Words of Christ vs Words of God

[BobRyan]

Maybe I am mistaken. I have no quotes, it was quite awhile ago. But just to be clear I will ask you a simple yes or no question.

I am married to a woman who was divorced and her x is still alive today. According to Jesus I have committed adultery by marrying her. Do I remain in adultery to this day, intentionally and knowingly breaking God's commandment?

#1. It depends on whether she had Biblical grounds for divorce as to whether that is adultery.

#2. Even in the case where she/you were guilty of adultery in the marriage - once Married she can not go back to her first husband - AND divorce again would be sin. To be obedient to God you must stay faithful to your new vows.

BTW - thanks for actually asking me after accusing me --

At least you got the point of asking in there in some order even if not the preferred one.

Now back to the thread - I don't see that this has anything to do with the OP -

in Christ,

Bob

 

[steaver]

hey - just out of curiosity -- does this sound familiar to you??

What? - you want to get back to the OP? - i don't blame you :thumbs:

When Christ argues (pre-cross) that "the Father and I are ONE" and that "I do not speak on my own - my Words are the Father's Words" is He claiming that the words of scripture and the Words of Christ are in fact one seamless continuous whole - or can we contrast HIS words vs God's Words so that one replaces/contradicts/voids/abolishes/superceeds the other?

Already answered on page one.

God Bless!

 

[steaver]

#1. It depends on whether she had Biblical grounds for divorce as to whether that is adultery.

#2. Even in the case where she/you were guilty of adultery in the marriage - once Married she can not go back to her first husband - AND divorce again would be sin. To be obedient to God you must stay faithful to your new vows.

BTW - thanks for actually asking me after accusing me --

At least you got the point of asking in there in some order even if not the preferred one.

Now back to the thread - I don't see that this has anything to do with the OP -

in Christ,

Bob

Must have been somebody else. raying: you forgive me.

God Bless!

 

[BobRyan]

As you point out, God's law was always to be observed from the heart. However, all have sinned and fall short. The law that was intended to bring life brought death because no one could obey the law from the heart. Furthermore the priest failed to teach the law correctly to the people.

In Gal 3 we are told that in both OT and NT - the LAW was "never given" as a means of salvation. It was given to define sin and to specify right living. It does not "save sinners".

But in your post you appear to go beyond that as if the OT saints were not saved by the Gospel -- Are you claiming that Abraham burned in hell until Christ died?

"I am the God of Abraham Isaac and Jacob" God said to Moses.

"Born again" is post cross only. It is a "new thing". The old covenant has past and the new covenant is in force, that is the receiving of Jesus Christ through rebirth and having the spirit of the law written on the heart.

Sounds like "the Gospel" but you seem to resrve it for NT saints only meaning that the successful OT saints of Heb 11 must have gotten to their "live by faith - fully accepted by God" status by "another gospel"
using your statement above.

I would rather stick with Paul in Gal 1:6-11 where we find that there is only ONE Gospel in all of time -- and it works.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

#2. Even in the case where she/you were guilty of adultery in the marriage - once Married she can not go back to her first husband - AND divorce again would be sin. To be obedient to God you must stay faithful to your new vows.

There I "once again" argued in favor of "obedience to God" -- I was half expecting you to come back with your usual "that's not gonna happen".

in Christ,

Bob

 

[steaver]

In Gal 3 we are told that in both OT and NT - the LAW was "never given" as a means of salvation. It was given to define sin and to specify right living. It does not "save sinners".

Yes, we are told this in the NT. However, the OT saints did not have the NT knowledge and seem to have "thought" that the observance of the law would actually get them to heaven. Thus, Paul was used by God to explain to them that the law could not save them. Rom 7:10And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death.

But in your post you appear to go beyond that as if the OT saints were not saved by the Gospel -- Are you claiming that Abraham burned in hell until Christ died?

Not at all. Abraham and all the OT saints were saved by grace through faith in the promisses of God. They had to wait in paradise until Christ redeemed them regenerating their spirits and taking them to heaven.

