Dr. Brown Answers Your Questions

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

49 Comments
  1. The scr.s about the other eloheem(gods), that are not the Father Eloheem(God), those other eloheem(gods) can be about false eloheem(gods) they are not true eloheem(gods), they are disobedient, but then also there can be true righteous other eloheem(gods) that are underneath the Father, in other words His malakim(angels, messengers & sent ones), which also is plural about reigning, these other eloheem(gods) rule in a lesser sense than the Father does. So angels, and obedient people can be considered to be other obedient eloheem(gods), that is why Messiah talked about Psalms, that those that are sactified are eloheem(gods), but that understanding can go into much more revelation.
    5For though there be that are called eloheem(gods), whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be eloheem(gods) many, and lords many,)
    6But to us there is but one Eloheem(God), the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him. 1 Cor. 8:5-6″

    There is so much more revelation to this.
    “5 Let this mind be in you which was also in Messiah Yeshua(Christ Jesus),
    6 who, being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God,
    7 but made Himself of no reputation, taking the form of a bondservant, and coming in the likeness of men. Phil. 2:5-7”

    So we are supposed to follow Messiah, & have that same mind, just as He came in the likeness of physical men He was more than solely a man, we also come in the likeness of men, but through Messiah we are more than solely men.

  2. Dear Dr. Brown,

    Thanks so much for sharing about the ISV, this is the first translation I’ve ever seen that translate the ending of 2nd Samuel 8:18 as “and David’s sons were priests.”

    Great! I have been comparing scriptures back and forth with the NKJV and other versions. It looks like a really great translation.

    Once again thanks so much and I pray Jesus’ light shines through you in Israel!

    Shalom!

  3. I’d love to hear your radio show live; however, I can’t pick it up — I’m too far from the nearest station in Carlsbad, NM. I wonder if I request it for my local Christian-inspired station if they’d pick it up.

  4. Ruth,

    Remember that you can listen live online to every broadcast. Also, you can always request that your local station carry the broadcast. Refer them to the Truth Radio Network for specifics.

  5. Certainly if some of David’s sons were priests, those killing one another, and letting blood were not (would not have met the qualifications). To get beyond the usual Bible story depictions of David’s own life to, for example, his general’s intrigue of political manipulation, the placement of a woman beside his aged body to attempt to revive it, the losses of sons due to sin cycles, etc. is to present a more accurate picture of the family life dysfunction of David. That Power corrupts even the ways and means of such icons cannot be denied, as to who he surrounded himself with to maintain it, and how it was maintained. Today, in a sense, his gang would be bullies on the block (recall too that he once was a mercinary soldier as well). Add the Bathsheba incident and the primary indicator of David’s value to scripture is that he once was a macho dude warrior, with a heart for God, and a lust for release.

  6. Michael Brown, PhD,

    Thanks for your last comment, answering a question I sent in. I too believe we are triune creatures, not fully able to act apart from the soul being bonded to the flesh without the new birth and awarenesses derived of the Holy Spirit allying with our renewal. It is a strong teaching in present day Evangelical Seminaries that soul and spirit are not divided at all by scripture, in spite of the two references you made, and experience thereby of personal witness. How to bring this teaching into these fortresses of doctrinal foundation?

  7. I am probably restating the obvious here, but isn’t it the Word of God’s job to “separate between soul and spirit”? How is there no separation taught if this is one of the attributes of the Lord Himself in dealing with us through His word?

    Or, if I am completely off-topic on the intention of the post, I apologize 🙂

  8. Dave,

    Good point. I think this is exactly what the Word does.

    Hebrews 4
    12 For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.

    I think it goes like this:

    We make a commitment to do whatever YHWH asks. Then we read/hear YHWH’s word in a certain area. Then it becomes quite evident whether it was just a thought or a true intent of our heart. If we can obey, it was an intent (from our renewed spirit). If we cannot (or at least do not) obey, it was just a thought (from our soul).

    The word of YHWH exposes our real motivation. It shows us if we are hearers only or doers of the word. Our soul jumps on good ideas only to be twarted by the cares of this life and such. Our spirits having been renewed are in agreement with YHWH’s word. This is why we need to renew our minds/souls so that they can subject themselves to the law of YHWH.

    Romans 8
    4 That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.
    5 For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit.
    6 For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.
    7 Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.

    This seems to be what James is speaking of when he talks about the perfect law of liberty being a mirror. It shows us whether we are being motivated by the spirit or our carnal minds. We will know which motivates us by our actions after hearing/reading YHWH’s law. The spirit brings obedience…the mind brings excuses.

    Shalom

  9. Let it be stated clearly, that I in no way associate James’ Perfect Law of Liberty statement with the Sinai law: James is speaking of the law of Christ, which he clarifies. The law of Christ is a higher principle of motivation and action–from the converted heart of the Holy Spirit promised by Jesus, sent by He and the Father. It bears testimony of Him, as is stated in the section from John 13:13 to early chptr. 16.

  10. My question was given to Dr. Brown for a reason, and that is how most Protestant Seminaries associate Spirit and Soul as one concept and the same for “all practical purposes of understanding”. I do not share this view, though it is understandable from the Greek.

  11. Even though David’s sons were the priests, I don’t think they would have taken the place of the Levitical priesthood, and offered the sacrifices in the Temple, they would have likely been spiritual leaders.
    Is that a correct way to think?

  12. It just might be possible that the writer of a letter to the “Hebrews” might be speaking of the same scripture/word of YHWH/law as James who wrote to the “twelve tribes which are scattered abroad.”

    It might even be probable.

    Maybe it is not quite a foregone conclusion, but the idea should not be cast off without objective investigation.

    Shalom

  13. Dr. Brown,

    I am trying for the life of me to get an answer to a question that I simply cannot understand.

    In Hebrews 10:10,12,18 states that Y’shua died for our sins and there will be no more offering.

    If this be the case, why does Ezekiel speak of ‘sin offerings’ during the millennium? Zachariah also speaks of offerings during the millennium.

    I have read ‘answers’ such as ‘the sin offering’ will be a ‘memorial offering’
    and we will reflect on Y’shua’s death, which makes no sense to me(wouldn’t taking communion during the millennium be easier if we are to remember His death?) Or another explanation: Sin offering is to cleanse the temple. Maybe you can shed some light on the subject. I am anxiously waiting your reply.

