₦airaland Forum

Joagbaje: Why would paul quote Old Testament law and scriptures for new creations? Because of the kindom principles there

A Corinthian church member slept with his mother Inlaw . The Holy Spirit didn't tell him it's wrong. Until paul excommunicate the brother .

1 Corinthians 5:1
It is reported commonly that there is fornication among you, and such fornication as is not so much as named among the Gentiles, that one should have his father's wife.

On what ground did paul condemn this act which the holyghost didn't .because it's in the Old Testament scripture.

the reference to 1 Corinthians you posted says it all. The act was something even pagans(gentiles) do not tolerate! It had nothing to do with foundation knowledge.

Joagbaje: Christians do many evil in ignorance. Cheat in business and say that's how this Bussoness is done . It takes the understanding of scripture to know good

nobody needs the law to know cheating is wrong. Even unbelievers knows it's wrong to cheat. For one that cheats, it's his/her nature and it is very unchrist-like. The person is yet to submit him/her self to the leading of the spirit. Knowledge of the law will not do that for you.

Joagbaje: If a man sleep with his own daughter , is it a sin? On what ground is it a sin.

for somebody that knows the meaning fornication, what is he doing sleeping with his daughter?

BTW, if the man truly loves his daughter, is he helping her by engaging in such act? What about his wife? Will his wife love him more?

Joagbaje: Conscience can be hardened.

....and reliance on the law will not soften conscience.

what am i saying? ...... Someone with a hardened conscience will still engage in ungodly acts, with or without knowledge of the law....

....meaning knowledge of the law is equally irrelevant to him/her.

Joagbaje: The Holy Spirit doesn't mislead. The issue is how much yieldedness does a christian have .

the question should have been how much "yieldedness" should a true Christian have?

Joagbaje: But the law contain foundationional principles and if anyone miss that he will end up in error. The law is a reference point.

for an unbeliever just getting to know God, the law does provide some insight regarding God's nature/character, but now that you known Christ what do you need the law for?

Joagbaje: We are not tithing or giving offerings because the law says so.We have gone past the law.

when some of us say the law been abolished, was meant for those that says they tithe according to the law. If you don't belong to that group of tithers, good for you.

Joagbaje: Apostle paul knew the value of the law. I get amazed when Christians fight against principles in the law. And they fail to see how many times the early apostles quoted the law. It is more amazing to know that Paul was quoting these laws to Gentiles who didn't have a law!

Quoting the law is not the same thing as 'doing' the law. Some of us are against the 'doing'. There is nothing wrong with quoting the law (if you are not quoting for the purpose of doing).

Joagbaje: Your conscience cannot be a guide without foundational knowledge .

While i agree with the idea of foundational knowledge, how do explain the case of God's people before the law? e.g. Noah...

Genesis 6:9 (NIV)
9 This is the account of Noah and his family. Noah was a righteous man, blameless among the people of his time, and he walked faithfully with God.

Maybe the law is not the only source of foundational knowledge.

Joagbaje: WHAT IS SIN?

We have enough issue with gay movement in the church today tomorow it will be worse.

We have already seen thread on this site where posters say fornication is not a sin. "As long as two of you feel right about it consensually etc.

Without the law homosexuality will be justified. "after all it's my body" without the you can sleep with your own daughter by consent if two of you feel good about it. May be soon with infants.

You are not saying anything new or different from what some of us been saying. Read your post above and see that it aligns very well with the saying that the law is not for the righteous. From ya post, i read gay movement, fornicators, child molesters but nothing relating to the righteous. The reason why Pauls says the law was meant for these category of people....

1 Timothy 1:8-10 (NIV)
8 We know that the law is good if one uses it properly. 9 We also know that the law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers, 10 for the sexually immoral, for those practicing homosexuality, for slave traders and liars and perjurers—and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine

so if you belong to any or all of these category of people, the law is for you.

Joagbaje: Let's look at the future of condemnation of the law .It's not just about the now.Today the argument is on tithing tomorow may be offering and next it will be about murder!

I believe it's wrong for anybody to say he is tithing as required by law, and i will be here to critic if and when you come here tomorrow and say you give offering because the law says Christians should give offering or Christians should not kill because that what the law says.

