Mattew 9:4
And he answered and said unto them, HAVE YE NOT READ,that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female.
Jesus laid emphasis on the beginning of creation for them to really understand God's intention concerning marriage. This same thing goes to the books of Matt-John in order for the world to believe the birth,death, ande resurrection of our Lord Jesuse Christ.

maximunimpact: @op d new/old testament dichotomy depends on d translation u ar using. Some other bible translation rightly separated it as ''the hebrew scriptures'' and the ''christian greek scriptures''. There is notin like old or new testament, all scriptures is inspired by God and its beneficial 4 teaching, correction, 4 settin tins straight........ So 4get abt d new/old diachy, its either the hebrew scriptures written in Hebrew language, or the Greek scriptures written in Greek language. Make ur research u will find a bible version dat xplains dis.

Spot on. smiley

Now if only they would heed to your voice and see reason, and the most high would heal them.

Could also need called Acts of Paul the apostle
E

dami_paul:

I read all the scriptures. I don't understand why you're avoiding mine. And no, I didn't find answers to my question in the scriptures u highlighted. There's a serious yearning, I'm tired of all the rhymes and rheterics, pls help me answer those direct questions in my post before this. Thank u.

Start your own church, reclassify your own bible and preach your own message. People have done it before, so why can't you do likewise? People like you are always eager to just show you know more than what Christianity has used for more than a thousand years. Rebellion starts from position like yours.

i am a muslim and u want peace im dis world
ahith before sleeping,
These following Sunnah Rasool (sallallaho
alaihe wasallam) can be fulfilled every time we
sleep, during the day and night. [Please
Share !!!]
1 - Dust the bed: "... When one of you goes to
bed, let him dust the bed because he does not
know what comes into it before or after
him." [Bukhari: 6320; Muslim: 2714]
2- Sleeping on Wudoo` and lie on right side.
The Prophet, sallAllahu 'alayhi wa salam told
al-Baraa` bin 'Aazib, radiallahu 'anh, If you go
to your bed, then do your wudoo` (ablution) as
you would do it for prayer, then lie on your right
side" [Agreed upon (Bukhari: 6311.Muslim:
2710)]
3 - Place the right hand under the right cheek.
"When the Prophet (sallAllahu alaih wasallam)
retired to bed at night, he (sallalahu alaih
wasallam) would put his hand under his (right)
cheek and then say, "Allahumma bismika amutu
wa ahya (O Allah, by Your Name I die and I
live)" and when He (sallalahu alaih wasallam)
got up (from sleep), he (saws) would say, "Al-
Hamdu lil-lahi al-ladhi ahyana ba`da ma
amatana, wa ilaihi an-nushur (Praise be to
Allah Who gave us life after death, and to Him
is the return." [Bukhari: 6314; Muslim: 5045]
4 - Recite Soorat Al-Kaafirun (109:1-6)
From its benefit: It frees the person from Shirk.
[Aboo Dawood: 5055; At-Tirmidhee: 3403;
Ahmad: 23807; Al-Hakeem: 2121]
5 - Reading Soorat al-Ikhlaas, al-Falaq and an-
Naas before sleeping.
From 'Aishah radiallahu 'anha, the Messenger,
sallAllahu 'alayhi wa salam used to recite "Qul
huwallahu ahad", "Qul a'oothu birrabilfalaq"
and "Qul a'oothu birrabinnaas" every night when
he went to sleep, then wiped his face and
whatever he was able from his body, beginning
with his head and face, and what faces him
from his body, three times". [al-Bukhaari:
5017] ...

tete7000:

Start your own church, reclassify your own bible and preach your own message. People have done it before, so why can't you do likewise? People like you are always eager to just show you know more than what Christianity has used for more than a thousand years. Rebellion starts from position like yours.

I'm telling you. These guys should stick to the middle of the road. The apostles didn't make a mistake. The gospel is not a new thing. If its new. Its not the gospel.

@Josh,
You have got it. What Jesus came to do was to teach us how to believe the words of God as He had always been saying not of the letter but of the Spirit, then his death was to make it an convenant by blood that whoever believed in Him will have their sins washed away and have the Holy Spirit to help them to will and do God's pleasure. It is the same one gospel but different approach.

Hebrews 4:2
For indeed we have had the glad tidings [Gospel of God] proclaimed to us just as truly as they [the Israelites of old did when the good news of deliverance from bondage came to them]; but the message they heard did not benefit them, because it was not mixed with faith (with the leaning of the entire personality on God in absolute trust and confidence in His power, wisdom, and goodness) by those who heard it; neither were they united in faith with the ones [Joshua and Caleb] who heard (did believe).

Blessed be the Lord God of Isreal.........

