miz3 Posted June 29, 2011 Author Posted June 29, 2011 Quote: The Son of God came voluntarily to accomplish the work of atonement. There was no obligatory yoke upon Him, for He was independent and above all law. The angels, as God's intelligent messengers, were under the yoke of obligation; no personal sacrifice of theirs could atone for the guilt of fallen man. Christ alone was free from the claims of the law to undertake the redemption of the sinful race. . . . {FLB 199.3} Thank you John317! I think this is a marvelous quote from Ellen White on the question posed in OP. Does this settle the issue, or are there others out there that wish to dispute this clear fact stated above. Either again from the Bible, Ellen White or any other Authority. The clear fact is: GOD IS GREATER THAN THE LAW! THAT MEANS THE LAW IS NOT BINDING ON GOD! (God being the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit). Quote
miz3 Posted June 29, 2011 Author Posted June 29, 2011 Ok, Dr. Rich here it is straight from the COVENANT! "Love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength. 6 These commandments that I give you today are to be upon your hearts." Deuteronomy 6:5-6. This is taken straight from the Law or as you put it the Covenant. Oh, there is more! "Do not seek revenge or bear a grudge against one of your people, but love your neighbor as yourself. I am the LORD. 19 “‘Keep my decrees." Leviticus 19:18-19. This is also taken straight from the Law or as you put it the Covenant. Once again counselor, you have been proven wrong! I rest my case! Quote
Moderators Gerr Posted June 29, 2011 Moderators Posted June 29, 2011 Originally Posted By: CoAspen They are one and the same! Bingo....God is an expression of the spirit of his law! Me thinks you got this thing backwards. The law is an expression of what God is like. So which is greater, the expression of something or that which the expression is derived from? Quote
Dr. Rich Posted June 29, 2011 Posted June 29, 2011 Ok, Dr. Rich here it is straight from the COVENANT! "Love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength. 6 These commandments that I give you today are to be upon your hearts." Deuteronomy 6:5-6. This is taken straight from the Law or as you put it the Covenant. Oh, there is more! "Do not seek revenge or bear a grudge against one of your people, but love your neighbor as yourself. I am the LORD. 19 “‘Keep my decrees." Leviticus 19:18-19. This is also taken straight from the Law or as you put it the Covenant. Once again counselor, you have been proven wrong! I rest my case! LOL! There are TWO places where the REAL and ONLY Covenant (Ten Commandments) are found and that is in Ex. 20:3-17 and Deut. 5:7-21 and they both say the same thing. Your evidence is not even a copy! At best, what you wrote is what Moses said about (1) the Commandments; (2) the statutes, and (3) the judgments (ordances) that Moses presented to Israel. (See Deut. 6:1) In court, only the original document can be used as evidence (original document law in "Rules of Evidence"). If you rest your case on evidence that does not meet this strict rule, then all of your evidence is to be considered trash. Quote
miz3 Posted June 29, 2011 Author Posted June 29, 2011 LOL! There are TWO places where the REAL and ONLY Covenant (Ten Commandments) are found and that is in Ex. 20:3-17 and Deut. 5:7-21 and they both say the same thing. Your evidence is not even a copy! At best, what you wrote is what Moses said about (1) the Commandments; (2) the statutes, and (3) the judgments (ordances) that Moses presented to Israel. (See Deut. 6:1) In court, only the original document can be used as evidence (original document law in "Rules of Evidence"). If you rest your case on evidence that does not meet this strict rule, then all of your evidence is to be considered trash. My dear counselor, all five books written by Moses are Primary Sources (ORIGINAL DOCUMENT), that is "Best Evidence"! You cannot just pick which parts of the Best Evidence (THAT IS THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT) you want to accept. Moses wrote everything according to the Command of God. Thus, what Moses wrote down came from God. You cannot get more Primary or Best Evidence than that! It is not what Moses wrote about the Law, IT IS ABOUT WHAT GOD WROTE THROUGH MOSES ABOUT THE LAW. Again, you cannot get better evidence than that! Again, counselor I rest my airtight case ON THIS ORIGINAL DOCUMENT! Quote
Dr. Rich Posted June 29, 2011 Posted June 29, 2011 Miz3, are you forgetting that it was the finger of God that wrote the Ten Commandments? That IS the ONLY original document my friend! It is NOT what Moses wrote, it is all about what God wrote Himself. Quote
