Who is the boss?

Truther

Active member
No, I called your use of those words magic. Peter believed what Jesus taught: "He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him." John 3:36, and he would have throw you out of the Church for believing that specific words are necessary for salvation. BTW, I would say the odds are about 99 to 1 that if Peter, or any other Apostle, baptized someone they would have used "in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost" as opposed to simply saying "in the name of Jesus". After all, the phrases means the same thing, the later is short hand for the former, the former is what Jesus ordered his disciples to use, and Luke was likely using the later to save space as paper was expensive in the first century.

God Bless
Unless you think Peter said nothing when baptizing folks, you called him Simon the sorcerer, using the magic word 'Jesus Christ" during baptisms.

Baptists are unbelievably defiant to Acts.
 

Anthony

Member
There is no such thing as Torah per Jesus and Paul's words .

They both taught the entire O.T. is the Law.

Modernists divided it up so they could teach "partial Law".

You teach partial Law too, which is an O.T. sin.(James also depicts).

When you start killing gays and adulterers, then preach Law to me.

Otherwise, put your toys away.
There is nothing like partial Law and full Law. Torah is the same - the difference is in people whether it's outward or inward.

You may not understand the difference in the impact of Torah in God's people by the difference of being outward and inward. The outward form of Torah brings forth death and the inward imprint of Torah brings forth life:

The outward form of Torah was a shadow of the heavenly pattern as shown to Moses:

Heb 8:4 For if he were on earth, he should not be a priest, seeing that there are priests that offer gifts according to the law:

5 Who serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things, as Moses was admonished of God when he was about to make the tabernacle: for, See, saith he, that thou make all things according to the pattern shewed to thee in the mount.

This was unfruitful in people of carnal nature as Paul said that the Torah is spiritual and that he was carnal sold to sin:

Rom 7:14 For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.

The inward impact of Torah changed the pattern of thinking and put a desire in God's people to obey Him for God reveals Himself through His Torah/Christ:

Heb 8:7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.

8 For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:

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.

10 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people:

There is nothing like jugglery of theologies/doctrines in Christendom but God will be personally revealed to God's people/spiritual Israel:

11: And they shall not teach every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for all shall know me, from the least to the greatest.

You are reading and understanding scriptures from the perspective of falsely based Christianity which practices lawlessness.
 

Truther

Active member
There is nothing like partial Law and full Law. Torah is the same - the difference is in people whether it's outward or inward.

You may not understand the difference in the impact of Torah in God's people by the difference of being outward and inward. The outward form of Torah brings forth death and the inward imprint of Torah brings forth life:

The outward form of Torah was a shadow of the heavenly pattern as shown to Moses:

Heb 8:4 For if he were on earth, he should not be a priest, seeing that there are priests that offer gifts according to the law:

5 Who serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things, as Moses was admonished of God when he was about to make the tabernacle: for, See, saith he, that thou make all things according to the pattern shewed to thee in the mount.

This was unfruitful in people of carnal nature as Paul said that the Torah is spiritual and that he was carnal sold to sin:

Rom 7:14 For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.

The inward impact of Torah changed the pattern of thinking and put a desire in God's people to obey Him for God reveals Himself through His Torah/Christ:

Heb 8:7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.

8 For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:

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.

10 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people:

There is nothing like jugglery of theologies/doctrines in Christendom but God will be personally revealed to God's people/spiritual Israel:

11: And they shall not teach every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for all shall know me, from the least to the greatest.

You are reading and understanding scriptures from the perspective of falsely based Christianity which practices lawlessness.
Which of the 613 commandments did God put in your heart?

Do you desire to kill offenders?

Or....

Are we speaking of a Spiritual Law called "love" or "Law of the Spirit of life in Christ"?
 

Anthony

Member
There is no such thing as Torah per Jesus and Paul's words .

They both taught the entire O.T. is the Law.

Modernists divided it up so they could teach "partial Law".

You teach partial Law too, which is an O.T. sin.(James also depicts).

When you start killing gays and adulterers, then preach Law to me.

Otherwise, put your toys away.
Jesus and the Apostles did teach from OT Torah and the Prophets because it testifies to Jesus Christ:

Luke 24:27 And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.

Acts 18:4-5
And he reasoned in the synagogue every sabbath, and persuaded the Jews and the Greeks.

5 And when Silas and Timotheus were come from Macedonia, Paul was pressed in the spirit, and testified to the Jews that Jesus was Christ.
 

Anthony

Member
Which of the 613 commandments did God put in your heart?

