₦airaland Forum

ayoku777:
You are arguing naively like a child. Let me try and lead you by the hand through scriptural interpretation.

Follow me.

Jesus told the rich young ruler that came to him;

Matthew 19v17 - ...if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.

Then a day before He was to go to the cross, the same Jesus now told His disciples;

John 13v34 - A NEW COMMANDMENT I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another.

Now what is the scriptural implication of calling something "NEW"?

This is it;

Hebrews 8v13 - By calling this covenant "new," he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and outdated will soon disappear.

When God calls something "new" in scripture, it is because He has made the former "old" and obsolete. And what is obsolete is done away with.

God doesn't bring in the new commandment to run with the old. He brings in the new to replace the old.

Hebrews 10v9 -Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second.

So Jesus didn't contradict Himself between what He told the young ruler and what He told His disciples. He simply instituted a new commandment as He went to the cross to bring in the new covenant. A new commandment that made the former old.

That is not contradiction, it is change of spiritual constitution as He was about to usher in a new covenant through His death on the cross. Its like drafting a new constitution as you're about to change from a military regime to a democracy.

Do you get it now?

Shalom.

THIS IS LAUGHABLE

YOUR ALMIGHTY GOD GIVES A LAW

YOUR ALMIGHTY GOD STATES THAT HIS LAWS SHOULD LAST FOREVER

YOUR ALMIGHTY GOD THEN COMES TO THEN COMES TO THE WORLD TO RENDER SOME HIS EVERLASTIG LAWS OBSOLETE

BRO, YOUR GOD IS VERY VERY CONFUSED

LET ME HELP YOU OUT

contradiction - /kɒntrəˈdɪkʃ(ə)n/
noun
1. a combination of statements, ideas, or features which are opposed to one another.

EG IF YOUR LORD GOD SAYS YOU ARE TO OBSERVE THIS LAW FOREVER

THEN YOUR LORD GOD COMES BACK AND SAYS STOP OBSERVING THAT LAW

YOUR LORD GOD HAS SUCCESSFULLY CONTRADICTED HIMSELF

ayoku777:
What do you understand about the difference between the old covenant and the new covenant? And the scriptural implication of calling something "new"?

Let's start with that.

I CAN SEE THAT THE IDEA OF YOUR DEAR BIBLE BEING FALLIBLE IS SOMETHING YOUR BRAIN CANT CONSIDER TO PONDER ON
INSTEAD OF LISTENING TO REASON YOU RESORT TO QUOTING ONE CHAPTER OR ANOTHER WHICH AT THE END OF THE DAY HAPPEN TO CONTRADICT IT SELF

AT THIS POINT ALL I CAN SAY IS EMPLOY REASONING!!

BECAUSE YOUR OLD COVENANT/NEW CONVENANT WHATEVER IS A SIMPLE CASE OF CHANGING HUMAN CREATED LAWS AND HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH ANY FICTIONAL DEITY

i rest

ayoku777:
You too learn from greek (the language the text was translated from).

Matthew 5v17 -Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to FULFIL.

The word "fulfil" there is the greek "pleroo"; which means to fill to the full, to bring something to its limit or endpoint, to consummate, to bring to pass or to an end.

Here are some other verses in the bible where the word "pleroo" was also used.

Luke 7v1 - Now when he had ENDED (pleroo) all his sayings in the audience of the people, he entered into Capernaum.

Acts 19v21 - After these things were ENDED (pleroo), Paul purposed in the spirit, when he had passed through Macedonia and Achaia, to go to Jerusalem, saying, After I have been there, I must also see Rome.

So you can see? Pleroo (fulfil) in greek means to bring to pass or to bring to an end.

So what Jesus actually meant is;

Matthew 5v17 -Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to pleroo (end).

So killing apostates is no more valid. Christ has ended that. The new commandment of love is the valid commandment now.

We are not talking about the dictionary meaning of "fulfil", I'm talking about the biblical application of the word "pleroo" used in the statement of Jesus for "fulfil". And it means "to bring to an end".

That's what Jesus meant by "fulfilling the law". He brought it to an end.

