Sin is Transgression of the Law - 1 John 3:4

[BobRyan]

1 John 3:4 states "sin IS transgression of the LAW" KJV and we have over a dozen other translations that agree with KJV on that.

That includes EXB (Expanded Bible) stating that this is the same as (or included in) the more general statement "sin is lawlessness".

1 John 3:4 EXB --The person [L Everyone] who ·sins [commits sin] ·breaks God’s law [commits lawlessness/iniquity; C  referring to the false teachers; 2:19–20]. Yes, sin is ·living against God’s law [lawlessness; iniquity].(EXB). So "yeah" - not "Just KJV"​

​

Some other translations render it "sin is lawlessness" which is the more general form (like saying "that is a square" vs "That is a rectangle" where square would of course - also qualify since it is also a rectangle). They are technically also correct since their broader term does included the more narrow one we see in over a dozen translations. This post is not an either-or argument. I am just pointing out that the reason for over a dozen translations using the much more specific "transgression of the Law" has to do with the context of 1 John. And as we know - Greek is a high-context language.

But in 1 John the statement is more specific than merely "lawlessness" as over a dozen translations confirm - because the context for 1 John 3 is 1 John 2 "Keep His Commandments" and 1 John 5:3 "this is the LOVE of God that we KEEP His Commandments".

So then right action in 1 John is "keep His Commandments" where "He" -- is God. " -- in both 1 John 2 and 1 John 5. And that is contrasted with wrong action is "transgression of the Law" 1 John 3:4 . The contrast is helpful in finding the most accurate rendering of the term.

And that LAW includes the one where as Paul says - "the first commandment with a promise - is Honor your Father and Mother" Eph 6:2

So then John says that Jesus taught "Love Me and KEEP My Commandments" John 14:15
Just as Jesus did in Ex 20:6 "Love Me and KEEP My Commandments"
(Since Paul informs us in Heb 8:6-12 that it is Jesus speaking at Sinai).

No wonder almost all denominations have positions affirming the TEN Commandments as being included in what is called the "moral law of God" written on the heart under the Jer 31:31-34 "New Covenant'

 

[BobRyan]

So then over a dozen translations confirm that the correct rendering of 1 John 3;4 deals with "transgression of the Law"

EXB (Expanded Bible) stating that this is the same as "sin is lawlessness".

4 ·The person [L Everyone] who ·sins [commits sin] ·breaks God’s law [commits lawlessness/iniquity; C  referring to the false teachers; 2:19–20]. Yes, sin is ·living against God’s law [lawlessness; iniquity].(EXB). So "yeah" - not "Just KJV"


1 John 3:4

KJV -Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.
AKJV Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.
CJB Everyone who keeps sinning is violating Torah — indeed, sin is violation of Torah.
CEV Everyone who sins breaks God’s law, because sin is the same as breaking God’s law.
KJ21- Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law, for sin is the transgression of the law.
BRG Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.
ERV Anyone who sins breaks God’s law. Yes, sinning is the same as living against God’s law.

EXB
·The person [L Everyone] who ·sins [commits sin] ·breaks God’s law [commits lawlessness/iniquity; C referring to the false teachers; 2:19–20]. Yes, sin is ·living against God’s law [lawlessness; iniquity].

GNV Whosoever commiteth sin, transgresseth also the Law: for sin is the transgression of the Law.

GW Those who live sinful lives are disobeying God. Sin is disobedience.
GNT Whoever sins is guilty of breaking God's law, because sin is a breaking of the law.
HCSB Everyone who commits sin also breaks the law; sin is the breaking of law.
ICB When a person sins, he breaks God’s law. Yes, sinning is the same as living against God’s law.
ISV Everyone who keeps living in sin also practices disobedience. In fact, sin is disobedience.
PHILLIPS Everyone who commits sin breaks God’s law, for that is what sin is, by definition—a breaking of God’s law. You know, moreover, that Christ became man for the purpose of removing sin, and he himself was quite free from sin. The man who lives “in Christ” does not habitually sin. The regular sinner has never seen or known him.

MOUNCE Everyone who makes a practice of · sinning is also breaking the law; indeed, · sin is · lawlessness.
NOG Those who live sinful lives are disobeying God. Sin is disobedience.
NCV The person who sins breaks God’s law. Yes, sin is living against God’s law.
NIRV Everyone who sins breaks the law. In fact, breaking the law is sin.


=========================

Obviously the "suggestion" that "Sin is Transgression of the LAW" is somehow excluded from "Sin is lawlessness" (in those translations that use that form) -- does not work at all in the book of 1 John since in 1 John 5:3 we find "this IS the LOVE of God that we KEEP His Commandments". John is speaking in the context of the Commandments of God -- and this is also seen in his statement in Rev 14:12 for the saints.

 

[BobRyan]

1 Cor 7:19 "what matters is KEEPING the Commandments of God"
where as Paul says - "the first commandment with a promise - is Honor your Father and Mother" Eph 6:2

No wonder that when in Matt 19 Jesus says "KEEP the Commandments" and is asked "which ONES?" Jesus then quotes exclusively from the LAW of Moses - portions of the moral law of God given in what Jesus called "The Word of God" in Mark 7

And Paul brings up that same list of commandments in Rom 13.

The NEW Covenant in Jer 31:31-34 has God's LAW "written on heart and mind" - which is a law known to Jeremiah and his readers that had to included the TEN at Sinai since in Deut 5:22 God says "He spoke those TEN Commandments and wrote them on two tablets of stone - and He added no more"

 

[Bob S]

1 Cor 7:19 "what matters is KEEPING the Commandments of God"
where as Paul says - "the first commandment with a promise - is Honor your Father and Mother" Eph 6:2

No wonder that when in Matt 19 Jesus says "KEEP the Commandments" and is asked "which ONES?" Jesus then quotes exclusively from the LAW of Moses - portions of the moral law of God given in what Jesus called "The Word of God" in Mark 7

And Paul brings up that same list of commandments in Rom 13.

