God's will was that of prophacy through others and that of the Old Covenant and the New.

Since the Old Covenant has been fulfilled it seems all of it's prophacy and Law has been as well.

That leaves only the New Covenant to indicate what God's will is - but few seem able to agree on exactly when the New Covenant went into effect and most important WHAT IS the New covenant and how does it determine what God's will is?

I love others as I love myself. Just as Jesus had suggested people should. I'm in agreement with him on this point. This is the wisdom of the Eastern Mystics as well.

I'd just like to comment on this because I've been down this road many times. The idea that Jesus brought a New Covenant is an extremely vague interpretation at best, IMHO. That really doesn't work very well for those who wish to cling to things like the idea of God hating homosexuality (Which comes entirely from the Old Testament).

There are several reasons why I reject the "New Covenant Theories"

Jesus said that he did not come to change the laws, but if that was indeed his main purpose then why lie about it? Why not be straight-forward and clear that this was indeed his mission?

Secondly, to maintain a theory of a "New Covenant" you'd need to toss out just about everything that was written by Paul. Because Paul's writings were constantly dredging up things from the Old Testament (i.e. the Old Covenant) and trying to support them in Jesus' name.

Paul's writings represent about 75% of the entire New Testament. Take that away, and you're down to basically Mark, Matthew, Luke and John.

If a religion could be built from those four books alone without any reference to the Old Testament, or to the writings of Paul, I might be tempted to support the religion myself. But clearly that's not going to happen.

So any talk of a "New Covenant" whilst the "Old Covenant" is still being used to support bigotry in the name of Jesus does not sit well with me. It just seems like Hypocrisy with a capital "H" to me.

It's a "Have your cake and eat it too" religion when it claims that Jesus represents a "New Covenant" yet it continues to use the "Old Covenant" to support judgmental bigotry against people as being 'sinners' based on laws from the Old Covenant.

So as far as I'm concerned, if anyone wants to speak to me about Jesus having brought a "New Covenant" they better have in their hand, the books of Mark, Matthew, Luke and John, ONLY.

Bring the Old Testament, or the writings of Paul along, and I'll reject the whole theory as being a contradiction in terms.

That's my stance on that.

Please note that I'm just offering why I wouldn't buy a particular theory. If someone else wants to buy it, that's up to them.

I don't believe in a God who communicates through hearsay rumors anyway. So I wouldn't be very impressed even if the theory was offered properly. I'd still be more inclined to continue to go with my own theory that Jesus was simply a misunderstood Buddhist.

Because after all, even if the Old Testament can be tossed aside as being 'fulfilled' and no longer applicable, it would STILL represent how God had interacted with mankind in the past. And I dismiss the Old Testament entirely as being ungodly.

So in other words, to accept it as a 'fulfilled covenant' doesn't change the fact that it was STILL a covenant that God supposedly had with men. I have difficultly in believing that an all-wise God would have ever had such a covenant with mankind at any point in history.

Lev. 20:13:

"If a man also lie with mankind, as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them."
==========================================



He changed nothing, he fullfilled the old and gave us the new. If you are writing a paragraph on a piece of paper, you can either erase and change things eg., changing the covenant. Or you could through the piece of paper out and get a new one to write the new paragraph on eg., the new covenant.



Just because they may contain some of the same laws does not mean they are using the laws from one another. As in just because the old covenant said not to do something and so does the new does not mean the new got that instruction from the old. Just merely has the law as well and holds power for it is also in the new.
========================



No it does not. The new covenant in particular tells us not to judge one another. And no one can profess you as a sinner in a negative way for we ALL sin everyday, we ALL fall short of the glory of God.
===========================



And that is purely opinionated. Opinions hold no factual power. And you have not shown how it is not intelligent in any way. Just again merely opinionated statements, nothing substantial.

Cowboy wrote:


Previously you said [Our obedience is to the law, therefore he listened to his conscience to obey the law.

When you realized you had misread you corrected your statement to include:



The man had not originally sinned according to the law you speak of, and was conflicted by what others told him the bible meant, he had prayed about the issue. In other words, as a believer and as sinless as anyone else, the spirit inside called him to pursue the path he took.

You say it could not have been God because God can only enforce the law as it is written in the Bible.

That means that God cannot work through a non-believer or anyone who does not obey the letter of the law in the bible. For if a person sins, his works - no matter how beneficial to others those works may be - are not of God and cannot be good.

It sounds like God is trapped in a box called the bible!

