GeneralDae:
You yourself said the other Christians escaped and chose to do so by the spirit of God. Stephen and Paul in both of your examples were major targets and could not have escaped.

Well, I don't know the particulars of their escape, so I cannot comment as to whether they escaped a direct attack or not. But one particular case we have more details of is the one I keep harping on.
Stephen was directly attacked by a mob, and rather than defend himself, Stephen stood there, eventually dying. My question to you is why you resist stating that what he, Stephen, did was indeed in obedience to what Jesus Christ Himself commandment of His followers?

Matthew 5 vs 43-48 (ERV)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
38. “You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth.’[i]
39. But I tell you, don’t fight back against someone who wants to do harm to you. If they hit you on the right cheek, let them hit the other cheek too.
40. If anyone wants to sue you in court and take your shirt, let them have your coat too.
41. If a soldier forces you to walk with him one mile,[j] go with him two.
42. Give to anyone who asks you for something. Don’t refuse to give to anyone who wants to borrow from you.
43. “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor[k] and hate your enemy.’
44. But I tell you, love your enemies. Pray for those who treat you badly.
45. If you do this, you will be children who are truly like your Father in heaven. He lets the sun rise for all people, whether they are good or bad. He sends rain to those who do right and to those who do wrong.
46. If you love only those who love you, why should you get a reward for that? Even the tax collectors do that.
47. And if you are nice only to your friends, you are no better than anyone else. Even the people who don’t know God are nice to their friends.
48. What I am saying is that you must be perfect, just as your Father in heaven is perfect.

I don't understand why you continue to refuse to give credit to Stephen for obeying Jesus Christ's direct commandment to all of His followers?

GeneralDae:
Jesus eventually told his disciples to buy two swords in Luke ( not to fight, because two swords would not have been enough) but to teach the importance of self protection without the desire to attack. Peter didn't understand his master, he attacked first and was rebuked. The poor disciple must have been confused, lol.

You are the second person this week to quote that passage without properly understanding the message of what Jesus Christ in fact asked His disciples to do there and the why.

How about carefully examing that verse in the context to which it belongs?

Luke 22 vs 35-38 (ESV)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
35. And he said to them, “When I sent you out with no moneybag or knapsack or sandals, did you lack anything?” They said, “Nothing.” 36. He said to them, “But now let the one who has a moneybag take it, and likewise a knapsack. And let the one who has no sword sell his cloak and buy one.
37. For I tell you that this Scripture must be fulfilled in me: ‘And he was numbered with the transgressors.’ For what is written about me has its fulfillment.”
38. And they said, “Look, Lord, here are two swords.” And he said to them, “It is enough.”

According to Jesus Christ, He told this to His disciples at the time so that the scripture found in Isaiah 53 vs 12 might be fulfilled in Him. From Isaiah, we learn that Jesus Christ was numbered with the transgressors, yet he bore the sin of man, and makes intercession for the transgressors.

Isaiah 53 vs 11-12 (ESV)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
10. Yet it was the will of the Lord to crush him; he has put him to grief;[g] when his soul makes[h] an offering for guilt, he shall see his offspring; he shall prolong his days; the will of the Lord shall prosper in his hand.
11. Out of the anguish of his soul he shall see[i] and be satisfied; by his knowledge shall the righteous one, my servant, make many to be accounted righteous, and he shall bear their iniquities.
12. Therefore I will divide him a portion with the many,[j] and he shall divide the spoil with the strong,[k] because he poured out his soul to death and was numbered with the transgressors, yet he bore the sin of many and makes intercession for the transgressors.

Was that scripture not fulfilled when one of His disciples took a soldier's ear off, Jesus Christ having to put the ear back on after calming both parties down?

Luke 22 vs 47-53 (ESV)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
47. While he was still speaking, there came a crowd, and the man called Judas, one of the twelve, was leading them. He drew near to Jesus to kiss him,
48. but Jesus said to him, “Judas, would you betray the Son of Man with a kiss?”
49. And when those who were around him saw what would follow, they said, “Lord, shall we strike with the sword?”
50. And one of them struck the servant[h] of the high priest and cut off his right ear.
51. But Jesus said, “No more of this!” And he touched his ear and healed him.
52. Then Jesus said to the chief priests and officers of the temple and elders, who had come out against him, “Have you come out as against a robber, with swords and clubs?
53. When I was with you day after day in the temple, you did not lay hands on me. But this is your hour and the power of darkness.”

* Note that the disciple who struck the servant of the high priest and cut off his ear during the chaos that ensued was also described as a transgressor in all of this.

Instead of being called a "hero", the disciple is called a "transgressor" by God - through His prophet Isaiah and through Jesus Christ Himself. You have to understand that this is the same God that announced "Vengence is mine".

Deuteronomy 32 vs 35 (ESV)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
35. Vengeance is Mine; I will repay. In due time their foot will slip; for their day of disaster is near, and their doom is coming quickly."

