERLY different. (and everyone here can cite at LEAST the one verse, in His First Public Address.)

Re: Being called a liar. Look at Who else they tar with that same brush.
 
I don't wish to reply for @Asforme&myhouse, but I would point out the passage you quoted above, from Matthew 22:37-40, already answers your question. Romans 13:10 says the same thing; Love does no harm to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfillment of the law. If we wholeheartedly love God and love our neighbour we will fulfill all God's commandments.
We are in agreement on this. Where disagreement is happening on this thread and topic has to do with where each persons understanding of words and definitions lie. And how these topics, especially covenants, are understood through reading scripture. We vary on which scripture we focus on. I know how I was taught from the church I grew up in
(Traditional Pre Vatican 2 Catholic/ Sedevacantist). And how I had to remove MANY layers of bias and filters to begin to read the bible as the source itself and as a WHOLE rather than having it explaining beliefs not actually taught in it using mainly NT books.

Law
Love
Sabbath
Covenants
Commandments

For me following Torah flows from an understanding of the bible where it is keeping commandments. With the expansion and practical applications of these commandments and HOW to love Yahweh and neighbor being found within the entire Bible.
 
*edit: This is a sarcastic response and way over the top to show you how ridiculous you are sounding. I, too, believe there is good in following the Law. There are blessings inherently built in. You have been set free, and so you may pick and choose as you and everyone in this forum has been doing their whole lives. Just quit pretending you actually know what you are doing or are keeping anything on the whole. That is laughable.
Pick and choose!??? "That is laughable."

I have heard the Atheist's Favorite Verse before (Deut. 21:18-21) until I'm sick of it, and taught at length on that entire parsha.

But here's what's laughable, and it's NOT sarcastic. But it is germaine to the Big Lie that He changes His mind, IS NOT the "same, yesterday, today, and tomorrow," and is a "liar, and the Truth not in Him," when He says He isn't changing so much as "one yod or tiddle" of His 'torah and prophets' so long as "heaven and earth" still exist.

I see hypocrites here (thankfully, very few, but obnoxious in their vehemence for twisting His Word) who will "strain at a gnat" when it comes to "heatou" and "mia" but IGNORE how conflation of "nomos" has been used to deceive them. Shame on you. Those here who seek His Truth deserve better. And at least some honest examination of His Word.

THAT Hated warning follows DIRECTLY after a verse some here might even know, and just as vehemently say MAY still apply! (It starts: "If a man have two wives...") And THAT in turn, follows a segment I call the "War Bride," because that's what it's about. Guess what? When I get the same BS about "do you still stone your SON?" I usually hear about women taken as slaves in war, and second wives, because it's ALL so Olde and AWFUL. There's a REASON, I suggest, that He put all of that together. And it's pitiful that the Scripture-haters who rail about the Evil Patriarchy, and two wives, and stoning sons will IGNORE modern sex slavery, disarm women, and raise "sons" who don't even KNOW their 'gender' but arguably SHOULD have been stoned before blowing away a bunch of people in a church.

The same Savior Who NEVER, ever, 'did away with' His own Instruction warned us PRECISELY about where this leads: Today! When "lawless-ness abounds" and the "love of many HAS grown cold."

If you can claim to see the truth about what the Whore Church DID to marriage, open your eyes and see what it (and its satanic master) have done to the "Rule of Law".
 
On the collecting food during Sabbath the passage you were referring to was part of collecting manna and how the people were to keep Sabbath when journeying to the promised land. There are many rules and regulations given to Moses and in the Torah that were specific to being "in the land" for once they arrived and were able to establish everything in accordance with his commands. Thus there are many times during the exiles and captivities of the OT that the people of Israel were not able to observe all that had been commanded them to do since they were physically unable to do so (Eg: not having a temple, priesthood, etc.) This did not take away Yahweh's desire for them to do so when they were able to.
See, this is what I'm talking about. There are commands given to some people for a certain time. What happens to those laws? Do those laws pass away? Or are those laws fulfilled and no longer apply? Torah keeping men of bibfam, can you answer this please? Why are you men quiet while the women answer the questions? No offense to you @HomesteadWife. I appreciate your answer.

That Yeshua would leave his home at all on a Sabbath should prove that walking around outside on that day was allowed as he kept the Torah/Law perfectly. Collecting food to eat a few grains for a meal would not have been considered work or breaking the Sabbath, which was the point Yeshua was making. It was providing the necessary food for your body for the day, not going out and cutting it down with a tool and 'working' to collect more food than you needed for that meal. He was pushing back against the fences of the Pharisees and manmade commands in that case. It was the same as healing the sick on the sabbath, taking care of people and their individual welfare (health, eating) is more important than their fences. They were focused on the letter rather than the spirit behind it.
Aha, the letter vs the spirit.
Just for clarification, Jesus did not violate the law of Moses. He completely spurned the Tradition of the Elders, but that was a separate body of work that the pharisees held to be on the same level as Scripture. Jesus upholds a sola scriptura position. If He broke the law he wouldn’t have been the perfect sacrifice.
So does this prove conclusively that some laws are temporary and either pass away or become fulfilled and no longer apply? Men of Bibfam, what say ye?

I'm disappointed... I've asked questions in good faith and only one man has bothered to respond, and his response was condescending and marked not with humility and grace, but pride and scoffing. And even he wouldn't answer.
 
Not surprised at the responses and false accusations....

And because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold. — Matthew 24:12 KJV

Speak not evil one of another, brethren. He that speaketh evil of [his] brother, and judgeth his brother, speaketh evil of the law, and judgeth the law: but if thou judge the law, thou art not a doer of the law, but a judge. There is one lawgiver, who is able to save and to destroy: who art thou that judgest another? — James 4:11-12 KJV
 
Not surprised at the responses and false accusations....

And because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold. — Matthew 24:12 KJV

Speak not evil one of another, brethren. He that speaketh evil of [his] brother, and judgeth his brother, speaketh evil of the law, and judgeth the law: but if thou judge the law, thou art not a doer of the law, but a judge. There is one lawgiver, who is able to save and to destroy: who art thou that judgest another? — James 4:11-12 KJV
What false accusation? What evil? Your response was condescending and marked with a prideful attitude and contempt. Is speaking the truth all of a sudden falsely accusing?
I asked a simple question, you responded with no answer, just a bad attitude and scoffing. Acting like you had all the answers and I just need to study. That's prideful. If you had no answer, why even respond? Because you were more interested in scorning someone. I don't find that honorable or respectable behavior. I am disappointed when men won't act honorable and instead behave like that. There's no call for it. I asked a legitimate question, asked it in good faith without contempt. I specifically explained that. You mocked it, why?

Proverbs 9:7-8
7 He that reproveth a scorner getteth to himself shame: and he that rebuketh a wicked man getteth himself a blot.
8 Reprove not a scorner, lest he hate thee: rebuke a wise man, and he will love thee.
 
There are commands given to some people for a certain time.
The reality is that certain laws could only be practiced at a certain place. It is coincidental that it happened during a period of time.
The requirement to obey the laws was dependent upon their ability to obey them.

An example would be immersion in a Mikvah, it was a requirement that probably didn’t happen a lot in the desert. But as they had access to flowing water (going from memory, flowing might be inaccurate) it was expected of them. The law didn’t change with the circumstances, the requirement to follow it did.
 
Ad hominem (Latin for 'to the person'), short for argumentum ad hominem, is a term that refers to several types of arguments, most of which are fallacious. Typically this term refers to a rhetorical strategy where the speaker attacks the character, motive, or some other attribute of the person making an argument rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself. This avoids genuine debate by creating a diversion to some irrelevant but often highly charged issue. The most common form of this fallacy is "A makes a claim x, B asserts that A holds a property that is unwelcome, and hence B concludes that argument x is wrong".

@NickF it seems that you (like some others) are suffering from a classic case of adhominemitis, you can throw all the insinuations and false accusations you want, it means absolutely nothing, to me or anyone who knows me, but, if it makes you feel better... know that if you are right before YAH your words will receive praise, if your words about me are wrong or idle then....

Needless to say I have come across many like yourself who declare peace and love and then their reaction/response is anything but... c'est la vie

There is so much I could say, but, all I will say is, go and read all that I have written before you asked your questions and all that others have written, do try and take off those eisegetical glasses before you do, it would help stop the circular debate.
 
Back
Top