What's new
By:
Filters
Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Jesus fulfilled the whole law, including the Sabbath

Sorry, but the "scholarly appraoch" I learned in bible study that Jesus is the Sabbath rest. So your attempt to discredit my posts by using worldly standards of who has the truth which is exemplified by degrees won't work. Again, you look to people for the truth instead of the word of God. I'm sorry you need scholars to interpret the bible for you. Jesus said "for you have one teacher and that is the Christ." If you even had a clue what he means, you would not need to look to scholars for the truth, but Christ alone. There are just as many scholars who agree with me as who agree with you. So which ones are right? Do you think the truth depends on a vote? :o

Sorry, but Jesus either is the Sabbath rest or he's not. The bible says he is and it also says that he fulfilled the whole law, not just some of it. I believe the bible. You don't have to. Therefore, you are a slave to works like the Jews still are. I'm a slave to the Spirit. Thanks be to God! :angel:
 
Heidi said:
Sorry, but the "scholarly appraoch" I learned in bible study that Jesus is the Sabbath rest. So your attempt to discredit my posts by using worldly standards of who has the truth which is exemplified by degrees won't work. Again, you look to people for the truth instead of the word of God. I'm sorry you need scholars to interpret the bible for you. Jesus said "for you have one teacher and that is the Christ." If you even had a clue what he means, you would not need to look to scholars for the truth, but Christ alone. There are just as many scholars who agree with me as who agree with you. So which ones are right? Do you think the truth depends on a vote? :o

Sorry, but Jesus either is the Sabbath rest or he's not. The bible says he is and it also says that he fulfilled the whole law, not just some of it. I believe the bible. You don't have to. Therefore, you are a slave to works like the Jews still are. I'm a slave to the Spirit. Thanks be to God! :angel:
Click to expand...

:roll: Whatever, Heidi. Your scholar iyou follow is Paul and you'd like to think you have the interpretation spot on. Unfortunately, your one track mind and tunnel vision will not serve you well in future interpretation and study.

I guess you're entitled to your knee-jerk, out of context interpretation. You're even entitled to believe it with all your being...it still doesn't make it true and it still doesn't make your 'study habits' sound hermeneutics.

And you are afraid of other interpretations that may just blow your own out of the water and then your preconceived notions you read into Paul's text will be on shaky ground.

It's easier to stick your head in the sand then to be open minded.
 
guibox said:
Heidi said:
Sorry, but the "scholarly appraoch" I learned in bible study that Jesus is the Sabbath rest. So your attempt to discredit my posts by using worldly standards of who has the truth which is exemplified by degrees won't work. Again, you look to people for the truth instead of the word of God. I'm sorry you need scholars to interpret the bible for you. Jesus said "for you have one teacher and that is the Christ." If you even had a clue what he means, you would not need to look to scholars for the truth, but Christ alone. There are just as many scholars who agree with me as who agree with you. So which ones are right? Do you think the truth depends on a vote? :o

Sorry, but Jesus either is the Sabbath rest or he's not. The bible says he is and it also says that he fulfilled the whole law, not just some of it. I believe the bible. You don't have to. Therefore, you are a slave to works like the Jews still are. I'm a slave to the Spirit. Thanks be to God! :angel:
Click to expand...

:roll: Whatever, Heidi. Your scholar iyou follow is Paul and you'd like to think you have the interpretation spot on. Unfortunately, your one track mind and tunnel vision will not serve you well in future interpretation and study.

I guess you're entitled to your knee-jerk, out of context interpretation. You're even entitled to believe it with all your being...it still doesn't make it true and it still doesn't make your 'study habits' sound hermeneutics.

And you are afraid of other interpretations that may just blow your own out of the water and then your preconceived notions you read into Paul's text will be on shaky ground.

It's easier to stick your head in the sand then to be open minded.
Click to expand...

You have just again displayed your ignorance about the bible. I do not follow Paul's words, I follow Christ's. You obviously do not know that the whole bible is the word of God. It is God, the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit.

John 1:1-2, "In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning."

So it is obvious again that you do not believe the bible or you would have not said that I follow scholars when I follow Paul. But of course you attack me for "misinterpreting" the bible when you admitted that I believe Paul's (God's)words. So since your contradictions endless, I do not consider your posts credible, and attacking me is not going to take your contradictions away. Sorry. :sad
 
[quote="Heidi]You have just again displayed your ignorance about the bible. I do not follow Paul's words, I follow Christ's. You obviously do not know that the whole bible is the word of God. It is God, the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit.