So why do you have a hard time accepting the teaching of Jesus Christ as documented in Matthew 5 vs 38 -

Matthew 5 vs 43-48 (ERV)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
38. “You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth.’[i]
39. But I tell you, don’t fight back against someone who wants to do harm to you. If they hit you on the right cheek, let them hit the other cheek too.
40. If anyone wants to sue you in court and take your shirt, let them have your coat too.
41. If a soldier forces you to walk with him one mile,[j] go with him two.
42. Give to anyone who asks you for something. Don’t refuse to give to anyone who wants to borrow from you.
43. “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor[k] and hate your enemy.’
44. But I tell you, love your enemies. Pray for those who treat you badly.
45. If you do this, you will be children who are truly like your Father in heaven. He lets the sun rise for all people, whether they are good or bad. He sends rain to those who do right and to those who do wrong.
46. If you love only those who love you, why should you get a reward for that? Even the tax collectors do that.
47. And if you are nice only to your friends, you are no better than anyone else. Even the people who don’t know God are nice to their friends.
48. What I am saying is that you must be perfect, just as your Father in heaven is perfect.

Jman24:



. When English language is clearly spelt out? Then we can as well assume that all those stories were created since you have an idea of what Jesus intended

What English was clearly spelt out?

Jman24:

Religion is quite funny.
The funniest thing is .. people even leave out what biblical Jesus instructed to practice. How many will leave their properties as instructed when one wants to take it

Oh no!! Even I am afraid to tell folks that Jesus Christ indeed requires they abandon it all if they want to follow Him. I am still trying to recover mentally from obeying that commandment myself but I don't ever want to go back to where I was before doing that. I am glad I did it but when I recall what I don't have now, I am like "NOooooooo", but the good thing is He takes the mental anguish that may result away as well. ROFLMAO!

GeneralDae:

Jesus is not saying you should run into fire but be ready to give yourself up rather than do something evil in the name of reaction. It doesn't mean if you can avoid the situation don't avoid it. It doesn't mean love your enemies more than yourself.
Your giving yourself up does not necessarily imply you love them more than yourself. You are definitely not pleased with that situation.

My brother I know my English language

Don't fight back at those who want to hurt you(Don't react)- you have an option to run away which is a very reasonable way of avoiding confrontation.

But the other clause(if he strikes you, turn the other cheek)- cannot justifying escaping confrontation or being harmed willingly even if it's an intended figure of speech like you said.

So it would make more meaning if you only say "don't fight back at those who Wana hurt you"

Kobojunkie:
Well, I don't know the particulars of their escape, so I cannot comment as to whether they escaped a direct attack or not. But one particular case we have more details of is the one I keep harping on.
Stephen was directly attacked by a mob, and rather than defend himself, Stephen stood there, eventually dying. My question to you is why you resist stating that what he, Stephen, did was indeed in obedience to what Jesus Christ Himself commandment of His followers?

I don't understand why you continue to refuse to give credit to Stephen for obeying Jesus Christ's direct commandment to all of His followers?
You are the second person this week to quote that passage without properly understanding the message of what Jesus Christ in fact asked His disciples to do there and the why.

How about carefully examing that verse in the context to which it belongs?

According to Jesus Christ, He told this to His disciples at the time so that the scripture found in Isaiah 53 vs 12 might be fulfilled in Him. From Isaiah, we learn that Jesus Christ was numbered with the transgressors, yet he bore the sin of man, and makes intercession for the transgressors.

Was that scripture not fulfilled when one of His disciples took a soldier's ear off, Jesus Christ having to put the ear back on after calming both parties down?

* Note that the disciple who struck the servant of the high priest and cut off his ear during the chaos that ensued was also described as a transgressor in all of this.

Instead of being called a "hero", the disciple is called a "transgressor" by God - through His prophet Isaiah and through Jesus Christ Himself. You have to understand that this is the same God that announced "Vengence is mine".
So why do you have a hard time accepting the teaching of Jesus Christ as documented in Matthew 5 vs 38 -

Kobojunkie Stephen was attacked by a mob and died, he even prayed for them. This doesn't imply that Stephen loved his killers more than himself but rather in this situation he chose to turn the other cheek ( be humiliated further, die, etc). and prayed for his enemies, while in thesame breath also prayed for God to receive his soul, he loved himself enough to do that, just as he loved his enemies. Stephen would not be a sinner if he chose to run away and even Jesus ran away twice.

The luke passage has Jesus telling his disciples to buy two swords for what reason? I agree the disciple was a transgressor and I stated that in the post you replied to. My only question is: What was the need for any sword at all? I answered that also in my previous reply.

Jman24:


My brother I know my English language

Don't fight back at those who want to hurt you(Don't react)- you have an option to run away which is a very reasonable way of avoiding confrontation.

But the other clause(if he strikes you, turn the other cheek)- cannot justifying escaping confrontation or being harmed willingly even if it's an intended figure of speech like you said.

So it would make more meaning if you only say "don't fight back at those who Wana hurt you"

I think you are the one not following our arguement. My only contention is that that passage is not saying Love your enemies more than yourself, even if you are not fighting back at them.