Do you REALLY believe that God is restricted as to how or to whom he can instruct or influence?

Do you REALLY believe that God cannot do good works through a sinner, or a non-believer regardless of their adherence to the letter of the law?

That is from the Old Testament.



I'm sorry but your putting this in terms of physical writing paper.

If they laws are changed they're changed. It doesn't matter how you go about changing them.




Jesus never spoke of homosexuality. Therefore that could not be considered to be part of his "New Covenant".



No no.

If you are claiming that ALL are sinners, they you are judging everyone.

You're not supposed to judge, remember?

Besides, Jesus was supposed to have said that he did not come for the Righteous, but only for the sick. Therefore, there is no reason for us to believe that ALL are sinners.




Yes, it's my opinion. That's correct.

And this one reason why I reject Bible as the word of God. I have many other reasons as well, but I'm sure you've already heard most of them and you have simply disagreed with those as well.

So we disagree.

As always.

What's the problem?

Who is it that's out to PROVE something?

I'm saying that I don't believe the Bible represents the word of God.

If you'd like to believe that it does then so be it. That's your freedom to believe whatever you like.

But if you want to demand that I must also accept it as the word of God, then any PROOF that it is the word of God is on YOU, not me.

I don't care whether you believe in the Bible or not.

You're the one who seems to be obsessed with convincing me that it's the word of God.

I'm quite happy believing that it isn't.

When you realized you had misread you corrected your statement to include:



The man had not originally sinned according to the law you speak of, and was conflicted by what others told him the bible meant, he had prayed about the issue. In other words, as a believer and as sinless as anyone else, the spirit inside called him to pursue the path he took.

You say it could not have been God because God can only enforce the law as it is written in the Bible.

That means that God cannot work through a non-believer or anyone who does not obey the letter of the law in the bible. For if a person sins, his works - no matter how beneficial to others those works may be - are not of God and cannot be good.

It sounds like God is trapped in a box called the bible!

Do you REALLY believe that God is restricted as to how or to whom he can instruct or influence?

Do you REALLY believe that God cannot do good works through a sinner, or a non-believer regardless of their adherence to the letter of the law?



No just merely stating God would not have put on his conscience to do anything with a homosexual activity for God has told us not to embark in such activities. And yes that is included in the new covenant about homosexuality being immoral and sinful.

Ok, my error. Here's one from the new testament

=====================================
Romans 1:26-27

26For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:

27And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.
========================================

Paul wrote Romans and I reject the writings of Paul because much of his writings are nothing more than dredging up stuff from the Old Testament and spewing it in the name of Jesus.

In fact, I have a HUGE problem with the whole Paul thing as well.

You expect me to believe that Jesus had such an important message from God. An entire NEW COVENANT with God to mankind instead of writing it down himself he leaves it to extremely questionable hearsay rumors written by mortal men (whom you claim are ALL sinners)

I'm supposed to believe that is a WISE means of communication for an all-wise creator?

Sorry, but surely even you can see that to write down his own message would be WISER. Thus leaving it to hearsay rumors is LESS WISE, so you're expecting me to believe that a ALL-WISE God does less than ALL-WISE things?

Why? Is he lazy or something?

Also, Jesus then needs to come back as a ghost and haunt Paul into finishing his "New Covenant" because he never even completed it himself when he was here?

Sorry, but no sale.

Sounds like an extremely poorly written mythology based on rumors and the hearsay delusions of mortal men to me.

That's just my honest assessment.

I'm trying to be HONEST here.

Surely you'll agree that if there is a God, God would want me to be HONEST above all else.

And I honestly see the biblical cannon as being utterly absurd.

That's my sincere honest perception of it.

I also honestly believe that my theory that the Old Testament is total mythology, Jesus was a misunderstood Jewish Buddhist, and that the New Testament is either delusional rumors or outright devious fraud, makes far more sense.

That's as sincere as it gets.

For me to pretend to believe otherwise would be insincere.

Surely you're not suggesting that God would expect me to be insincere?

No we don't have more evidence for other history or even the landing on the moon. I've got a rock I got from my trip to mars last weekend if you wish to see it. NO evidence is accountable less one is will to accept it as true.



ALL scientific evidence is hearsay. Everything about Science is hearsay with your way of thinking. It's all given to us by word of mouth of someone else's discovery.

Well then why don't you reject all history? You have no absolute way to know any of it is what it is. You have no way of knowing for sure that any of it is factual. ALL history is hearsay rumours with your way of thinking my friend.