The NEW Covenant in Jer 31:31-34 has God's LAW "written on heart and mind" - which is a law known to Jeremiah and his readers that had to included the TEN at Sinai since in Deut 5:22 God says "He spoke those TEN Commandments and wrote them on two tablets of stone - and He added no more"

That sounds so authentic until you study what happened to all of the laws found in the old covenant. In Matt 5 Jesus told the Jews that He came to fulfil those laws and until He did fulfil them nothing could be removed from the laws of the old covenant. The question for the Jews is did Jesus accomplish what He came to do? If Jesus was able to accomplish what He came to do then the new covenant is not the old one warmed over. What would be the point of fulfilling all of them if they were to continue to be in force?

In the flawed analysis you try to make us believe God just wrote the ten commandments, period, but anyone who has studied scripture knows God, with his mouth, dictated somewhere around 603 other commands to Moses. Your flawed reasoning states that the warmed-over laws of the old covenant, around 613 of them, are now written on our hearts. This flawed analysis poses so many problems it is laughable. It is no wonder the learned Biblical scholars around the World don't pay any attention to what SDAs teach.

Biblical scholars know that the laws of the old covenant contained over 600 commands. They understand Eph2:15 by setting aside in his flesh the law with its commands and regulations. His purpose was to create in himself one new humanity out of the two, thus making peace. They understand that where the term "keep the commandments of God" found in the New Testament does not mean the 613 laws of the old covenant.

Paul, in the new Testament, calls the ten commandments the ministry of death and tells us that they are no longer the Jew's guide. In 2Cor3:6-11 Paul doesn't try to tell us that the ministry of death is now written on our hearts, but that is what you your misinformation tells us. In the King James version, it even states that the ten commandments have been done away yet you ignore that fact and tell us it is the ten commandments that are written on our hearts. The word "our" is a misnomer too because Gentiles have never been under any of the old covenant law system.

Now that I have explained how wrong you are it is only fair to tell the reader what the truth really is. John in 1Jn 3:19-24 tells us we belong to the TRUTH and what commands all mankind is asked to keep. 19 This is how we know that we belong to the truth and how we set our hearts at rest in his presence: 20 If our hearts condemn us, we know that God is greater than our hearts, and he knows everything. 21 Dear friends, if our hearts do not condemn us, we have confidence before God 22 and receive from him anything we ask, because we keep his commands and do what pleases him. 23 And this is his command: to believe in the name of his Son, Jesus Christ, and to love one another as he commanded us. 24 The one who keeps God’s commands lives in him, and he in them. And this is how we know that he lives in us: We know it by the Spirit he gave us.

The truth is truly beautiful.

 

[BobRyan]

That sounds so authentic until you study

am still looking forward to your exhaustive detailed Bible study on the topic

wat happened to all of the laws found in the old covenant.

Here's one "do not take God's name in vain" Ex 20:7 -
Here is another one "Love your neighbor with all your heart" Lev 19:18 - affirmed in the NT by Christ in Matt 22
Here is another one "Love God with all your heart" Deut 6:5 affirmed in the NT by Christ in Matthew 22

Your Bible studies on this topic often refuse to respond to Bible details such as the above

In Matt 5 Jesus told the Jews that He came to fulfil those laws

Fulfill does not mean "delete" -- in Rom 13 we TOO are called to "fulfill" those laws. (Not just Christ)

Your Bible studies on this topic often refuse to respond to Bible details such as the above

If Jesus was able to accomplish what He came to do then the new covenant is not the old one

Everyone agrees the New Covenant is not the old Covenant.
But as usual your topic of "New Covenant" often refuses to even quote it at all.

Reminder - you can find it in Jer 31:31-34 quoted verbatim in Hebrews 8.
I am suggesting that this is no longer a surprise to you -- but you keep not mentioning it for some reason.

In your flawed analysis you try to make us believe God just wrote the ten commandments, period,

By not reading my post you fall into a pretty obvious error - as I posted -- it is GOD who said in Deut 5:22 "The spoke and wrote these TEN Commandments - and added NO MORE".

Sometimes you post as if I WROTE the scripture you are opposing so simply dismissing "me" deletes whatever scripture you find to be inconvenient.

but anyone who has studied scripture knows God, with his mouth, dictated somewhere around 603 other commands to Moses.

But by failing to actually read the OP and Deut 5:22 you missed "the detail" that God only spoke 10 to Israel from the cloud of smoke and fire and only wrote ten on stone with His own hand.

Skimming over details in the OP is not helping your suggestions - it only invites me to highlight the details you are ignoring

(As well as ignoring the 1050 commands in the NT -- as "if" you had "put a limit" on God)

Your flawed reasoning states that the warmed-over laws of the old covenant, around 613 of them, are now written on our hearts.

Your use of pejoratives is unsurpassed as usual - but we still wait for you to do an actual Bible study where you pay attention to the details in the Bible regarding your own topic.

 

[BobRyan]

Paul, in the new Testament, calls the ten commandments the ministry of death

Which it is the work of the law for the lost as we see in Rom 3:19-20.

So your view of that part of it - is very clear as you do keep reminding us of this fact while ignoring the actual New Covenant view of of the Law as stated in scripture.

No wonder Paul says "what matters is KEEPING the Commandments of God" 1 Cor 7:19 -- because he had the view of the Law that is for saints under the NEW Covenant with the LAW of God written on the heart Jer 31:31-34 which is the Law having "Honor your father and mother - as the first commandment with a promise" Eph 6:2 (as Paul reminds us).

So then speaking of the Law that condemns all mankind as sinners in Rom 3:19-20, Paul adds in Rom 3:31 "our faith ESTABLISHES the LAW" rather than abolishing or deleting it.

 

[Soyeong]

1 John 3:4 states "sin IS transgression of the LAW" KJV and we have over a dozen other translations that agree with KJV on that.

That includes EXB (Expanded Bible) stating that this is the same as (or included in) the more general statement "sin is lawlessness".