GeneralDae:
Kobojunkie Stephen was attacked by a mob and died, he even prayed for them. This doesn't imply that Stephen loved his killers more than himself but rather in this situation he chose to turn the other cheek ( be humiliated further, die, etc). and prayed for his enemies, while in thesame breath also prayed for God to receive his soul, he loved himself enough to do that, just as he loved his enemies.

It implies exactly that. It is natural for humans to want to defend themselves - a natural act done in self-love. But in this case, Stephen chose to love his enemy, more than he loved himself and so stood there, even praying that God forgives his enemy for the evil, dying in the end. Do not rob Stephen of his "testimony" for the sake of your ego in this.

Matthew 5 vs 43-48 (ERV)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
38. “You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth.’[i]
39. But I tell you, don’t fight back against someone who wants to do harm to you. If they hit you on the right cheek, let them hit the other cheek too.
40. If anyone wants to sue you in court and take your shirt, let them have your coat too.
41. If a soldier forces you to walk with him one mile,[j] go with him two.
42. Give to anyone who asks you for something. Don’t refuse to give to anyone who wants to borrow from you.
43. “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor[k] and hate your enemy.’
44. But I tell you, love your enemies. Pray for those who treat you badly.
45. If you do this, you will be children who are truly like your Father in heaven. He lets the sun rise for all people, whether they are good or bad. He sends rain to those who do right and to those who do wrong.
46. If you love only those who love you, why should you get a reward for that? Even the tax collectors do that.
47. And if you are nice only to your friends, you are no better than anyone else. Even the people who don’t know God are nice to their friends.
48. What I am saying is that you must be perfect, just as your Father in heaven is perfect.

In the passage, Jesus Christ commands you to go the extra mile on behalf of your enemy, something many of us don't even do for our own selves. You are told to be ready to give up even your shirt if your enemy asks for just your coat, what is that? Does that not imply a love many of us would not even do for those we love?
If I love my neighbor as I love myself, but I have to do even more for my enemy, what does that tell you?

GeneralDae:
The luke passage has Jesus telling his disciples to buy two swords for what reason? I agree the disciple was a transgressors and I stated that in the post you replied to. My only question is: What was the need for any sword at all? I answered that also in my previous reply.

I am afraid your answer goes against what is written.

As I explained there in my previous post, Jesus did what He did at that moment to ensure that the word of the prophet concerning His person would be fulfilled before His death, and it was so. There needed to be a sword on the scene, and a transgressor from among his own. Isaiah's prophecy concerning the person of Jesus Christ was fulfilled by the action of His disciple there - it was finished there and then. To suggest that Jesus Christ instead commanded His disciples to take up swords and fight, or that Jesus Christ taught them the importance of self-protection is a lie. Nowhere in that passage does Jesus Christ teach them any such.

GeneralDae:

I think you are the one not following our arguement. My only contention is that that passage is not saying Love your enemies more than yourself, even if you are not fighting back at them.

Who is saying the passage supports loving your enemies more than yourself?. It's a simple English that Stephen obeyed what was written in Mathew 5: 39

Kobojunkie:
It implies exactly that. It is natural for humans to want to defend themselves - a natural act done in self-love. But in this case, Stephen chose to love his enemy, more than he loved himself and so stood there, even praying that God forgives his enemy for the evil, dying in the end. Do not rob Stephen of his "testimony" for the sake of your ego in this.

I am afraid your answer goes against what is written.

As I explained there in my previous post, Jesus did what He did at that moment to ensure that the word of the prophet concerning His person would be fulfilled before His death, and it was so. There needed to be a sword on the scene, and a transgressor from among his own. Isaiah's prophecy concerning the person of Jesus Christ was fulfilled by the action of His disciple there - it was finished there and then. To suggest that Jesus Christ instead commanded His disciples to take up swords and fight is a lie.

So you are trying to say jesus set up his disciples just to fulfill a prophecy in Isaiah? He intentionally made them transgressors just to fulfill that prophecy? Wasn't that prophecy fulfilled when jesus was on the cross with two thieves?

As for Stephen, didn't Stephen also pray that God receives his soul? Stephens' worldview ( as that of jesus and all Christians) is that the soul which would rise on the day of resurrection matters more. Even Jesus looked forward to the glory ahead, paul didn't want to be a cast away, etc etc.

GeneralDae:

So you are trying to say jesus set up his disciples just to fulfill a prophecy in Isaiah? He intentionally made them transgressors just to fulfill that prophecy?

Read what transpired for your own self.

Wasn't that prophecy fulfilled when jesus was on the cross with two thieves?[/quote] Read what transpired for your own self.

Luke 22 vs 35-38 (ESV)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
35. And he said to them, “When I sent you out with no moneybag or knapsack or sandals, did you lack anything?” They said, “Nothing.”
36. He said to them, “But now let the one who has a moneybag take it, and likewise a knapsack. And let the one who has no sword sell his cloak and buy one.
37. For I tell you that this Scripture must be fulfilled in me: ‘And he was numbered with the transgressors.’ For what is written about me has its fulfillment.”
38. And they said, “Look, Lord, here are two swords.” And he said to them, “It is enough.”