  14. Jabez,

    Is the “law of Christ” in opposition to the law of His Father? Is it really different? The term, “law of Christ,” is used only once, that I know of.

    Galatians 6
    1 Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual, restore such an one in the spirit of meekness; considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted.
    2 Bear ye one another’s burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ.
    3 For if a man think himself to be something, when he is nothing, he deceiveth himself.

    Above we find that the “law of Christ” is in regard to restoring someone who is sinning. Paul did not want someone to “deceive” himself by thinking that he was “something when he is nothing.” He did not want him to walk around in sin thinking he was fine.

    James does have some similar thoughts. We deceive ourselves when we go away from hearing the the word without conforming to it.

    James 1
    22 But be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves.
    23 For if any be a hearer of the word, and not a doer, he is like unto a man beholding his natural face in a glass:
    24 For he beholdeth himself, and goeth his way, and straightway forgetteth what manner of man he was.
    25 But whoso looketh into the perfect law of liberty, and continueth therein, he being not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed.

    This perfect law of liberty is spoken of a little later in James.

    James 2
    8 If ye fulfil the royal law according to the scripture, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself, ye do well:
    9 But if ye have respect to persons, ye commit sin, and are convinced of the law as transgressors.
    10 For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.
    11 For he that said, Do not commit adultery, said also, Do not kill. Now if thou commit no adultery, yet if thou kill, thou art become a transgressor of the law.
    12 So speak ye, and so do, as they that shall be judged by the law of liberty.

    This perfect law of liberty is YHWH’s law (Do not kill. Do not commit adultery. etc.). Transgression of this law brings bondage. Keeping YHWH’s law brings liberty. It is perfect. If we add or subtract, it is no longer perfect. We break the whole, when we break just one aspect, because parts cannot be separated from the whole. If we could pick and choose the parts we like, it would cease to be perfect…complete.

    James points us to Leviticus just like Paul did in Galatians and Messiah did in the Gospels. The perfect law contains a key to being able to keep it. That key is loving our neighbor as ourself. This is the “royal law.” It presides over the rest of the “perfect law.” It does not take the place of the rest of YHWH’s law, but sets our hearts in the right direction. The rest of the “perfect law of liberty” informs us of what is the correct behavior according to our Creator. Let’s look at the original context of the “royal law” and see if Paul and James use it in context.

    Leviticus 19
    15 Ye shall do no unrighteousness in judgment: thou shalt not respect the person of the poor, nor honour the person of the mighty: but in righteousness shalt thou judge thy neighbour.
    16 Thou shalt not go up and down as a talebearer among thy people: neither shalt thou stand against the blood of thy neighbour: I am the LORD.
    17 Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thine heart: thou shalt in any wise rebuke thy neighbour, and not suffer sin upon him.
    18 Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: I am the LORD.
    19 Ye shall keep my statutes…

    We see Paul speaking of restoring/rebuking a sinning brother/neighbor. We see James speaking of not having respect of persons. We break the royal law when we fail in either of these areas. If we fail to rebuke our sinning brother because we like him too much to hurt his feelings, we break both aspects at once. The other aspect of the “royal law” is doing unto our neighbor as we would have done to ourselves. So when we see our brother transgressing the “perfect law of liberty,” we should be motivated by the “royal law” to set him free from the bondage of sin by loving rebuke. We should want this done to us if we really love YHWH with our whole heart, mind and strength.

    The so called “law of Christ” is not in opposition to the law of His Father. It does not replace the Torah. It has, at its core, the concept of restoring transgressors of YHWH’s law back to a place of true liberty. Free from sin.

    The word of YHWH/perfect law is a mirror to show us our spots and wrinkles. Y’Shua uses this word to wash His bride. He uses our brother’s rebuke to turn us back into the way of righteousness. This word of YHWH/perfect law of liberty is like a sword…showing us if our souls/minds are really in line with our born again spirits. When we have the righteous standard of YHWH’s Torah as a perfect mirror and a two edged sword, we can see the discrepancies of our thoughts and actions compared to that of our righteous spirit’s desire to be in perfect alignment to the will of our Father in heaven.

    The heart of man is very deceitful. Paul and James agree. We deceive ourselves when we stray from the truth. We can easily walk around transgressing and thinking all the while that we are something when we are nothing…thinking that we are acting righteously while breaking YHWH’s commandments. I guess John agrees with Paul and James.

    1 John 3
    4 Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.
    5 And ye know that he was manifested to take away our sins; and in him is no sin.
    6 Whosoever abideth in him sinneth not: whosoever sinneth hath not seen him, neither known him.
    7 Little children, let no man deceive you: he that doeth righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous.

    Let no man deceive you…especially the man that is you.

    Shalom

  15. Jabez,

    Matthew 22
    40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

    Continuing in the thought process of the post above, we should see that we may not separate the “royal law” form YHWH’s perfect law. (The royal is one of two straps that the rest of the garment of righteousness hangs on. Imagine a pair of overalls with only one strap…a bit cavemanish 🙂 And what of wearing only the straps without the body of the garment?) The perfection that comes as a unit would be compromised with any division of the whole. The rest of the law would not have the proper motivation behind it without the royal and the royal would lack the divine definitions of what acting in love really is.

    The word of YHWH/perfect law of liberty is supposed to show us the truth of our intentions. Are they really good intentions if they do not fulfill the righteousness of YHWH’s instructions? Do we just have sentimental thoughts about walking in righteousness?

    Romans 8
    7 Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.

    The Sword is supposed to do the dividing to show us where we really stand. Instead we use our carnal souls/minds to divide the sword so that we end up holding only the handle. This is much easier, as the weight and pointedness of YHWH’s instructions are not something easy to swing against our deceitful hearts.

    The standard remains the same. It is YHWH’s perfect law of liberty. The royal cannot void the rest of the law. It is what establishes YHWH’s instructions…especially in our hearts.

    Romans
    31 Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.

    Romans 6
    15 What then? shall we sin, because we are not under the law, but under grace? God forbid.

