What you believe is not what matters, you are being questioned WHY you believe what you believe and you have refused to address it each time by answering something you weren't asked and not answering the questions.
Again, I believe what I believe because: """To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, [it is] because [there is] no light in them."""
Isa.8:20 is very clear and excludes all opinions which are contradictory to that which comes from GOD either on those stone tablets or through HIS prophets.(including Moses writings).
You may caLL THE SCRIPTURES AS ANSWERS being "non-Sequitur" if you want, but the Scriptures are the only valid answers.
There is no separation. I've heard this desparate argument before by those who try to reconcile the concept of the Law to their beliefs. There is no proof whatsoever that when it refers to "The Law" it's referring to anything less than the entirety of the commandments. There is only one covenant, it's not divided into parts.
Are you saying that the laws Of Moses(given by GOD) which have to do with sanitation can be used to condemn a person for idol worshiping(a law written on those stone tablets)??
Heb.9:1 has this information. "Then verily the first [covenant]
had also ordinances of divine service, and a worldly sanctuary."
Where does it say the House was left Desolate exactly?
Matt.23:37-38, "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, [thou] that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under [her] wings, and ye would not! Behold, your house is left unto you desolate. "
The entire Church was comprised of Messianic Jews until Paul stepped in. Cornelius was the first gentile convert. You are now making up your own Theology by trying to say the Law is outright eliminated or something because most Jews didn't accept Jesus? The subject was about the Jerusalem Church under James' leadership and its difference with Paul. Your argument is that the Jerusalem Church's authority was never binding because not enough Jews converted?
Paul was converted and then Cornelius. The instructions Jesus gave before HIS ascending was to the Jews First and then the Gentiles.
Jesus saw that Paul was honest in his belief in GOD, but had been deceived---NOT in the doctrines given from Sinai, but in the Messiah and HIS followers.
Paul didn't just "step-in" Paul was choosen by Jesus and was brought to his knees and blinded----so that he could see the truth of the correct light of knowledge.
ALL that Paul taught was revealed by Jesus.(Gal.1:11-12)
False! The only part of the law which was
fulfilled was the Sacrificial/ceremonial laws dealing with the Sanctuary/priestly duties.
The reason sought to be heard by the Jerusalem council was some believing Pharisees insisted that new Gentile converts be circumcised and keep those Sacrificial laws of Moses which had been prophesied and fulfilled by Jesus Christ upon the Cross. The Council stated they had NOT sent those men with such a message and upheld Paul in his teachings.Acts15:1-29
Which has nothing to do with anything in terms of doctrinal requirements. That has nothing to do with why the Church of Jerusalem differed from Paul. Is your argument that James never had Apostolic authority to begin with?
The Jerusalem Council didn't differ with Paul and the council was affirming the authority of the teaching which Jesus taught and lived in accordance to the Law and the Prophets.
No, the ENTIRE church was Israelite, Cornelius was the first convert. Only later did Gentiles convert. I understand this may put a wrench in your logic, but it's the facts.
Shermana, That "church in the wilderness" was a mixture of abraham's seed and "A Mixed Multitude" and on entering the Promised land, a pick up of Rahab and her kin who believed her report were added---also, Ruth---and any of the nations surrounding the Israelites who choose to have GOD as their GOD.
At Pentacost, Acts 2. reveals that proselytes were in that number who attended.
Therefore, unless you are using "Israelite" to mean "prevailer/overcomer" and not strickly Jewish, Gentiles were in the Church at Jerusalem.
Yes, While Paul taught the Jews first, there were many Gentiles happy that the Gospel was for them as well.
The Jews who heard the messages taught were just as free to decide then as today what they wanted to believe as from GOD. From the very beginning of leading HIS Chosen people, it was known that GOD isn't a respecter of persons.
Accurately discerned as false?... I showed that your counter statements were wrong, and then you just repeat that you're right instead of addressing my arguments.
Your sites didn't convince me that you were correct in your arguments.
Shermana, I don't recall ever using the words, "I'm right and you are wrong" or a variant. Just because you believe something/anything doesn't mean I have to agree with you because that is your belief and that goes for posted sites as well.
Now would you like to try actually debating? If you continue....without actually countering, I'll simply ignore you.
Suit yourself! My answers will still be from the Scriptures rather than believing some biased against the truths of the Scriptures sites.