1 John 3:4 EXB --The person [L Everyone] who ·sins [commits sin] ·breaks God’s law [commits lawlessness/iniquity; C  referring to the false teachers; 2:19–20]. Yes, sin is ·living against God’s law [lawlessness; iniquity].(EXB). So "yeah" - not "Just KJV"​

​

Some other translations render it "sin is lawlessness" which is the more general form (like saying "that is a square" vs "That is a rectangle" where square would of course - also qualify since it is also a rectangle). They are technically also correct since their broader term does included the more narrow one we see in over a dozen translations. This post is not an either-or argument. I am just pointing out that the reason for over a dozen translations using the much more specific "transgression of the Law" has to do with the context of 1 John. And as we know - Greek is a high-context language.

But in 1 John the statement is more specific than merely "lawlessness" as over a dozen translations confirm - because the context for 1 John 3 is 1 John 2 "Keep His Commandments" and 1 John 5:3 "this is the LOVE of God that we KEEP His Commandments".

So then right action in 1 John is "keep His Commandments" where "He" -- is God. " -- in both 1 John 2 and 1 John 5. And that is contrasted with wrong action is "transgression of the Law" 1 John 3:4 . The contrast is helpful in finding the most accurate rendering of the term.

And that LAW includes the one where as Paul says - "the first commandment with a promise - is Honor your Father and Mother" Eph 6:2

So then John says that Jesus taught "Love Me and KEEP My Commandments" John 14:15
Just as Jesus did in Ex 20:6 "Love Me and KEEP My Commandments"
(Since Paul informs us in Heb 8:6-12 that it is Jesus speaking at Sinai).

No wonder almost all denominations have positions affirming the TEN Commandments as being included in what is called the "moral law of God" written on the heart under the Jer 31:31-34 "New Covenant'

In Romans 3:20, it is by the Mosaic Law that we have knowledge of sin, so that is how the Israelis knew what sin is, what should be should understand that we are being called to obey when we are called to repent from our sins, and how we should understand 1 John 3:4. I see no basis for thinking that it is a sin to transgression some of God's commandments, but not others, such as thinking that it is a sin to break God's commandment against murder, but not a sin to break His commandment against rape. In Jeremiah 31:33, it says that the New Covenant involves God putting the Torah in our minds and writing it on our hearts, which refers to all of the Mosaic Law, not to just ten of God's commandments. If a verses speaks about God's commandments and doesn't specify that it is only speaking only about ten of God's commandments, then it should be interpreted as referring to all of God's commandments. For example, in Revelation 14:12, I see no basis for thinking that it is referring to people who obeyed ten of God's commandments while refusing to obey all of God's other commandments.

 

[HIM]

The text literally says if you practice sin you practice lawlessness. For sin is lawlessness. Hence why the KJV PARAPHARESED it, "sin is transgression of the law." Lawlessness is without law and that Law would be as God put forth to John in the Scripture he had which is the Pentateuch. To think John would have any other thought of what lawlessness in mind is blasphemous.

 

[Soyeong]

That sounds so authentic until you study what happened to all of the laws found in the old covenant. In Matt 5 Jesus told the Jews that He came to fulfil those laws and until He did fulfil them nothing could be removed from the laws of the old covenant. The question for the Jews is did Jesus accomplish what He came to do? If Jesus was able to accomplish what He came to do then the new covenant is not the old one warmed over. What would be the point of fulfilling all of them if they were to continue to be in force?

NAS Greek Lexicon: pleroo
"to fulfil, i.e. to cause God's will (as made known in the law) to be obeyed as it should be, and God's promises (given through the prophets) to receive fulfilment"

Jesus did indeed accomplish what he came to do and fulfilled the law by spending his ministry calling for us to repent and teaching how to correctly obey the Mosaic Law through spreading the Gospel in accordance with the promise (Acts 3:25-26).

In the flawed analysis you try to make us believe God just wrote the ten commandments, period, but anyone who has studied scripture knows God, with his mouth, dictated somewhere around 603 other commands to Moses. Your flawed reasoning states that the warmed-over laws of the old covenant, around 613 of them, are now written on our hearts. This flawed analysis poses so many problems it is laughable. It is no wonder the learned Biblical scholars around the World don't pay any attention to what SDAs teach.

In Jeremiah 31:33, it says that the New Covenant involves God putting the Mosaic Law in our minds and writing it on our hearts, which is counted to be 613 laws.

Biblical scholars know that the laws of the old covenant contained over 600 commands. They understand Eph2:15 by setting aside in his flesh the law with its commands and regulations. His purpose was to create in himself one new humanity out of the two, thus making peace. They understand that where the term "keep the commandments of God" found in the New Testament does not mean the 613 laws of the old covenant.

In Psalms 119:160, all of God's righteous laws are eternal, however, Ephesians 2:15 is referring to a law that is not eternal, therefore it is not referring to any of God's laws. In Ephesians 2:10, we are new creators in Christ to do good works, so it wouldn't make sense to interpret 2:15 as saying that Christ did away God's instructions for how to do good works. God did not give any laws for the purpose of creating a dividing wall of hostility, but rather His law instructs us to love our neighbor as ourselves. God did not make any mistakes when He gave His law, so He had no need to abolish His own laws and laws for how to act in accordance with God's nature can't be abolished without first abolishing God. Furthermore, the Greek word "dogma" is used five times in the NT, twice in regard to a decree by Caesar (Luke 2:1, Acts 17:7), and once in regard to the decree of the Jerusalem Council (Acts 16:4), so you need to give justification for interpreting it in Ephesians 2:15 as referring to any of God's laws.

Paul, in the new Testament, calls the ten commandments the ministry of death and tells us that they are no longer the Jew's guide. In 2Cor3:6-11 Paul doesn't try to tell us that the ministry of death is now written on our hearts, but that is what you your misinformation tells us. In the King James version, it even states that the ten commandments have been done away yet you ignore that fact and tell us it is the ten commandments that are written on our hearts. The word "our" is a misnomer too because Gentiles have never been under any of the old covenant law system.

There are many verses that support that the New Covenant involves following the Mosaic Law, that the Spirit has the role of obeying it, and that obedience to it brings life, so 2 Corinthians 3:6-11 needs to be interpreted in light of these other verses and not in a way that is contrary to them. For example, in Deuteronomy 30:15-20, it says that obedience to the Mosaic Law brings life and a blessing while disobedience brings death and a curse, so choose life! So the fact that it brings death to those who refuse to obey the Mosaic Law is not a very good reason for you to choose death instead of life.