Guest Posted June 29, 2011 Posted June 29, 2011 Originally Posted By: RLH The last six commandments are about nothing else BUT loving your neighbor, you dope, er..ol buddy. I thought you said you studied the words of Jesus? Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets. Matt 22:37-40 Richard, I just saw a news spot on tv where the gays in the Gay Pride parade were saying that people should just allow people to love one another. Do you suppose this is what God's covenant is all about? Is the words of John Linnon's song 'All you need is Love' the same as God's covenant? Is God's love as found in His covenant the same type of love as what Paul wrote in 1Cor. 13? Rich, how in the world do you look at the words of Jesus, which I posted, and then go off talking about some gay pride parade, and Paul, for crying out loud? I didn't say anything about either one of those, and they have nothing to do with what I was trying to show you. I guess your one track mind has shut down to about 50% to save energy or something. Would you call that a half track? I don't know. For someone who claims to follow the words of Jesus, you sure are quick to gloss right over them and go back to ranting about your one and only topic. Especially when they prove you are wrong. You just ignore Jesus when you can't get around what He said, and try to change the subject, is that it? But I am patient, so lets try this one more time. This time try to at least stay in the ball park with the subject matter at hand. JESUS said: Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets. Matt 22:37-40 Jesus puts loving your neighbor as yourself right into the heart of the ten commandments. Did you catch it that time? If not re-read it until it sinks in. If you're dyslexic or something, then have somebody read it to you. Or you can actually buy the Bible on CD now. Maybe that would work. Quote
Moderators John317 Posted June 29, 2011 Moderators Posted June 29, 2011 Yes, I agree that the law of God as written for man is not binding on God. Having said that, we can trust God to do what is right because of His loving character. He does not change, and we can be glad of that, because any change in a perfect Being can only result in an imperfect Being. Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.
miz3 Posted June 29, 2011 Author Posted June 29, 2011 Miz3, are you forgetting that it was the finger of God that wrote the Ten Commandments? That IS the ONLY original document my friend! It is NOT what Moses wrote, it is all about what God wrote Himself. Dr. Rich the only way we know that fact is from the writer of the Primary Document (Best Evidence) which would be Moses! Moses is the one who testifies! Thus all his testimony is valid as Best Evidence. Thus, all of Moses testimony is ORIGINAL! As I pointed out before EVERYTHING MOSES WROTE MOSES GOT FROM GOD! The "Ten Commandments" are/were not the only thing Moses got from God. Everything absolutely EVERYTHING MOSES WROTE HE GOT FROM GOD! That makes it all of the same importance, the same originality, the same primacy! Whether God wrote with His finger, or God dictated with His mouth is not relevant. Communication whether by finger or by mouth is communication plain and simple provided the finger and mouth come from the same source and they do! Sorry counselor your objections to this evidence have been overruled! Your briefs have been rejected as not Biblical and not factual! Quote
miz3 Posted June 29, 2011 Author Posted June 29, 2011 Thank you Dr. Rich for being so gracious in your concession! Quote
Dr. Rich Posted June 29, 2011 Posted June 29, 2011 Good Grief, sure glad you 'love' me Richard! Thanks for the wonderful 'poke in the eye! Quote
Administrators Gail Posted June 29, 2011 Administrators Posted June 29, 2011 This is male bonding, right? :) Quote Isaiah 32:17 And the work of righteousness shall be peace; and the effect of righteousness quietness and assurance for ever.
Dr. Rich Posted June 30, 2011 Posted June 30, 2011 Thank you Dr. Rich for being so gracious in your concession! U R welcome! BTW, take a look at this site as I think you all would find this interesting about this issue: http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/06/2...Wrote_the_Bible Quote
miz3 Posted June 30, 2011 Author Posted June 30, 2011 Dr. Rich, Thank you. That article was extremely interesting. I found two things about the article and about the new tool that is interesting to me. First is the Algorithm. This is a constant that is applied to all texts. Second is the variable part of the program! That is the article stated that "criteria" had to be injected into the Algorithm. Thus it depends on what "criteria" is used. This injected criteria could possibly be "biased" depending on who is injecting such criteria. Putting my possible fears aside the idea is most fascinating and interesting. We might have to be prepared to possibly change some of our cherished ideas provided the process is honest! Quote
Dr. Rich Posted June 30, 2011 Posted June 30, 2011 Dr. Rich, Thank you. That article was extremely interesting. I found two things about the article and about the new tool that is interesting to me. First is the Algorithm. This is a constant that is applied to all texts. Second is the variable part of the program! That is the article stated that "criteria" had to be injected into the Algorithm. Thus it depends on what "criteria" is used. This injected criteria could possibly be "biased" depending on who is injecting such criteria. Putting my possible fears aside the idea is most fascinating and interesting. We might have to be prepared to possibly change some of our cherished ideas provided the process is honest! Again, U R Welcome! Yes, I too have the same questions about this. But again, this brings up another issue I have been investigating for a few months and that is the difference in writing style between the gospel of John and Revelation and 1st and 2nd John. Before I ever saw the site I am providing here that I got from RLH, it came to me that the disciple John could not have written the gospel of John. In fact, I had been seeking help with this and praying about it when Richard sent me an email about this site: www.disciplewhomjesusloved.com It may be off topic, but it sure is interesting! Quote