According to Jesus Christ, He told this to His disciples at the time so that the scripture found in Isaiah 53 vs 12 might be fulfilled in Him. From Isaiah, we learn that Jesus Christ was numbered with the transgressors, yet he bore the sin of man, and makes intercession for the transgressors.

Isaiah 53 vs 11-12 (ESV)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
10. Yet it was the will of the Lord to crush him; he has put him to grief;[g] when his soul makes[h] an offering for guilt, he shall see his offspring; he shall prolong his days; the will of the Lord shall prosper in his hand.
11. Out of the anguish of his soul he shall see[i] and be satisfied; by his knowledge shall the righteous one, my servant, make many to be accounted righteous, and he shall bear their iniquities.
12. Therefore I will divide him a portion with the many,[j] and he shall divide the spoil with the strong,[k] because he poured out his soul to death and was numbered with the transgressors, yet he bore the sin of many and makes intercession for the transgressors.

Was that scripture not fulfilled when one of His disciples took a soldier's ear off, Jesus Christ having to put the ear back on after calming both parties down?

Luke 22 vs 47-53 (ESV)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
47. While he was still speaking, there came a crowd, and the man called Judas, one of the twelve, was leading them. He drew near to Jesus to kiss him,
48. but Jesus said to him, “Judas, would you betray the Son of Man with a kiss?”
49. And when those who were around him saw what would follow, they said, “Lord, shall we strike with the sword?”
50. And one of them struck the servant[h] of the high priest and cut off his right ear.
51. But Jesus said, “No more of this!” And he touched his ear and healed him.
52. Then Jesus said to the chief priests and officers of the temple and elders, who had come out against him, “Have you come out as against a robber, with swords and clubs?
53. When I was with you day after day in the temple, you did not lay hands on me. But this is your hour and the power of darkness.”

Jesus Christ Himself said the swords had to do with the fulfillment of the prophecy.

GeneralDae:
Wasn't that prophecy fulfilled when jesus was on the cross with two thieves?

Jesus Christ did not make intercession between transgressors while He was on the cross. The conversation He had while on the cross was just with the one thief, and it was no intercession

GeneralDae:

As for Stephen, didn't Stephen also pray that God receives his soul? Stephens' worldview ( as that of Jesus and all Christians) is that the soul which would rise on the day of resurrection matters more. Even Jesus looked forward to the glory ahead, paul didn't want to be a castaway, etc etc.

Here's another way to think of this, If Jesus Christ had in fact commanded that we, His followers, know to defend ourselves when attacked, Stephen's death would have been for nothing because Stephen's actions would have been in direct disobedience of the teachings of Jesus Christ? There is nothing to gain from disobeying the commandments of Jesus Christ.

So you talk of glory and resurrection and what not hinges on obedience to the teachings of Jesus Christ. If the actions were born of disobedience, then it was for nothing.

Kobojunkie:
Read what transpired for your own self.

Wasn't that prophecy fulfilled when jesus was on the cross with two thieves? Read what transpired for your own self.

Luke 22 vs 35-38 (ESV)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
35. And he said to them, “When I sent you out with no moneybag or knapsack or sandals, did you lack anything?” They said, “Nothing.”
36. He said to them, “But now let the one who has a moneybag take it, and likewise a knapsack. And let the one who has no sword sell his cloak and buy one.
37. For I tell you that this Scripture must be fulfilled in me: ‘And he was numbered with the transgressors.’ For what is written about me has its fulfillment.”
38. And they said, “Look, Lord, here are two swords.” And he said to them, “It is enough.”

According to Jesus Christ, He told this to His disciples at the time so that the scripture found in Isaiah 53 vs 12 might be fulfilled in Him. From Isaiah, we learn that Jesus Christ was numbered with the transgressors, yet he bore the sin of man, and makes intercession for the transgressors.

Isaiah 53 vs 11-12 (ESV)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
10. Yet it was the will of the Lord to crush him; he has put him to grief;[g] when his soul makes[h] an offering for guilt, he shall see his offspring; he shall prolong his days; the will of the Lord shall prosper in his hand.
11. Out of the anguish of his soul he shall see[i] and be satisfied; by his knowledge shall the righteous one, my servant, make many to be accounted righteous, and he shall bear their iniquities.
12. Therefore I will divide him a portion with the many,[j] and he shall divide the spoil with the strong,[k] because he poured out his soul to death and was numbered with the transgressors, yet he bore the sin of many and makes intercession for the transgressors.

Was that scripture not fulfilled when one of His disciples took a soldier's ear off, Jesus Christ having to put the ear back on after calming both parties down?