Sin is the transgression of God's law, so if Gentiles have never been under God's law, then they would have no need to refrain from sin, would have no need to repent from their sin, would have no need of the Gospel message, would have no need of grace, and would have no need of Jesus to have given himself to redeem us from all lawlessness.

Now that I have explained how wrong you are it is only fair to tell the reader what the truth really is. John in 1Jn 3:19-24 tells us we belong to the TRUTH and what commands all mankind is asked to keep. 19 This is how we know that we belong to the truth and how we set our hearts at rest in his presence: 20 If our hearts condemn us, we know that God is greater than our hearts, and he knows everything. 21 Dear friends, if our hearts do not condemn us, we have confidence before God 22 and receive from him anything we ask, because we keep his commands and do what pleases him. 23 And this is his command: to believe in the name of his Son, Jesus Christ, and to love one another as he commanded us. 24 The one who keeps God’s commands lives in him, and he in them. And this is how we know that he lives in us: We know it by the Spirit he gave us.

The truth is truly beautiful.

In Psalms 119:142, God's righteousness is eternal and the Mosaic Law is truth, but your posts is opposed to following truth. Likewise, in Psalms 119:160, the sum of God's word is truth and all of God's righteous laws are eternal. Jesus is God's word name flesh, so the way to believe in his name is by all also embodying truth by obeying God's word. If we love God and our neighbor, then we won't commit adultery, idolatry, theft, murder, rape, kidnapping, favoritism, and so forth for everything else that God has commanded, so the greatest two commandments are inclusive of everything in the Mosaic Law, which is why Jesus said that those are the greatest two and that all of the other commandments hang on them (Matthew 22:36-40). Likewise, the Spirit has the role of leading us in truth (John 16:13), the Spirit has the role of leading us to obey the Mosaic Law (Ezekiel 36:26-27), and again the Mosaic Law is truth.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

In Romans 3:20, it is by the Mosaic Law that we have knowledge of sin, so that is how the Israelis knew what sin is, what should be should understand that we are being called to obey when we are called to repent from our sins, and how we should understand 1 John 3:4. I see no basis for thinking that it is a sin to transgression some of God's commandments, but not others, such as thinking that it is a sin to break God's commandment against murder, but not a sin to break His commandment against rape. In Jeremiah 31:33, it says that the New Covenant involves God putting the Torah in our minds and writing it on our hearts, which refers to all of the Mosaic Law, not to just ten of God's commandments. If a verses speaks about God's commandments and doesn't specify that it is only speaking only about ten of God's commandments, then it should be interpreted as referring to all of God's commandments. For example, in Revelation 14:12, I see no basis for thinking that it is referring to people who obeyed ten of God's commandments while refusing to obey all of God's other commandments.

I don't think @BobRyan has ever stated there are only 10 commandments. The point I believe he is making is that all 10 are included in the commandments of God and included in 1 John 3:4, Romans 3:20 and obviously Romans 7:7. I also think there is a precedence God made when He identified the Ten Commandments as "My commandments" right in the Ten Exodus 20:6 so when we see this carried out through the entire OT and NT is absolutely includes all Ten Commandments, which Jesus also referenced directly from the Ten in Matthew 15:3-9. I do believe the Ten sits on a different foundation than the other commandments as these are the only commandments God personally wrote and personally spoke and the only commandments inside the ark of the covenant in the earthy temple in the holies of holy, which was modeled after God's Heavenly Temple Hebrews 8:5 Revelation 11:19. There are other laws and most have a basic principle that falls under one of the categories of the Ten.

That said I think the biggest difference in what we believe in regards to laws are the animal sacrifices. Col 2:14-17, Hebrews 10:1-22 We believe the animal sacrifices are no longer required for the forgiveness of sins in the New Covenant. Jesus became our High Priest and He became our Sacrificial Lamb and can cleanse us of all sin when we have a change of heart and repent and can go directly to Him.

 

[BobRyan]

In Romans 3:20, it is by the Mosaic Law that we have knowledge of sin, so that is how the Israelis knew what sin is, what should be should understand that we are being called to obey when we are called to repent from our sins, and how we should understand 1 John 3:4. I see no basis for thinking that it is a sin to transgression some of God's commandments, but not others, such as thinking that it is a sin to break God's commandment against murder, but not a sin to break His commandment against rape. In Jeremiah 31:33, it says that the New Covenant involves God putting the Torah in our minds and writing it on our hearts, which refers to all of the Mosaic Law, not to just ten of God's commandments. If a verses speaks about God's commandments and doesn't specify that it is only speaking only about ten of God's commandments, then it should be interpreted as referring to all of God's commandments. For example, in Revelation 14:12, I see no basis for thinking that it is referring to people who obeyed ten of God's commandments while refusing to obey all of God's other commandments.

As we see in Matt 22 - the two greatest commandments are not in the TEN - yet they are part of what is considered "God's commandments"... also called "The Commandments of God" in OT and NT.

Yet it is most "certain" that Jeremiah and his readers DID notice Deut 5:22 saying that God spoke Ten, and wrote Ten on stone,, "and added no more". Meaning they were for dead sure INCLUDING the Ten in the term "the Law of God written on the heart".

As you point out - there would be other commands as well included in that phrase.

My point is that for dead certain the core set of TEN as Deut 5:22 states is included that Law. And this is because almost everyone here opposing the Bible Sabbath - goes after the TEN.

 

[Dahveed]

1 John 3:4 states "sin IS transgression of the LAW" KJV and we have over a dozen other translations that agree with KJV on that.

That includes EXB (Expanded Bible) stating that this is the same as (or included in) the more general statement "sin is lawlessness".