    Romans 8
    4 That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

    Shalom

  16. Simply put, the reason the New Covenant is taking the place of the old one is because of the Law of Christ being placed in believer’s hearts as a to be cultivated motivator to practice that law, “Love as I have loved”. In too many forums of this website we have quoted the basics over and over for you, Bo, and as to why the preaching of the King, is the sharing of the basic Principle of the Law of Him, the Christ. The way he lived it out then, person to person, not primarily being about the ritual satisfaction he undertook being born “under” the law of Moses. He came to his own, his own did not receive him, but, as Paul so estutely stated, their rejection compelled the acceptance of the Gentiles of the Message.

    Read Acts, as to missionary journeys, and the teaching of the Apostles, and try, and actually do not reinterpret the plain speech there given as to what they taught. It is simple enough, they taught Jesus, and Jesus crucified and resurrected, who lived the precious and perfect law of the Way the Messiah, Hin, became the sacrifice acceptable to God. Why, because He was the perfect lamb, born before the foundation of the world, whose life thereafter, especially even when incarnated was the only honorable and complete sacrifice.

    Why? Because He was sent, He lived predicted and exacting fulfillments, He will live more fulfillments in the future, He completed righteousness, He sent the Promised Spirit, and He will complete detailed requirements of the Prophets of of Old. The law of Christ extended into the nations, not the law of Moses. The law of Christ=the life, truth, and way He lived.

    Now, that perfect law grants a New Covenant abiding liberty, which is completed in the liberty of the adopted Sons of God. These Sons, do “greater things” than He did because they walk in their own timeframes, in their own received gifts, completing their own appointed works: yet, motivated and full of the energy of the Law of Christ.

    Why go back to weak and miserable principles, when the imparted Holy Spirit works the works of Jesus (per John 13:13-early chapter 16). Apart from Him we can not do this. The denominator of the Law of Christ shed abroad as His love to us all is based on His sacred heart and life, not on the precepts of Moses. He is light, liberty, and the completed revealed Way of His kind of love.

    Praise be to our Father, throught the veil now open to us. Praise be to the Son for his sacrifice and present intercession. Praise be to the Spirit for enabling and bringing the testimony of us of the Son. Praise indeed for revealing the Law of Christ to all His children.

  17. “…if you look increasingly into the ‘perfect law of liberty'”, you will likewise assist in His harvest, from the inside out. The heart toward others is the heart of saving grace, established in the relationship of each adopted child of God to the Father of redeemed souls.

  18. Luk 10:21

    In that hour Jesus rejoiced in spirit, and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes: even so, Father; for so it seemed good in thy sight.

  19. Sheila,

    I wonder what has been hidden from the wise and prudent lately?

    Luke 10
    21 In that hour Jesus rejoiced in spirit, and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes: even so, Father; for so it seemed good in thy sight.
    22 All things are delivered to me of my Father: and no man knoweth who the Son is, but the Father; and who the Father is, but the Son, and he to whom the Son will reveal him.
    23 And he turned him unto his disciples, and said privately, Blessed are the eyes which see the things that ye see:
    24 For I tell you, that many prophets and kings have desired to see those things which ye see, and have not seen them; and to hear those things which ye hear, and have not heard them.
    25 And, behold, a certain lawyer stood up, and tempted him, saying, Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?
    26 He said unto him, What is written in the law? how readest thou?
    27 And he answering said, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbour as thyself.
    28 And he said unto him, Thou hast answered right: this do, and thou shalt live.

    Do this and you will live too. Only be sure you go by YHWH’s definitions of love instead of your own.

    So what is real love for YHWH and our neighbor? It is spelled out in YHWH’s word. It is not coming up with our own version of love. Here is the apostolic teaching on what true love for YHWH and our brother is:

    1 John 5
    2 By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God, and keep his commandments.
    3 For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous.

    Here is Moses’s teaching:

    Deuteronomy 5
    10 And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me and keep my commandments.

    Seems to be the same as the apostles, yes?

    Here is the context of the greatest commandment:

    Deuteronomy 6
    4 Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD:
    5 And thou shalt love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might.
    6 And these words, which I command thee this day, shall be in thine heart:
    7 And thou shalt teach them diligently unto thy children, and shalt talk of them when thou sittest in thine house, and when thou walkest by the way, and when thou liest down, and when thou risest up.

    Have you allowed YHWH to write these words, that YHWH is referring to, on your heart? If not you will not be able to love Him or your brother in truth.

    Shalom

  20. Sheila,

    John 1:17 For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.

    Just so you know the “but” is in italics. This means that it is not there in the Greek text. It is not a contrast between what YHWH used Moses and Y’Shua to do…it is cumulative…it is complementary.

    Shalom

  21. Jabez,

    Too many times, I have quoted the passages that say strait forwardly that the law is good if it is used lawfully, that it is righteous, just and good, that it written on the hearts of true believers. I say the same that these passages say. You say the opposite. Jabez, you keep insisting on your own commandments of men that set aside YHWH’s commandments.

    This “law of Christ” that you believe in does not exist in the scripture. You have made up a false law. Just read the passages above and see what the real law of Messiah is. You can keep preaching a antinomian/sloppy grace gospel if you want. I will continue to do what Y’Shua said would produce greatness in the kingdom.

    It is outrageous to even think, let alone say, that the perfect word of YHWH is weak and miserable principles. Since you will not look at the actual context of the passages, you err greatly.

    The Messiah that Paul preached kept all the commandments and taught men to do so…or else he is not to be considered great in the kingdom by His own statements. The imaginary king that you envision is dishonoring his father by setting his commandments aside, and teaching us to not do the father’s will by his spirit. False witnesses say that Y’Shua will change the law. Steven didn’t say it…neither did the apostles. False witnesses still do say it.

    Acts 6
    13 And set up false witnesses, which said, This man ceaseth not to speak blasphemous words against this holy place, and the law:
    14 For we have heard him say, that this Jesus of Nazareth shall destroy this place, and shall change the customs which Moses delivered us.

    The anti-messiah thinks to change the law.

    Daniel 7
    25 And he shall speak great words against the most High, and shall wear out the saints of the most High, and think to change times and laws: and they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and the dividing of time.

    The earth is defiled by this sort of thing.