Joagbaje: Someone may say its the Holy Spirit that tells me what is right and what is wrong . Another person says it's my conscience that matters.as long as your mind doesn't condemn you.
All these a nice but without a foundation of rightness or wrong it will end in error.

You should first ask yourself this question; can the Holy Spirit mislead children of God into error? if your answer is no, then what the issue in someone saying the Holy Spirit tells him/her what is right or wrong?

MEILYN: nobody is saying Melchizedec is Christ in human form. In Spirit thats what am talking about...

Goshen360: If the scripture says Melchizedek is a man and that he reigned or ruled as a king of a specific location, Salem and was a priest of the Most High. It will mean first, as a man, he was born of a woman and a man because the only man that was created was Adam and Eve from Adam, every other man is born, including Christ in His human nature.

2. It will mean, as a king, he rules in a physical geographical location and it will take physical human being to rule as king over a geographical location.

3. As a priest, he will be physically available to minister unto God.

If some teaches Melchizedek is Christ, it will mean Christ physically ruled on this earth before being born of a woman and we are no more talking about the second coming of Christ; we will be talking about the third coming because he would have first come as Melchi, come as Christ and then thirdly coming again - This is a destructive heresy!

Wherever Christ appear in types and shadows, the new testament testified to that truth and revelation; confirming that Christ fulfilled those appearance of types and shadows. When we read in scriptures like, "the Spirit descending LIKE a dove" Does that mean the Spirit IS A Dove? Christ AS the sacrificial lamb, does that mean Christ IS a lamb?

The controversial verse here is,

Without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life; but made like unto the Son of God; abideth a priest continually.

What we need is investigate this text so it doesn't appear contradictory to the other text. If some are saying, Christ IS Melchizedek, we all know Christ is born of a woman and means is WITH mother while Melchizedek is said to be WITHOUT mother. If Christ IS Melchi, why will ONE have MOTHER (Christ) and the other is WITHOUT mother (Melchi) and yet they are SAME person? Our solution is to investigate the text in Hebrew\Greek language AS IT IS UNDERSTOOD by those who heard these scriptures.

Without father, without mother . . . is a rabbinical phrase that means (in Greek) apatōr and understood to mean whose father is not recorded in the genealogies. How do you describe a man who you don't know his father? You either call him a bastard or a man whose father is not known or a man without father. Such phrase (without father\mother) was used to describe Melchizedek.

without descent . . . is the same rabbinical expression in Greek agenealogētos and it means, one whose descent there is no record of, without genealogy BUT we know Christ's as a man have genealogy - Matthew 1. So, if Melchi IS Christ, how could one have genealogy and the other don't? It simply means, they are not same person.

. . . having neither beginning of days . . . also a rabbinical text meaning, his BIRTH, understood as BEGINNING OF DAYS, wasn't known or recorded neither is his DEATH (END of life). BIRTH is the beginning of days, DEATH is the end of life as existence. All these information are missing in the genealogy and so, he was chosen to typify Christ's priesthood. So, what scripture is saying is when he was BORN (beginning of days) and when he died (end of life) was not known or missing in the Genesis genealogy. Therefore, he was COMPARED to the ETERNAL Sonship and Priesthood of Christ, not the PERSON OF CHRIST - made LIKE (not, that he IS) Son of God.

This is where I will end my argument on this subject. I'm not doing this into the new year. Happy new year to y'all in advance.

you don try, but I doubt the law lovers are willing to learn. Happy new year.

Bidam: oK,thanks for chit chat.. i get other things do.

okay, no wahala. Happy new year, pray that the 2014 brings you lot of love and happiness always (with plenty money, plenty friends and good health).

Please ensure you also repent of ya scripture twisting ways in 2014

Bidam: So why should God supposedly die for the sins of men.

Lol! You don jump from Adam to post crucufixion totally avoiding the period and subject being discussed. You see ya self?

Bidam: Stop ridiculing yasef here. I am of the school of thot that strongly believes Melchizedek may have been a theophany of Christ, or a manifestation of deity in temporary form.

you believe in theophany without support, abi na for dream God reveal am to you? Una no try at all thank God you said "may" have been...

Bidam: Do you believe in trinity?