John 1:1-2, "In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning."

So it is obvious again that you do not believe the bible or you would have not said that I follow scholars when I follow Paul. But of course you attack me for "misinterpreting" the bible when you admitted that I believe Paul's (God's)words. So since your contradictions endless, I do not consider your posts credible, and attacking me is not going to take your contradictions away. Sorry. :sad[/quote]

Sorry, Heidi. When all is said and done, you are a Pauline disciple. If you actually followed Christ's words and examples, you'd see that the Sabbath was quite important to Him and NOTHING Christ said or did gives any impression that the Sabbath was, was not going to be, and still isn't important.

If you followed the entire word of God, you'd see that the Sabbath plays a role from Creation to glorification and the New Earth. You don't follow the entire Bible, rather, to make your theories fit, you'd have to IGNORE the entire Bible, Heidi.

Your entire theology is based on Paul's writings (and poorly misunderstood concerning what Paul had to say about the law and the Sabbath)

These links might help you clear up your confusion but you've shown in your one track thinking that ignorance is more comfortable then sound theology.
 
guibox said:
[quote="Heidi]You have just again displayed your ignorance about the bible. I do not follow Paul's words, I follow Christ's. You obviously do not know that the whole bible is the word of God. It is God, the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit.

John 1:1-2, "In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning."

So it is obvious again that you do not believe the bible or you would have not said that I follow scholars when I follow Paul. But of course you attack me for "misinterpreting" the bible when you admitted that I believe Paul's (God's)words. So since your contradictions endless, I do not consider your posts credible, and attacking me is not going to take your contradictions away. Sorry. :sad
Click to expand...

Sorry, Heidi. When all is said and done, you are a Pauline disciple. If you actually followed Christ's words and examples, you'd see that the Sabbath was quite important to Him and NOTHING Christ said or did gives any impression that the Sabbath was, was not going to be, and still isn't important.

If you followed the entire word of God, you'd see that the Sabbath plays a role from Creation to glorification and the New Earth. You don't follow the entire Bible, rather, to make your theories fit, you'd have to IGNORE the entire Bible, Heidi.

Your entire theology is based on Paul's writings (and poorly misunderstood concerning what Paul had to say about the law and the Sabbath)

These links might help you clear up your confusion but you've shown in your one track thinking that ignorance is more comfortable then sound theology.[/quote]

And you have shown that you do not see how holy the Sabbath is. You see it as simply a day of the week like the Jews still do. Therefore, since you agree with the Jews, then you are still under Jewish law, and haven't a clue what the difference is between Jewish beliefs and Christian beliefs.

You have also shown that you do not believe that Paul's words are the word of God. John 1:1-3 says otherwise and also says that the Word is also the word of Christ; "And the Word was with God. He was with God in the beginning." Who do you think the "He" is? The tooth fairy? Probably so. And since you do not believe the bible is the Word of God or the word of Christ, then it is obvious why you argue with it. Therefore, conversing with you is a complete waste of time so I am now placing you on my ignore list.
 
For someone who is Holy Spirit-filled, Heidi, you sure anger easily. And, you react quite regularly as though you are threatened personally. Hmmm. Putting someone on your ignore list (what on earth is an ‘ignore list’ anyway?) seems like a cop out to me.

The thread title, Heidi, is "Jesus fulfilled the whole law, including the Sabbath." The implication here is that the word 'fulfil' means 'brought to an end'. Heidi and others on this forum have gotten this definition in their minds and nothing - even the correct definition of 'fulfil' when in context with the rest of the scripture - can shake that belief. So, as long as we're debating an issue that is based on a total misunderstanding of scripture ...what is the point?

Jesus had just stated that He had not come to destroy the Law or the Prophets (Matthew 5:17). Did He actually mean this or was He about to contradict Himself? Jesus follows that statement with, "I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them." The same definition of 'fulfill' (Greek 'pleroo') is found in Matthew 3:15. This is where Jesus says, "Let it be so now; it is proper for us to do this to fulfill all righteousness." It didn't mean that righteousness would not continue (be abolished) but that all of God's righteous requirements for the Messiah were fully met in Jesus. The word 'fulfill' ('pleroo) in this context means 'to satisfy' or 'accomplish'.