    Isaiah 24
    5 The earth also is defiled under the inhabitants thereof; because they have transgressed the laws, changed the ordinance, broken the everlasting covenant.

    I am afraid that you have fallen into deception for lack of love of the truth. The mystery of lawlessness has fooled you.

    2 Thessalonians 2
    7 For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work. Only he who now restrains it will do so until he is out of the way.
    8 And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will kill with the breath of his mouth and bring to nothing by the appearance of his coming.
    9 The coming of the lawless one is by the activity of Satan with all power and false signs and wonders,
    10 and with all wicked deception for those who are perishing, because they refused to love the truth and so be saved.
    11 Therefore God sends them a strong delusion, so that they may believe what is false,
    12 in order that all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

    Do not be deceived any longer…a truly righteous person does righteousness. Unrighteousness is sin…sin is the transgression of the law. Stop taking pleasure in unrighteousness (transgression of the law).

    1 John 3
    4 Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.
    5 And ye know that he was manifested to take away our sins; and in him is no sin.
    6 Whosoever abideth in him sinneth not: whosoever sinneth hath not seen him, neither known him.
    7 Little children, let no man deceive you: he that doeth righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous.

    You think that you are loving YHWH but you are not keeping His commandments.

    Deuteronomy 5
    10 And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me and keep my commandments.

    1 John 5
    2 By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God, and keep his commandments.
    3 For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous.

    According to John you do not really love like Y’Shua loved. You do not love your brother if you do no keep YHWH’s commandments. You do not love YHWH if you do not keep His commandments. Y’Shua continued in the Father’s love…He kept His commandments. He set the example for us. We are to walk in His steps…He did no sin. Paul and John tell us plainly that breaking the law is sin.

    You preach a lawless law of Christ…therefore a loveless law of Christ. You refuse to read what is in black and white in the letters of Paul, John and James. The law of YHWH is perfect, righteous, just, and good. You refuse to renew your mind in YHWH’s law and are unable to subject yourself to it. You fight YHWH.

    Romans 8
    7 Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be

    Psalm 19
    7 The law of the LORD is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple.
    8 The statutes of the LORD are right, rejoicing the heart: the commandment of the LORD is pure, enlightening the eyes.
    9 The fear of the LORD is clean, enduring for ever: the judgments of the LORD are true and righteous altogether.
    10 More to be desired are they than gold, yea, than much fine gold: sweeter also than honey and the honeycomb.
    11 Moreover by them is thy servant warned: and in keeping of them there is great reward.
    12 Who can understand his errors? cleanse thou me from secret faults.
    13 Keep back thy servant also from presumptuous sins; let them not have dominion over me: then shall I be upright, and I shall be innocent from the great transgression.
    14 Let the words of my mouth, and the meditation of my heart, be acceptable in thy sight, O LORD, my strength, and my redeemer.

    So the perfect law that you reject causes you to enter into presumptuous sins. You are in danger of the great transgression. You trow away things that are more precious than much fine gold for a false promise freedom. You have turned form holy commandment.

    2 Peter 2
    21 For it had been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than, after they have known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered unto them.
    22 But it is happened unto them according to the true proverb, The dog is turned to his own vomit again; and the sow that was washed to her wallowing in the mire.

    And I could guess that you will be thinking even now, “YHWH’s law is the mire and the vomit.” YHWH says His law is perfect and more valuable than pure gold and sweeter than honey. You call it weak and miserable. I choose to believe YHWH rather than man.

    Shalom

  22. Well, to avoid hell, obedience to God no child of God can disallow, disobedience is a promotion of self enhancement or worse. I John is a letter covering many details of truth, love, and obedience–the question is what is established therein to obey? Is it what Bo is stating or something else entirely? Let us see. What are the commandments of God to which the 5th chapter he quoted our of context then refer? A survey of what John says leads up to the out of context verse Bo has cited along with others so cited in an alike fashion from other incomplete references. Let’s not be hoodwinked here, for Bo the Old law is interchangeable with the New, for New Testament writers it is simply not so. Ask yourself from your own understanding of the Message of scripture, what did Jesus usher in, and what is being replaced in Hebrews 8 and 10?

    I John is constructed with comment built upon comment, with a central theme of Jesus providing substance for faith in Him. John’s readers are challenged to accept freedom from what is false and freedom for what is true. To know and practice the will of God, is to John knowing and practicing the ways of Jesus toward others, especially the brethren. John has prior written a believer finds in the law the goal, values, and purposes only summed up in Christ’s love (John 14:21, 23, and verified by Paul Gal. 5:14). The question remains to be clarified in this response to Bo, is the Jesus of the Gospels the Jesus proclaimed as the Message of Acts, and here in I John 1 & 5? Is the Messiah of the Gospels, sent to the Jews, consistently the anointed Christ of the missionary journeys and letters which follow as so interwoven through the words of the Apostles?

    To live the More Excellent Way is to choose God’s clear instruction, not other instruction or intention. One cannot deny that the Message of the Apostles in Acts is Jesus Christ: sent to Israel, teacher, prophet, and Messiah King; rejected; crucified; atoning and forgiving; resurrected of the Father; teacher about the Kingdom for 40 days thereafter, and giver of the Holy Spirit to all who accept the Message, repent and ask for adoption (Acts 2:38&39). What is indicated in I John as to commandments is Bo’s radically out of context challenge? He places a quote from I John in his own context and advocacy, as is his central tendency.

  23. continued from above

    To John, like Paul in Rom 9:5, it is difficult to decide for a reader if it is to the Father or the Son of whom reference is made. We have John 1:1, 18; 20:28; and we have John almost exclusively giving the instruction of Jesus to relate directly to the Father through the Promise of the Spirit living in a believer, as sent from both. By :our love” we are known as being of Him, and by “his love” we know Him. That “God is love” is in summary in I John 4:8,16. We know this love is unique of Christ because we find it of the Cross of Christ (John 3:16, I John 4:10); it represents a sacrificial love, a sacrificial obedience to knowingly fulfill or complete what God has indicated needs completion. Jesus does not say believe in me because I have obeyed the law, but because of the miracles, His fulfillments of what is written in the Prophets of Old and the Law, due to sending the Promised the Holy Spirit, and because of fulfilling righteousness.