1 John 3:4 EXB --The person [L Everyone] who ·sins [commits sin] ·breaks God’s law [commits lawlessness/iniquity; C  referring to the false teachers; 2:19–20]. Yes, sin is ·living against God’s law [lawlessness; iniquity].(EXB). So "yeah" - not "Just KJV"​

No wonder almost all denominations have positions affirming the TEN Commandments as being included in what is called the "moral law of God" written on the heart under the Jer 31:31-34 "New Covenant'

But we preach Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.​

​

"None but Christ could redeem fallen man from the curse of the law and bring him again into harmony with Heaven." PP63.2​

"As Adam's transgression had brought wretchedness and death, so the sacrifice of Christ would bring life and immortality." PP66.1​

​

"Saving men from eternal ruin, can be carried out only through the Son of God, through His triumph over sin and death, and in seeking to fathom this plan all finite intelligences are baffled." 5BC1133.4​

”Whenever the law is presented before the people, let the teacher of truth point to the throne arched with the rainbow of promise, the righteousness of Christ...mercy and peace have met together in Christ, and righteousness and truth have embraced each other...". 5BC1133.5​

​

"Before the theme of redemption, let man lay his wisdom in the dust, and accept the plans of Him whose wisdom is infinite."​

"Those who will be saved in the kingdom of God will be those who have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb." The Signs of the Times, December 30, 1889.​

​

​

​

 

[Studyman]

That sounds so authentic until you study what happened to all of the laws found in the old covenant. In Matt 5 Jesus told the Jews that He came to fulfil those laws and until He did fulfil them nothing could be removed from the laws of the old covenant. The question for the Jews is did Jesus accomplish what He came to do? If Jesus was able to accomplish what He came to do then the new covenant is not the old one warmed over. What would be the point of fulfilling all of them if they were to continue to be in force?

The Old Covenant that was changed was not God's Word defining sin and righteousness. There was never a teaching that these would become obsolete. The covenant that changed, was the Priesthood Covenant God made with Israel after the Golden Calf. This "ADDED Law", added till the Seed, True Lamb of God should come, is what became obsolete. You can read for yourself. The only thing that Changed in GOD's Definition of His Own New Covenant, was how His Laws were administered, and how transgression of His Laws was provided for.

As for His Laws, here is the God of the Bible defining HIS Own New Covenant.

33 But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.

34 And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.

Prior to this, the only way to hear God's Laws was to find a Levite Priest to read Moses to them. But God, in fulfillment of His Promise, has delivered His Oracles into the homes of everyone who wants them.

And prior to this the only way sins could be forgiven, was to take a goat to a Levite Priest who would then perform sacrificial "Works of the Law" for forgiveness. But the Jesus of the Bible is now our Priest, the Priesthood being changed.

So you can read this for yourself. There is not even an implication that God's Laws defining sin and righteousness would become obsolete. And yet this world's religions, or as Jesus called them, "MANY" who come in His Name, preach to the world that they did.

For me, it seems important to let God define His Own New Covenant so as to conform to the teaching of His Son.

Matt. 4:4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.

And those whom His Son chose to teach.

2 Tim. 3: 16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

 

[Dahveed]

The Old Covenant that was changed was not God's Word defining sin and righteousness. There was never a teaching that these would become obsolete. The covenant that changed, was the Priesthood Covenant God made with Israel after the Golden Calf. This "ADDED Law", added till the Seed, True Lamb of God should come, is what became obsolete. ...

As for His Laws, here is the God of the Bible defining HIS Own New Covenant.
33 But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.
34 And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.
For me, it seems important to let God define His Own New Covenant so as to conform to the teaching of His Son.

And that from childhood you have known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. 2 Tim 3:15

2 Tim. 3: 16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

Be diligent to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who doesn’t need to be ashamed, correctly teaching the word of truth.
2 Tim 2:15

 

[Bob S]

The Old Covenant that was changed was not God's Word defining sin and righteousness. There was never a teaching that these would become obsolete. The covenant that changed, was the Priesthood Covenant God made with Israel after the Golden Calf. This "ADDED Law", added till the Seed, True Lamb of God should come, is what became obsolete. You can read for yourself. The only thing that Changed in GOD's Definition of His Own New Covenant, was how His Laws were administered, and how transgression of His Laws was provided for.

As for His Laws, here is the God of the Bible defining HIS Own New Covenant.

33 But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.

34 And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.

Prior to this, the only way to hear God's Laws was to find a Levite Priest to read Moses to them. But God, in fulfillment of His Promise, has delivered His Oracles into the homes of everyone who wants them.

And prior to this the only way sins could be forgiven, was to take a goat to a Levite Priest who would then perform sacrificial "Works of the Law" for forgiveness. But the Jesus of the Bible is now our Priest, the Priesthood being changed.

So you can read this for yourself. There is not even an implication that God's Laws defining sin and righteousness would become obsolete. And yet this world's religions, or as Jesus called them, "MANY" who come in His Name, preach to the world that they did.

For me, it seems important to let God define His Own New Covenant so as to conform to the teaching of His Son.

Matt. 4:4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.

And those whom His Son chose to teach.

2 Tim. 3: 16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

Is mankind under the new covenant? That must mean that Israel is no longer under the words of the old covenant, correct? God spoke to Moses in EX19: 5 Now if you obey me fully and keep my covenant, then out of all nations you will be my treasured possession. Although the whole earth is mine, 6 you[a] will be for me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.’ These are the words you are to speak to the Israelites.”

As we all know Israel failed that covenant miserably even before Moses could return with the stone tablets. God knew they would fail so the plan of Salvation was devised before the foundation of the Earth.

Along with the new and better covenant came a change in the Priesthood and scripture tells us that when there is a change in the priesthood there is also a change in the law. So, the Law did change. Laws dealing with morality never change. For instance, it has always been wrong to kill another. But something did change, and that happened at Calvary where Jesus ratified, with His own blood, the new and better covenant. In Jn 15 Jesus said He kept His Father's commandments, the laws of the old covenant. Then He asks us to keep His NEW command to love others as He loves us. He said this love includes giving our lives for our fellow man. Read it in Jn15:9-14. Jesus, even when He was under the old covenant law didn't go around expounding on the ritual or ceremonial laws of the covenant He was under. The Apostles didn't preach ritualism of the old covenant. John especially taught LOVE, the greatest command

Man has never needed the ten commandments to know right from wrong. They were a great reminder, but how much greater is the power of the holy Spirit dwelling in each of us. Read 2Cor3:6-11. Paul there is telling us the ten commandments WERE glorious and how much more glorious is the Holy Spirit.