Do you desire to kill offenders?

Or....

Are we speaking of a Spiritual Law called "love" or "Law of the Spirit of life in Christ"?
My friend love is the essence of Torah which requires obeying the Torah of YHWH written in hearts and minds.

You are not in a position to understand The Torah which is outward given to Israel as the physical Kingdom of God in Israel.

Physically Killing or stoning the offenders spiritually is fulfilled by Christ Himself as He was cast outside the camp and was hung on the Tree and stoned as an offender/blasphemer.

The Law of Divorce and Remarriage was made in OT for the sake of divorcing carnal Israel and marrying Israel through the death of the Testator and His resurrection.

Actually, you demonstrate the same mind exhibited by those Jews who rejected Christ not understanding the nature of Torah
 

Truther

Active member
Jesus and the Apostles did teach from OT Torah and the Prophets because it testifies to Jesus Christ:

Luke 24:27 And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.

Acts 18:4-5
And he reasoned in the synagogue every sabbath, and persuaded the Jews and the Greeks.

5 And when Silas and Timotheus were come from Macedonia, Paul was pressed in the spirit, and testified to the Jews that Jesus was Christ.
They taught the entirety of the O.T. was Law, not "Torah".

You have this division of books stuck in your head.

Find "Torah" in the Bible.
 

Truther

Active member
My friend love is the essence of Torah which requires obeying the Torah of YHWH written in hearts and minds.

You are not in a position to understand The Torah which is outward given to Israel as the physical Kingdom of God in Israel.

Physically Killing or stoning the offenders spiritually is fulfilled by Christ Himself as He was cast outside the camp and was hung on the Tree and stoned as an offender/blasphemer.

The Law of Divorce and Remarriage was made in OT for the sake of divorcing carnal Israel and marrying Israel through the death of the Testator and His resurrection.

Actually, you demonstrate the same mind exhibited by those Jews who rejected Christ not understanding the nature of Torah
You just dismissed the "Torah".
 
Unless you think Peter said nothing when baptizing folks, you called him Simon the sorcerer, using the magic word 'Jesus Christ" during baptisms.

Baptists are unbelievably defiant to Acts.
An empty response. Peter believed what Jesus taught: "He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him." John 3:36, and he would have throw you out of the Church for believing that specific words are necessary for salvation. BTW, I would say the odds are about 99 to 1 that if Peter, or any other Apostle, baptized someone they would have used "in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost" as opposed to simply saying "in the name of Jesus". After all, the phrases means the same thing, the later is short hand for the former, the former is what Jesus ordered his disciples to use, and Luke was likely using the later to save space as paper was expensive in the first century.

God Bless
 

Truther

Active member
An empty response. Peter believed what Jesus taught: "He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him." John 3:36, and he would have throw you out of the Church for believing that specific words are necessary for salvation. BTW, I would say the odds are about 99 to 1 that if Peter, or any other Apostle, baptized someone they would have used "in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost" as opposed to simply saying "in the name of Jesus". After all, the phrases means the same thing, the later is short hand for the former, the former is what Jesus ordered his disciples to use, and Luke was likely using the later to save space as paper was expensive in the first century.

God Bless
Evidence that you think Peter is "Simon the sorcerer" of Acts 2:38.
 
Evidence that you think Peter is "Simon the sorcerer" of Acts 2:38.

Evidence that you think I think Peter was "Simon the sorcerer"? You are the one who thinks Peter believes in magic words. In reality, Peter believed what Jesus taught: "He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him." John 3:36, and he would have throw you out of the Church for believing that specific words are necessary for salvation. BTW, I would say the odds are about 99 to 1 that if Peter, or any other Apostle, baptized someone they would have used "in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost" as opposed to simply saying "in the name of Jesus". After all, the phrases means the same thing, the later is short hand for the former, the former is what Jesus ordered his disciples to use, and Luke was likely using the later to save space as paper was expensive in the first century.

God Bless
 

Truther

Active member
Evidence that you think I think Peter was "Simon the sorcerer"? You are the one who thinks Peter believes in magic words. In reality, Peter believed what Jesus taught: "He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him." John 3:36, and he would have throw you out of the Church for believing that specific words are necessary for salvation. BTW, I would say the odds are about 99 to 1 that if Peter, or any other Apostle, baptized someone they would have used "in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost" as opposed to simply saying "in the name of Jesus". After all, the phrases means the same thing, the later is short hand for the former, the former is what Jesus ordered his disciples to use, and Luke was likely using the later to save space as paper was expensive in the first century.