There I "once again" argued in favor of "obedience to God" -- I was half expecting you to come back with your usual "that's not gonna happen".

in Christ,

Bob

Not one person on this entire board argues against obeying God. This is only a mo of yours as i pointed out earlier. If someone disagrees with your interpretation of "commandment keeping" and the consequences thereof you claim they have an attitude of rebellion towards God. People don't argue against you because they want to sin at will, they argue against you because their conclusions (whether right or wrong) are different than yours. I welcome your debate and your views. I do not believe that your sound bites of accusations of rebellion are worthy of you. Just keep it thoughtful and informative, christian to christian. :wavey:

God Bless!

 

[BobRyan]

Quote:
In Gal 3 we are told that in both OT and NT - the LAW was "never given" as a means of salvation. It was given to define sin and to specify right living. It does not "save sinners".

Stever
Yes, we are told this in the NT. However, the OT saints did not have the NT knowledge and seem to have "thought" that the observance of the law would actually get them to heaven. Thus, Paul was used by God to explain to them that the law could not save them. Rom 7:10And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death.

Is it your position that SAUL as an unconverted Jew who persecuted the followers of Christ was "an OT SAINT"??

Why wouldn't you pick John the baptizer as an example of an OT saint and all of HIS disciples ALONG with the disciples of Christ AND Dave (read the Psalms any?) and Daniel etc?

Why pick Saul as your proof of what "OT Saints were thinking"??

Why not pick an actual OT saint?

As for what OT saints had regrading the ONE Gospel in ALL ages that WORKED for them according to Heb 11 - Paul says in Heb 4 "WE have had the GOSPEL preached to US JUST as THEY also"

In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Quote:
But in your post you appear to go beyond that as if the OT saints were not saved by the Gospel -- Are you claiming that Abraham burned in hell until Christ died?

Steaver
Not at all. Abraham and all the OT saints were saved by grace through faith in the promisses of God.

Well then they DID have the ONE Gopsel and they WERE actively living grace based - justified by faith lives!!

The Bible worked for them just as it still does today.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Steaver
They had to wait in paradise until Christ redeemed them regenerating their spirits and taking them to heaven.

Hint: as long as you keep repeating what people have told you and refuse to look at the Bible for yourself you are doomed to repeat the same mistakes over and over.

Clue - try going to the NT and looking up the Word Paradise (NASB, NIV, NKJV - pick one) and believe what you find THERE instead!

Start with this simple question as you read the THREE places paradise is mentioned in ALL of the NT --"WHO is in Paradise according to this text?".

This is also left as a trivial exercise for the reader.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Here we have Steaver saying that "obedience" is "just not gonna happen".

I
Now, is sin breaking God's commandments?

I sin daily. I fall short every day. Just a passing thought of lust causes God's commandment to be broken. Or a moment of selfishness.
So how do i apply these text to my Christian life?

Does the text allow for my fallen nature. Or does the text mean that no one shall eat from the tree of life since all fall short whether Christian or not?
Or, give me your analysis of the text and maybe I will learn something rather than having to answer your question after question. You have an opportunity to teach a brother something about these text, so tell me how you understand "keeping God's commandments" in light of knowing that you and I break them all the time, UNINTENTIONALLY of course. :thumbs:

Post 27

Yes. This is what I would like to understand. What does it mean to "keep" God's commandments?

Well, I am one of God's people and I know that I transgress the law (sin) everyday. Not intentionally, but I know I fall short of God's perfect commandments each and every day.

So back to what does it mean to "keep" God's commandments? This I would like to understand from you or anyone else who might understand.

I do not advocate a non-stop "rebellion". I do advocate a non-stop falling short of God's commandments.

Falling short is not something that I think I do. It is something I know I do. I do not break God's commandments out of intentional rebellion but I know for a fact that I do break God's commandments everyday in some way.

So back to the question....what does it mean to "keep" God's commandments? Can you explain?

God Bless! :thumbs:

Here is Bob remembering what Steaver's argument has been so far...

Bob said
There I "once again" argued in favor of "obedience to God" -- I was half expecting you to come back with your usual "that's not gonna happen

Then innexplicably -- here is Steaver's response to that!!