So, Jesus was saying that He had not come to abolish the Law and the Prophets but to satisfy them by His sinless life. Jesus fully met the requirements of the Law ...He didn't come to destroy the Law. You, Heidi, keep arguing in circles. You say that YOU automatically keep the Law (through the Holy Spirit) but argue that OTHERS who keep the Law do so without the Holy Spirit and are therefore legalists. You have not yet answered my question in regard to the first four commandments of The Ten. THOSE are the ones that set the Christian apart from the nonchristian. And, of course, the Sabbath is included within the commandments 1-4. And THAT ONE is the thorn in the side of mainstream Christians ...isn't it?

How do you show your love for God, Heidi? Do you 'automatically' (as though on 'auto pilot') fulfill the commandments of God ...that is, every one but the fourth? One more question, does Sunday figure AT ALL in the Holy Spirit's guiding in your life? I have a sneaky feeling that you get up on Sunday morning (which requires some concerted effort on your part) specifically to attend your church service. And yet, those who do so on Saturday (the 7th-day) are, in your view, somehow working their way to heaven. Hmmmm ...
 
SputnikBoy said:
For someone who is Holy Spirit-filled, Heidi, you sure anger easily. And, you react quite regularly as though you are threatened personally. Hmmm. Putting someone on your ignore list (what on earth is an ‘ignore list’ anyway?) seems like a cop out to me.

The thread title, Heidi, is "Jesus fulfilled the whole law, including the Sabbath." The implication here is that the word 'fulfil' means 'brought to an end'. Heidi and others on this forum have gotten this definition in their minds and nothing - even the correct definition of 'fulfil' when in context with the rest of the scripture - can shake that belief. So, as long as we're debating an issue that is based on a total misunderstanding of scripture ...what is the point?

Jesus had just stated that He had not come to destroy the Law or the Prophets (Matthew 5:17). Did He actually mean this or was He about to contradict Himself? Jesus follows that statement with, "I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them." The same definition of 'fulfill' (Greek 'pleroo') is found in Matthew 3:15. This is where Jesus says, "Let it be so now; it is proper for us to do this to fulfill all righteousness." It didn't mean that righteousness would not continue (be abolished) but that all of God's righteous requirements for the Messiah were fully met in Jesus. The word 'fulfill' ('pleroo) in this context means 'to satisfy' or 'accomplish'.

So, Jesus was saying that He had not come to abolish the Law and the Prophets but to satisfy them by His sinless life. Jesus fully met the requirements of the Law ...He didn't come to destroy the Law. You, Heidi, keep arguing in circles. You say that YOU automatically keep the Law (through the Holy Spirit) but argue that OTHERS who keep the Law do so without the Holy Spirit and are therefore legalists. You have not yet answered my question in regard to the first four commandments of The Ten. THOSE are the ones that set the Christian apart from the nonchristian. And, of course, the Sabbath is included within the commandments 1-4. And THAT ONE is the thorn in the side of mainstream Christians ...isn't it?

How do you show your love for God, Heidi? Do you 'automatically' (as though on 'auto pilot') fulfill the commandments of God ...that is, every one but the fourth? One more question, does Sunday figure AT ALL in the Holy Spirit's guiding in your life? I have a sneaky feeling that you get up on Sunday morning (which requires some concerted effort on your part) specifically to attend your church service. And yet, those who do so on Saturday (the 7th-day) are, in your view, somehow working their way to heaven. Hmmmm ...
Click to expand...

What may sound like anger is simply a fact. I feel the exact same way about false teachers and the Pharisees that Jesus and Paul did. Do you think Jesus was wrong in his reaction to the Pharisees, Sputnik? :o Yet he called them "snakes" and a "brood of vipers" which I have not done. Do you not think that was love?

Therefore you must think that Jesus did not show love for God either. So I suggest that you re-read not only Hebrews 4:1-9, but all of the gospels again to see what Jesus means.

Also, do you think Christ's healing on the Sabbath broke the Sabbath law, or do you think he was simply showing us the real meaning of the Sabbath? :o If it's the latter, then you have my answer on what I do on the Sabbath. I go to church because church is held on Sundays and I testify for Christ. What do you do besides watch football? :o
 
Lets try and get our quotes right, I have to work at trying to figure out who said what above. ;-)

Also, lets stop threatening people by telling them they will be put on their "ignore" list. That's not very Christian-like. I wish we never had that ignore feature. :-?

