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.
Do not understand the text? People are NOT the filthy rags, OUR righteousness through our own works are AS filthy rags. Get it straight and quit trying to twist what is clearly stated. And because the soul is the garment for the spirit (ie. the garment spotted by the flesh), it must be cleansed and replaced with HIS righteousness, which is the SANCTIFICATION process.
It's called, justified/sanctified and glorified in that order, just as in the order of the compartments of the Tabernacle and you don't get to "skip grades" based on what you believe with your carnal mind to be true about yourself. "Promotion" is strictly by His Spirit, so that no man can boast and say they did anything, and that includes what you believe with your carnal mind. Peace
No the scripture is definitely referring to to none BEING righteous, there is none that seeks after God, none doing good, not one of us. You're twisting of the scriptures is at a level i have never seen on here before.
Look up the meaning for PARDES if you can't understand how it can both plainly state something, yet have additional truths attached to it.
I never said people were filthy rags, that's your attempt at deflecting what was really said.
Again, you think yourself in a place spiritually where it is IMPOSSIBLE for you to be right now, and the word and the Tabernacle and time, prove it. Peace
I will ask you this question again
Do you ever break the law that you try to keep by the spirit?, if you answer yes, then you are caught in a vicious circle of breaking and keeping the law, in other words you are slave to the law, it owns and condemns you and causes you to be sin conscious rather than God conscious, unless of cause if you don't sin.
Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law (Like Hanni, RBBI and Pin): that their mouths may be stopped, and all they become guilty before God. See what putting yourself under the law will do to you, you create for yourself a judge and jury that condemn you.
For sin shall not have dominion over you, for you are not under law but under grace. In other words while you are under the like Hanni, RBBI and Pin are, sin will have dominion over you, then what you will end up doing is justifying yourself by the scriptures and condemning those who are not accepting of the law that condemn(no matter how much it "appears' good)
Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law (Like Hanni, RBBI and Pin): that their mouths may be stopped, and all they become guilty before God. See what putting yourself under the law will do to you, you create for yourself a judge and jury that condemn you.
For sin shall not have dominion over you, for you are not under law but under grace. In other words while you are under the like Hanni, RBBI and Pin are, sin will have dominion over you, then what you will end up doing is justifying yourself by the scriptures and condemning those who are not accepting of the law that condemn(no matter how much it "appears' good)
Acts 21 ~ Hanni is running up with all the brethren who are all zealous for the law.
Thou seest, brother, how many thousands of Jews there are which believe; and they are all zealous of the law:
Acts 21 ~Pcamps running up telling rumors about Paul. 21And they are informed of thee, that thou teachest all the Jews which are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children, neither to walk after the customs.
LOL Pcamps, what you keep doing is implying that stupid debate about circumcision as if somebody was running around telling you that you couldn't be saved if you did or didn't keep a certain law, and that is a debate stuck on stupid, you keep insinuating that I am somehow teaching people that they need to keep the laws of Moses to be saved, and that is not what you are seeing from me, it is what you keep falsely insinuating and I can understand this from a person who doesn't know the law or want to know the law from this bias that you always see in people who love God and his commandments. I think all you people are saved, but I am telling you that there are greater things than salvation. I don't judge anyone if they don't keep all the laws of Sabbaths and feasts of God Pcamps, It wouldn't even occur to me to judge whether you keep all the laws of Moses or not, and you keep coming back acting like I am telling you to keep the law to be saved from that one dumb conversation where a Jew told a Gentile he had to be circumcised to be saved. I really wish you would stop insinuating that I am teaching salvation on the principles of whether or not somebody is keeping all the laws of Moses or not.
Acts 21 ~ Hanni is running up with all the brethren who are all zealous for the law.
Thou seest, brother, how many thousands of Jews there are which believe; and they are all zealous of the law:
Acts 21 ~Pcamps running up telling rumors about Paul. 21And they are informed of thee, that thou teachest all the Jews which are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children, neither to walk after the customs.