Romans 10v4 - For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth.

Shalom.

NOW JESUS CAME TO PUT AN END TO "THE LAW"

remember,

THE SAME JESUS SAID ALL THE LAWS ARE TO BE OBEYED

AT THIS POINT ANYONE WHO CANT SEE THE CLEAR CONTRADICTION HAS A BIG PROBLEM

OR LET ME ASK IS IT SEALED AGAIN

i rest

ayoku777:
Because Jesus Christ -the one who is the fulfilment and consummation of the law of God (Matt 5v17), and who God said we should hear (Matt 17v5), said;

John 13v34 - A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another.

The new LOVE commandment from Christ is the consummation of the old. The new has brought the old to pass (to an end)

So just has we no longer sacrifice animals because Jesus Christ the lamb of God has been sacrificed for us, we also no longer kill anyone for their sins because Jesus Christ has died for our sins.

Get it?

Shalom

LETS LEARN SOME ENGLISH

fulfil - /fʊlˈfɪl/
verb
1. achieve or realize (something desired, promised, or predicted).
2. carry out (a duty or role) as required, promised, or expected.

LET ME REPHRASE MY QUESTION

THE TEACHING ABOUT APOSTASY IN DEUTRONOMY 13
IS IT STILL VALID

BECAUSE FUFILMENT OF OT LAWS WAS JESUS' DUTY

ayoku777:
You're partly right. But "amend" is not the right word. The word Jesus used is "fulfill". Jesus did not come to amend the law, He came to fulfill the law.

Matthew 5v17 -Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to FULFIL.

VERY GOOD!



NOW GIVE ME A REASON WHY YOU AS A CHRISTAIN
SHOULDNT PRACTISE APOSTASY AS INSTRUCTED IN DEUTRONOMY

ayoku777:
You've not seen because you keep refusing to see. Because I keep showing you.

Jesus Himself, when He was about going to the cross, said this;

John 13v34 - A NEW COMMANDMENT I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another.

Can you see that?

Jesus has given us a new commandment, which is to love. Love is the new commandment to the believer in Christ.

And when God calls something "new", He has made the former old and obsolete.

Hebrews 8v13 - By calling this covenant "new," he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and outdated will soon disappear.

See that? God doesn't bring in the new commandment to run with the old. He brings in the new to replace the old.

Look at all these verses

Hebrews 10v9 -Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second.

Hebrews 7v18 - The former regulation is set aside because it was weak and useless (through the flesh).

Ephesians 2v15 - He did this by ending the system of law with its commandments and regulations. He made peace between Jews and Gentiles by creating in himself one new people from the two groups.

I keep telling you that Judaism is different from Christianity. Christianity is the spiritual reality of what was shadow rituals in Judaism.

The pre-grace and pre-calvary era, where judgment was stronger than mercy is different from the dispensation of grace we are now, where mercy triumphs over judgment through Jesus our advocate.

Hebrews 10v28 - He that despised Moses' law DIED WITHOUT MERCY under two or three witnesses:

But now under grace through Jesus;

...Mercy triumphs over judgment (James 2v13).

I keep explaining this to you with verses. But you will run away from that thread and come to another to continue the same rant that has already been explained to you.

Its one thing to be ignorant, its another to combine ignorance with arrogance. When you do that, it becomes self-delusion. Don't turn ignorance to self-delusion.

God bless you.

SO JESUS CAME TO AMMEND LAWS THAT GOD GAVE TO MOSES
AND JESUS SAID ALL THE LAWS SHOULD BE OBEYED
AND ISIAH SAID THE LAWS OF GOD ARE MEANT TO STAND
FOREVER



THIS IS THE PROBLEM OF CONTRADICTIONS AND INCONSISTENCY
OF THE BIBLE
AN OMNISCIENT BEING SHOULD KNOW BETTER

elveco:
Psalms 14:1 The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.