Heidi... take a deep breath and cool down for a moment. Remember Who it is that rules our heart. :angel:
 
I really don't care if Heidi puts me on her ignore list. As Sputnik says, she and others already have their mind made up and nothing will deter it. No scholarly research, no linguistic context. What is the point?

And as Sputnik has rightly pointed out and continually goes ignored, what is the meaning of 'fulfilled'? And does this 'fulfillment' NEGATE the importance of the law?

On the contrary, even our 'law abrogator' friends will admit that Jesus magnified the law even more through the spirit. Paul says that we don't make void the law through faith but establish it! The OT (which followed the letter of the law) says that God will write it on our hearts! We see both Peter and James reiterate the ten commandments long after Christ rose and ascended. They obviously were not done away with in any form if they are continually mentioned by the NT writers.

And yet our 'law abrogator' friends then contradict themselves, Christ and Paul and say that the 10 commandments are done away with.

No, friends! The law is even more meaningful now because we no longer are condemned by it! Now we follow it as a sanctifying part of our lives out of love and not obligation to be justified, and without the fear of condemnation! As a matter of fact, Christ made the law even MORE legalistic if you wanted to look at it from that angle. Instead of actually killing someone, I am breaking the commandment if I hate my brother. FAR from being done away with!

How can they be internalized and followed by all Christians (except, as Sputnik pointed out, that annoying 4th commandment) and yet say that it has been done away with?

When the law is internalized, it is not done away with. Do you think the OT writers thought this is what God meant in Jeremiah when God said He would 'write them on their hearts'? I think not ,and yet that is exactly what our friends would have us believe.

I guess they know more then the bible writers. :roll:
 
Heidi said:
What may sound like anger is simply a fact. I feel the exact same way about false teachers and the Pharisees that Jesus and Paul did. Do you think Jesus was wrong in his reaction to the Pharisees, Sputnik? :o Yet he called them "snakes" and a "brood of vipers" which I have not done. Do you not think that was love?

No, I think Jesus was plain angry. Whether or not Jesus was 'wrong' is not for me to say. I guess, however, that Jesus was incapable of being wrong, so there you have it.

Therefore you must think that Jesus did not show love for God either. So I suggest that you re-read not only Hebrews 4:1-9, but all of the gospels again to see what Jesus means.

Not sure what this has to do with the topic, Heidi, but I'm sure that I've never even implied that Jesus did not show love for God. On the contrary, Jesus demonstrated to all how the spirit of God's Law should be applied. He FULFILLED the Law of God ...remember ...?

Also, do you think Christ's healing on the Sabbath broke the Sabbath law,

No, why would it have?

or do you think he was simply showing us the real meaning of the Sabbath? :o

Yes, ma'am.

If it's the latter, then you have my answer on what I do on the Sabbath.

Pleased to hear that. So you DO keep the Sabbath? ;-)

I go to church because church is held on Sundays

An honest answer and one that most Christians would give if they were being as honest.

and I testify for Christ.

No one can criticize you for doing that.

What do you do besides watch football? :o

That was silly, Heidi ...now, wasn't it? :smt018
Click to expand...
 
SputnikBoy said:
Heidi said:
What may sound like anger is simply a fact. I feel the exact same way about false teachers and the Pharisees that Jesus and Paul did. Do you think Jesus was wrong in his reaction to the Pharisees, Sputnik? :o Yet he called them "snakes" and a "brood of vipers" which I have not done. Do you not think that was love?

No, I think Jesus was plain angry. Whether or not Jesus was 'wrong' is not for me to say. I guess, however, that Jesus was incapable of being wrong, so there you have it.

Therefore you must think that Jesus did not show love for God either. So I suggest that you re-read not only Hebrews 4:1-9, but all of the gospels again to see what Jesus means.

Not sure what this has to do with the topic, Heidi, but I'm sure that I've never even implied that Jesus did not show love for God. On the contrary, Jesus demonstrated to all how the spirit of God's Law should be applied. He FULFILLED the Law of God ...remember ...?

Also, do you think Christ's healing on the Sabbath broke the Sabbath law,

No, why would it have?

or do you think he was simply showing us the real meaning of the Sabbath? :o

Yes, ma'am.

If it's the latter, then you have my answer on what I do on the Sabbath.

Pleased to hear that. So you DO keep the Sabbath? ;-)

I go to church because church is held on Sundays

An honest answer and one that most Christians would give if they were being as honest.

and I testify for Christ.

No one can criticize you for doing that.