God Bless
You are not the only one that teaches the use of the name of Jesus is a supposed "magic word".

The great Baptist debater Oscar Hill called the name of Jesus "....your little magical formula...".

The opposition reminded Hill that at the name of Jesus he will bow someday....

It got quiet on the debate stage.

I think you should do a N.T. word search about scriptures referring to the name of Jesus before you get to clumsy.
 

Anthony

Member
They taught the entirety of the O.T. was Law, not "Torah".

You have this division of books stuck in your head.

Find "Torah" in the Bible.
Torah is the Hebrew word for God's Law. You don't understand it because your demonstrate a mind against His Torah. The NT is all about The Messiah Who in Person defines the Torah. If one rejects Torah of YHWH results in rejecting Jesus as The Christ:

Rom 8:6 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.

8 So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.

Listen to the Jewish Apostle:

1John 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.

5 Who is he that overcometh the world, but he that believeth that Jesus is the Son of God?

One can't believe Jesus as The Son of God if one rejects His commandments.

He didn't come to do away with the Law but fulfill obedience for His people:

John 5:17
Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
 

Anthony

Member
You just dismissed the "Torah".
I didn't! The essence of Torah is explained by two phrases - Love God and love your neighbor.

To love God is to keep His commandments and to love the neighbor stands by the first.

Because you don't want to subject yourself to God's Torah you are bringing all excuses. See my previous post.

Christendom believes in a false and lawless heathen christ who can't save anyone.
 
You are not the only one that teaches the use of the name of Jesus is a supposed "magic word".

I don't teach the use of the name of Jesus is a magic word. You are the one who teaches "in the name of Jesus" is a magic phrase that saves people. Peter believed what Jesus taught: "He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him." John 3:36, and he would have throw you out of the Church for believing that specific words are necessary for salvation.

The great Baptist debater Oscar Hill called the name of Jesus "....your little magical formula...".

Because heretics like you treat it like a magical formula. Don't blame the messenger. We are just telling you the truth. Change your dogma; believe what Jesus taught in Scripture: "He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him." John 3:36.

The opposition reminded Hill that at the name of Jesus he will bow someday....

What a great non sequitur. Is it fun being so illogical?

It got quiet on the debate stage.

And for some reason, you never bothered to listen to this valid critique of your position.

I think you should do a N.T. word search about scriptures referring to the name of Jesus before you get to clumsy.

I think you should actually read the whole NT and see what the gospel is. At the name of Jesus, your knees will bow, and you will be judged for your sin given your rejection of the Christ of Scripture.

God Bless
 

Truther

Active member
Torah is the Hebrew word for God's Law. You don't understand it because your demonstrate a mind against His Torah. The NT is all about The Messiah Who in Person defines the Torah. If one rejects Torah of YHWH results in rejecting Jesus as The Christ:

Rom 8:6 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.

8 So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.

Listen to the Jewish Apostle:

1John 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.

5 Who is he that overcometh the world, but he that believeth that Jesus is the Son of God?

One can't believe Jesus as The Son of God if one rejects His commandments.

He didn't come to do away with the Law but fulfill obedience for His people:

John 5:17
Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
Is Torah only 5 books or all 39?
 

Truther

Active member
I didn't! The essence of Torah is explained by two phrases - Love God and love your neighbor.

To love God is to keep His commandments and to love the neighbor stands by the first.

Because you don't want to subject yourself to God's Torah you are bringing all excuses. See my previous post.

Christendom believes in a false and lawless heathen christ who can't save anyone.
You talk Law like you keep it.

I guarantee you don't even keep the sabbath per the Law.

You have fragmented the Law to keep what you think you can keep.

Fact is, James said if you break a single Law, you are guilty of all.

That can't be a good feeling, my Law breaking friend.
 

Truther

Active member
I don't teach the use of the name of Jesus is a magic word. You are the one who teaches "in the name of Jesus" is a magic phrase that saves people. Peter believed what Jesus taught: "He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him." John 3:36, and he would have throw you out of the Church for believing that specific words are necessary for salvation.



Because heretics like you treat it like a magical formula. Don't blame the messenger. We are just telling you the truth. Change your dogma; believe what Jesus taught in Scripture:
"He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him." John 3:36.



What a great non sequitur. Is it fun being so illogical?



And for some reason, you never bothered to listen to this valid critique of your position.



I think you should actually read the whole NT and see what the gospel is. At the name of Jesus, your knees will bow, and you will be judged for your sin given your rejection of the Christ of Scripture.


God Bless
7 And whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father by him.