LOL Pcamps, what you keep doing is implying that stupid debate about circumcision as if somebody was running around telling you that you couldn't be saved if you did or didn't keep a certain law, and that is a debate stuck on stupid, you keep insinuating that I am somehow teaching people that they need to keep the laws of Moses to be saved, and that is not what you are seeing from me, it is what you keep falsely insinuating and I can understand this from a person who doesn't know the law or want to know the law from this bias that you always see in people who love God and his commandments. I think all you people are saved, but I am telling you that there are greater things than salvation. I don't judge anyone if they don't keep all the laws of Sabbaths and feasts of God Pcamps, It wouldn't even occur to me to judge whether you keep all the laws of Moses or not, and you keep coming back acting like I am telling you to keep the law to be saved from that one dumb conversation where a Jew told a Gentile he had to be circumcised to be saved. I really wish you would stop insinuating that I am teaching salvation on the principles of whether or not somebody is keeping all the laws of Moses or not.
Your posts in my opinion are way to wordy. In other words you have to go "Round the Wrekin"(the long way round) to make a point, is that really necessary when rbbi says the the text clearly states?. Now the 2 scriptures i have quoted clearly by the text state, you have placed yourself under something that by doing so owns you.The law is your god, and the god of that law will always deal with you by the law and the consequences of breaking it like you often do like rbbi and pinacled do.
Your posts in my opinion are way to wordy. In other words you have to go "Round the Wrekin"(the long way round) to make a point, is that really necessary when rbbi says the the text clearly states?. Now the 2 scriptures i have quoted clearly by the text state, you have placed yourself under something that by doing so owns you.The law is your god, and the god of that law will always deal with you by the law and the consequences of breaking it like you often do like rbbi and pinacled do.
The saints, the fathers of Christianity were Pharsiees like Paul, and all of them became even more zealous to keep the law because they knew the punishment had been taken away.
What don't you get?
Those thousands of Jewish believers who were our Pharisee fathers tried to keep the law even better after Jesus came because the punishment was lifted and it was done in joy, and here you come in a different religion than Paul or any of the first Christians convicting Paul and all the disciples of being false prophets.
Again, Liars were paid to tell the SAME LIE you are saying in order to stone Stephen, AGAIN, Paul was brought from one court to the next after rumors and lies were convicting him of being a false prophet who spoke against Moses.
You CONFIRM the liars who were paid to tell a lie against Stephen, only you say it wasn't a lie, YOU CONVICT PAUL of what he went out of his way to prove lies against him, you try and confirm the lies, and if they are not lies, and you are teaching a Paul who taught Israel to forsake Moses, then you are just quoting a false prophet who needed to die by the laws of Moses.
Which is it?
YOU convict Paul, YOU CONVICT STEPHEN, YOU SAY, the liars were not telling lies?
If the lies were true, they would have killed Paul and they would have been righteous in killing him and all you are trying to prove is that Paul needed to die.
You either follow a two faced coward who says one thing and does another, or a false prophet who deserves to die because of the rumors and lies about him were true?
That is what you are telling me, the rumors and lies against Paul in Acts 21 were true, and so Paul should have been killed right there, but Paul must have run from death huh? Paul must have lied to save his life? What sort of man could live with such contradiction to where you will follow a man who is either a false prophet, OR you is a two faced liar who teaches against the law with his right hand and then lies about it with his left hand to save his life. WHAT KIND OF PAUL are you following and why would you follow a man who contradicts Jesus in the first place. We know what Jesus said of the law, and your view of Paul contradicts everything Jesus said.
The saints, the fathers of Christianity were Pharsiees like Paul, and all of them became even more zealous to keep the law because they knew the punishment had been taken away.
What don't you get?
Those thousands of Jewish believers who were our Pharisee fathers tried to keep the law even better after Jesus came because the punishment was lifted and it was done in joy, and here you come in a different religion than Paul or any of the first Christians convicting Paul and all the disciples of being false prophets.
Again, Liars were paid to tell the SAME LIE you are saying in order to stone Stephen, AGAIN, Paul was brought from one court to the next after rumors and lies were convicting him of being a false prophet who spoke against Moses.