Luke 22 vs 47-53 (ESV)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
47. While he was still speaking, there came a crowd, and the man called Judas, one of the twelve, was leading them. He drew near to Jesus to kiss him,
48. but Jesus said to him, “Judas, would you betray the Son of Man with a kiss?”
49. And when those who were around him saw what would follow, they said, “Lord, shall we strike with the sword?”
50. And one of them struck the servant[h] of the high priest and cut off his right ear.
51. But Jesus said, “No more of this!” And he touched his ear and healed him.
52. Then Jesus said to the chief priests and officers of the temple and elders, who had come out against him, “Have you come out as against a robber, with swords and clubs?
53. When I was with you day after day in the temple, you did not lay hands on me. But this is your hour and the power of darkness.”

Jesus Christ Himself said the swords had to do with the fulfillment of the prophecy.
Wasn't that prophecy fulfilled when jesus was on the cross with two thieves? Jesus Christ did not make intercession between transgressors while He was on the cross. The conversation He had while on the cross was just with the one thief, and it was no intercession

As for Stephen, didn't Stephen also pray that God receives his soul? Stephens' worldview ( as that of Jesus and all Christians) is that the soul which would rise on the day of resurrection matters more. Even Jesus looked forward to the glory ahead, paul didn't want to be a castaway, etc etc. Here's another way to think of this, If Jesus Christ had in fact commanded that we, His followers, know to defend ourselves when attacked, Stephen's death would have been for nothing because Stephen's actions would have been in direct disobedience of the teachings of Jesus Christ? There is nothing to gain from disobeying the commandments of Jesus Christ.

So you talk of glory and resurrection and what not hinges on obedience to the teachings of Jesus Christ. If the actions were born of disobedience, then it was for nothing.

I am ready to concede that Jesus told his disciples to buy swords in order for the prophecy to be fulfilled, although I also think the prophecy was fulfilled when jesus died alongside two transgressors as well. But I concede you are right on this one in addition to that, and I was wrong on my earlier interpretation as to why they bought swords.

I don't think you get the point about Stephen. My point is not that jesus did not command that we should turn the other cheek, rather my point is that he didn't say we should do this simply because we love our enemies more than ourselves. Also running away ( like the other disciples did) is no disobedience. Self defence when we can afford it without hurting anyone is no disobedience, because even Jesus had to run away at some point when they picked up stones and like you said, the other disciples ran away too.
The purpose of the command was not targeted at making Christians avoiding to protect themselves when they can ( by avoiding conflict or running if they could), the purpose is to teach love and perseverance. Stephen wasn't just obeying turn the other cheek, rather he was dying because he believed in a purpose not necessarily a commandment written on stone.

GeneralDae:
I am ready to concede that Jesus told his disciples to buy swords in order for the prophecy to be fulfilled, although I also think the prophecy was fulfilled when jesus died alongside two transgressors as well. But I concede you are right on this one in addition to that, and I was wrong on my earlier interpretation as to why they bought swords.

Ok

GeneralDae:
I don't think you get the point about Stephen. My point is not that jesus did not command that we should turn the other cheek, rather my point is that he didn't say we should do this simply because we love our enemies more than ourselves. Also running away ( like the other disciples did) is no disobedience.

No where in His teaching does He suggest that you can run when you want to. Do not add, and do not remove from His teachings your own meaning - the Pharisees were found guilty of this very thing by Jesus Christ.

GeneralDae:
Self defence when we can afford it without hurting anyone is no disobedience, because even Jesus had to run away at some point when they picked up stones and like you said, the other disciples ran away too.

Again, in this you are guilty of what Jesus Christ accused the Pharisees of doing - teaching their own ideas instead or in addition to the teachings of God.

GeneralDae:
The purpose of the command was not targeted at making Christians avoiding to protect themselves when they can ( by avoiding conflict or running if they could), the purpose is to teach love and perseverance. Stephen wasn't just obeying turn the other cheek, rather he was dying because he believed in a purpose, not necessarily a commandment written on stone.

Purpose? You are trying to explain the reason why Jesus Christ gave us this commandment to obey, forgetting instead what the Truth of God means. Jesus Christ is the Truth of God, and so His teachings are meant as foundational truths - axioms, propositions regarded as being established and accepted truths for all of His followers to obey without questioning. That is what the Word of God is. So trying to explain away what Jesus Christ said is akin to trying to replace what God said with your reasoning... it is no longer God's Word(Spirit) but your doctrine then, hence disobedience.

enilove:
Jesus made it cleared to us that we christians which are under the grace are expected to obey the laws given by God to Moses :

Matthew 5:17 KJV
Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

For example , are we not to obey this laws ?

Leviticus 19:26-28 KJV
Ye shall not eat any thing with the blood: neither shall ye use enchantment, nor observe times. [27] Ye shall not round the corners of your heads, neither shalt thou mar the corners of thy beard.
[28] Ye shall not make any cuttings in your flesh for the dead, nor print any marks upon you: I am the Lord.

You're confused....get the word study....okay

enilove:


I have a question for you .

The law says , '' thou shall not kill '' .
Is this abolished ?