Steaver -
People don't argue against you because they want to sin at will, they argue against you because their conclusions (whether right or wrong) are different than yours. I welcome your debate and your views. I do not believe that your sound bites of accusations of rebellion are worthy of you. Just keep it thoughtful and informative, christian to christian.

Now what do you suppose is up with that??

in Christ,

Bob

 

[steaver]

Now what do you suppose is up with that??

in Christ,

Bob

I re-read all you posted that I posted and I don't see your point. Surely you can see by my post that I was distinguishing between rebellion and the natural fallen state of man.

And we went through the paradise study once before. It solidified my position on the matter.

God Bless! :thumbs:

 

[BobRyan]

Hint -- this one of those points where your argument is "exposed" like J Jumps in Matt 7.. So forgive me if I don't mind going over it some more.

This is in reference to faithfulness in Marriage -- even if it is a 2nd Marriage.

Bob said


Quote:
Bob said
There I "once again" argued in favor of "obedience to God" -- I was half expecting you to come back with your usual "that's not gonna happen

Then innexplicably -- here is Steaver's response to that!!

Steaver said -
Quote:
Steaver -
People don't argue against you because they want to sin at will, they argue against you because their conclusions (whether right or wrong) are different than yours. I welcome your debate and your views. I do not believe that your sound bites of accusations of rebellion are worthy of you. Just keep it thoughtful and informative, christian to christian.

You are finding "the need" to "have it both ways" sir.

on the one hand you can not tolerate a Christianity that allows for "occassional adultery in Marriage as the sinful nature may dictate" -- on the other hand you want to argue for the "occassional nature of sin as the sinful fallen nature may dictate" to make your case that God's Law and obedience should not be our focus since it can not actually be followed in real life.

 

[steaver]

(BobRyan)...You are finding "the need" to "have it both ways" sir.

on the one hand you can not tolerate a Christianity that allows for "occassional adultery in Marriage as the sinful nature may dictate" -- on the other hand you want to argue for the "occassional nature of sin as the sinful fallen nature may dictate" to make your case that God's Law and obedience should not be our focus since it can not actually be followed in real life.

I don't think that is my view of scripture's position.

I believe we should obey God's commandments to the fullest extent of our ability to do so in this body of death. I believe the Spirit leads us to do that.

I believe that the closer we walk with God and His Word the better we can behave and obey God's Word.

I believe that we (I am refering to Christians in this post) can choose to rebel and disobey God's Word. I believe that this does not make us any less a Christian nor any less saved by the blood of Christ.

I believe that those who do rebel and disobey pierce themselves through with many troubles and some even sleep because of it. I do not believe that rebellion as a Christian changes your saved status in Christ.

I believe that all true Christians (because scripture tells us there are false Christians or pretenders) will agree in heart and mind with God's moral Word when challenged even if they make a conscience choice to go against it or continue against it. They already suffer the consequences in their choices, but God could even take them home for their own good that they may not go on giving their Lord a bad name or destroying the faith of others.

Some of my beliefs are scripture and others are only discernments from what I have experienced with fellow Christians.

God Bless! :thumbs:

 

[BobRyan]

I don't think that is my view of scripture's position.

I believe we should obey God's commandments to the fullest extent of our ability to do so in this body of death. I believe the Spirit leads us to do that.

I believe that the closer we walk with God and His Word the better we can behave and obey God's Word.

Agreed.

I believe that we (I am refering to Christians in this post) can choose to rebel and disobey God's Word. I believe that this does not make us any less a Christian nor any less saved by the blood of Christ.

"By their fruits you shall NOT know them"? Matt 7

"Not merely everyone who DOES the will of My FAther but anyone who merely SAYS Lord Lord will enter the kingdom of heaven "??? Matt 7

"The one who SAYS He knows Christ and does NOT walk as Christ walked is TELLING the truth anyway" 1 John 2:4-6

"I FORGAVE you -- you should have forgiven your fellow servant in reality JUST as I forgave you in reality - but you did NOT do that-- so HAVE no worries be happy because all is well anyway"? Matt 18

"IF we deny Him HE will claim us ANYWAY" 2Tim 2:4

"Not only the DOERS of the LAW but ALSO those who are merely hearers and NOT doers will be justified" Romans 2:13-16???

