Must we keep the 10 commandments to be saved

[DansingWall]

The bible appears to say yes. Whats your thoughts

[McCulloch]

the truth is we have more in common than we think. we all suffer, we are all sinners, we all of the same necessities... i want the best for you guys. i most certainly do not want to turn you away from Christ and the Bible...

i'm open to any suggestions...

except the suggestion that denies Jesus and the Bible of course...

Here's a really good suggestion:

Let the Bible explain itself.

Then the LORD spoke again to Ahaz, saying, "Ask a sign for yourself from the LORD your God; make it deep as Sheol or high as heaven."
But Ahaz said, "I will not ask, nor will I test the LORD!"
Then he said, "Listen now, O house of David! Is it too slight a thing for you to try the patience of men, that you will try the patience of my God as well? Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, a virgin will be with child and bear a son, and she will call His name Immanuel. He will eat curds and honey at the time He knows enough to refuse evil and choose good. For before the boy will know enough to refuse evil and choose good, the land whose two kings you dread will be forsaken.

To whom is the prophesy in Isaiah addressed? Ahaz.
What time frame did the LORD put on that prophesy? Before the boy mentioned in the prophesy is old enough to refuse evil and choose good, the land whose two kings Ahaz dreads will be forsaken. Who are the two kings? (Hint: read the context). This certainly not intended to have been fulfilled 700 years later in the Roman era.

Now muster yourselves in troops, daughter of troops;
They have laid siege against us;
With a rod they will smite the judge of Israel on the cheek.
But as for you, Bethlehem Ephrathah,
Too little to be among the clans of Judah,
From you One will go forth for Me to be ruler in Israel
His goings forth are from long ago,
From the days of eternity."
Therefore He will give them up until the time
When she who is in labor has borne a child
Then the remainder of His brethren
Will return to the sons of Israel.
And He will arise and shepherd His flock
In the strength of the LORD,
In the majesty of the name of the LORD His God
And they will remain,
Because at that time He will be great
To the ends of the earth.
This One will be our peace
When the Assyrian invades our land,
When he tramples on our citadels,
Then we will raise against him
Seven shepherds and eight leaders of men.
They will shepherd the land of Assyria with the sword,
The land of Nimrod at its entrances;
And He will deliver us from the Assyrian
When he attacks our land
And when he tramples our territory.
Then the remnant of Jacob
Will be among many peoples
Like dew from the LORD,
Like showers on vegetation
Which do not wait for man
Or delay for the sons of men.
The remnant of Jacob
Will be among the nations,
Among many peoples
Like a lion among the beasts of the forest,
Like a young lion among flocks of sheep,
Which, if he passes through,
Tramples down and tears,
And there is none to rescue.
Your hand will be lifted up against your adversaries,
And all your enemies will be cut off.
"It will be in that day," declares the LORD,
"That I will cut off your horses from among you
And destroy your chariots.
I will also cut off the cities of your land
And tear down all your fortifications.
"I will cut off sorceries from your hand,
And you will have fortune-tellers no more.
"I will cut off your carved images
And your sacred pillars from among you,
So that you will no longer bow down
To the work of your hands.
"I will root out your Asherim from among you
And destroy your cities.
"And I will execute vengeance in anger and wrath
On the nations which have not obeyed."

Does this prophesy really sound like it was fulfilled in the person of Jesus of Nazareth? Who did he save from the Assyrians?

But, that aside, it would be a very surprising thing if the Christ of the Gospels was not born in Bethlehem. After all, his biographers were steeped from their childhood in the Jewish messianic mythology. They would have known where the Messiah should be born. So, they were writing decades after the event with the express purpose of convincing their readers that this Jesus was the promised Messiah. Of course they would have Jesus being born in Bethlehem. If Jesus was really born in Allentown or Phillipsberg, they would have written that he was born in Bethlehem!

[McCulloch]

by the way, no one responded to my post on Revelation 17...

So here's some interesting verses about the great whore that sits on seven hills.

Revelation 17:3-9

3 Then the angel carried me away in the Spirit into a desert. There I saw a woman sitting on a scarlet beast that was covered with blasphemous names and had seven heads and ten horns.

4 The woman was dressed in purple and scarlet, and was glittering with gold, precious stones and pearls. She held a golden cup in her hand, filled with abominable things and the filth of her adulteries.

5 This title was written on her forehead:
MYSTERY
BABYLON THE GREAT
THE MOTHER OF PROSTITUTES
AND OF THE ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH.

6 I saw that the woman was drunk with the blood of the saints, the blood of those who bore testimony to Jesus.

When I saw her, I was greatly astonished.

7 Then the angel said to me: "Why are you astonished? I will explain to you the mystery of the woman and of the beast she rides, which has the seven heads and ten horns.

8 The beast, which you saw, once was, now is not, and will come up out of the Abyss and go to his destruction. The inhabitants of the earth whose names have not been written in the book of life from the creation of the world will be astonished when they see the beast, because he once was, now is not, and yet will come.

9 "This calls for a mind with wisdom. The seven heads are seven hills on which the woman sits.