If as you are telling us that it is the laws of the old covenant that is in our hearts, then why is it those who believe we have to observe the old covenant Sabbath have to proselytize Sabbath observance. It Sabbath law is in our hearts then it would seem there wouldn't be enough room in the churches for all those wanting to keep all those laws written in our hearts. Instead, millions upon millions are spent every year trying to convince others they have to keep Sabbath in order to be saved. (as per SDAs)

 

[Studyman]

Is mankind under the new covenant? That must mean that Israel is no longer under the words of the old covenant, correct? God spoke to Moses in EX19: 5 Now if you obey me fully and keep my covenant, then out of all nations you will be my treasured possession. Although the whole earth is mine, 6 you[a] will be for me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.’ These are the words you are to speak to the Israelites.”

Israel broke this Covenant. God was going to wipe them out. Moses interceded on their behalf.

Ex. 32: 30 And it came to pass on the morrow, that Moses said unto the people, Ye have sinned a great sin: and now I will go up unto the LORD; peradventure I shall make an atonement for your sin.

A new Covenant was established like unto the old, with an "ADDED" LAW concerning sacrifices and burnt offering for sin.

Heb. 8: 9 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord.

Jer. 7: 22 For I spake not unto your fathers, nor commanded them in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt, concerning burnt offerings or sacrifices: (No, this LAW was "ADDED, Till the SEED should come".

23 But this thing commanded I them, saying, Obey my voice, and I will be your God, and ye shall be my people: and walk ye in all the ways that I have commanded you, that it may be well unto you. 24 But they hearkened not, nor inclined their ear, but walked in the counsels and in the imagination of their evil heart, and went backward, and not forward.

It was the covenant God made with them after they "hearkened not" that the God of the Bible told us would change, "after those days". The instruction to "Obey my voice, and I will be your God, and ye shall be my people: and walk ye in all the ways that I have commanded you, that it may be well unto you", never changed as both Jesus and Paul teaches.

As we all know Israel failed that covenant miserably even before Moses could return with the stone tablets. God knew they would fail so the plan of Salvation was devised before the foundation of the Earth.

Caleb and Joshua humbled themselves before God. They didn't lust after disobedience like the others did. Your religious philosophy that God created Laws HE knew no one could obey, then lied to Abraham's Children by telling them they Could Obey them, and that they were for their own good, then killing them by the thousands when they didn't obey, is a popular religious philosophy in this world God placed us in. But it is a deception just the same, if a person believes the Christ of the Bible.

Along with the new and better covenant came a change in the Priesthood and scripture tells us that when there is a change in the priesthood there is also a change in the law. So, the Law did change.

Yes, the "ADDED" Priesthood Law did change. And the Hebrews Author tells us exactly what the change was. I always find it fascinating how so many mention the "change of the law", yet they refuse to speak about or an many cases, even acknowledge what the Change actually was. Here, along with letting God define HIS Own New Covenant, why don't we also acknowledge what the Change in the Law was, according to the Hebrews author who tells us.

Heb. 7: 12 For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law.

What was the Change?

13 For he of whom these things are spoken pertaineth to another tribe, of which no man gave attendance at the altar. 14 For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Juda; of which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning priesthood.

In the "ADDED" Priesthood Covenant, only a descendant of Levi could become an anointed Priest of God. No other "tribe" could partake of the Priesthood. The Jesus of the Bible was from Judah, not Levi. So before HE could become the Prophesied Priest of God, "After the Order of Melchizedek", and not "after the Order of Aaron", there was by necessity, also a change of the Law.

It's right there in your own bible.

Laws dealing with morality never change. For instance, it has always been wrong to kill another. But something did change, and that happened at Calvary where Jesus ratified, with His own blood, the new and better covenant.

Yes, as Prophesied. No longer am I required to hear about God from Levite Priests, or any one as I have His Oracles in my own home, in my mind and in my heart. And no longer am I required to partake of the Old Priesthood sacrificial "Works of the Law" for the forgiveness of sins. Jesus' own Blood Sacrifice atones for the sins of the repentant.

In Jn 15 Jesus said He kept His Father's commandments, the laws of the old covenant. Then He asks us to keep His NEW command to love others as He loves us. He said this love includes giving our lives for our fellow man. Read it in Jn15:9-14. Jesus, even when He was under the old covenant law didn't go around expounding on the ritual or ceremonial laws of the covenant He was under. The Apostles didn't preach ritualism of the old covenant. John especially taught LOVE, the greatest command.

Your philosophy notwithstanding, the Christ of the Bible defines for His people how to Love and Honer God, and how to Love and honor each other.

The Christ of the Bible was given instruction from His Father regarding the creation of all things, including God's instruction in righteousness, and teaching God's People in the way that they should go.

Is. 48: 16 Come ye near unto me, hear ye this; I have not spoken in secret from the beginning; from the time that it was, there am I: and now the Lord GOD, and his Spirit, hath sent me.

17 Thus saith the LORD, thy Redeemer, the Holy One of Israel; I am the LORD thy God which teacheth thee to profit, which leadeth thee by the way that thou shouldest go. 18 O that thou hadst hearkened to my commandments! then had thy peace been as a river, and thy righteousness as the waves of the sea:

In your religion, is this the same Christ who became a man in the person of Jesus? And if so, are these not HIS sayings?

Matt. 7: 24 Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock: 25 And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock.

Man has never needed the ten commandments to know right from wrong. They were a great reminder, but how much greater is the power of the holy Spirit dwelling in each of us. Read 2Cor3:6-11. Paul there is telling us the ten commandments WERE glorious and how much more glorious is the Holy Spirit.

Wasn't the "Ministry of death" concerning burnt offerings or sacrifices for Sins? It was surely Glorious, but Temporary as certainly God knew of the Sacrifice His Son would make when HE gave this "ADDED" Law that Abraham was justified apart from.

You seem to be forgetting God's OWN definition of HIS Own New Covenant.

If as you are telling us that it is the laws of the old covenant that is in our hearts, then why is it those who believe we have to observe the old covenant Sabbath have to proselytize Sabbath observance.