As for you little child, you shall be called a prophet of God the most high

You shall go ahead of the Lord to prepare His ways before him and make known to his people their salvation through forgiveness of their sins (through baptism)

Just reciting the Benedictus

MATTEW MARK LUKE are referred to as the SYNOPTIC GOSPELS telling the same stories with different accounts.
I was moved to comment in this thread after CAREFULLY going through individual posts. The essense of the word of God is for spiritual upliftment and not to satisfy some curiousity based on self righteous indignations. We shouldn't treat the WORD as scholarly article subject to review but be guided by the Spirit to understand the words therein. Just using my mobile to comment but promise by His grace to participate on this thread moro. Nice contributions @all

pasino26: Blessed be the Lord God of Isreal.........

As for you little child, you shall be called a prophet of God the most high

You shall go ahead of the Lord to prepare His ways before him and make known to his people their salvation through forgiveness of their sins (through baptism)

Just reciting the Benedictus

MATTEW MARK LUKE are referred to as the SYNOPTIC GOSPELS telling the same stories with different accounts.
I was moved to comment in this thread after CAREFULLY going through individual posts. The essense of the word of God is for spiritual upliftment and not to satisfy some curiousity based on self righteous indignations. We shouldn't treat the WORD as scholarly article subject to review but be guided by the Spirit to understand the words therein. Just using my mobile to comment but promise by His grace to participate on this thread moro. Nice contributions @all

Hear me out sir, I didn't start this thread to show off or argue too long. My existence as a christian as always been guided by the words of Jesus. I had always wondered about the story of the Leper in Mk 1:44, before going into these readings, I asked questions severally no one gave me an answer. When I discovered this, it now dawned on me with other scriptures that Jesus actually lived as one that was under the law; he kept the feasts, encouraged giving of Sacrifice etc, I simply wanted to be sure I was thinking right, I didn't want anybody saying you no just for saying no's sake or because I was saying something that's against a certain belief that's been passed down from generations, if it's going to be a no, let it be a no with appropriate scriptures. We are all striving for perfection!

Matthew, Mark, Luke and John are the account of the life of Jesus on earth,
The new testament (will) started with Acts of the Apostles and Revelation is what is to come.
God bless you. [color=#990000][/color]

dami_paul:

Hear me out sir, I didn't start this thread to show off or argue too long. My existence as a christian as always been guided by the words of Jesus. I had always wondered about the story of the Leper in Mk 1:44, before going into these readings, I asked questions severally no one gave me an answer. When I discovered this, it now dawned on me with other scriptures that Jesus actually lived as one that was under the law; he kept the feasts, encouraged giving of Sacrifice etc, I simply wanted to be sure I was thinking right, I didn't want anybody saying you no just for saying no's sake or because I was saying something that's against a certain belief that's been passed down from generations, if it's going to be a no, let it be a no with appropriate scriptures. We are all striving for perfection!

Lean not on your own understanding nor put your trust on the princes of this earth. That which you seek is ever before because God made things simple but man sought out confusion and complications.
You became a christian by faith and you're defending it by faith cuz you believed words written long before you. Seek the Spirit of God on this topic as I see its personal to you. I was once asking too many questions and even read the bible for points n answers but the scriptures are never monosyllabic or uniform in tune. The spirit reveals a new life upon each passage and word.
We unconsciouly confuse ourselves atimes. Will share more with you later tomorrow. Forgive me if I earlier sounded indifferent or deviating from the objectivity of the thread, I promised not to .......

Alwaystrue: @ Swtchicgurl,
I believe the whole of Jesus Christ is important.

His Life which is the way, truth, light and life still.
His Death that sealed His testament and is the sacrifice for sin blotting away transgressions
His Resurrection which is the manifestation of Eternal Life in full.

Afterall the bible says if Jesus did not resurrect our faith is in vain. I Cor. 15:14

Thank you for the other scriptures. Very enlightening.

My dear, u try!

If you actually want to understand what the new testament is all about,u have to be open minded....and understand one basic fact that the religion you practice isn't an african religion....further more,you have to view christianity in the eyes of a jew......because it originated there.....read a lot about the history of the people who own the religion and the root of christianity. Which is judaism.....because if you expect these penticostal pastors to explain thes things to You,its like passing a camel thru the eyes of a needle......and lastly,the new testament isn't the foundation of the religion jesus practised....and please jesus didn't bring any new law,neither did he abolish any.....jesus operated on the existing laws at that time,which is still in effect till today.....please let's read more....keep and open mind and you would get the knowledge u seek.

Joshthefirst: I didn't know we were called after the order of melchizedek, I thought only jesus was called after the order of melchizedek. Now I know better. Thank you.