BEFORE...thought shall not kill, killing was never right. Before thou shall not commit adultery or fornication...ask Joseph he refused to sleep with his boss wife...when then is the purpose of the law if the thou shall not wasn't right before the law....you want to take us back to the law....olorun o je ooo

OkCornel:


The things Jesus spoke of in Matthew 5 are higher requirements than the Laws of Moses. For example compare Jesus’ standard on adultery, revenge etc.

You’ll see Jesus requires a higher standard from His followers.

Our righteousness must exceed that of the Pharisees and the Sadducees who were custodians of the Mosaic Law. A higher standard is required of Christ’s followers.

Nothing Changed! The Standard of Commission and Conviction for Any of God's Laws, be it Adultery, Stealing, Lying, Killing etc Commences, from the heart (soul).

It was so when Moses was given The Law, but because the people wanted to rid themselves of from God and His Laws but they could not, thus they perverted the Application of The Law and "changed" it.

But, The Lord came to Restore It As it was, when it was given to Moses!

Hence the Statement in Matthew 5.

Dtruthspeaker:


Nothing Changed! The Standard of Commission and Conviction for Any of God's Laws, be it Adultery, Stealing, Lying, Killing etc Commences, from the heart (soul).

It was so when Moses was given The Law, but because the people wanted to rid themselves of from God and His Laws but they could not, thus they perverted the Application of The Law and "changed" it.

But, The Lord came to Restore It As it was, when it was given to Moses!

Hence the Statement in Matthew 5.

Jesus gave higher standards than the laws of Moses with some commandments in Matthew 5. So something definitely changed.

Meanwhile, do these laws still apply to believers today?

1. Animal sacrifice
2. Stoning adulterers
3. Tithing (people don argue this one tire)
4. Cities of refuge for those who committed manslaughter.
5. Cutting off a woman’s hand for squeezing the testicles of a man.
6. Men with crushed testicles cannot join the assembly of men presenting themselves before the Lord

OkCornel:


Jesus gave higher standards than the laws of Moses with some commandments in Matthew 5. So something definitely changed.

Meanwhile, do these laws still apply to believers today?

1. Animal sacrifice
2. Stoning adulterers
3. Tithing (people don argue this one tire)
4. Cities of refuge for those who committed manslaughter.
5. Cutting off a woman’s hand for squeezing the testicles of a man.
6. Men with crushed testicles cannot join the assembly of men presenting themselves before the Lord

Yes, they do!

But the Problem is None is Righteous to Implement and Execute The Law, for The Law Can Only be implemented by a Righteous man hence "Let he who is clean (Righteous) cast the first stone" can not be found in the earth.

It is The Further Law that A sinner can not and must not Judge Another Sinner, It is The Job of The Righteous!

And seeing that None is Righteous, therefore, it is The Lord Who Shall Judge Himself!

Kobojunkie:
You don't read at all before you respond to posts.

My comments are very clear on the meaning implied. Yet somehow it still goes over your head.. how? I don't know. I want to respond but I am lost as to how it is I can help you.

Okay, could you clearly explain these statements

First,

Kobojunkie:

We are not under the Old Covenant Law (The Law of Moses). So yes, we are not to obey the Old Covenant Laws depicted in the books of Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy. ..

With

Kobojunkie:

...In fact, the Old Covenant continues to bind the people of Israel and those who live in their land forever...

Dtruthspeaker:

Okay, could you clearly explain these statements
First,
With

Are you of the Blood of Jacob(people of Israel)? Do you live in the land of Canaan(land of Israel)?

Deuteronomy 30 vs 15-20 (ERV)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
15. “Today I have given you a choice between life and death, success and disaster.
16. I command you today to love the Lord your God. I command you to follow him and to obey his commands, laws, and rules. Then you will live, and your nation will grow larger. And the Lord your God will bless you in the land that you are entering to take for your own.
17. But if you turn away from your God and refuse to listen, if you are led away to worship and serve other gods,
18. you will be destroyed. I am warning you today, if you turn away from God, you will not live long in that land across the Jordan River that you are ready to enter and take for your own.

19. “Today I am giving you a choice of two ways. And I ask heaven and earth to be witnesses of your choice. You can choose life or death. The first choice will bring a blessing. The other choice will bring a curse. So choose life! Then you and your children will live.
20. You must love the Lord your God and obey him. Never leave him, because he is your life. And he will give you a long life in the land that he, the Lord, promised to give to your ancestors—Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.”

The Old Covenant was and remains a covenant between those of the blood of Jacob and the foreigners that live in the land of Canaan with them.

Kobojunkie:
Are you of the Blood of Jacob(people of Israel)? Do you live in the land of Canaan(land of Israel)?
The Old Covenant was and remains a covenant between those of the blood of Jacob and the foreigners that live in the land of Canaan with them.

I see that you have updated that The Law/Covenant includes Foreigners which was our previous contention in the past but now you make the error of limiting it Only to the Landed Territories of Israel.

For, would your opinion be different if you took great cognisance of the Words of God, inserted in that same Covenant made to and with Abraham, the First, and the Grand Father of Israel to wit "All the Families of the earth shall be blessed"?