Do you think it or say it?

Did Peter think the name or say the name?...


6 Then Peter said, Silver and gold have I none; but such as I have give I thee: In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth rise up and walk.

7 And he took him by the right hand, and lifted him up: and immediately his feet and ankle bones received strength.

8 And he leaping up stood, and walked, and entered with them into the temple, walking, and leaping, and praising God.

9 And all the people saw him walking and praising God:...

12 And when Peter saw it, he answered unto the people, Ye men of Israel, why marvel ye at this? or why look ye so earnestly on us, as though by our own power or holiness we had made this man to walk?...

16 And his name through faith in his name hath made this man strong, whom ye see and know: yea, the faith which is by him hath given him this perfect soundness in the presence of you all....

10 Be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even by him doth this man stand here before you whole.


Did the Jews command Peter to stop thinking or speaking the name of Jesus?....


17 But that it spread no further among the people, let us straitly threaten them, that they speak henceforth to no man in this name.

18 And they called them, and commanded them not to speak at all nor teach in the name of Jesus.
 
7 And whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father by him.


Do you think it or say it?

Obviously. Maybe you shouldn't make assumptions. I just don't think someone else saying certain words while baptizing me is relevant to my salvation. For "if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved." Romans 10:9. This verse isn't complicated. It's painfully straight forward. And, any necessity for baptism, let alone also requiring certain words to be spoken during that baptism, 100% contradicts what Paul taught in Romans. Even if Paul didn't write Romans to me and he wrote it to you, you are calling Paul a liar every time you express your gospel.

Did Peter think the name or say the name?...

Obviously. We Christians say the name all the time. We finish practically ever prayer with "in the name of Jesus Christ, amen". Maybe our issue isn't with you saying the words, but how you treat the words as if they are access to some magic from God.

Did the Jews command Peter to stop thinking or speaking the name of Jesus?....

Yep, maybe you should listen to what we are saying as to not make replies that are utterly irrelevant to what we are saying?

Again, you are the one who teaches
"in the name of Jesus" is a magic phrase that saves people. Peter believed what Jesus taught: "He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him." John 3:36, and he would have throw you out of the Church for believing that specific words are necessary for salvation.

God Bless
 

Truther

Active member
Obviously. Maybe you shouldn't make assumptions. I just don't think someone else saying certain words while baptizing me is relevant to my salvation. For "if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved." Romans 10:9. This verse isn't complicated. It's painfully straight forward. And, any necessity for baptism, let alone also requiring certain words to be spoken during that baptism, 100% contradicts what Paul taught in Romans. Even if Paul didn't write Romans to me and he wrote it to you, you are calling Paul a liar every time you express your gospel.



Obviously. We Christians say the name all the time. We finish practically ever prayer with
"in the name of Jesus Christ, amen". Maybe our issue isn't with you saying the words, but how you treat the words as if they are access to some magic from God.



Yep, maybe you should listen to what we are saying as to not make replies that are utterly irrelevant to what we are saying?

Again, you are the one who teaches
"in the name of Jesus" is a magic phrase that saves people. Peter believed what Jesus taught: "He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him." John 3:36, and he would have throw you out of the Church for believing that specific words are necessary for salvation.

God Bless

If you were Peter in Acts 3-4, would you have spoken the name of Jesus Christ like he did to heal the man, or just thought it?
 

Anthony

Member
You talk Law like you keep it.

I guarantee you don't even keep the sabbath per the Law.

You have fragmented the Law to keep what you think you can keep.

Fact is, James said if you break a single Law, you are guilty of all.

That can't be a good feeling, my Law breaking friend.
I don't think you understand that James wrote his epistle to the 12 tribes scattered abroad (James 1:1). He didn't write it to so called Christians belonging to the religion of Christianity.

As usual, so called lawless Christians don't understand his epistle at all. You always quote these scriptures far away from their proper context.

Better understand this:

1:1 James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad, greeting.

James 2:17 Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.

The works of the Torah doesn't produce faith but if Jesus Christ is the Substance of faith then it will produce good works.

As usual, you will always misunderstand the contexts Paul and James wrote.

Abraham was saved in his uncircumcision in his flesh. But he received circumcision as the seal of his righteousness.

Rom 4:11 And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised: that he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcised; that righteousness might be imputed unto them also:

Paul is not writing against physical circumcision as unsaved Christians think. He isn't writing to heathens but fellow Jews who taught circumcision is necessary to be saved.

Christianity teaches exactly opposite of what scriptures teach and thus practice and teach lawlessness.
 
Top