My brother it was ONLY Jesus that the scriptures said had the order of Melchizedech NOT his disciples. there was a reason the bible stopped there so as to draw a similarity between what Christ will be and what Melchizedeck was. Lets stop there.

His prefiguring Christ is unique to Jesus for a reason. it is true that the saints will be king-priests as Melchizedech was, however, the superiority of his priesthood is replica of that of Christ NOT the saints.

For eg. Christ became a priest though he wasnt from the priestly lineage just like Melchizedek. But some who accepted Jesus were priests already according to levitical lineage. And some were levites and had to become priest as a right. If we now apply the manner of Melchizedek to them (the saints), you will miss the sense or prophetic picture God wants to draw with Melchizedek's priesthood.

secondly, Melchizedek was a superior priest in that levites 'paid' tithe to him. This fittingly pictured Christ priesthood as a superior high priest. Paul never said that their would be Priests in the manner of Melchizedek but Priest.

@NEW ONES

Some who are just commenting to this thread should have in mind that someone asking question is nothing wrong as far as the question has a scriptural answer. Please dont critisize the questioner. one unique thing about a questioner (assuming he is open minded) is that when you give them a prove, their belief in that subject will be stamped like an iron and they will preach it with a greater zeal, instead of being gullible.

secondly, I think that the questioner has even received answer to his question. It seems he has seen good reasons for the ''NT'' to begin with Matthew. the thread is now discussing another topic altogether, 'cos atimes one discussion leads to another.

@damipaul, I have not been able to open my mailbox to view your message as I currently don't have access to the mailbox I open my nairaland account with. However in the meantime I have to point you to a scripture from Hebrew1 I quoted below:

' In the past God spoke to our ancestors through the prophets at many times and in various ways, 2 but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom also he made the universe. 3 The Son is the radiance of God's glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word. After he had provided purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven.'

Firstly, the classification into old and new testaments of the bible is not based on whether Christ lived under the law or not but specifically to distinguish between two dispensations: first is the time of the prophets during which the world eagerly awaited the coming of the Messiah, second is the time when Christ actually lived, died, resurrected, went back into heaven and thereafter continued to live with us by outpouring of the Holy Spirit on His Church.

Secondly, scripture should stop being looked from a point of dichotomy, one of law and other without law. No, Scripture is continuous. Everything from Genesis to Revelation points to only one Person - Christ the Son of Living God. He is the word who became flesh and lived( and continue to live) among us. He co exist eternally with the Father and He is the FULFILMENT OF THE LAW and HE NEVER CAME TO ABOLISH THE LAW but RATHER TO PERFECT IT.

Thirdly, yes Christ lived and SUBJECT Himself to the law but it was His choice and one He made to save us. In essence our focus shouldn't be what you raised but rather how we can key into His plan of Salvation for us. How does whether you have Matthew in old testament or Judith in new testament ( though these would have been inappropriate and make scripture reading difficult to understand) affect the contents of the message, which is salvation?

Finally, always remember the warning of St. Paul: 'God has used the foolish things of this world to confound the wise' and also that the ' Wisdom of man is foolishness to God'. Christianity is one built on blood of Martyrs, handed down by the Apostles. It has been practised for over a thousand years during which people far and more knowledgeable and wiser than you existed. A kind of curiosity like yours is not going to edify anybody. It's not the type that brings anyone salvation. Let he who thinks he stands watch lest he fall - The scripture warns.

The modern church is mislead into believing the old testament isnt important. But even the King of Kings said he came not to abolish the law but fufil. Churchs today are club houses because 'grace'. Mercy of the father be with us

meccuno: If you actually want to understand what the new testament is all about,u have to be open minded....and understand one basic fact that the religion you practice isn't an african religion....further more,you have to view christianity in the eyes of a jew......because it originated there.....read a lot about the history of the people who own the religion and the root of christianity. Which is judaism.....because if you expect these penticostal pastors to explain thes things to You,its like passing a camel thru the eyes of a needle......and lastly,the new testament isn't the foundation of the religion jesus practised....and please jesus didn't bring any new law,neither did he abolish any.....jesus operated on the existing laws at that time,which is still in effect till today.....please let's read more....keep and open mind and you would get the knowledge u seek.

honestly, knowing the Jewish laws, custom and traditions helps me to understand the bible more.

@ogbronx,
Thanks, na God's grace o. The word of God has been there since, the difference between us and the Israelites to whom it was given is simply Jesus and Belief. That is all and that is the understanding I have fully received now.


@mecuuno,
You made valid point about Jesus and the law, God does not change (Mal. 3;6), He only used a different approach to handle us. Jesus, however, added a new commandment that we should love as He loved for He gave the proper definition of love and He is the SPIRIT. It is the same law but not just of the letter but all of the SPIRIT.


