If the New Testament is such an Authority, why don’t you trust what it’s saying?
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
The Biggest Difference Between Judaism and Christianity
- Thread starter 37818
- Start date
If the New Testament is such an Authority, why don’t you trust what it’s saying?
37818
Well-Known Member
Dennis Prager is not yet a Christian. And only genuine Christians know God. Romans 8:15-16.
If we love Jesus, The Light of Dawn, The Light of Noon, The Light of end of day, we follow that Light wherever it leads, no matter the time in our lives, young to old.
Believing is feeling this Light and receiving it within us for its life.
The Truth is like this. We are always Light hungry as we are Truth hungry here.
We sacrifice what we have and grasp higher and greater, to something Eternal and Unmade and far above.
The Truth is what it is. He said I am who Am.
To follow Truth we must make sacrifice and deny our self, our ideas and notions and be still in its Presence, allow it to permeate us. Not dismiss it in habitual self sufficiency, satisfied in our own knowledge.
Following Truth makes us ever more faithful to it, it raises us higher each time we take it to ourself and make it part of ourself.
Truth always has new things to teach, we must be ready to invite it in and welcome it. It stands at your doorstep, it knocks on your door. We must recognise the hour of its visitation and receive it in.
We must prepare a table for Truth in the sight of its enemies, not be one of its many enemies. We must shelter it, we must love it with all our heart, mind and strength.
Yes. That’s what I’m speaking of.
37818
Well-Known Member
37818
Well-Known Member
Dennis Prager in his video is not a Christian.
Jeremiah 31:31-32, Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah: Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake. . . .
No. Rather Biblical Judaism precedes Christianity.
Jeremiah 31:31-32, Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah: Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake. . . .
Does not, when you correctly view it from the covenant angle.
"There's nothing 'new' about any of the spiritual tenets of the 'new' covenant, it's new only because the first has been made old. God doesn't change, Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and to-day, yea and for ever. The Spirit has always blown where He wills, God has never been a respecter of persons, and in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, has been acceptable to him.
The first covenant was ADDED (casting a shadow of the good things of the Everlasting Covenant behind it):
What then is the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise hath been made.....Gal 3:19,
And then it was removed:
And this word, Yet once more, signifieth the removing of those things that are shaken, as of things that have been made, that those things which are not shaken may remain. Heb 12:7
These 'new' things of the New Covenant are 'new' only because they were mysteries that had not hitherto before been revealed. The 'new' is actually not 'new', it is revealed mystery."
37818
Well-Known Member
No. Is, per Jeremiah 31:31-34.
How does the New Testament references to the Old Testament affect the Apostolic authority of the Old Testament?
I have not read much of this thread, but addressing the title question, the New Covenant replaced the Old Covenant.
The OT Saints obtained approval, i.e. were chosen for salvation, but had to wait in Abraham's bosom, until after Christ provided the means of reconciliation on the cross. Thus from my dubious perspecifive, the OT Saints "converted" to Christianity when Christ preached to them and then led them captive into the kingdom of God, having then been "made perfect" by the blood of the Lamb.
The OT Saints obtained approval, i.e. were chosen for salvation, but had to wait in Abraham's bosom, until after Christ provided the means of reconciliation on the cross. Thus from my dubious perspecifive, the OT Saints "converted" to Christianity when Christ preached to them and then led them captive into the kingdom of God, having then been "made perfect" by the blood of the Lamb.
The problem with the Old Testament is not all of its requirements are applicable today, under the New Covenant. Thus, today, we must view the requirements of the Old Testament through the New Testament. All of it (the OT) is useful, but sometimes its use is to contrast the old requirement with the new requirement. Its purpose is to lead the lost to Christ, not to impose requirements that conflict with New Testament doctrine.
Sometimes a New Testament writer will cite a verse or passage, or part of one, and re-purpose its contextual application.
Sometimes a New Testament writer will cite a verse or passage, or part of one, and re-purpose its contextual application.