    He grants the New summary command on completing his teaching mission to “love as I have loved.” I John calls this something established “from the beginning”, not so of Moses, but of Jesus. To John the beginning is of Jesus. Nowhere in the Gospels is it written that when he ministers through relational interaction it is because he did so out of this precept of Moses or that one, but out of revealing the Father in the Son to believers in the Son.

    His is the “spirit of truth” (John 14: 16-17. which does not vacate believers once present in them (14:16). His is a love of truth that relates to loving other people, enemies, brethren, self without selfishness, by action, and even of persecutors). I John emphasizes this love. It is “not burdensome”, is lessening in demand from Moses’ demands, yet is greater still. In Lk. 13:16 this New law of Christ compelled a nonliteral observation of the law of Moses, where, due to a presenting need, it “was necessary” that Jesus healed a woman “on the Sabbath” (under Moses commandments, a violation of it). It is “lasting” to do good, regardless of the precept or set observations of the cultic community following Moses (Mt 12:12). Intention of heart and way carries the greater revelation of the perfect love or law of Christ in that revealing passage. Does this greater fulfillment of the law carry to I John, or by lesser commandments?

    In Mt. 19:16-22 Jesus makes OT commandments basic to his own demands, but this is not the bottom line of understanding. These are imposed as an impossibility of heart on a seeker “after eternal life”, not as a Jew as a seeker of the law. The man of interchange has kept the commandments of the Decalogue there. That person is still seen after claiming that obedience to be short of “entrance into the Kingdom of heaven”. The real demand PUT ON ALL DISCIPLES OF JESUS is to “follow me”. Is this then really not about the details of the law at all, for is something greater expected of a disciple to be???? Why did Jesus heal on the Sabbath? “The law and the prophets were until John: since then the good news of the Kingdom of God is preached, and every one enters it through struggle” (Lk 16:16).

    Jesus fulfills the OT law by encapsulating and adding to it by His New Commandment will of full service from the heart to God. The basis of authority of scripture has shifted to His person and His life as the way, truth, and life. Watch Him closely a still small voice would say. Why was this man born blind, according to Moses, and why according to what is ascribed of Jesus actions for intervention in John??? What then is the fulfillment of the law in the New and Living Way of the revealed Son’s Messianic expectation?

    I John, Chapter 5, as Bo cites it to be, by implication alone, is presented grossly out of context, for, it follows on earlier remarks of the author on how faith, hope, and love are established, through obedience to God which his Son has revealed (not Moses, the Son). 5: 1 refers to the relationship with Jesus and a believer’s new birth, where to love Him as so gifted is to love the Father. Vs. 2 mentions loving other children of God by carrying out His commandments. In Vs. 3 to obey such is by His (the Son’s) “not burdensome” commandments. Vss. 4 & 5 such an obedience is shown by overcoming the world by our relationship to Jesus as the Son of God. NO MENTION of Moses is found in the passage, so one then asks, what are the commandments Jesus has ushered in that John refers to? This is answered earlier in I John, in fact being the central theme thereof. True agape’ requires actions like those of Jesus, described as to their way in my above paragraphs. The believer’s life is a life of response to his model, which is Jesus according to I John. The entire rest of the 5th chapter is a testimony of Jesus and what He did, not of Moses or by allusion of what He did or requires as in reference to Moses law at all. The Spirit, the Water, the Blood are all testimonies of relationship to the truth and grace of Jesus Christ (not Moses law).

  24. continued from above

    The 5th chapter built upon 4th chapter is about testing the spirits, in reference to Jesus Christ, not Moses. Truth is of the testimony of Him. Brotherly love too, as follows stems from the work of the Son. The love of God is shown because of the work of the Son. The Father has sent the Son to save the world, acknowledging this is to live in God, and rely on God, no reliance on obedience to Moses is mentioned at all. This love drives away fear, fear has to do with punishment, love with Jesus. Brotherly love comes from the relationship with Jesus.

    Chapters 1,2 and 3 further clarify the author’s “obedience to commands” as being obedience to the “old command Jesus gave, to love from His shining light (2:7-17). The earlier mention of the letter is about loving the Son and remaining in the Son, not in the law of Moses. “The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the devil’s work (2:8)….Anyone who does not do what is right is not a child of God, neither is anyone who does not love his brother [in Christ]” (3:10). “This is the message you heard from the beginning: we should love one another” (3:11), on and on it is the PERFECT LAW OF CHRIST”S COMMANDMENT which is the standard raised throughout the letter: as to action, commandments, obedience and truth. Nowhere does it state that Jesus Christ came to instruct the law of Moses. It is upheld that if we deny the Son we so deny the Father (both being God). The old command is the New Covenant commandment of Christ, not the law of Moses.

    In chapter 1’s earlier building material for the 5th chapter quotation cited out of its context, it makes the author’s “joy complete” that we are under the blood of Jesus (not the law of Moses for no mention of Moses is found in the letter whatsoever).

    As first written here, above, Bo’s personal zealousy for Moses’ law is not John’s theme or commandments reference whatsoever. As is often the case, Bo has attempted the old bait and switch game. Bait and switch to get a lesser product.

  25. Bo also quoted Acts 6, again out of context, to assume it is saying or emphsizing something it is not.

    He wrote,,,

    “Acts 6
    13 And set up false witnesses, which said, This man ceaseth not to speak blasphemous words against this holy place, and the law:
    14 For we have heard him say, that this Jesus of Nazareth shall destroy this place, and shall change the customs which Moses delivered us.

    [Bo] The anti-messiah thinks to change the law”.

    Again, what is being said is totally misconstrued as meaning exactly the opposite of what is being stated. In context it is the antagonist to Stephen, Jesus true witness,who stirrs up the people with vs. 13’s accusation. Stephen, it is written, was full of wisdom 9vs. 3) and full of the Holy spirit (vs.5) when then stating what he said of full faith and power (vs.8). He had the giftedness for the boldness to speak as a witness of Jesus as the Christ. When we get to the verse 13 which Bo has quoted it is the accuser of Stephen so accusing him of being false, when the earlier versus just cited say

  26. continued,
    EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE, BY THEIR ACCUSER, OF WHO STEPHEN WAS. THE ACCUSERS WORD IS PRESENTED BY BO AS THE TRUE WORD OF GOD. IT WAS NOT THE ESSENCE OF THE JEWISH FAITH OR LAW THAT WAS UNDER ATTACK BY STEPHEN, STEPHEN HAD PROCLAIMED THE TRUE GOSPEL OF CHRIST AND WAS BEING PERSECUTED BY THE ANTAGONIST FOR SO SAYING THE TRUTH. FOR BO UP IS DOWN AND DOWN IS UP. BAIT AND SWITCH? LET THE READER HERE CHECK THE VERSES AND DECIDE.