You CONFIRM the liars who were paid to tell a lie against Stephen, only you say it wasn't a lie, YOU CONVICT PAUL of what he went out of his way to prove lies against him, you try and confirm the lies, and if they are not lies, and you are teaching a Paul who taught Israel to forsake Moses, then you are just quoting a false prophet who needed to die by the laws of Moses.
Which is it?
YOU convict Paul, YOU CONVICT STEPHEN, YOU SAY, the liars were not telling lies?
If the lies were true, they would have killed Paul and they would have been righteous in killing him and all you are trying to prove is that Paul needed to die.
You either follow a two faced coward who says one thing and does another, or a false prophet who deserves to die because of the rumors and lies about him were true?
That is what you are telling me, the rumors and lies against Paul in Acts 21 were true, and so Paul should have been killed right there, but Paul must have run from death huh? Paul must have lied to save his life? What sort of man could live with such contradiction to where you will follow a man who is either a false prophet, OR you is a two faced liar who teaches against the law with his right hand and then lies about it with his left hand to save his life. WHAT KIND OF PAUL are you following and why would you follow a man who contradicts Jesus in the first place. We know what Jesus said of the law, and your view of Paul contradicts everything Jesus said.
Like i said , you go round the wrekin(the long way round) to justify a belief that you think is scriptural but isn't. Change the weed you are smoking.
There's nothing wrong with all these daily celebrations being "celebrated", EXCEPT the motive of the heart to exclude the ones G-d specified. Peace
I'm certain you meant this as a general statement and were not saying that this was the motive of MissH, specifically? Just asking you to clarify, because I know that Hep would NOT ask anyone to exclude whatever celebrations that they personally believed were "God specified".
I'm certain pretty much NO ONE else here would have that motive, either.
Round a wreckin, never heard that but don't I know it, I catch myself at it all the time, and I still do it. You know when I am thinking about doing it, I do it even more, when you are going around about the same subject over and over and over and over, and you just keep saying the same things making a point over and over, and then you make the same point over and over, and.............Somebody stop me from quoting the law.
The saints, the fathers of Christianity were Pharsiees like Paul, and all of them became even more zealous to keep the law because they knew the punishment had been taken away.
What don't you get?
Those thousands of Jewish believers who were our Pharisee fathers tried to keep the law even better after Jesus came because the punishment was lifted and it was done in joy, and here you come in a different religion than Paul or any of the first Christians convicting Paul and all the disciples of being false prophets.
Again, Liars were paid to tell the SAME LIE you are saying in order to stone Stephen, AGAIN, Paul was brought from one court to the next after rumors and lies were convicting him of being a false prophet who spoke against Moses.
You CONFIRM the liars who were paid to tell a lie against Stephen, only you say it wasn't a lie, YOU CONVICT PAUL of what he went out of his way to prove lies against him, you try and confirm the lies, and if they are not lies, and you are teaching a Paul who taught Israel to forsake Moses, then you are just quoting a false prophet who needed to die by the laws of Moses.
Which is it?
YOU convict Paul, YOU CONVICT STEPHEN, YOU SAY, the liars were not telling lies?
If the lies were true, they would have killed Paul and they would have been righteous in killing him and all you are trying to prove is that Paul needed to die.
You either follow a two faced coward who says one thing and does another, or a false prophet who deserves to die because of the rumors and lies about him were true?
That is what you are telling me, the rumors and lies against Paul in Acts 21 were true, and so Paul should have been killed right there, but Paul must have run from death huh? Paul must have lied to save his life? What sort of man could live with such contradiction to where you will follow a man who is either a false prophet, OR you is a two faced liar who teaches against the law with his right hand and then lies about it with his left hand to save his life. WHAT KIND OF PAUL are you following and why would you follow a man who contradicts Jesus in the first place. We know what Jesus said of the law, and your view of Paul contradicts everything Jesus said.
Its probably because they've yet to see Hezekiah in Yeshua
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.
