The rich young ruler

[Biblebeliever]

Of course, the only righteousness that would exceed all of God' s laws, plus all of the Talmud's, was the Righteousness of Christ.  Matthew 5,6 & 7 are reiteration of the impossible- to- keep- law, to those who thought they were keeping it, and those who were led by them.

Jn 5:39
39 Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life:and they are they which testify of me.

Anishinaabe

The Old Testament Law was not impossible to keep.

Now if what you meant is that it was impossible to keep perfectly, well then that is correct. No body could keep the Law perfectly without breaking one or many of the  commandments.

Only the Lord Jesus Christ could keep the whole Law perfectly without ever breaking one commandment.

Again though; the Old Law of the Mosaic Covenant was not impossible to keep. The LORD made provisions in the Law for the offender where he (the offender) could offer the proper sacrifice, and then that would atone for the offender's sin and trangression.

 

[prophet]

Of course, the only righteousness that would exceed all of God' s laws, plus all of the Talmud's, was the Righteousness of Christ.  Matthew 5,6 & 7 are reiteration of the impossible- to- keep- law, to those who thought they were keeping it, and those who were led by them.

Jn 5:39
39 Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life:and they are they which testify of me.

Anishinaabe

The Old Testament Law was not impossible to keep.

Now if what you meant is that it was impossible to keep perfectly, well then that is correct. No body could keep the Law perfectly without breaking one or many of the  commandments.

Only the Lord Jesus Christ could keep the whole Law perfectly without ever breaking one commandment.

Again though; the Old Law of the Mosaic Covenant was not impossible to keep. The LORD made provisions in the Law for the offender where he (the offender) could offer the proper sacrifice, and then that would atone for the offender's sin and trangression.

Now you are not only wrongly dividing scripture, you are wrongly defining English.

Anishinaabe

 

[Ransom]

And some other great Dispensational Charts and Timelines:

I was wondering when the kiddies would pull out the picture books.

 

[Ransom]

Well Did I ever say that Jesus' words were not for us?

All I said was Doctrinally, the sermon on the mount is pointed at Jews in the Millennial Kingdom.

And with this not being the Millennial Kingdom, and the vast majority of Christians not being Jews, I'd say that's a pretty fair definition of "not for us," as far as anyone is concerned who got past third-grade English.

Thanks, Bibleburner. I was hoping that my 2000th post was something more momentous than pointing out the obvious to the likes of you.

 

[Biblebeliever]

You guys who fail to rightly divide the word of truth and who refuse to acknowledge the distinctions which are given in the Scriptures, have need to be ashamed (2 Tim. 2:15).

A good thing to keep in mind when studying the Bible is this:

"while all the Bible is written for us. Not all the Bible is written to us."

There are passages in the Scriptures which are Doctrnally for the Body of Christ, while there other passages in the Scriptures which are Doctrinally for Israel.

Discern the differences and the distinctions.

And stop trying to make all Scripture line up Doctrinally for the Church Age. It does not work that way. And anyone with enough common sense and discernment should be able to see that.

 

[Ransom]

You guys who fail to rightly divide the word of truth and who refuse to acknowledge the distinctions which are given in the Scriptures, have need to be ashamed (2 Tim. 2:15).

[Bibleburner logic] No we don't. [/Bibleburner logic]

 

[Biblebeliever]

No we don't.

Indeed, you do not. And it shows. Especially in your sloppy handeling of the Scriptures.


If you were obeying the command in 2 Tim. 2:15, then you would also be acknolwedging the Dispensational differences given in the Scriptures.

A simple and yet, quite overlooked Dispensational truth in the Scriptures is the following:

The Gospel that is preached today will not be the Gospel that is preached in the time of Jacob's trouble.

 

[Ransom]

Indeed, you do not.

Do not have need to be ashamed? You said we did, and I said we didn't. Now you are agreeing with me.  Make up your mind, Bibleburner. A double-minded man is unstable in all his ways, and you're the living proof of that.

The Gospel that is preached today will not be the Gospel that is preached in the time of Jacob's trouble.

It is clear from all your posts that you wouldn't recognize the Gospel if it bit you on your Bible-burning, Nazi-loving rear end, so take your sanctimony and shove it.

 

[prophet]

No we don't.

Indeed, you do not. And it shows. Especially in your sloppy handeling of the Scriptures.


If you were obeying the command in 2 Tim. 2:15, then you would also be acknolwedging the Dispensational differences given in the Scriptures.

A simple and yet, quite overlooked Dispensational truth in the Scriptures is the following:

The Gospel that is preached today will not be the Gospel that is preached in the time of Jacob's trouble.

ahemm....it should read "sloppy HANDLING".
In fact, it would, if someone hadn't handled the English language sloppily.

Anishinaabe

 

[prophet]

No we don't.

Indeed, you do not. And it shows. Especially in your sloppy handeling of the Scriptures.


If you were obeying the command in 2 Tim. 2:15, then you would also be acknolwedging the Dispensational differences given in the Scriptures.

A simple and yet, quite overlooked Dispensational truth in the Scriptures is the following:

The Gospel that is preached today will not be the Gospel that is preached in the time of Jacob's trouble.

"Sloppy Handeling" is : Miscuing during the Christmas Cantata.

Anishinaabe