  27. Bo has also quoted 2 Peter 2:21 and 22 out of context. He earlier accused me of the error of “cheap grace” or salvation without repentance from dead works, though he has no knowledge of my walk with Christ whatsoever. This is how the section of 2 Peter was used by his context here. This violates the rules here for posting by a false direct attack.

    If we read 2 Peter 2:20 and earlier, we see that Peter ascribes the lusts of the predators of reference as having moved from connection to Christ. I do not live by lust, nor is my connection, profession, and whole way of living departed from a faithful witness of Christ. Those Peter mentions as predators at early Christian love feasts “19 They promise them freedom, while they themselves are slaves of depravity–for a man is a slave to whatever has mastered him. 20 If they have escaped the corruption of the world by knowing our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and are again entangled in it and overcome, they are worse off at the end than they were at the beginning.” Upholding that this applies to me is crass ignorance, for my confession has been of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. I and my family have a long history of such an affiliation.

    It is clear here that Bo has ceased practice of the commands of I John as to loving the brethren. His accusation is like the accuser of Stephen, spoken of of zeal for the law, yet without real acquaintance of who Stephen was, or who I am.

    I request of the moderator to remove Bo from further comment based on the rules of engagement of this forum.

  28. I was further accused of not heeding the words of Paul, John (already covered), and James. Clearly James perfect law of liberty is directly referenced by James in his letter, simply put as quoting the law of Christ as its simple reference, not the law of Moses. As for what Paul taught, Galations is pretty clear on the law not being added to the sufficiency of the work of Christ for anyone adhering to it as to having a right relationship with the Father. As for what I have shared about the Law of Christ, as James calls it the “perfect law”, it is out of loyalty to He who has paid the price for my sin. I confess my sins to him alone. Bo, it seems, has labeled an understanding of the love of Christ, as He has stated it to be, as cheap grace, when my reflections and quotations were about His Love, as is written, not about His Grace (as is also written, as so tempered by truth. One must reckognize that truth without grace equates as condemnation, and grace without truth as a mushy license–neither of which stand alone as representing the real picture of the love of Christ. It is Christ who described and lived that love, who came into the world not to condemn the world). Jesus said a few things about what constituted his New Covenant, and it begins with statements about his blood, his love, and his fulfillments.

    The law appears to someone face down on a sandy beach like a grey stone before his eyes, looming of close focus,yet, when raising up and standing, and then walking down that beach, what once filled the sight of someone, is absorbed among the pure and wide everchanging sands as a very tiny component of that vast and widening beach.

  29. 2CO 3:12 Therefore, since we have such a hope, we are very bold. 13 We are not like Moses, who would put a veil over his face to keep the Israelites from gazing at it while the radiance was fading away. 14 But their minds were made dull, for to this day the same veil remains when the old covenant is read. It has not been removed, because only in Christ is it taken away. 15 Even to this day when Moses is read, a veil covers their hearts. 16 But whenever anyone turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away. 17 Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom. 18 And we, who with unveiled faces all reflect the Lord’s glory, are being transformed into his likeness with ever-increasing glory, which comes from the Lord, who is the Spirit.

    HEB 8:13 By calling this covenant “new,” he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and aging will soon disappear.

    14 How much more, then, will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself unblemished to God, cleanse our consciences from acts that lead to death, so that we may serve the living God!

    HEB 9:15 For this reason Christ is the mediator of a new covenant, that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance–now that he has died as a ransom to set them free from the sins committed under the first covenant.

  30. Bo,

    Don’t even go there! Don’t you dare begin to say that my love for the Lord is “not equal to yours”!!

    “Sheila,

    Do this and you will live too. Only be sure you go by YHWH’s definitions of love instead of your own.”

  31. Luk 18:9 He also told this parable to some who trusted in themselves that they were righteous and despised others:

    Luk 18:10 “Two men went up into the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector.

    Luk 18:11 The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, ‘God, I thank thee that I am not like other men, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even like this tax collector.

    Luk 18:12 I fast twice a week, I give tithes of all that I get.’

    Luk 18:13 But the tax collector, standing far off, would not even lift up his eyes to heaven, but beat his breast, saying, ‘God, be merciful to me a sinner!’

    Luk 18:14 I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other; for every one who exalts himself will be humbled, but he who humbles himself will be exalted.”

  32. Bo,

    You need to step back a bit, and think before you hurl condemnation at others. I’ll submit a comment on the appropriate blog under the Mosaic Covenant, if my ire does not subside, which, right now, I am praying that it does. All has been rehashed over and over, but, there is one thing that I have avoided saying, and I will post it there.

  33. Jabez,

    You wrote:
    “In Lk. 13:16 this New law of Christ compelled a nonliteral observation of the law of Moses, where, due to a presenting need, it “was necessary” that Jesus healed a woman “on the Sabbath” (under Moses commandments, a violation of it).”

    Kinda funny, (actually not) that the self righteous religious leaders accused Messiah of breaking the Sabbath. It was the doctrines of men that Y’Shua disregarded. Messiah could not have broken the law or He would have not been our spotless sacrifice. Jabez, here makes Y’Shua into a law breaker. He agrees with the Pharisees instead of the word of YHWH. This “non-literal observation of the law” of Jabez’s is all mush. There is no such thing as non-literal observation of the law that is somehow the “New law of Christ.” We broke it in a literal way and needed a literal keeper of the it to be atoned for.

    Jabez wrote:
    “Nowhere does it state that Jesus Christ came to instruct the law of Moses.”

    If He didn’t teach it, He is not the greatest in the kingdom. This is straight logic.

    Matthew 5:19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

    After the above statement, He goes on to teach the Torah perfectly.