@Jman, the questioner had been given answers long before now but kept saying he was not answered and at a point it is just best to leave the questioner to be led himself by the Spirit, that is the best experience.

Jesus gave the correct demarcation....Until John the Baptist, the law of Moses and the messages of the prophets were your guides. But now the Good News of the Kingdom of God is preached, and everyone is eager to get in - Luke 16:16.

Jesus the Son and the Holy Spirit are our guides now and had started guiding us from John. It is as simple as that. It is the same law but first understood in the heart/spirit, knowing the mind of God.

JMAN05:

My brother it was ONLY Jesus that the scriptures said had the order of Melchizedech NOT his disciples. there was a reason the bible stopped there so as to draw a similarity between what Christ will be and what Melchizedeck was. Lets stop there.

His prefiguring Christ is unique to Jesus for a reason. it is true that the saints will be king-priests as Melchizedech was, however, the superiority of his priesthood is replica of that of Christ NOT the saints.

For eg. Christ became a priest though he wasnt from the priestly lineage just like Melchizedek. But some who accepted Jesus were priests already according to levitical lineage. And some were levites and had to become priest as a right. If we now apply the manner of Melchizedek to them (the saints), you will miss the sense or prophetic picture God wants to draw with Melchizedek's priesthood.

secondly, Melchizedek was a superior priest in that levites 'paid' tithe to him. This fittingly pictured Christ priesthood as a superior high priest. Paul never said that their would be Priests in the manner of Melchizedek but Priest.

A quote from wordtalk:

Peter was not thinking about a different kind of priesthood - which was why I mentioned that he recognizes "the function of this type of priesthood" that Melchizedek bore even though he did not mention the man by name. You don't need to mention someone or something by name before you're able to recognize the character or function of a particular subject.

This is why we can be sure that he was not thinking about the Jewish priesthood in 1 Peter 2:9 when he talked about a "royal priestood" - because Jewish priesthood is NOT one of royalty in FUNCTION. The only one we see that fits this FUNCTION is that of Melchizedek - not Jethros, not Potipherah's, and not Moses' priesthood.

To even argue that Peter could not have been thinking of Melchizedek simply because he did not mention him, you would have to find the foundation for the TYPE of priesthood that he was infact discussing. To ignore this would only render that verse absolutely BASELESS - because almsot ALL priesthood that have anything to do with God's redemptive and salvation purpose in Scripture have a foundation! Peter did not magically throw words about 'royal priesthood' around - there is a foundation for his proclamation in that verse.

@Bidam

Peter was not thinking about a different kind of priesthood - which was why I mentioned that he recognizes "the function of this type of priesthood" that Melchizedek bore even though he did not mention the man by name. You don't need to mention someone or something by name before you're able to recognize the character or function of a particular subject.

This is why we can be sure that he was not thinking about the Jewish priesthood in 1 Peter 2:9 when he talked about a "royal priestood" - because Jewish priesthood is NOT one of royalty in FUNCTION. The only one we see that fits this FUNCTION is that of Melchizedek - not Jethros, not Potipherah's, and not Moses' priesthood.

To even argue that Peter could not have been thinking of Melchizedek simply because he did not mention him, you would have to find the foundation for the TYPE of priesthood that he was infact discussing. To ignore this would only render that verse absolutely BASELESS - because almsot ALL priesthood that have anything to do with God's redemptive and salvation purpose in Scripture have a foundation! Peter did not magically throw words about 'royal priesthood' around - there is a foundation for his proclamation in that verse.

I still think you need to revisit my reason for saying that Melchizedek could not apply to the disciples of Jesus.

God was no longer walking with the fleshly israelites but spiritual israelites. So Peter was applying God's statement at Exod. 19:6 to the spiritual israelites in that verse. so he was alluding to it. Ah! how can you say he was talking of Melchizedek? He was talking of a nation, but a spiritual one this time.

JMAN05:

I still think you need to revisit my reason for saying that Melchizedek could not apply to the disciples of Jesus.

God was no longer walking with the fleshly israelites but spiritual israelites. So Peter was applying God's statement at Exod. 19:6 to the spiritual israelites in that verse. so he was alluding to it. Ah! how can you say he was talking of Melchizedek? He was talking of a nation, but a spiritual one this time.

Mysterious Melchizedek is spiritual. Levitical is physical. The children of Israel did not enter into the exodus 19:6 you quoted.

Bidam: Mysterious Melchizedek is spiritual. Levitical is physical. The children of Israel did not enter into the exodus 19:6 you quoted.

I dont understand you.