There is no such thing as the "Old Covenant Sabbath". This is a creation of men who rebel against the Christ of the Bible, and the Sabbath HE created for man at His Father's behest. There are lots of people who call Jesus Lord, Lord. They have created dozens of different religious sects and franchises, they all preach in His Name, they all cast out devils in His Name, they all do many wonderful works, build huge religious businesses, create their own high days and sabbaths and images of God, all in the name of Christ.

But how do I know if I am deceived by these "many" who come in Christ's Name that Jesus warned about, or am on the right Path? Fortunately, this same Christ inspired the very answer to this question.

1 John 2: 3 And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments. 4 He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him. 5 But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him. 6 He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked.

If men had "GOD's" laws in their heart, they wouldn't be having this dispute.

It Sabbath law is in our hearts then it would seem there wouldn't be enough room in the churches for all those wanting to keep all those laws written in our hearts. Instead, millions upon millions are spent every year trying to convince others they have to keep Sabbath in order to be saved. (as per SDAs)

I don't much care about one religious business over another. They all quote some of God's Word, just as the Pharisees did, and the serpent in the garden.

I am addressing your philosophy regarding the difference between God's definition of His New Covenant, and yours. For me the name above the door of the manmade shrine of worship is meaningless. The Jesus of the Bible said a man is known by their works. Paul warns. "They profess that they know God; but in works they deny him, being abominable, and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate."

I can find not one example of Faith in the entire Bible, who didn't know of and Honor God in His Commandments. We are never warned about listening to the Scriptures, but we are warned all over them about listening to men who profess to know God.

This is why I believe we should let God define HIS Own New covenant, and not the Pope or Kenneth Copeland or anyone else. Even if we find ourselves alone in our Faith, like Caleb and Joshua were.

 

[Dahveed]

This is why I believe we should let God define HIS Own New covenant, and not the Pope or Kenneth Copeland or anyone else. Even if we find ourselves alone in our Faith, like Caleb and Joshua were.

Of course Caleb and Joshua were not found alone in the faith. I will be with you; I will not fail you or abandon you. Joshua 1:5

So we may boldly say:
The Lord is my helper; Heb 13:6-8

He does provide for the seed of Abraham. Heb 2:16-17

Just as Abraham “believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness. Galatians 3:5-7

 

[Studyman]

Of course Caleb and Joshua were not found alone in the faith. I will be with you; I will not fail you or abandon you. Joshua 1:5

Num. 14: 6 And Joshua the son of Nun, and Caleb the son of Jephunneh, which were of them that searched the land, rent their clothes: 7 And they spake unto all the company of the children of Israel, saying, The land, which we passed through to search it, is an exceeding good land. 8 If the LORD delight in us, then he will bring us into this land, and give it us; a land which floweth with milk and honey. 9 Only rebel not ye against the LORD, neither fear ye the people of the land; for they are bread for us: their defence is departed from them, and the LORD is with us: fear them not. 10 But "all the congregation" bade stone them with stones. And the glory of the LORD appeared in the tabernacle of the congregation before all the children of Israel.

Truly, Joshua and Caleb were alone in their Faith in the context I used.
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Joshua 1:5&version=NIV

So we may boldly say:
The Lord is my helper; Heb 13:6-8

The Congregation with Joshua and Caleb were not so bold.

He does provide for the seed of Abraham. Heb 2:16-17

John 8: 39 They answered and said unto him, Abraham is our father. Jesus saith unto them, If ye were Abraham's children, ye would do the works of Abraham.

Just as Abraham “believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness. Galatians 3:5-7

Duet. 32: 17 They sacrificed unto devils, not to God; to gods whom they knew not, to new gods that came newly up, whom your fathers feared not. 18 Of the Rock that begat thee thou art unmindful, and hast forgotten God that formed thee. 19 And when the LORD saw it, he abhorred them, because of the provoking of his sons, and of his daughters. 20 And he said, I will hide my face from them, I will see what their end shall be: for they are a very froward generation, children in whom is no faith.

But of Caleb, this same Rock that begat him had this to say.

Numbers 14: 22 Because all those men which have seen my glory, and my miracles, which I did in Egypt and in the wilderness, and have tempted me now these ten times, and have not hearkened to my voice; 23 Surely they shall not see the land which I sware unto their fathers, neither shall any of them that provoked me see it:

24 But my servant Caleb, because he had another spirit with him, and hath followed me fully, him will I bring into the land whereinto he went; and his seed shall possess it.

 

[Dahveed]

Truly, Joshua and Caleb were alone in their Faith in the context I used.

Tell it to the Priest.

24 But my servant Caleb, because he had another spirit with him, and hath followed me fully, him will I bring into the land whereinto he went; and his seed shall possess it.

May your priests, Lord God, be clothed with salvation, may your faithful people rejoice in your goodness. 2 Chron 6:41

 

[Bob S]

Israel broke this Covenant. God was going to wipe them out. Moses interceded on their behalf.

So much for those who proclaim God never changes.

Ex. 32: 30 And it came to pass on the morrow, that Moses said unto the people, Ye have sinned a great sin: and now I will go up unto the LORD; peradventure I shall make an atonement for your sin.

A new Covenant was established like unto the old, with an "ADDED" LAW concerning sacrifices and burnt offering for sin.

How about providing scripture to back up the claim sacrifices and burnt offerings were added to the original covenant. In Gen4 we read of Cain and Able's offerings to the Lord.

Heb. 8: 9 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord.

That covenant called the Mosaic or Sinai covenant was the one given to Israel at Sinai and ended at Calvary. This was the same covenant that ended at Calvary. You have not proven that is not correct.

Jer. 7: 22 For I spake not unto your fathers, nor commanded them in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt, concerning burnt offerings or sacrifices: (No, this LAW was "ADDED, Till the SEED should come".

I guess you dug deep enough you were able to find a verse that appears to prove your point. The law that "was added" were the words of the Sinai covenant. (Around 613 of them)

23 But this thing commanded I them, saying, Obey my voice, and I will be your God, and ye shall be my people: and walk ye in all the ways that I have commanded you, that it may be well unto you. 24 But they hearkened not, nor inclined their ear, but walked in the counsels and in the imagination of their evil heart, and went backward, and not forward.

