You don't appear to understand that just because someone knows more than you do that that does not mean they are infallible. If that were the case then the parallel argument could be that because you are wrong in this regard you are never correct in anything else you say.
How do you know he knows more than I do? I have been studying the Bible for over 40 years, and the law specifically for the past 8 years. Are you sure Hank Hanegraaff has studied the law that extensively? Having a piece of paper from a seminary or having a public ministry doesn't mean you automatically know more than everyone else.
It is silly to argue Hank doesn't know what he's talking about when more than one person has attempted without success to brig to your attention that it is you who are ignorant about these issues.
I won't repeat the list.
Okay, then I will. Here are all of the replies I've received in this thread concerning the video.
Listen a little more carefully to his words.
Jesus, Himself, was qualified (in part) to be our atonement, and the ONLY one qualified......... Why?
I agree the poster needs to watch the video again. The OT law was for instruction in righteous living. Jesus was the living example of the culmination of the law so that we entered into the church age, or age of grace, through he who was the only one who could achieve perfection as that sacrifice we required to achieve salvation from our sin nature.
I'm afraid you are still missing how the Bible reads. It is to be understood in its ENTIRE message, not sliced up into individual sentences that you hope will say what you want it to.
What was the very point, and specific question the Rich Young Ruler came asking? He wanted to know how to inherit eternal life. What did Jesus tell him was necessary? He said to "Keep the law."
When he claimed he had... for all his life... Jesus knew he had not, so He kept going. He stepped over into the HEART realm, and showed the man that he was already in violation of the very first commandment by loving his possessions more than he loved God.
Unlike others here I have no wish to argue with you. Your proclamation at the end is a self-fulfilling prophecy when it would be you who lacks understanding in this issue. And you appear to be set in that deficit because you continue to argue your errant point of view. Arguing Hank Hanegraaff doesn't know what he's talking about when it is obvious you are in error is, well, silly.
To summarize:
- Listen again
- Listen again
- You're still missing it
- You're being silly
Please show me where all these people you refer to (I only see two) have tried to bring to my attention that I am ignorant. Telling me to listen again (50% of the responses I've gotten) or that I'm being silly (25% of the responses), isn't showing me anything. The only one that's left is Willie's second response, where, after he states that I'm still missing it, without actually providing any support for that statement, he goes on to talk about the story of the rich young ruler. In that encounter, Jesus told the man to keep the law. He then does the exact same thing as Hank Hanegraaff does in the video and goes on to interpret the partial passage that he referred to to mean something that isn't there. What actually is there is this:
And behold, a man came up to him, saying, “Teacher, what good deed must I do to have eternal life?” And he said to him, “Why do you ask me about what is good? There is only one who is good. If you would enter life, keep the commandments.” He said to him, “Which ones?” And Jesus said, “You shall not murder, You shall not commit adultery, You shall not steal, You shall not bear false witness, Honor your father and mother, and, You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” The young man said to him, “All these I have kept. What do I still lack?” Jesus said to him, “If you would be perfect, go, sell what you possess and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me.” When the young man heard this he went away sorrowful, for he had great possessions. (Matt. 19:16-22 ESV)
Notice that when the young man says that he has kept the commandments, Jesus doesn't argue with him. He doesn't tell him that he's wrong and that he has broken the commandments. The man was doing what was right. Jesus never said he wasn't or that it wasn't right to live by the law. But he knew there was something more to life (What do I still lack?), and Jesus told him what to do if he wanted more out of life, which was to leave everything he had and follow Jesus. Nothing in that passage says the man wasn't following the commandments Jesus mentioned. Nothing in that passage says the law has been done away with. Nothing says that we needn't or can't follow the law. And, more to the point for this thread, that passage mentions neither the Sabbath nor Sunday. So, where exactly have multiple people shown me that I am ignorant?
If you go back you'll see where you are wrong in challenging Hank H. on these issues. That you refuse to agree you are wrong does not make you correct and HH in error.
Neither does the fact that Hank Hanegraaff is a celebrity that has a public ministry and I'm not mean that he is right and I am in error. It not Hank Hanegraaf that determines what is right and wrong. We should go to the Bible, and not any man, to find the truth. If Hank Hanegraaff or anyone else contradicts what the Bible says, then I will argue against them, not matter how silly that may seem to others.
The TOG
