Dtruthspeaker: Did I not infer that The Law is The Commandments?
Anyway, it is laymen and churchgoers and devils who do not understand what Paul means or refuse to understand. Christians get it and they understood that that is what Christ Said in fewer words.
Huh? Are you confused? First you say he advocated for the law now you are saying he didn't.
The same Jesus the supposedly said to someone to obey all the laws? The same Jesus that said:
Matt. 23 Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples,
2 Saying The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat:
3 All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not.
SIRTee15: I agree with u that atheist shouldn't waste their energy on Christians because u guys don't even know anything about the bible u want to chuk mouth enter.
Abi no be one of u chop disgrace this night on this thread. That one no kuku get shame, he will still find my trouble tmrw.
But atheist that has shame will know when to keep shut and not get involved in what he knows little about. A good example is Lord reed, I will advise u follow his lead.
You are funny. Because I haven't responded means I have shut up? LMAO! You guys always think silence means you've won but when someone talks you start getting salty. Calm your tits down and await my response like a reasonable person who knows that I don't live on Nairaland.
He did not mean that Christians are not under Law. He was talking about The Law of Condemnation. The Laws which convicts and condemna a man what you would understand as "Criminal Law" with all the standards of proof of guilt and absolve-tion from guilt according to Law.
Paul was simply showing and proving in accordance with Law how a man is guilty and how a man is declared innocent making the connection and Law effects (legal effects) with the Works Christ Did and had Done.
Thus, his writings is about The Law implications (legal implications) of what Christ had done via a vis what The Law had done and will do.
So; Paul was writing to us lawyers first, hence Peters warning to lay men (2 Peter 3:6) to save help us see the Truth and Foundations of Law, for we absolutely know that there is no thing on earth that is not under Law.
Therefore, when Paul said "not under law" he meant a person who would not be attacked by criminal law since he has committed no offence exactly as no police or Efcc or ndlea has come to face you since you have not broken their law. That is what he was trying to teach hence why he said "sin (offence) is not imputed when there is no Law" Romans 5:13". This is where man and his fake laws called legal attached their own "Nullum crimen sine lege is Latin for "no crime without law." The phrase reflects the principle in criminal law and international criminal law that a person cannot or should not face criminal punishment except for an act that was criminalized by law before they performed the act. Though they say "Law" they mean man made laws e.g. criminal code, police act, acja, constitutions and all those fake commands that man made
So, Paul was talking about Law and how the Law operates in convicting an offender (a sinner)/absolving a person from sin.
Dude he was talking of the law given by Moses. Christians he said are not under that law so I dunno what you are talking about. Jesus never said anything like that.
Dtruthspeaker: Were they not more than 3million people? Surely 200,000+ bodies is not an issue
Poop, trash, food wastes etc these things are never there when you travel. Surely you have not found the bone you ate last time you travelled to Oré
Have you seen the trash heaps in Lokoja before? How would I find my own trash amongst the trash of millions of people.
Dude they were not travelling with the bodies of their dead.
Deuteronomy 10:6 And the children of Israel took their journey from Beeroth of the children of Jaakan to Mosera: there Aaron died, and there he was buried; and Eleazar his son ministered in the priest's office in his stead.
Dtruthspeaker: There normally isn't! You wont find the poop you laid when you were travelling after a week or 2 especially when you buried it or covered it with sand. Even the one laid open turns to sand and dust. That's my point.
Secondly, there is no big deal in carrying their dead. Mortuarying and handling of dead bodies is a part of living.
Dude they would not be carrying round with them the dead bodies of 200,000+ people.
Not just poop, trash, bones of animals that were eaten, burn pits, etc. Nothing, no evidence.
BadPanda: Ecclesiastes 3:11 says that God has "put eternity in our hearts". That verse alone contradicts your statement. Humans were always destined to grasp the concept of eternity. If Adam and Eve hadn't eaten the fruit, then humans would have. Humans were always meant to live forever. Death just came in later as punishment for disobedience. (Romans 5:12; 6:23) God says that soon He will "swallow up death forever". (Isa. 25:8 ). Death will be brought to nothing (1Cor. 15:26; Rev. 21:4).
Do better research.
LoLz. What makes you think I believe your book of favourite Jewish mythologies?