Cowboy wrote:


According to the quote above – there is no reason to have a written law for the law is written inside of every person.

I’m not saying that makes the bible a useless tool, it is still a historical document and many of the parables are open ended enough to be useful guides for moral conduct, even in today’s society.

But the New Covenant is a ‘spiritual law’ that can only be found in the heart. Not even the priesthood is necessary (Heb 7:11-12)



Notice in Galations – Paul explains the difference between the old law and the new covenant.

The Old covenant included the 10 commandments and as Paul says “a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump” – meaning, that following the least of the law, like circumcision (v5) makes a man a debtor to do the whole law all the law of the old covenant, but Paul explains that doing so is to fall from grace because adhering to the old law means salvation through Jesus is ineffectual and the man has profited nothing through Christ’s sacrifice.



So far in these posts there is a lot of information about fulfilling the Old Covenant – and we know the New Covenant is supposed to be a spiritual law that works from within and not according to the letter of the law.

But where in – exactly – is the New Covenant given and to whom? And what does it say?





For your entertainment - A couple other examples that indicate the Old Covenant, in total – yes with 10 commandments is fulfilled and down away with.

Yes! Even the bible says that things which are made from man are corrupt..so how can I trust a book written by several men whom I know nothing about? I'd rather not. You could say it is all about faith..but tell me, is it more faithful to follow this man made book? Or to see the truth (nature) that surrounds you and find your own love for God?

When you realized you had misread you corrected your statement to include:



The man had not originally sinned according to the law you speak of, and was conflicted by what others told him the bible meant, he had prayed about the issue. In other words, as a believer and as sinless as anyone else, the spirit inside called him to pursue the path he took.

You say it could not have been God because God can only enforce the law as it is written in the Bible.

That means that God cannot work through a non-believer or anyone who does not obey the letter of the law in the bible. For if a person sins, his works - no matter how beneficial to others those works may be - are not of God and cannot be good.

It sounds like God is trapped in a box called the bible!

Do you REALLY believe that God is restricted as to how or to whom he can instruct or influence?

Do you REALLY believe that God cannot do good works through a sinner, or a non-believer regardless of their adherence to the letter of the law?




I am going to comment on several of your previous post and give you some answers here.


In the Old Testament times God used to speak to people on what seemed like a daily basis.When I say God is speaking to them I am saying people actually heard God talking to them just like he was standing in front of them.God talked to Moses frequently especially when it came time for Moses to free the Jews from Egypt.There is many more times and many more people that God spoke to.In Judges in speaks of the victory of 300 Jews against 135,000 Midianites in a battle.God warning one family to flee Sodom and Gomorrah before it's destruction and many more.

I do not believe God spoke to people anymore after the death of Jesus with the exception of the Angels telling Mary that Jesus was not there at the tomb.God would not interfere with anyones life anymore regarding any issues good or bad.



Not much was written in the first 30 years of Jesus but we do know he observed and practiced Jewish laws set forth by God.He dressed as a Jew,observed the Sabbath,did not eat unclean animals,and frequently read the Torah in the synagogues.In Luke 4:16 it speaks of how Jesus read aloud the scroll of Isaiah in a synagogue.He then spoke to the masses about what those bible verses meant.

In the last 3 years of Jesus all he did was travel from place to place talking to them about what the bible meant and what is expected to of them from God and performing miracles.He had a huge following.So many people followed him his disciples said they couldn't even count that high.Jesus often had to leave in the middle of the night so he didn't have these huge masses of people following him.


You keep mentioning is it wrong for a unbeliever to be doing Gods word or a evil person doing Gods word.I don't know of any unbelievers or evil people out there preaching Gods word or doing Gods work.I really don't see how they would tell people they have to believe in Jesus when they don't believe themselves.It would seem very strange to hear a evil person or unbeliever doing that kind of work.If they were doing it they might as well believe it so they were saved.

You mention the idea of is it wrong for a homosexual to be doing the works of God and is this person good or bad for doing so?I think it's a dangerous game of cat and mouse and nearly always you are going to be exposed for what you really are.Many people including many famous pastors have had their lives destroyed because they were such hypocrites doing the very things they spoke of not doing.The bible says your sins will always find you out.

Ecclesiastes 12:14 For God will bring every act to judgment, everything which is hidden, whether it is good or evil.

Luke 8:17 “For nothing is hidden that will not become evident, nor anything secret that will not be known and come to light.