Wetin concern trinity for this matter? You want to tell me that God was once a priest? oya na, say it so we can take it from there.

Bidam: The striking similarities in scripture is too good not to come to that reasonable conclusion.

which kin similarities? Facial similarity or what? my brother we cannot rely on similarities here o! Na you talk say old testament point to Christ, so what do you expect? If Melchi resemble Christ, that is not saying he is Christ.

MEILYN: i made sure i searched very well before i opened this thread.

even after searching very well, you are unable to provide scriptures to show Melchi is Christ.

MEILYN: << and secondly please, what is the work of a high priest?

my brother am not a certified high priest so I will not be able to list the duties, but I do know the high priest should be the the spiritual oga at the top, making atonement for sin, he is the people representative (before God).

MEILYN: read my first post again.
"Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am. " (John 8:58)

Jesus was before Abram as what? High priest? If Jesus is Melchi, he must be high priest. You guys are dodging this bit. Being in existence before Abraham is not what qualifies him to be Melchi. You need to show scriptures that point to the fact that Jesus is Melchi. The quote above is not it.

Bidam: Go back to Genesis and find out what God did when Adam sinned.God actually did the priestly Job of sacrificing an animal to cover their sins.

meaning Jesus was not priest at the time. So how can he be Melchi if he was not yet priest. You people are dodging the koko of the matter here to address irrelevant matters.

doubleDx: What is the meaning of the emboldened? You do err not knowing the scripture, reincarnation is Biblical; I do not expect a confused heathen like you to understand things of the spirit anyway! Just go through my previous posts on this thread and you will understand my stands on this topic....The word of God MUST be precept upon precept, line upon line, a little here, a little there....You ignorant Christians subscribe only to what your so-called Pastors teach you....Study the Bible and let it interpret itself, simple! Study to show yourself approved!

Lol!

Bidam: All Men ancestry is traced back to God who is the creator,so It's no big deal if Melchi and Christ are one and same.

It's no big deal, we all agree to that but it's not telling us that Melchi is Jesus.

Bidam: The bible also referred to Jesus as a Man,does that remove his priesthood from Him?

Nobody is saying Melchi not a priest cos he was human. The question here is if Melchi & Christ are one and same. If Melchi was man then he must have ancestry, he cannot be priest forever cos he been unseated, and he cannot be Christ cos to achieve that he needs to do away with the physical body to take on new one. The position of my good friend, doubleDx.

Bidam: So is it wrong to conclude Jesus and Melchi are one and the same person?

It's wrong only if you cannot support ya assertion. Bible did not say Jesus is Melchi, so you need to explain to us how you arrive at such conclusion.

Bidam: Read hebrews again, i believe you will see more info..other than what you posted here.

you are saying you don't have scripture to support ya assertion?

Bidam: I won't use the word reincarnation but for you to say Christ did not appear in the OT in other forms is gross error and poor bible knowledge on your part.

forget other forms, the issue or question here is if Christ and Melchi are one and same. If you answer yes, then you should ccnsider the message you passing across; it means Christ was already king-priest before Abram. Am still looking for scripture to support that one. If he was already mediating prior to Abram, why the levitical priesthood? Was Christ on break?

Bidam: Melchi too is a Priest forever. Stop misbehaving here and quote scripture exactly as you see it. The last time i checked Christ was of that Order.

if Melchi is a priest forever, where can I find his temple/church? and the followers? Are you one of them The bible say there is only one high priest and his name is Jesus.

Bidam: Your friend says he was a man, so the onus is on you guys to reveal his identity, like you said before MEN DON'T FALL FROM THE SKY. And who told you He is NOT Christ-like?

the bible referred to him as man. Since the scripture refuse to privide info regarding his ancestry, I cannot help you. And being Christlike (if he was) does not equate to being Christ himself.

Bidam: Are you telling us Paul did not reveal who Melchi was in NT?

The Hebrews writer did not provide additional info regarding identity other than telling you the meaning of his name and meaning of salem. If you believe otherwise, oya na provide scripture revealing Melchi's identity

Bidam: I support those who quote scripture to buttress a truth, not monikkers.

what truth? That Christ is reincarnation of Melchi? Is that your idea of truth? Cos that's what the man was saying