Jokerman: That means we need at least get to year 3,000 or 3001, before all these may come to pass following what I wrote up their by God's 7 day timeline... But I'm not into that... What I'm after is doing what God wants, evangelize the good news of Jesus Christ, have the power in Jesus to tread upon serpents and scorpions and all power of the enemy, and finally when I leave this doomed world,be in the Lord's Army
LoLz! So Jesus is not coming soon or quickly then.
SIRTee15: Criteria for tanakh is different from the new testament canonisation. The Jews that compiled the book of Daniel said it was written by Daniel in the 6th century BC. Ezekiah who lived in Babylonian exile mentioned Daniel in his book as a righteous person. You may want to question the historicity of Daniel but remember until 1993 most scholars insisted David never existed, them an ancient inscription depicting city of David was discovered.
This is funny. The criteria for some parts of the same so called Holy Book was made different to others and yet you are here trying to defend the reason why books where excluded? LoLz.
The question is not about the historicity of Daniel but the authorship of the book.
The 3 gospels were made anonymous by who? The early church knew the writers of the gospel, this wasn't disputed until modern scholars came up until their unanimous claim.
John, Peter and James also didn't quote the Lord in their letters. What does that change. The audience of these letters already heard the gospel. Why should u tell them again. The aim of the letters is to explain exegesis and address heresy/controversy in the church. They don't need to recount the gospel.
By what method do you know who wrote the gospels, just tell me that.
Heard the gospel from who? And why shouldn't they be told again? What is wrong with repetition especially to buttress whatever point is being made? Why do they quote passages from the prophets and the psalms if they've already heard those many times before?
Where did the heresy spring from if they were already hearing the gospels?
Dtruthspeaker: Can you identify who owns the poop between Abuja and Okene that it belongs to Muhammad's people or that it belongs to Tinubu's people? Or did you not read that even Jacob asked to be buried in the promised land? So obviously, they carried their dead.
There's no poop to identify that's the point.
They carried the dead bodies of thousands of people who died over the course of forty years? Are you kidding?
Jokerman: No... What Ieant was that that's about the time Jesus was born on the earth up to this very day
Dude you are counting how many thousand years from the supposed creation to now and remarking how 6000 & 7000 is a significant numbers, why are you dodging your own words.
Dtruthspeaker: Because his focus was in the area where he was an expert, which is Law (The Commandments) and his knowledge of Law which was the same reason why he hated Christ's movement in the first place and made him think that they were evil anti-God like you.
Until God opened his eyes to see that Christ was still talking about The Law, the very thing which he supported and upheld.
Thst is why we see him making the connections of Law to us and to Christ as he applauded and uppraised Christs works.
Thus his writings focused on re-raising up The Law and giving us The Law opinion (if i say legal opinion now you people will get it but legal means man made while Law is God Made) for us to see and know the workings and implications of The Law (The Commandments).
Which is why God chose him so that the world would have a glimpse from The Eye of The Law how God, The Law would judge them!
It's as simple as that. The lay men like the fishermen can say and repeat what Christ had Said and taught them but God raised Paul, to be the lawyer who gives The Judgments of The Law!
Which law? The same one he said Christians are not under?
Galatians 3 10 For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them.
11 But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith.
12 And the law is not of faith: but, The man that doeth them shall live in them.
13 Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree:[
Galatians 5:4 Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.
Dtruthspeaker: See, you did not read well. Here is a brief list of places where they stopped.
From Exodus 13 upwards we see Etham, Pi-ha-hiroth, Marah, Elim, Kadesh, Midian, Nu. 20:1,22, 33:36–37 Located in the Wilderness of Zin; Miriam's burial place
Mount Hor Nu. 20:22, 21:4, 33:37–41 On the border of Edom; Aaron's burial place according to Numbers Zalmonah Nu. 33:41–42 - - Punon Nu. 33:42–43...
The Sinai area is 60sqkm, that is a small area to be wandering in for 40 years. You are speaking as if they never stopped moving day in day out when several times it is said that they camped and stayed at locations for days. Even if they never stopped moving will they not eat? Will they not poop? Will they not stop to bury the dead? So thousands of people die over 40 years in a 60sqkm area and their bones cannot be found?