miz3 Posted July 1, 2011 Author Posted July 1, 2011 Again, U R Welcome! Yes, I too have the same questions about this. But again, this brings up another issue I have been investigating for a few months and that is the difference in writing style between the gospel of John and Revelation and 1st and 2nd John. Before I ever saw the site I am providing here that I got from RLH, it came to me that the disciple John could not have written the gospel of John. In fact, I had been seeking help with this and praying about it when Richard sent me an email about this site: www.disciplewhomjesusloved.com It may be off topic, but it sure is interesting! You are correct again. This is a fascinating concept. The Gospel of John has been my favorite gospel of the Gospel Books. That is not to say that Matthew, Mark, and Luke are not good also. There is something about the Book of John that strikes a huge spiritual chord in my soul. I have never thought about questioning the "authorship" of John's Gospel before but that article sure does make a good case to get to wondering. The fact that the author could be a woman and Mary Magdalene to boot at first might strike you as preposterous. However, when one thinks about the Gospel of John and what it contains it does not sound so far out. There is certainly at least on the initial surface of my mind that the fact that she sat at the feet of Jesus for hours upon hours, that she was always there to take care of many things for Him (along with other women), the fact that she loved Jesus because of the Forgiveness He gave her, etc. leads me to at least be open to the idea that indeed she may be the author of the John the Gospel. This is something that bears further study! Thanks again Dr. Rich! Quote
Dr. Rich Posted July 1, 2011 Posted July 1, 2011 Originally Posted By: Dr.Rich Again, U R Welcome! Yes, I too have the same questions about this. But again, this brings up another issue I have been investigating for a few months and that is the difference in writing style between the gospel of John and Revelation and 1st and 2nd John. Before I ever saw the site I am providing here that I got from RLH, it came to me that the disciple John could not have written the gospel of John. In fact, I had been seeking help with this and praying about it when Richard sent me an email about this site: www.disciplewhomjesusloved.com It may be off topic, but it sure is interesting! You are correct again. This is a fascinating concept. The Gospel of John has been my favorite gospel of the Gospel Books. That is not to say that Matthew, Mark, and Luke are not good also. There is something about the Book of John that strikes a huge spiritual chord in my soul. I have never thought about questioning the "authorship" of John's Gospel before but that article sure does make a good case to get to wondering. The fact that the author could be a woman and Mary Magdalene to boot at first might strike you as preposterous. However, when one thinks about the Gospel of John and what it contains it does not sound so far out. There is certainly at least on the initial surface of my mind that the fact that she sat at the feet of Jesus for hours upon hours, that she was always there to take care of many things for Him (along with other women), the fact that she loved Jesus because of the Forgiveness He gave her, etc. leads me to at least be open to the idea that indeed she may be the author of the John the Gospel. This is something that bears further study! Thanks again Dr. Rich! Mary Magdalene? Huh? That is not found in the study I posted. Read the whole thing, it's free. The evidence points to Lazarus, not John or anyone else. Who knows? Could be as it would not change anything because Lazarus was also an eyewitness of Jesus ministry from the start. Quote
miz3 Posted July 1, 2011 Author Posted July 1, 2011 Maybe Lazarus, but I like Mary Magdalene better. Just my speculation! I'll look into it more! Quote
miz3 Posted July 1, 2011 Author Posted July 1, 2011 Mary Magdalene was also an eyewitness! Maybe even more so than others. Oh! by the way don't put your face in the gutter I am not making any "sexual" intimations of any kind shape or form! Keep it real and keep it clean! Quote
Dr. Rich Posted July 1, 2011 Posted July 1, 2011 Mary Magdalene was also an eyewitness! Maybe even more so than others. Oh! by the way don't put your face in the gutter I am not making any "sexual" intimations of any kind shape or form! Keep it real and keep it clean! Miz3, I know you wouldn't do that! After all, Jesus is coming back for His bride and had to remain 'perfect' for His Bride! Quote
miz3 Posted July 2, 2011 Author Posted July 2, 2011 I was not accusing you Dr. Rich. However. there are nutty ones out there who jump to that conclusion and I just wanted to distance myself as far as the east is from the west from such blasphemy and heresy! Mary Magdalene was a child of the Living God (Jesus Christ) and was with the Savior day after day as were several of the women and men who followed Christ! Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.