What do you do besides watch football? :o

That was silly, Heidi ...now, wasn't it? :smt018
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

So do you, or do you not think Jesus was showing love to the Pharisees when he confronted them? I think he was because he was telling them the truth about their hypocrisy and they can never come to God unless they admit the truth. And neither can any of us. When I hear the bible being contradicted, I again react the same way that Paul and Jesus do.

You indicated that I wasn't loving when I confronted false teaching. And I just explained that you couldn't be further from the truth. Love isn't necessarily saying to others what they want to hear. Love is telling the truth just like Jesus did. He did not compromise the truth to spare people's feelings. he simply called a spade a spade. :)

I keep the Sabbath by going to my Lord and Savior for rest everyday of the week, not just one day because the Sabbath is not a day of the week. :)

Actually I think it was a very important question. When I was in Israel, the Jews didn't work on what they believe is the Sabbath, but they were all in Nazareth shopping for material things! Therefore, if one sees the Sabbath as a day of the week, then what is considered work? One has to then look back at OT law to define work which the Jews still have to do because they don't come to Christ for rest.

But we are no linger under OT law because Jesus fulfilled it for us. So now all we have to do is come to Christ for love and forgiveness which then gives us the ability to keep the law! And that is why love is the fulfillment of the law.

"You however, are not controlled by the sinful nature, but by the Spirit, if the Spirit of God lives in you." All good deeds come from the Spirit which is why they are called "the fruits of the Spirit."
 
guibox said:
I really don't care if Heidi puts me on her ignore list. As Sputnik says, she and others already have their mind made up and nothing will deter it. No scholarly research, no linguistic context. What is the point?

And as Sputnik has rightly pointed out and continually goes ignored, what is the meaning of 'fulfilled'? And does this 'fulfillment' NEGATE the importance of the law?

On the contrary, even our 'law abrogator' friends will admit that Jesus magnified the law even more through the spirit. Paul says that we don't make void the law through faith but establish it! The OT (which followed the letter of the law) says that God will write it on our hearts! We see both Peter and James reiterate the ten commandments long after Christ rose and ascended. They obviously were not done away with in any form if they are continually mentioned by the NT writers.

And yet our 'law abrogator' friends then contradict themselves, Christ and Paul and say that the 10 commandments are done away with.

No, friends! The law is even more meaningful now because we no longer are condemned by it! Now we follow it as a sanctifying part of our lives out of love and not obligation to be justified, and without the fear of condemnation! As a matter of fact, Christ made the law even MORE legalistic if you wanted to look at it from that angle. Instead of actually killing someone, I am breaking the commandment if I hate my brother. FAR from being done away with!

How can they be internalized and followed by all Christians (except, as Sputnik pointed out, that annoying 4th commandment) and yet say that it has been done away with?

When the law is internalized, it is not done away with. Do you think the OT writers thought this is what God meant in Jeremiah when God said He would 'write them on their hearts'? I think not ,and yet that is exactly what our friends would have us believe.

I guess they know more then the bible writers. :roll:
Click to expand...

Guibox,

The law is just as true today as it was when it was written in OT times. Since Christ died, the only difference now, is in how we obey it. Since the Jews don't acknowledge Christ as their permanent sacrifice once and for all, they still have to perform the same rituals they have always performed in order to feel atoned. But we Christians no longer have to do that because Christ is our permanent sacrifice. Otherwise, Christ did indeed die for nothing. So as Paul says, the law now only exists to convict us of sin, to tell us what is right and what is wrong. But as he says in Romans, we are no longer slaves to the law but slaves to the Spirit.

Vic made a preference that we not use the ignore option. So I'm simply going to suggest that you and I agree to disagree. You are just as intent on keeping your interpretation as I am on keeping mine. I have explained Grace 6 ways to Sunday and have also explained why Jesus is Lord of the Sabbath and why we are no longer under OT law. If you still disagree, then we'll simply have to agree to disagree. :)
 
Can someone ponit me in the right direction in the bible, where Christ observed a Sabbath Day as the Jews did according to the Law of Moses?
 
Maybe there is a scripture where he has observed it according to the Law of Moses, I can't recall one off the top of my head though?
 