I do not believe that rebellion as a Christian changes your saved status in Christ.

Your belief seems to require a lot of Bible editing sir.

Or do you view these texts worded against your view as God challenging you to find good ways to edit scripture while clinging faithfully to popular man-made tradition?

in Christ,

Bob

 

[steaver]

Quote: (steaver)..

I believe that we (I am refering to Christians in this post) can choose to rebel and disobey God's Word. I believe that this does not make us any less a Christian nor any less saved by the blood of Christ.



(BobRyan)..."By their fruits you shall NOT know them"? Matt 7

"Not merely everyone who DOES the will of My FAther but anyone who merely SAYS Lord Lord will enter the kingdom of heaven "??? Matt 7

"The one who SAYS He knows Christ and does NOT walk as Christ walked is TELLING the truth anyway" 1 John 2:4-6

"I FORGAVE you -- you should have forgiven your fellow servant in reality JUST as I forgave you in reality - but you did NOT do that-- so HAVE no worries be happy because all is well anyway"? Matt 18

"IF we deny Him HE will claim us ANYWAY" 2Tim 2:4

"Not only the DOERS of the LAW but ALSO those who are merely hearers and NOT doers will be justified" Romans 2:13-16???


Quote: (steaver)....
I do not believe that rebellion as a Christian changes your saved status in Christ.


(BobRyan)...Your belief seems to require a lot of Bible editing sir.

Or do you view these texts worded against your view as God challenging you to find good ways to edit scripture while clinging faithfully to popular man-made tradition?

in Christ,

Bob

Not at all. I know Christians who are hooked on taking drugs, a clearly defined sin in scripture, yet still show fruits of the Spirit towards loving thy nieghbors and treating others with kindness, mercy and compasion. They do the will of the Father by believing in Christ and loving thy neighbor. They walk as CHrist did by loving God and loving thy neighbors. They forgive those who tresspass against them. They do not deny Christ. They fulfill the royal law thereby doing the law. Yet they fail daily, in many ways they sin, as do I.

Or do you suggest that these verses are calling for perfection?

God Bless! :wavey:

 

[BobRyan]

Rather I am proposing that your "rebellion means nothing "comment when it comes to salvation "requires an edit" to the texts that actually SAYS what you claimed to believe.

I am pointing out the obvious.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[steaver]

Rather I am proposing that your "rebellion means nothing "comment when it comes to salvation "requires an edit" to the texts that actually SAYS what you claimed to believe.

I am pointing out the obvious.

in Christ,

Bob

I disagree. I find nothing in the texts you provided that would void a believer's salvation.


God Bless! :thumbs:

 

[BobRyan]

So then you accept the texts "as edited" to show your beliefs? Or do you claim that the edited version and the non-edited verion say the same thing??

I believe that we (I am refering to Christians in this post) can choose to rebel and disobey God's Word. I believe that this does not make us any less a Christian nor any less saved by the blood of Christ.



(BobRyan)..."By their fruits you shall NOT know them"? Matt 7

"Not merely everyone who DOES the will of My FAther but anyone who merely SAYS Lord Lord will enter the kingdom of heaven "??? Matt 7

"The one who SAYS He knows Christ and does NOT walk as Christ walked is TELLING the truth anyway" 1 John 2:4-6

"I FORGAVE you -- you should have forgiven your fellow servant in reality JUST as I forgave you in reality - but you did NOT do that-- so HAVE no worries be happy because all is well anyway"? Matt 18

"IF we deny Him HE will claim us ANYWAY" 2Tim 2:4

"Not only the DOERS of the LAW but ALSO those who are merely hearers and NOT doers will be justified" Romans 2:13-16???


Quote: (steaver)....
I do not believe that rebellion as a Christian changes your saved status in Christ.


(BobRyan)...Your belief seems to require a lot of Bible editing sir.

