Page 60 of 60 FirstFirst ... 1050585960
Results 591 to 596 of 596

Thread: Keeping His Commandments

  1. #591
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    2,024

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Off-Grid Organics View Post
    70 AD saw to that.
    True. I was hoping for some more on your thoughts about Ez 44 and the other scriptures you referenced, but you are probably busy. So, you think sacrifices will restart? For forgiveness of sin? The Hebrews passage about there being not being any more sacrifice for sin but a certain terrifying expectation of judgement, for some? comes to mind.

  2. #592
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    671

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dmatic View Post
    If the LORD chose to place His Name somewhere on earth and restarted the Levitical priesthood, would you comply?
    Even mainstream sources acknowledge this: https://www.gotquestions.org/millennial-sacrifices.html

    https://www.compellingtruth.org/mill...acrifices.html

    https://www.biblestudytools.com/comm...acrifices.html

    https://www.swrc.com/animal-sacrifices.html
    1Jn 2:6 The one who says he stays in Him ought himself also to walk, even as He walked.

  3. #593
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    2,853

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dmatic View Post
    OK, forty9er. So, in answer to my question if you believe the commandments should be taught, your answer is "No"?
    LOL When did you stop beating your wife?

  4. #594
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    671

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dmatic View Post
    For forgiveness of sin?
    No. My thoughts are that they will impact people on the horrors concerning the price of sin*; a debt only Messiah could pay in full...*something the so-called 'church age' seems to have forgotten. Won't they be surprised when they will have no 'choice' in regards to Sabbath, feast days, eating clean, etc?
    1Jn 2:6 The one who says he stays in Him ought himself also to walk, even as He walked.

  5. #595
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    2,024

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Off-Grid Organics View Post
    No. My thoughts are that they will impact people on the horrors concerning the price of sin*; a debt only Messiah could pay in full...*something the so-called 'church age' seems to have forgotten. Won't they be surprised when they will have no 'choice' in regards to Sabbath, feast days, eating clean, etc?
    Yes! I think very many will be surprised! Including me! Good readings. I think it must be stated that Ezekiel's passage, 40-48 was in a "vision". Interesting that there is so much literal detail! Whereas Peter's vision was to teach him an important aspect of God's plan, it wasn't as so many think! That they can now eat rats, mice and pigs!

    I do agree that it is possible that God could restart them, to show the gravity of sin. Thanks. I might be surprised, however!

  6. #596
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    2,024

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Davy Crockett View Post
    I was re-reading some of the recent posts and saw this:



    Could you explain this, please?
    Davy, you had posed this question to Off-Grid, I think, regarding Romans 7:4? I had typed a post in response but it got lost somehow, and couldn't retrieve it. Then I thought Off-Grid might be the one to answer, but, he's probably busy. It's a good question you raise.

    I have had questions about Romans 7 for a long time. Verse 1 starts with Paul speaking to "those who know the Law", and confessing that it, the law, has rule over a man as long as he lives. Then, in verse 9, I think, he suggests that he, himself, had been "alive once, without the law". Not sure how to rectify those seeming contradictions. When had he been alive without the law if the law has jurisdiction over a man as long as he lives? Anyway, then the law came and sin was discovered?

    So, back to the earlier portion, Paul says a woman is bound to her husband, by the law, as long as he lives, but if he dies, then, the law frees her from being bound to the dead husband and she is free to marry another. So, who dies? Not the law, but the husband. So, how does Paul want us identify in this analogy? He says, I think, that we have died to the law, verse 4. Like the dead husband? Or, like the wife, who has died to the law that had bound her to her living husband until he died? Certainly, in my view, it is not the Law that died? Correct? If you have any thoughts on this, I would love to read them. Thanks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •