The Phrase 'Word of God' and its usage in the New Testament. (vain, witness)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Originally Posted by JerwadeWho wrote that for you, daqq?
Quote:
Yeah, Rbbi1 asked me to say more about it when I brought up "the Living Oracles" of Elohim, which in the Acts passage clearly means the Torah, (the post is back on Pg 38, Reply #376). Just as Paul says, the Torah is spiritual and supernal, not for neanderthals*, (lol), because they only trample it anyways just as they do with the Testimony of the Messiah and all the scripture.
*neanderthal: one who says the Tanakh was written by neanderthals.
The way they played with BaptistFundie, would it not be possible he was being wanted for something else?
You know they just had to keep the persistence up that two men together is a great thing, is it an excuse.
Whoa, been gone for a couple of days and this thread blew up.
Anyway I still think there is a disconnect here. No one is really listening to each other.
The law (torah) is spiritual and as it is a spiritual law it can only be taken as spiritual. If one tests the spiritual law via the fruits of the spirit they will match up.
The problem that many seem to have is they are taking that which is spiritual literally. YOU CAN'T DO THAT.
We are to compare that which is spirit with spirit.
Thus if one takes that which is spiritual and compares it with the literal (or the letter) you will just get a bunch of nonsense, which will lead to death, for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.
Daag ( who like me believes the law/torah is spiritual) made a couple of very good post explaining the spiritual aspect of the Torah/law and if you guys would actually listen to what he said I think you would find you are in agreement with it.
And if dagg and rbbi would actually listen to what you guys (and myself) present about following the fruits of the spirit, taking every thought captive to Christ I think they would find they actually agree with it.
For myself I see the disconnect going on here because I can agree with much of what each camp (for a lack of a better term) is saying.
My only issue here is when someone takes that which is spiritual literally or is saying there is no spiritual application to the law/torah.
All both parties need to do is ask one simple question.
Is the law/torah spiritual? if one answers yes then both parties need to reevaluate what they are saying.
Pnuema, I actually believe the scriptures are God breathed, inspiring and that the Law is spiritual. What I do not believe is they are God, the Father, or greater than the one whom they testify of. As I clearly pointed out BY the scriptures, Jesus never once said the scriptures were his source, he repeatedly credited his Father for that. If Christ is in us and with us always it would not matter one iota if I never opened the Bible again if my heart and mind are set on things above. It is a travesty how the Bible is presented as if it is God. The folk that do that are clearly held in fear by it, the proof of this is the unwillingness to reason outside of their beliefs they have set in stone.
An excellent point, Pneuma, and both sides SAY the Law is spiritual, but when I point out that physical aspects IN the Law are fulfilled not in form but in spirit, all of a sudden those forms are required (except the ones that can't be performed and then THOSE are no longer required).
Pnuema, I actually believe the scriptures are God breathed, inspiring and that the Law is spiritual. What I do not believe is they are God, the Father, or greater than the one whom they testify of. As I clearly pointed out BY the scriptures, Jesus never once said the scriptures were his source, he repeatedly credited his Father for that. If Christ is in us and with us always it would not matter one iota if I never opened the Bible again if my heart and mind are set on things above. It is a travesty how the Bible is presented as if it is God. The folk that do that are clearly held in fear by it, the proof of this is the unwillingness to reason outside of their beliefs they have set in stone.
Ya I get that brother. The fundies do hold the bible on = footing with Christ, and I do have an issue with that also (as many here are a where of from past posts in this thread) as the bible has been added to and taken away from and the history of the canon actually shows this. Tis why I repeated say that there is scripture in the bible but not everything in the bible is scripture and not all scripture is in the bible.
However with Christ, he was of full stature so nothing can be added or taken away from him. He alone is the unadulterated, infallible word of God.
An excellent point, Pneuma, and both sides SAY the Law is spiritual, but when I point out that physical aspects IN the Law are fulfilled not in form but in spirit, all of a sudden those forms are required (except the ones that can't be performed and then THOSE are no longer required).
Ya I seen that, but I think (could be wrong) rbbi is the only one who says the law/torah is both literal and spiritual and thus she requires BOTH to be fulfilled.
She need to reevaluate her stance on this as Paul expressly tells us the law is spiritual.
Whoa, been gone for a couple of days and this thread blew up.
Anyway I still think there is a disconnect here. No one is really listening to each other.
The law (torah) is spiritual and as it is a spiritual law it can only be taken as spiritual. If one tests the spiritual law via the fruits of the spirit they will match up.
The problem that many seem to have is they are taking that which is spiritual literally. YOU CAN'T DO THAT.
We are to compare that which is spirit with spirit.
Thus if one takes that which is spiritual and compares it with the literal (or the letter) you will just get a bunch of nonsense, which will lead to death, for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.
Daag ( who like me believes the law/torah is spiritual) made a couple of very good post explaining the spiritual aspect of the Torah/law and if you guys would actually listen to what he said I think you would find you are in agreement with it.
And if dagg and rbbi would actually listen to what you guys (and myself) present about following the fruits of the spirit, taking every thought captive to Christ I think they would find they actually agree with it.
For myself I see the disconnect going on here because I can agree with much of what each camp (for a lack of a better term) is saying.
My only issue here is when someone takes that which is spiritual literally or is saying there is no spiritual application to the law/torah.
All both parties need to do is ask one simple question.
Is the law/torah spiritual? if one answers yes then both parties need to reevaluate what they are saying.
Well that is my 2 cents for what is is worth.
Apparently you also were not paying any attention either because you failed to mention anything I was actually debating with those who entirely disagreed and contradicted the scripture.
The way they played with BaptistFundie, would it not be possible he was being wanted for something else?
You know they just had to keep the persistence up that two men together is a great thing, is it an excuse.
I really have no idea what your comments have to do with my post which you quoted. I have never "played" with anyone named BaptistFundie: and how are my comments an "excuse" when all I did was answer Jerwade who asked Rbbi1 if I wrote what was posted. And since my name was mentioned by Jerwade, I answered affirmatively, because I did write it. And I see nothing wrong with Rbbi1 reposting it, for no doubt, Rbbi1 reposted it because it is clearly the teaching of the Apostolic writers.
I really have no idea what your comments have to do with my post which you quoted. I have never "played" with anyone named BaptistFundie: and how are my comments an "excuse" when all I did was answer Jerwade who asked Rbbi1 if I wrote what was posted. And since my name was mentioned by Jerwade, I answered affirmatively, because I did write it. And I see nothing wrong with Rbbi1 reposting it, for no doubt, Rbbi1 reposted it because it is clearly the teaching of the Apostolic writers.
I don't think OR was referring to you, Daqq, and yes I reposted it because it's excellent. Peace
I don't think OR was referring to you, Daqq, and yes I reposted it because it's excellent. Peace
Well, that is at least twice now in this thread alone where someone has quoted me and responded with things that have nothing to do with what I said. Perhaps that is a big part of the problem here: people using other peoples posts as nothing more than a launching pad to fire their own pontifications in the air, regardless of what was actually said.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