Heidi said:
Guibox,

The law is just as true today as it was when it was written in OT times. Since Christ died, the only difference now, is in how we obey it. Since the Jews don't acknowledge Christ as their permanent sacrifice once and for all, they still have to perform the same rituals they have always performed in order to feel atoned. But we Christians no longer have to do that because Christ is our permanent sacrifice. Otherwise, Christ did indeed die for nothing. So as Paul says, the law now only exists to convict us of sin, to tell us what is right and what is wrong. But as he says in Romans, we are no longer slaves to the law but slaves to the Spirit.
Click to expand...

And this is the most sense that you have said this entire thread, Heidi. You are exactly right and nothing you say negates keeping the Sabbath along with the rest of the commandments.

Heidi said:
Vic made a preference that we not use the ignore option. So I'm simply going to suggest that you and I agree to disagree. You are just as intent on keeping your interpretation as I am on keeping mine. I have explained Grace 6 ways to Sunday and have also explained why Jesus is Lord of the Sabbath and why we are no longer under OT law. If you still disagree, then we'll simply have to agree to disagree. :)
Click to expand...

We are 'under the law' when we are under the condemnation of the law (which is what Paul meant, btw). When we try to follow the law to save ourselves, we are condemned. Paul condemns this use of the law but upholds the law when it convicts and when we follow it out of love and obedience. This includes the Sabbath. The Sabbath is even more important in our hectic world then ever! Following what God commands is not legalism. Your problem is that you are trying to uphold the other commandments of not murdering, stealing or committing adultery but the Sabbath is legalism. None of the commandments in their basic form have changed, Heidi. They are still tests of obedience and there to make our life better.

The Sabbath is no different.

However, you are correct. We shall agree to disagree.

klee shay said:
Can someone ponit me in the right direction in the bible, where Christ observed a Sabbath Day as the Jews did according to the Law of Moses?
Click to expand...

And that is the whole point, you guys! Jesus came not to abrogate the Sabbath but to make it free of the burdens that kept it from being 'a delight'. Jesus went into the synagogue to preach as was his custom on the Sabbath (as did Paul) and came to show that it is lawful to do good on the Sabbath.

The Jews squelched the true joy of the Sabbath. Jesus came and through His divine example, showed HOW the Sabbath should be kept and what it truly meant. Nowhere does He say that He is the Sabbath rest or that He was coming to do away with Sabbath keeping. Many many times He had the opportunity to do so to the Pharisees. Instead, He did the opposite. He kept it the way it should be kept because He IS "Lord of the Sabbath".
 
So guibox, when you sin, what do you do? Try to keep the law or ask Christ for forgiveness? :o If it's the latter then you agree with me that the law exists now only to convict us of sin. If you think it's the former, then you are still under OT law and not under grace.

Also, where in scripture does it say that the one law that Jesus didn't fulfill was the Sabbath law? Verses please. And if you can't find any, then why do you hold the belief that he did not fulfill that law? :o
 
Heidi said:
So guibox, when you sin, what do you do? Try to keep the law or ask Christ for forgiveness? :o If it's the latter then you agree with me that the law exists now only to convict us of sin. If you think it's the former, then you are still under OT law and not under grace.

Though directed at guibox, I'd like to jump in here. Why do so many seem to place 'obedience to God' in the 'way too hard basket'? I'm a sinner from way back. I still sin on a fairly regular basis, if only in thought. Come to think of it, I think my main 'sin' these days is NOT doing the good that I could be doing ...the 'sin' of apathy, I guess.

This doesn't mean, however, that one still can't strive for obedience. The spirit of obedience is not only pleasing to God, it makes the individual feel good too. So, there is also a personal bonus involved for the obedient Christian. Obedience=pleasing to God=good for individual well-being=reflects one's Christianity to others. So, please don't knock obedience.

Also, where in scripture does it say that the one law that Jesus didn't fulfill was the Sabbath law? Verses please. And if you can't find any, then why do you hold the belief that he did not fulfill that law? :o

This is a question specifically directed at guibox. I have no idea what the question means since I can find no reference in any of guibox' posts where he said that Jesus didn't fulfill the Sabbath law. Over to you, guibox.
Click to expand...
 
So guibox does believe that Jesus fulfilled the Sabbath law for us. Is that correct? If so, then why does he think he still has to bey the Sabbath like the Jews still do? :-? Do you know what Jesus means when he said he has come to fulfill the law for us? It means we now don't have to fulfill the law by ourselves, Sputnik, which is impossible anyway. So then, why be concerned about resting on Sundays? :o

and to whom do you give the credit for your obedience, Sputnik? To yourself, or to God? :-?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top