Jesus had it exactly right when he said "Pray for you enemies".It is much better for a evil and wicked person to be a born again Christian and give testimony to people because it holds so much more substance than a Christian who was just born into a Christian family.The key to Christianity is not wishing all your enemies drop dead.The key is for them to convert,have a change of heart,and have them on your side.What a powerful and great ally it would be if people like the prime minister of China became a reborn Christian.Or many of those famous movie stars and musicians.

It's the same with the homosexuals out there.Christian churches want the homosexuals to come there to repent,change their lifestyle,and be born again.A church has a lot of firepower when you have ex homosexuals,ex Atheist,ex Muslims,ex drunks and murders,and all the others all saying that Jesus is the reason they had a change of heart.No other religion comes close to having the diverse followers as Christianity has as it will take anyone.


For your final question...Do I believe that Jesus can do works through non believers?The answer in no I don't.God gave everyone free will to live their life anyway they want to.That includes God not making them do anything for any reason.God can't take a non believer and do works because...

1.)He doesn't know them.
2.)It would be taking away their free will which God has promised.

Can a non believer seek the bible and Jesus and do great things?Of course.Believe it or not there is thousands of people who go to church ever Sunday and have for 20 years and still have not accepted Jesus.They actually follow the bible and do what the bible says but for some reason will not accept Jesus.

This topic reminds of a friend I used to have who was not a Atheist but acted just like a Christian.After many years and many talks about Christianity I said "Your living a life better than most Christians out there.Your life will be the same in nearly all aspects except you will be promised heaven and eternal life".She thought that was a very good logic and decided being a Christian would only improve her life which it did.


But the most important thing to remember is that if you do not accept Jesus it won't matter what you did in this life for God or Jesus.You will still go to Hell and you will still burn.It don't matter if you saved the entire nation of China.Your name is not written in the book of life and you did not accept the most important and crucial thing God asks of you.

Cowboy continues a reply to the end quote (above) of a previous post


You are assuming that the birth of Jesus fulfilled all of the Old covenant, but that is not the case. In fact the Old Covenant could not be fulfilled and the New covenant replacing it until Jesus had been sacrificed and risen.

This means that Jesus was born a Jew beholding to ALL the Law of the Old covenant, and he taught ALL the Law of the Old covenant, for it remained in tact until fulfillment of that law was complete.

Therefore, what you claim to be a part of the New covenant is only the old one being taught and adhered to.

It was necessary for Jesus to adhere to the OLD LAW in order to be a model of behavior for the New covenant that was to be written in the heart of man and not in a book.

It was necessary that people understood WHAT the old law was, what it meant, and WHY IT was insufficient for salvation.

Without that understanding the greatness of his sacrifice could not be recognized for what it was meant to accomplish.

Where in the bible is the New covenant revealed and to whom – do you know?

You are continually searching
coming up with every god imaginable
beside the True and Living One.

You are free to believe what you will.

What book holds more truth.A book written by someone who said this is true because I wrote it and said so.Or several people writing a book about this person who said it was true because they saw it?It would be like going to court and saying I am not guilty because I say so.You have witness who saw and heard these things and that makes it more factual then someone just saying it's true because I say it is.

If God wrote the bible and just gave it to man people would say anyone could have written it and claimed God gave it to them.But the fact you have all these people who wrote the bible at different times in history living in different places in the world who all seem to say the same story is not only incredible it's almost a miracle.It only gives the bible much more credibility since the bible wasn't written in one room with all the disciples present immediately after Jesus's death.

lol...you trust the Bible just enough to cling to that quote.

And just how is this love of yours exhibited?

The New covenant is revealed to everyone who reads about the death of Jesus and believes his is the son of God and accepts him as their Saviour.Because with out the belief in Jesus you are either a Jew still practicing the Old covenant,or a non believer who is not forgiven of his or her sins and who is not know by God.

Many people ask "God had his temple in Jerusalem but where is Jesus's temple"?The answer is Jesus's temple is in his believers.We are his temple.

The New covenant is a gift from God to make our lives easier,with more freedom,and to fulfill Old testament prophecy.God wanted to put a end to death by sin which he was never happy about.He didn't want death by law.He wanted repentance and forgiveness.

You should also remember that despite the punishment for death for many of those Old testament laws Jews frequently broke them and did not suffer any punishment simply because many of the high priests who could give you the death sentence did not live in those towns or have a church there.You could also repentant of your sins to God and the people and promise to redeem yourself which has always been Gods preferred way.This would almost always spare your life from any death sentence regardless of what you were accused of.