Dtruthspeaker: You did not read well. They did not live in an area for 40 years. They were moving (travelling) and stopping at different spots over the court of 40 years exactly like Young Shall grow night buses used to stop well well when they were travelling from Lagos to Calabar or ehen like Ethiopian airlines stop over flights where Delta Airlines take 12 hours from Atlanta to Lagos, Ethiopian stop overs take tactically almost 48hours and there is no debris to found be found of either of them.
You didn't read very well. They were in the same area for 40 years. They would kill animals, eat and discard bones, poop, discard waste, bury the dead and all the other associated debris hundreds of thousands of people would normally generate just by living and you want to compare that to 1 person taking a trip.
basilico: I'll take just some examples of Trump's initial appointees. His first AG Jeffrey . Immediately after passing nomination, he was pressured to recuse himself from the Clinton and FBI Russia investigation leaving Rosenstein to carry out the inquisition through Mueller and Weissman.Reason for recusal is that he was part of Trump's campaign which Cris Steele and FBI lied was colluding with Russia.
Gen Flynn. Obama expelled Russian diplomats. Flynn called Kisylak the Russian ambassador and the FBI recorded his call. Mary McCord (find out where she is today) and some other deep stater went to WH saying that Flynn was belittling Obama by making contact with Russians. Which was within his purview as incoming Nat Sec Advisor. Pence said that Flynn had not told him about the comms with Russian Ambassador. Forcing Flynn to get out of the way. Remember Obama had told Trump not to appoint Flynn.The reason was that petulant Obama had fallen out with and fired Flynn because Flynn had stated that Obama admin was arming extremist group ISIS and lying that they were moderate elements of the Free Syrian army. This intercepted call would land Flynn in court as part of lawfare.
That was the first strike. Get rid of Sessions and Flynn. Next appointment. James Comey was fired. Gov Chris Christie lobbied for Chris Wray to be appointed, he is a deep state sympathiser who thinks parents protesting Critical Race Theory in schools are domestic terrorists.
Trump was an outsider, didn't know these corrupt DC creatures who would never pass nomination via senate if McConnell did not approve them.McConnell wife is a Chinese family invested in ship building or something like that. Any Chinese financial drastic measures by Trump would be tempered down by the senate unless it was through an Executive Order
There. Good allies, severely curtailed. New appointment,wolves in sheepskins.
LMFAO! Spin master, when the same corrupt McConnell was helping conservative judges elected you talk say him corrupt na now why your lord and savior wan enter frying pan you know say he's corrupt. Bwahahahahaha!
Dtruthspeaker: Even in the 1 to 13hours when you travel the evidence of your travel is not there not to talk of 40 years travel.
There is no comparison between traveling and living within an area for 40 years with traveling between 2 distant points for 13 hrs. For one they are living and conducting all the activities associated with hundreds of thousands of people living in an area which generates way more debris than a single person traveling for 13hrs.
SIRTee15: Regarding old testament. Christians regard it as books telling the history of the Israelites. The Jews compiled their history in the books. It's not for me to start disputing the history of a race I don't belong. The old testament is read either as historical evidence or theology interpretation. The later is the interest of christians when it comes to the old testament. We learn the principles of God as he relates with his elects and then apply such principles to the new testament. The old testament was already compiled possibly by Ezra 200 years b4 any Christian existed so I really don't see how Christianity wil influence something already established b4 it.
I've read the apocryphal books in the old testament and I don't see much difference in canonised and non canonised. It's basically much of the same Jewish history and their challenges. My favourite is the book of sirach anyway.
Now to new testament. I already dealt with 2 Peter in one of my previous posts. I will check and bring it here, can't repeat myself.
But if we are to go by scholars. Only 13 of the 27 new testament books are accepted as genuine. The authorship of the rest are disputed by modern day scholars. The funny thing is the number keeps changing. A scholar may wake up this morning and claim another book's authorship is disputed because of some new criteria he discovered. Every bible scholar must defend his phD by claiming they've discovered something new about the bible. That's the way it works. It's either they publish or perish. Even 1 Thessalonians that have been agreed by all scholars to be the first authentic letter of Paul is now been disputed as fake by some new scholars. I don't know about u but personally I will take their work by a pinch of salt.
Anyway, back to 2 Peter, it was a private letter and wasnt well known in the early church period. However Clement of Rome quoted from it in his own letter in the first century AD. That was one of the decisions that influenced it's canonisation.