Thus, negating the 613 laws. Remember Ex19:5-6 where God told Moses the covenant was an "IF" covenant. If they keep the covenant I will....

It was the covenant God made with them after they "hearkened not" that the God of the Bible told us would change, "after those days". The instruction to "Obey my voice, and I will be your God, and ye shall be my people: and walk ye in all the ways that I have commanded you, that it may be well unto you", never changed as both Jesus and Paul teaches.

Jesus lived under the Law and taught to those under the Law. Paul lived under first the Law then under Grace. Paul taught Grace, never the Law. He even wrote that the Law was until Jesus. Gal3:19

Caleb and Joshua humbled themselves before God. They didn't lust after disobedience like the others did. Your religious philosophy that God created Laws HE knew no one could obey, then lied to Abraham's Children by telling them they Could Obey them, and that they were for their own good, then killing them by the thousands when they didn't obey, is a popular religious philosophy in this world God placed us in. But it is a deception just the same, if a person believes the Christ of the Bible.

Hold on there partner. That statement is a blatant lie. Why would you feel the need to smear another person to bolster your preconceived beliefs?

Yes, the "ADDED" Priesthood Law did change. And the Hebrews Author tells us exactly what the change was. I always find it fascinating how so many mention the "change of the law", yet they refuse to speak about or an many cases, even acknowledge what the Change actually was. Here, along with letting God define HIS Own New Covenant, why don't we also acknowledge what the Change in the Law was, according to the Hebrews author who tells us.

Heb. 7: 12 For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law.

What was the Change?

13 For he of whom these things are spoken pertaineth to another tribe, of which no man gave attendance at the altar. 14 For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Juda; of which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning priesthood.

In the "ADDED" Priesthood Covenant, only a descendant of Levi could become an anointed Priest of God. No other "tribe" could partake of the Priesthood. The Jesus of the Bible was from Judah, not Levi. So before HE could become the Prophesied Priest of God, "After the Order of Melchizedek", and not "after the Order of Aaron", there was by necessity, also a change of the Law.

It's right there in your own bible.

What really changed was that Jews no longer were subject to the ritual laws of the Sinai covenant. LAWS DEALING WITH MORALITY NEVER CHANGE.

Yes, as Prophesied. No longer am I required to hear about God from Levite Priests, or any one as I have His Oracles in my own home, in my mind and in my heart. And no longer am I required to partake of the Old Priesthood sacrificial "Works of the Law" for the forgiveness of sins. Jesus' own Blood Sacrifice atones for the sins of the repentant.

That is not what Paul is telling us throughout his writings. Works of the law would be keeping days, sacrificing animals and all the other obligations one had to do in order to remain faithful to the covenant.

Your philosophy notwithstanding, the Christ of the Bible defines for His people how to Love and Honer God, and how to Love and honor each other.

The Christ of the Bible was given instruction from His Father regarding the creation of all things, including God's instruction in righteousness, and teaching God's People in the way that they should go.

Is. 48: 16 Come ye near unto me, hear ye this; I have not spoken in secret from the beginning; from the time that it was, there am I: and now the Lord GOD, and his Spirit, hath sent me.

17 Thus saith the LORD, thy Redeemer, the Holy One of Israel; I am the LORD thy God which teacheth thee to profit, which leadeth thee by the way that thou shouldest go. 18 O that thou hadst hearkened to my commandments! then had thy peace been as a river, and thy righteousness as the waves of the sea:

In your religion, is this the same Christ who became a man in the person of Jesus? And if so, are these not HIS sayings?

Matt. 7: 24 Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock: 25 And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock.

Jesus taught the way to go and the Bible writers recorded them. Jn in 1JN 3:19-24 we find the answer as to what commands we are to keep.

Wasn't the "Ministry of death" concerning burnt offerings or sacrifices for Sins? It was surely Glorious, but Temporary as certainly God knew of the Sacrifice His Son would make when HE gave this "ADDED" Law that Abraham was justified apart from.

You seem to be forgetting God's OWN definition of HIS Own New Covenant.

You not only seem to not notice what the subject of 2Cor3:6-11 the telling us

There is no such thing as the "Old Covenant Sabbath".

How would you define the Sabbath given to Israel after the crossing the Red Sea? Seems you create things just to be obstinate.

This is a creation of men who rebel against the Christ of the Bible, and the Sabbath HE created for man at His Father's behest. There are lots of people who call Jesus Lord, Lord. They have created dozens of different religious sects and franchises, they all preach in His Name, they all cast out devils in His Name, they all do many wonderful works, build huge religious businesses, create their own high days and sabbaths and images of God, all in the name of Christ.


But how do I know if I am deceived by these "many" who come in Christ's Name that Jesus warned about, or am on the right Path? Fortunately, this same Christ inspired the very answer to this question.

1 John 2: 3 And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments. 4 He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him. 5 But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him. 6 He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked.

If men had "GOD's" laws in their heart, they wouldn't be having this dispute.

If you would humble yourself by studying 1Jn3:19-24 you would have the answer to what commands we are to keep.

I don't much care about one religious business over another. They all quote some of God's Word, just as the Pharisees did, and the serpent in the garden.

WOW! sounds a bit self-righteous, but that was what was intended, right?

I don't much care about one religious business over another. They all quote some of God's Word, just as the Pharisees did, and the serpent in the garden.

And you are here to debate even though you don't care?

For me the name above the door of the manmade shrine of worship is meaningless. The Jesus of the Bible said a man is known by their works. Paul warns. "They profess that they know God; but in works they deny him, being abominable, and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate."


I can find not one example of Faith in the entire Bible, who didn't know of and Honor God in His Commandments. We are never warned about listening to the Scriptures, but we are warned all over them about listening to men who profess to know God.

This is why I believe we should let God define HIS Own New covenant, and not the Pope or Kenneth Copeland or anyone else. Even if we find ourselves alone in our Faith, like Caleb and Joshua were.

God has defined his covenant to us. Maby it is not the little box you think it is. About the name over the door, are you sure yours would fit?