says the god who created every human beign
but seemed to care only about israel

it will take time........but people would use their brains more in the future

it cannot be said for sure who enjoys it more or ask caitlyn jenner

makzeze:
part 1, Subsection 1 of the Nigeria’s Money Laundering Act of 2011 limits transported cash to no more than N5 million for individual and 10 million for corporation.

this is why she might get into trouble

virginboy1:
So are we sensing any contradictory message here? . Moreover, More wisdom and Less wisdom which is better to you?

much more wisdom anytime any day

virginboy1:
Why are your lots so subjective about things like this? Even the Bible said, "my people perish for lack of wisdom"

ooh same bible says Ecclesiastes 1:18 For with much wisdom comes much sorrow; the more knowledge, the more grief.

virginboy1:
I believe there is a God, though no evidence I just have that latent Faith. But I am skeptical about the concept of Hell Fire.

hehhe thats how atheism starts......keep on asking
things would become clearer to u

winner01:
He's not a christian, he's just being stupid in sarcasm.

lol.

god heals the sick but he has to wait for scientists to discover the cure for diseases before he heals them.
god is all powerfull but has to chill for doctors to treat before he comes and steal the glory for their effort.
how deluded can people get?

TrajansKong:
Do not question. Believe. Obey and pray that his retribution passes you by. For He is an angry god and hellfire is real.

Fear Him above all things.

do not question?...listen to urself man
this is exactly the problem of africans

sha na valhala me i go like go fa!!

well if things like travelling without fuel can be tested in a science lab and confirmed to actually happen by supernatural means.....millions would begin to believe!!




but sorry it doesnt happen....there is absolutely no evidence of any supernatural or magic whatsoever

christains should stop using science to support thier religious claims...science and god never go together!....
like the biblical story of creation doesnt make sense when compared to scientific observations...http://www.huecotanks.com/debunk/genesis.html

SMH.........peoples brains are shrinking

but the bilble really has contradictions!

montezz:
I prefer black lips to pink lips any day anytime! #teamnatural

some pink lips natural now

well, giving gay people rights doesnt affect any non gay persons life it doesnt mean gay people should go around fvcking straight people it just gives right to gay people to do their stuff

PS iam not gay.........and FYI some animals can be gay!!

benvolavolarag:
Am glad Durban chose to build along the shoreline all the way to Mozambique...
SOON WE WILL BE COUNTING DURBAN WITH THE LIKES OF MIAMI AND RIO.
21 KM STRETCH OF DEVELOPED BEACHFRONT WITH SKYSCRAPERS NOT 22 STOREY BUILDINGS IN ONE TINY CORNER.

who gives a flying fvck??

koreskbv:
will be better than Abuja

except if abuja's centenary city project fails

its funny how gullible religous fanatics fall for such nonsense......why can they never predict something positive?...no they cant because the probability of it coincidentally happening is way lower

perfect girl from fantasy land

psucc:
Whose report should we believe; pope's, pastor's or God's.

neither..... we are here by chance!

Khd95:
Man nd science can never agree with God,maka y

Anothr thing is most of these scientific facts are not true or accurate,but because there are no alternatives,we accept them

examples?