So then whether a book was pseudepigraphal would be irrelevant as a criteria if you going to add pseudepigraphal books to the canon anyway.
BTW 3 of the gospels have unknown authors nor does Paul who some of his books were likely written before the gospels barely quotes anything from Jesus' words. If indeed these were all stuff that was being transmitted orally how come Paul's books barely has any touchstones by way of verbatim quotes?
basilico: Each and every Trump ally and family has been grilled by law enforcement over matters that are bloated. By the Mueller inquisition, via impeachment 1 and 2, the Jan6 select committee, by DAs across the land, by Jack Smith. It takes an ounce of intelligence to see that a cabal does not want Trump or any other pretender Granted Trump did not start any war, looks out for nationalism, knows DC is corrupt to the core, does not want open borders and is staunchly Pro Israel. Republicans and Democrats don't want Trump because they obviously benefit via largese. For instance the Congress has had a fund that pays off victims of sexual harrasment by House members.
LoLz! Trump himself selected these people so your spin is just nonsense. After shouting drain the swamp, filling the courts with conservative judges and giving tax breaks to the rich is now you know DC is corrupt. Why didn't Trump do anything significant to combat the corruption? Why is it the very people of his kitchen cabinet that are falling apart? Nonsense and ingredients. Bwahahahahaha!
basilico: What's there to spin. I've said all along the idea is to prevent Trump from running. Not Trump but anyone else that DNC and RNC do not approve . The speaker of the house. The Republicans are flatly refusing a Trump supporting Speaker, they will stall until they get a RINO in place.
As for Trump, I now think they will move to jail him. Have close aides strung up in legal jeopardy until they plead guilty. Voila It's now confirmed that felonies were committed. Next step is jailing Trump. And by the way, don't ever think that Kennedy Jr will ever win the election. He is not an acceptable candidate, he is now an independent after seeing the roadblocks in place via the Democrat party. They will never let any other outsider become the president. That to me is the sad state of a system I thought works but whose decline will be inevitable.
Bwahahahahaha! OMFD! You are an awesome disaster! Bwahahahahaha!
SIRTee15: There's no evidence anywhere Peter wrote a gospel when he was alive. None of the apostolic fathers mentioned anything about Peter writing a gospel. What the apostolic fathers wrote was that the gospel of Mark is the oral rendition of Peter. Gospel of Peter started circulating in the 2nd century. No reference was made of it in the 1st century.
Gospel of Peter was a pseudepigrapha
One of the criteria you mentioned was that it was in oral traditions, Gospel of Peter was in oral tradition.
As for it being pseudepigrapha, riddle me this:
In addition to the sets of generally agreed to be non-canonical works, scholars will also apply the term to canonical works who make a direct claim of authorship, yet this authorship is doubted. For example, the Book of Daniel is considered by some to have been written in the 2nd century BC, 400 years after the prophet Daniel lived, and thus the work is pseudepigraphic. A New Testament example might be the book of 2 Peter, considered by some to be written approximately 80 years after Saint Peter's death. Early Christians, such as Origen, harbored doubts as to the authenticity of the book's authorship.[4]
SIRTee15: Criteria based on theological deduction and logical reasoning. Strict criteria for the new testament scriptures include the books must be written in the 1st century AD by people who knew the Lord or who met people that knew the Lord. It must have a new Christology doctrine not written in books b4 it. If it's just a repetition of what's already known, there's no need for it to be canonised.
It must not contain legends, fables or supernatural tales that sounds strange to the early church. Whatever supernatural that's written in the book must be well known and established by the early church.
It's pertinent to note that the gospel was initially sung as a hymn or chants in the early church and known to hearts by the early Christians b4 it was written down. So coming up with tales that's strange or unheard of will be rejected.
That's why stories like Jesus talking at birth was rejected because early Christians didn't sing it and books having such tales not included in the bible.
I don't know anything about widespread geographical use. 2 Peter wasn't widespread when it was canonised.
The gospel of Peter met all these criteria but was still rejected. Tell me why.
None of the things you've said have excluded human judgement.
Christianity Etc › Re: How Did They Do The BIBLE? (BIBLIOGY) by LordReed(m): 8:49am On Oct 27, 2023*. Modified: 9:15am On Oct 27, 2023