Now these verses are pretty deep and intense but what church has shown itself (in history) to be drunken with the blood of the saints and martyrs? And what church seems like it might gain power again?

Is it not the Papacy? Is it not the Roman Catholic Church that dresses in purple and scarlet "glittering with gold and precious stones" in all her pomp and pride?

Also John says that the leaders of this church will attempt to change "times and laws" and they have... They've "changed" at least 3 Commandments that I know of... and they even lead the ones who have protested against them to follow in their un-Biblical traditions... (example: Sunday keeping)

Christians have been struggling with the interpretation of this passage for literally hundreds of years.
Some options that have been presented by believers:

• the goddess Roma sitting on the seven hills of Rome which personified Rome (the Roman Empire) to those living in these parts.
• Pagan Rome
• Rome and the Papacy
• Jerusalem,
• the late Germanic league
• Islam

[josefcorrealima]

the truth is we have more in common than we think. we all suffer, we are all sinners, we all of the same necessities... i want the best for you guys. i most certainly do not want to turn you away from Christ and the Bible...

i'm open to any suggestions...

except the suggestion that denies Jesus and the Bible of course...

Here's a really good suggestion:

Let the Bible explain itself.

Then the LORD spoke again to Ahaz, saying, "Ask a sign for yourself from the LORD your God; make it deep as Sheol or high as heaven."
But Ahaz said, "I will not ask, nor will I test the LORD!"
Then he said, "Listen now, O house of David! Is it too slight a thing for you to try the patience of men, that you will try the patience of my God as well? Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, a virgin will be with child and bear a son, and she will call His name Immanuel. He will eat curds and honey at the time He knows enough to refuse evil and choose good. For before the boy will know enough to refuse evil and choose good, the land whose two kings you dread will be forsaken.

To whom is the prophesy in Isaiah addressed? Ahaz.
What time frame did the LORD put on that prophesy? Before the boy mentioned in the prophesy is old enough to refuse evil and choose good, the land whose two kings Ahaz dreads will be forsaken. Who are the two kings? (Hint: read the context). This certainly not intended to have been fulfilled 700 years later in the Roman era.

Now muster yourselves in troops, daughter of troops;
They have laid siege against us;
With a rod they will smite the judge of Israel on the cheek.
But as for you, Bethlehem Ephrathah,
Too little to be among the clans of Judah,
From you One will go forth for Me to be ruler in Israel
His goings forth are from long ago,
From the days of eternity."
Therefore He will give them up until the time
When she who is in labor has borne a child
Then the remainder of His brethren
Will return to the sons of Israel.
And He will arise and shepherd His flock
In the strength of the LORD,
In the majesty of the name of the LORD His God
And they will remain,
Because at that time He will be great
To the ends of the earth.
This One will be our peace
When the Assyrian invades our land,
When he tramples on our citadels,
Then we will raise against him
Seven shepherds and eight leaders of men.
They will shepherd the land of Assyria with the sword,
The land of Nimrod at its entrances;
And He will deliver us from the Assyrian
When he attacks our land
And when he tramples our territory.
Then the remnant of Jacob
Will be among many peoples
Like dew from the LORD,
Like showers on vegetation
Which do not wait for man
Or delay for the sons of men.
The remnant of Jacob
Will be among the nations,
Among many peoples
Like a lion among the beasts of the forest,
Like a young lion among flocks of sheep,
Which, if he passes through,
Tramples down and tears,
And there is none to rescue.
Your hand will be lifted up against your adversaries,
And all your enemies will be cut off.
"It will be in that day," declares the LORD,
"That I will cut off your horses from among you
And destroy your chariots.
I will also cut off the cities of your land
And tear down all your fortifications.
"I will cut off sorceries from your hand,
And you will have fortune-tellers no more.
"I will cut off your carved images
And your sacred pillars from among you,
So that you will no longer bow down
To the work of your hands.
"I will root out your Asherim from among you
And destroy your cities.
"And I will execute vengeance in anger and wrath
On the nations which have not obeyed."

Does this prophesy really sound like it was fulfilled in the person of Jesus of Nazareth? Who did he save from the Assyrians?

But, that aside, it would be a very surprising thing if the Christ of the Gospels was not born in Bethlehem. After all, his biographers were steeped from their childhood in the Jewish messianic mythology. They would have known where the Messiah should be born. So, they were writing decades after the event with the express purpose of convincing their readers that this Jesus was the promised Messiah. Of course they would have Jesus being born in Bethlehem. If Jesus was really born in Allentown or Phillipsberg, they would have written that he was born in Bethlehem!

Yes, the prophecy is about Jesus.

How do you explain this:

From you One will go forth for Me to be ruler in Israel
His goings forth are from long ago,
From the days of eternity." ???

[Goat]

Daniel predicted the four great kingdoms

Daniel 2:32-33:

The biggest thing to remember about Daniel is most scholars date it between 161 and 165 bce. Writing about a 'future' even after it happens isn't a prophecy.

[Cathar1950]

Most of your so-called prophesies are not prophesies.
They are the creative invention of the unknown writers.