    Jabez wrote:
    “It is upheld that if we deny the Son we so deny the Father (both being God). The old command is the New Covenant commandment of Christ, not the law of Moses.”

    Now hold on a cotton pickin’ minute. You say that the old law is the new law of Christ and you say the law of Christ is to love but you also say that love is the new law. What is the point in having the word new or old in your vocabulary? The old law we had form the beginning is just what it says it is.

    Jabez wrote:
    “As is often the case, Bo has attempted the old bait and switch game. Bait and switch to get a lesser product.”

    No bait and switch here. The real gospel produces repentance and obedience. By transgressing the law, we became sinners in need of a savior. A saved person repents for having broken YHWH’s law. It is absurd to imagine that once one is saved from ones transgressions that it is not sin to break the law anymore. The real gospel produces law abiding citizens of the kingdom of heaven. The law is written on their hearts. YHWH’s commandments are not grievous to them.

    1 John 3
    4 Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.
    5 And ye know that he was manifested to take away our sins; and in him is no sin.
    6 Whosoever abideth in him sinneth not: whosoever sinneth hath not seen him, neither known him.
    7 Little children, let no man deceive you: he that doeth righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous.

    1 John 5
    2 By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God, and keep his commandments.
    3 For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous.

    Romans
    31 Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.

    Romans 6
    15 What then? shall we sin, because we are not under the law, but under grace? God forbid.

    Romans 8
    4 That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

    The real Spirit being walked after produces us fulfilling the righteousness of the law. The real Spirit gives us the power to live without sinning (transgressing the law).

    Jabez wrote:
    “Acts 6
    13 And set up false witnesses, which said, This man ceaseth not to speak blasphemous words against this holy place, and the law:
    14 For we have heard him say, that this Jesus of Nazareth shall destroy this place, and shall change the customs which Moses delivered us.

    Again, what is being said is totally misconstrued as meaning exactly the opposite of what is being stated. In context it is the antagonist to Stephen, Jesus true witness,who stirrs up the people with vs. 13’s accusation. Stephen, it is written, was full of wisdom 9vs. 3) and full of the Holy spirit (vs.5) when then stating what he said of full faith and power (vs.8). He had the giftedness for the boldness to speak as a witness of Jesus as the Christ. When we get to the verse 13 which Bo has quoted it is the accuser of Stephen so accusing him of being false, when the earlier versus just cited say EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE, BY THEIR ACCUSER, OF WHO STEPHEN WAS.”

    I say again that the false witnesses falsely accused Stephen of saying, “ Jesus of Nazareth…shall change the customs which Moses delivered us.” This is something that Y’Shua never said and Steven did not say it either. Will we falsely accuse Messiah?

    Matthew 5
    17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets:…

    Jabez’s doctrine make Messiah out to be a law changer/destroyer. I agree with Messiah…He did not come the destroy/change the law.

    Shalom

  34. Sheila,

    You wrote:
    “Don’t even go there! Don’t you dare begin to say that my love for the Lord is “not equal to yours”!!”

    I didn’t say it. I didn’t “go there.” All I did was quote scripture and commentate. All I know is that real love keeps YHWH’s commandments and cold love disregards them. 1 John says it plainly enough.

    Luke 10
    25 And, behold, a certain lawyer stood up, and tempted him, saying, Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?
    26 He said unto him, What is written in the law? how readest thou?
    27 And he answering said, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbour as thyself.
    28 And he said unto him, Thou hast answered right: this do, and thou shalt live.

    Maybe I should have said the following with the inserted corrections:

    Do this and you(we) will live too. Only (let’s) be sure you (we) go by YHWH’s definitions of love instead of your (our) own.

    And we can do it if we walk in YHWH’s Spirit.

    Romans 8
    4 That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

    Shalom

  35. Once more we see Bo moving away from what is written in the very contexts of I John he first raised here. He quotes me:

    “Jabez wrote:
    “Nowhere does it state that Jesus Christ came to instruct the law of Moses.”

    If He didn’t teach it, He is not the greatest in the kingdom. This is straight logic” Yet my response was on I John, that being the context of the remark, again taken out of context.

    Then it is that I have obsfucated another key teaching of I John, where John himself in it says the commandment to love is the commandment heard “from the beginning”. Simply read I John from beginning to end. It is a matter plainly stated therein and thereby. I would strongly suggest reading this in the NKJV, or NIV, or NASB, to obtain the Hebrew mind which knew Jesus’ clarity. James and John both wrote of the commandment in reference to Jesus love commandment, not Moses commandment. It is vital to understanding the letters to read them in their own context, and that such too is of eyewitnesses.

    ““It is upheld that if we deny the Son we so deny the Father (both being God). The old command is the New Covenant commandment of Christ, not the law of Moses.”

    Now hold on a cotton pickin’ minute. You say that the old law is the new law of Christ and you say the law of Christ is to love but you also say that love is the new law. What is the point in having the word new or old in your vocabulary? The old law we had form the beginning is just what it says it is”.

    No, I did not write that the old “law” is the “new law of Christ”, I wrote that what John states about the commandments are those of Jesus, and that the one so referenced in I John as was heard “from the beginning”, is referenced by John as Jesus commandment to love. You simply cannot seem to follow the thoughts of he, James, Paul, or Peter, and this is sad. An exegesis course would help tremendously.

  36. It would assist you to read an interlinear original language “Pony” translation, with lexicon and linguistic aids, then what is stated by John in Greek reference is clear enough. We have the Newly exhibited commandment to Agape’ love being referenced as the old commandment from the beginning. Moses had no reference to this kind of love at all, it was clarified and lived, as such, by Yeshua–due to his Messianic mission.

    I recall too an earlier conflict you experienced with the notion that the perfect law of liberty, of James allusion to the New Law introduced by Jesus, being also “precious”. It is founded by the precious act on the Cross of the Messiah’s sacrifice. Agape’s self sacrificial love is unique to the mission of the Messiah, not being introduced until “the fullness of time”. This was the beginning of empowerment of the Apostle’s to carry the Message of the King and Kingdom into the wider world than the Commonwealth of Israel and Judah.