Or do you view these texts worded against your view as God challenging you to find good ways to edit scripture while clinging faithfully to popular man-made tradition?

in Christ,

Bob

 

[steaver]

(BobRyan)...So then you accept the texts "as edited" to show your beliefs?

Your edits are not my beliefs.

You will have to define "how much fruit" counts. One pear, a bushel, a truck load?

You will have to define "the will of the Father". Believe on Jesus, go to church, do unto others as ye would they do unto you, love one another, love God, do not eat pork, help elderly ladies cross the street, be perfect even as Christ is perfect?

You will have to define "walking as Christ walked". Christ walked in perfect submission to the Father. Are you walking as Christ walked?

You will have to define "deny". Deny Christ with the heart (like false converts), deny Christ in word (like Peter) ?

You will have to define "doers of the law". Those who do all the law, every day, how much law, dietary law, an eye for an eye law, perfect law keepers, never fail, never intentionally lie (even a tiny little one), never steal (even a paper clip, a sheet of paper), never tell one gossip, never slander a brother, never say a bad word about the government, never complain about the job you have to do?

God Bless! :wavey:

 

[BobRyan]

Your edits are not my beliefs.

Fine - then "Show" how the edits given do NOT fit the statement you made as follows

Steaver said "I believe that we (I am refering to Christians in this post) can choose to rebel and disobey God's Word. I believe that this does not make us any less a Christian nor any less saved by the blood of Christ."



(BobRyan)..."By their fruits you shall NOT know them"? Matt 7


Then Steaver said "You will have to define "how much fruit" counts. One pear, a bushel, a truck load?"

Precisely sir -- there is just no way to know them by their fruits.


Bob edits -- "
"Not merely everyone who DOES the will of My FAther but anyone who merely SAYS Lord Lord will enter the kingdom of heaven "??? Matt 7

Steaver said "You will have to define "the will of the Father". Believe on Jesus, go to church, do unto others as ye would they do unto you, love one another, love God, do not eat pork, help elderly ladies cross the street, be perfect even as Christ is perfect?"

Or as Christ said "Hears My Words but does not DO them" but as MY EDIT and YOUR QUOTE point out - this just is not possible. Christ said wayyyy toooo many things and people just don't follow them all the time so no way to use that as any kind of criteria as opposed to "everyone who SAYS Lord Lord".

Bob edits""The one who SAYS He knows Christ and does NOT walk as Christ walked is TELLING the truth anyway" 1 John 2:4-6


Steaver said "You will have to define "walking as Christ walked". Christ walked in perfect submission to the Father. Are you walking as Christ walked?"

Precisely sir! that is exactly the point of my edit. We have no business talking about those who SAY they know Christ and then observing that they do or DO NOT WALK as Christ walked -- thus concluding that they (or even WE) have lied about knowing Christ. The EDIT above is the only way to accept it and keep your point in tact.

Bob edits -- "I FORGAVE you -- you should have forgiven your fellow servant in reality JUST as I forgave you in reality - but you did NOT do that-- so HAVE no worries be happy because all is well anyway"? Matt 18

Bob edits -- "IF we deny Him HE will claim us ANYWAY" 2Tim 2:10-12

Steaver said "You will have to define "deny". Deny Christ with the heart (like false converts), deny Christ in word (like Peter) ?

Excellent illustration proving that the EDIT HOLDS true!


Bob Edits Romans 2 "For it is BOTH the HEARERS only AND the DOERS of the Law that WILL be justified for in truth no one is really an actual DOER all are merely some level of HEARER"

Steaver said --You will have to define "doers of the law". Those who do all the law, every day, how much law, dietary law, an eye for an eye law, perfect law keepers, never fail, never intentionally lie (even a tiny little one), never steal (even a paper clip, a sheet of paper), never tell one gossip, never slander a brother, never say a bad word about the government, never complain about the job you have to do?


And once again the EDIT serves to make your point perfectly sir.

Which leaves me very puzzled by your opening claim that the EDITS do NOT reflect your beliefs!

in Christ,

Bob