This was the Position when Isaac ran with it until it was passed to Israel whom you appear to recognise and accept but it also appears that you discard Abraham, Who is the True Undersigned Party while all others, that is Isaac and Jacob where just Privies and heirs to an Already Established Covenant/Law.

So, would you recognise Abraham as the Original Party and One who Undersigned that Covenant?

Dtruthspeaker:
I see that you have updated that The Law/Covenant includes Foreigners which was our previous contention in the past but now you make the error of limiting it Only to Landed Territories of Israel.

For, would your opinion be different if you took great cognisance of the Words of God, inserted in that same Covenant made to and with Abraham, the First, and the Grand Father of Israel to wit "All the Families of the earth shall be blessed"

This was the Position when Isaac ran with it until it was passed to Israel whom you appear to recognise and accept but it also appears that you discard Abraham, Who is the True Undersigned Party while all others, that is Isaac and Jacob where just Privies and heirs to an Already Established Covenant/Law.

So, would you recognise Abraham as the Original Party and One who Undersigned that Covenant?

How can I update what you have quoted twice now and each time remaining the same?
Learn to read before you respond next time.

The details of the Old Covenant are there in that book for you to read up on.

Kobojunkie:

The Old Covenant was and remains a covenant between those of the blood of Jacob and the foreigners that live in the land of Canaan with them.

I just got to this part of your post

Kobojunkie:

19. “Today I am giving you a choice of two ways. And I ask heaven and earth to be witnesses of your choice. You can choose life or death. The first choice will bring a blessing. The other choice will bring a curse. So choose life! Then you and your children will live.
20. You must love the Lord your God and obey him. Never leave him, because he is your life. And he will give you a long life in the land that he, the Lord, promised to give to your ancestors—Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.”

Just saw this statement you quoted above!

Do you not See that this is the SAME STATEMENT MADE IN THE LAW/COVENANT with no variation?

[b]Deuteronomy 30:15-20
15 See, I have set before thee this day life and good, and death and evil;

16 In that I command thee this day to love the Lord thy God, to walk in his ways, and to keep his commandments and his statutes and his judgments, that thou mayest live and multiply: and the Lord thy God shall bless thee in the land whither thou goest to possess it.

17 But if thine heart turn away, so that thou wilt not hear, but shalt be drawn away, and worship other gods, and serve them;

18 I denounce unto you this day, that ye shall surely perish, and that ye shall not prolong your days upon the land, whither thou passest over Jordan to go to possess it.

19 I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live:

20 That thou mayest love the Lord thy God, and that thou mayest obey his voice, and that thou mayest cleave unto him: for he is thy life, and the length of thy days: that thou mayest dwell in the land which the Lord sware unto thy fathers, to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, to give them."

The Very Same Pronouncement of The Law, No Variation thereof!

Kobojunkie:

How can I update what you have quoted twice now and each time remaining the same?
Learn to read before you respond next time.

The details of the Old Covenant are there in that book for you to read up on.

You misunderstand me, I am updating that you have now taken cognisance that Foreigners are Partakers Under the Covenant where in the past you contended with me that the Covenant was Exclusively for Israel Alone!

So now, I am trying to understand your view on why you now think that the Covenant is Limited Only to the Landed Territories of Israel? For you said

Kobojunkie:
Are you of the Blood of Jacob(people of Israel)? Do you live in the land of Canaan(land of Israel)?
The Old Covenant was and remains a covenant between those of the blood of Jacob and the foreigners that live in the land of Canaan with them.

Whilst I disagree with the bolded but I wish to understand your view on it.

OkCornel:


The things Jesus spoke of in Matthew 5 are higher requirements than the Laws of Moses. For example compare Jesus’ standard on adultery, revenge etc.

You’ll see Jesus requires a higher standard from His followers.

Our righteousness must exceed that of the Pharisees and the Sadducees who were custodians of the Mosaic Law. A higher standard is required of Christ’s followers.

In addition to what I answered earlier to wit-
" Nothing Changed! The Standard of Commission and Conviction for Any of God's Laws, be it Adultery, Stealing, Lying, Killing etc Commences, from the heart (soul)."

See Leviticus 19:17
"Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thine heart: thou shalt in any wise rebuke thy neighbour, and not suffer sin upon him."

Many people do not understand the Holy Scripture. They manage to read in full but dissect in parts and contradict themselves.

This Scripture is written for the past, present and future.......many of us giving our own views in place of interpretation will die and the Scripture will still be in existence.

The essence of this is that the Spirit of God is not static but dynamic in nature. I hope you all understand it.

I am saying this with respect to our knowledge base and in particular understanding that leads to interpretation of the Word.

Dtruthspeaker:
You misunderstand me, I am updating that you have now taken cognisance that Foreigners are Partakers Under the Covenant where in the past you contended with me that the Covenant was Exclusively for Israel Alone!
So now, I am trying to understand your view on why you now think that the Covenant is Limited Only to the Landed Territories of Israel? For you said
Whilst I disagree with the bolded but I wish to understand your view on it.