Many creationists make the claim that the order and timing of the events described in Genesis are scientifically accurate, and thus could only be the result of divine knowledge. The most vociferous proponents of this argument are the Jehovah's Witnesses, in their booklet "Life: How Did It Get Here?". Are the creationists right? Is Genesis accurate in the order and timing of the events it describes? Is Genesis a historical narrative that accurately describes the appearence of life? A cursory examination shows that it is not. To see why, let's go through the creation accounts verse by verse.
Genesis 1:1 "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth".
There are some questions about this translation. The original Hebrew word usually translated as "God" here is elohim, which is actually the plural form. Literally, this verse reads, "in the beginning, the GODS created the heavens and the earth." This is one of several places in the Bible where God is referred to in the plural. Biblical scholars conclude that these fragments are left over from an early part of Hebrew history when the Jewish religion was, like every other religion on earth at the time, polytheistic, with more than one god. During this time, the god Yahweh was a storm god, one of many others.
There is also some dispute about the words. An alternate translation has this verse as "When god began to create the heavens and the earth".
This verse implies that the "heavens and the earth" were created more or less at the same time. Scientifically, we know that the "heavens", that is, space, appeared billions of years before the earth ever appeared. The sun is at least a "third generation" star, which formed from condensed gas clouds made up of remnants of at least two supernovae from previous stars.
2: And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
The early universe was not "dark". We know from quantum mechanics that the earliest universe was a sea of quarks, followed shortly after by a sea of free nucleons and photons. Until the era of "decoupling", about 300,000 years after the formation of the universe, the entire universe was as bright throughout as the surface of the sun is today.
The verse refers to "the face of the waters". If this verse refers to the waters on earth, such as the ocean, it is completely wrong. The early earth had no ocean. It was not until millions of years of accretion had built up the planet that liquid water began to form, both from volcanic outgassing and from the impacts of comets attracted by the gravity of the earth.
However, most Biblical scholars believe that the "waters" referred to here are those in heaven, from which rain comes. This interpretation is supported by the fact that the Genesis account later describes how these "waters" were divided from those of earth by a wall, with one portion of these divided waters forming the oceans.
But we know from science that the early universe did not have any liquid water. None at all. Not even any water molecules. In fact, for a period of several hundred thousand years, it did not have any molecules of any sort. The Genesis description of water above the "firmament" is simply wrong.
3: And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.
This verse has the formation of light occuring only AFTER the "waters" and the earth already existed. As noted above, this is simply wrong. The entire universe was brightly lit for its first 300,000 years of existence, billions of years before the earth came into being.
4: And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.
This verse betrays a fundamental misunderstanding of "light", one that was common to the pre-industrial peoples who wrote the Bible. During these times, it was believed that "darkness" was an element separate and distinct from "light" (see, for example, Amos 5:8, which declares that God "maketh the day dark with night". This of course is simply not true. Darkness is nothing more than the absence of light. One can no more "separate" light from darkness than one can separate "left" from "right" or "up" from "down".
5: And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.
Notice here that there is no Sun yet, it not having yet been created. This account is thus contradicted by science on several grounds. Since a "day" is itself based on the earth's rotation near the Sun, there could have been no "day" until AFTER the sun appeared. Nor is there any cosmic source of "day light" other than the sun. Scientifically, we know that the sun actually condensed first, and was already burning nuclear fuel when the earth first began to appreciably accrete. The Genesis account, which has the earth and the "waters" formed before the Sun, is simply wrong.
6: And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.
7: And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.
8: And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.
The word "firmament" refers to a hard, clear wall or divider. It refers to the ancient belief that the stars and planets were held in the sky by a huge transparent wall or roof. The "waters above" the firmament were presumed to be huge reservoirs of water in the sky, from which, it was presumed in ancient times, rain came through holes in the firmament. This is referred to during the Flood story by Genesis 7:11, which says "the windows of heaven were opened", and also in Genesis 8:2, which says "the windows of heaven were stopped, and the rain from heaven was restrained". It is also referred to by other verses in the Bible like Acts 14:17, where God "gave us rain from heaven", Deuteronomy 11:11, which says "But the land, whither ye go to possess it, is a land of hills and valleys, and drinketh water of the rain of heaven", Deuteronomy 11:17, which says "And then the LORD's wrath be kindled against you, and he shut up the heaven, that there be no rain", Deuteronomy 28:12, which says "The LORD shall open unto thee his good treasure, the heaven to give the rain unto thy land in his season", Isaiah 55:10, which says "For as the rain cometh down, and the snow from heaven, and returneth not thither, but watereth the earth, and maketh it bring forth and bud", and Revelations 11:6, which says "These have power to shut heaven, that it rain not in the days of their prophecy".
Needless to say, there is no "firmament" that holds rainwater or stars up in the sky. The ancient writers of the Bible, having no knowledge or understanding of "gravity", simply postulated that this hard clear sphere MUST be there, or else the stars and planets would all fall down, and that the "firmament" must have "windows" to let the rain through. They were wrong.
9: And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so.
10: And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good.
According to the Genesis account, the oceans