    All New Testament writers carry the Message of the Apostle’s teaching, as so charged, not the message of Moses’ teaching. As written, Jesus encapsulated and added to the notions of Moses by his very acts of sacrifice and care. He permitted and advocated the New personal relationship 1:1 with the Father; He and the Father sent the Holy Spirit. Check out John 13:13-through the early 16th chapter to catch the uniqueness and complete provision of the Message of the Messiah King. The New and Living Way is indeed as quoted of scripture cited for you.

  37. Jabez,

    You might be interested in the sight I got the following quote from…so here is the link:

    http://www.wholebible.com/Christian%20&%20Jewish%20Myths.htm

    6. Believers are not ‘under the OT’ but under the ‘New Covenant.’

    Wrong again. Usually this statement is used to dismiss the Old Covenant as ‘Law.’ But ‘Law’ is part and parcel of the New Covenant. If you hear this from someone, just ask them if they know what the New Covenant is and where it is found. We haven’t run across anyone yet that can answer correctly. The reason they can’t answer is that they just use this idea (it’s just something they heard) to avoid obedience, and stop short of actually studying the Word and doing the Word. The New Covenant is found in the Old Testament (the Tanakh) in Jeremiah 31:31-34.

    “Behold, days are coming,” declares the Lord , “when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah, not like the covenant which I made with their fathers in the day I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, My covenant which they broke, although I was a husband to them,” declares the Lord.

    “But this is the covenant which I will make with the house of Israel after those days,” declares the Lord, “I will put My law within them and on their heart I will write it; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people.”

    “They will not teach again, each man his neighbor and each man his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’ for they will all know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them,” declares the Lord, “for I will forgive their iniquity, and their sin I will remember no more.”

    New American Standard Bible : 1995 update. LaHabra, CA: The Lockman Foundation.

    This scripture is kind of a drag for people who want to believe they don’t have to change their actions. First, the parties involved are God, Israel, and Judah. If you’ll notice, Gentiles are not mentioned. Where are they? Just keep reading and by the time you get to Romans 11 you will figure out that we are grafted in to this covenant. We do not displace anyone and can in fact be displaced ourselves if we are not careful. Second, as part of the new covenant God is going to write His Law on our hearts. Whoops, so much for not under Law, huh? Third, the ‘new’ part of the covenant is that everyone will know Him. Nationally, Israel will obey for once.

    Shalom

  38. Jabez,

    I posted again, but it does not appear that it worked. I’ll try again. There were some links to a few comics that I thought were appropriate. I’ll post this message with the links on the Mosaic law forum that we should probably be posting on.

    Shalom

  39. I’m submitting my comment under the Mosaic Covenant, meanwhile I’ll say this.

    Why not stone people, which the Lord refused to do when “tempted” by the Pharisees and doctors of the law who brought the woman caught in the “very act” of adultery? Meaning there were two or more witnesses. If the Lord was to keep the law of Moses, He should have done so! So, in fact, the Lord broke the law of Moses. What truth was He pointing out to them? That there are laws which supercede the letter of the law. You are picking and choosing according to “your” standards while ignoring the rest.

    An elaboration is under the other post.

  40. Sheila,

    There were no witnesses that would testify against the man involved in the adultery. They would be guilty of false witness if they continued any further. They all left…probably because they did not want to have the same punishment as the one they were accusing. This is spelled out in Torah.

    The man and the woman must be stoned. You cannot stone one or the other. Messiah called for anyone that was not guilty of sin in this matter to step forward. There would have had to have been at least 2 that would implicate the man so that anyone could be stoned. Here is a link that explains this very well.

    http://av1611.com/kjbp/articles/jones-pericope.html

    Shalom

  41. So you see, Messiah upheld the law to perfection. He did it and taught it to the least commandment. He did not break the Sabbath, or teach that adulteresses and adulterers should not be stoned. He wore tassels. He even ate only clean animals.

    The religious leaders accused Him of breaking Torah, but they were wrong. If He did break Torah, he was a liar. He said He came to fulfill. It is impossible to fulfill and break at the same time.

    Contrary to your and Jabez assertions, Messiah kept every last detail of Torah and taught men to do the same. The story of the woman caught in adultery is a prime example of this. He upheld every aspect of the applicable Torah in this case. They thought they could trick Him into at least disagreeing with Torah. He upheld it instead. They thought that they could trick Him into catch 22 but He easily put the catch 22 back on their shoulders. He was wiser than his enemies, his teachers, and his elders. I wonder why?

    Psalm 119
    97 MEM. O how love I thy law! it is my meditation all the day.
    98 Thou through thy commandments hast made me wiser than mine enemies: for they are ever with me.
    99 I have more understanding than all my teachers: for thy testimonies are my meditation.
    100 I understand more than the ancients, because I keep thy precepts.
    101 I have refrained my feet from every evil way, that I might keep thy word.
    102 I have not departed from thy judgments: for thou hast taught me.
    103 How sweet are thy words unto my taste! yea, sweeter than honey to my mouth!
    104 Through thy precepts I get understanding: therefore I hate every false way.
    105 NUN. Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path.
    106 I have sworn, and I will perform it, that I will keep thy righteous judgments.

    Shalom

  42. I’ll no longer answer your comments here. If you want to have a discourse go to the appropriate blog. Although, I don’t see where there is anymore reasoning to be presented that was not already covered.

  43. The New Covenant indeed changed hearts and minds, where the very Spirit of the law became internalized and of fresh motivation for those of its receipt. Peter so commented as to its results carrying forth into this day [Acts 2:38 & 39]. When such conversion and internalization happens, the testimony of He, Himself, is confirmed. It is not another testimony (II Cor4:5), as the work and confession of the Apostles has indeed confirmed.

  44. I’ve made the correction for post #41 on another blog, but, for those reading it here, I’ll submit it again. I edited my original document and I’ve since discovered my error. I wrote: “So, in fact, the Lord broke the law of Moses. What truth was He pointing out to them?”

    The correct readin is this: “So, in fact, [it seems] the Lord broke the law of Moses, [but, did He?”]

    I try to proofread before posting, but, I missed it.

  45. Sheila,

    Did you read the article above yet. I think it will clear up quite a bit for you on Messiah upholding the Torah perfectly.

    Shalom

Leave Your Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


*