If you read through the details of the Old Covenant itself, you will learn that indeed the foreigners, though allowed to live among the people of Israel, do not partake of the promise of the Old Covenant just as is stated clearly that only those who are of the Blood of Jacob inherit the land forever.

Out of the 613 commandments, there are only about 4 that foreigners are required to obey - foreigners are not included in the Tithing structure even. They are just allowed to live in the land, but they do not benefit from the promise of Abraham.

Kobojunkie:
If you read through the details of the Old Covenant itself, you will learn that indeed the foreigners, though allowed to live among the people of Israel, do not partake of the promise of the Old Covenant just as is stated clearly that only those who are of the Blood of Jacob inherit the land forever.

Out of the 613 commandments, there are only about 4 that foreigners are required to obey - foreigners are not included in the Tithing structure even. They are just allowed to live in the land, but they do not benefit from the promise of Abraham.

I think you have it the wrong side up, it is rather that foreigners are supposed and expected to keep The Law save for a meagre few which they Might be Forbidden from taking up but I am not very certain of this forbidden part for I think that they are not up to 5 out of your 613.

However, I have seen some Discretionary Laws eg Numbers 15:14-16

And if a stranger sojourn with you, or whosoever be among you in your generations, and will offer an offering made by fire, of a sweet savour unto the Lord; AS YE DO, SO HE SHALL DO.

15 One ordinance shall be both for you of the congregation, and also for the stranger that sojourneth with you, an ordinance for ever in your generations: as ye are, so shall the stranger be before the Lord.

16 ONE LAW AND ONE MANNER shall be for you, and for the stranger that sojourneth with you.

The Laws which Prohibit and Exclude A Foreigner who wishes to abide with them are very few!

Out of those 613 as you have often said for I really do not know how many they but how many there Expressly and Directly Prohibit Strangers/Foreigners?

I would like to examine them if you have them!

Dtruthspeaker:


I think you have it the wrong side up, it is rather that foreigners are supposed and expected to keep The Law save for a megre few which they Might be Forbidden from taking up but I am not very certain of this.

However, I have seen some Discretionary Laws eg Numbers 15:14-16

And if a stranger sojourn with you, or whosoever be among you in your generations, and will offer an offering made by fire, of a sweet savour unto the Lord; AS YE DO, SO HE SHALL DO.

15 One ordinance shall be both for you of the congregation, and also for the stranger that sojourneth with you, an ordinance for ever in your generations: as ye are, so shall the stranger be before the Lord.

16 ONE LAW AND ONE MANNER shall be for you, and for the stranger that sojourneth with you.

The Laws which Prohibit and Exclude A Foreigner who wishes to abide with them are very few!

Out of those 613 as you have often said for I really do not know how many they but how many there Expressly and Directly Prohibit Strangers/Foreigners?

I would like to examine them if you have them

Again, as I stated earlier there only 4 laws in the Old Covenant that foreigners who live among the people of Israel are required to live by.
The same 4 laws are repeated by the disciples in Jerusalem when asked of what rules the gentiles should be required to follow.

I do not care to examine them since I am not of that Kingdom.

Dtruthspeaker:


In addition to what I answered earlier to wit-
" Nothing Changed! The Standard of Commission and Conviction for Any of God's Laws, be it Adultery, Stealing, Lying, Killing etc Commences, from the heart (soul)."

See Leviticus 19:17
"Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thine heart: thou shalt in any wise rebuke thy neighbour, and not suffer sin upon him."

The eye for an eye and tooth for a tooth law Jesus changed in Matthew 5?

OkCornel:


The eye for an eye and tooth for a tooth law Jesus changed in Matthew 5?

No it did not change, it was rather restored for what does an eye for an eye and tooth for a tooth Truly Mean?

Answer, Equity and balance, "Just Is" and "Accuracy" (As we say today, not a Kobo more, not a Kobo less)

For by Mathew 5, the Scribes and Pharisees and their lawyers had evilised The Law and perverted it.

So though they were mouthing The Law, it was the Evil Version they implemented, which is what you see in their Application of The Law of The Sabbath, The "Just is" or rather "in just is" of the case of the Adulterous Woman (the man was safely tucked away, and I am certain that the man was a scribe), The Law of Giving and Offerings.

They perverted and evilised The Law, thus, The Lord was setting it back to its Original Form!

Kobojunkie:
Again, as I stated earlier there only 4 laws in the Old Covenant that foreigners who live among the people of Israel are required to live by.
The same 4 laws are repeated by the disciples in Jerusalem when asked of what rules the gentiles should be required to follow.

I do not care to examine them since I am not of that Kingdom.

.

Dtruthspeaker:

You misunderstand me, I wish you to supply The Law or Laws Commanding foreigners to keep Only 4 out of All The Laws of The Commandments.

Or in the Alternative, The Law which Prohibits Foreigners from keeping The Commandments Save for the 4.

And where can I find those 4 Laws which you say foreigners are permitted to keep to the Exclusion of All the other Laws!

I will not supply you that. You can read through the book of the Law for yourself so you can gain the understanding of it for yourself.