Micah 5:1-2:

1 Marshal your troops, O city of troops, for a siege is laid against us. They will strike Israel's ruler on the cheek with a rod.

2 "But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though you are small among the clans of Judah, out of you will come for me one who will be ruler over Israel, whose origins are from of old, from ancient times."

(written between 750-686 BC)

Here Bethlehem, as Goat points out, is about the family of David not the city of any Messiah’s birth. Given the Micah was looking forward to someone taking the throne of David (a messiah or anointed king) and the ideology that he must be descendent of David it is redundant to say it is a prophesy that he would be from the tribe of Judah.

The Messiah would come from the tribe of Judah

Genesis 49:10:

The scepter will not depart from Judah, nor the ruler's staff from between his feet, until he comes to whom it belongs and the obedience of the nations is his.

(written as early as 1400 BC)

There is no reason to think this was written as early as 1400 BCE.
Most scholars understand the writings were after the time of David (1000 BCE)
The E portions were written in the North and the J portions were written in the South.
All were written after David about a son of David. If he was a descendent of David then he would be from the tribe of Judah.
If a descendent of David takes the throne then he would be from the tribe of Judah.
That doesn’t sound like much of a prophesy and it seems more like propaganda from the Southern tribe.

John the baptist would prepare the way for Jesus

Isaiah 40:1-3:

1 Comfort, comfort my people, says your God.

2 Speak tenderly to Jerusalem, and proclaim to her that her hard service has been completed, that her sin has been paid for, that she has received from the LORD's hand double for all her sins.

3 A voice of one calling: In the desert prepare the way for the LORD; make straight in the wilderness a highway for our God.

(written between 701-681 BC)

Here is not a voice calling in the wilderness but a voice calling to prepare a place in the desert. The Essenes felt they were doing that literally.

The Messiah would be betrayed for 30 pieces of silver

Zechariah 11:12-13:

12 I told them, "If you think it best, give me my pay; but if not, keep it." So they paid me thirty pieces of silver.

13 And the LORD said to me, "Throw it to the potter"-the handsome price at which they priced me! So I took the thirty pieces of silver and threw them into the house of the LORD to the potter.


(written between 520 and 518 BC)

If you read the passage in the Hebrew writings you will se the prophet is talking about himself no Judas.

Not enough proof of prophecy fulfilled? I'll be back with more...

I think we should look at them all.
It seems the unknown authors of the Gospels took passages from the LXX and created the Jesus stories around the so-called prophesies. A closer look will show us how poor they were given the context and content.

[AB]

The biggest thing to remember about Daniel is most scholars date it between 161 and 165 bce. Writing about a 'future' even after it happens isn't a prophecy.

Most? I know many Biblical scholars put it at this date. But there are also many who have the writing around the 530 bc date. Needless to say, there is too much evidence and problems with the 165 bc dating to discard the 530 bc date. And even if the majority is in favor of the 165 bc date. Plus, Daniels seventy-sevens prophesy includes Christ's death on the cross. That didn't happen before 165 bc.

[Goat]

The biggest thing to remember about Daniel is most scholars date it between 161 and 165 bce. Writing about a 'future' even after it happens isn't a prophecy.

Most? I know many Biblical scholars put it at this date. But there are also many who have the writing around the 530 bc date. Needless to say, there is too much evidence and problems with the 165 bc dating to discard the 530 bc date. And even if the majority is in favor of the 165 bc date. Plus, Daniels seventy-sevens prophesy includes Christ's death on the cross. That didn't happen before 165 bc.

From what I have been reading, most do. Yes, there are many who put it at the 530 mark, but they have to ignore whole bunches of evidence to make it fit . And, if you look at the ones that are at colleges, every solitary college of those people have this statement of faith saying the bible is inerrent....

there are many different variations about what the 70 weeks * seven means. Most christian end with that, but the way they get there is different. It is trying to retrofit stuff to make it fit, but so many don't agree on HOW to get it to fit.

when there is a dozen different explanations, and some don't even mention Jesus and 70 ad, the chances are they ALL are wrong.

[Cathar1950]

The biggest thing to remember about Daniel is most scholars date it between 161 and 165 bce. Writing about a 'future' even after it happens isn't a prophecy.

Most? I know many Biblical scholars put it at this date. But there are also many who have the writing around the 530 bc date. Needless to say, there is too much evidence and problems with the 165 bc dating to discard the 530 bc date. And even if the majority is in favor of the 165 bc date. Plus, Daniels seventy-sevens prophesy includes Christ's death on the cross. That didn't happen before 165 bc.

There is also too much evidence and problems with the 530 BCE date. There is no metion of Christ's death or a cross. An anounted one (Onias III) gets cut off and it happens after a period of time.
Given he gets the facts wrong about the empires and Darius the Mede didn't take the kingdom, it was Cyrus the Great (the Lord's Anointed), followed by Darius the Persian.
The unknown author of Daniel was reintepreting Jeremiah. It is 49 years , 434 years and 7 years taking us to 171 and 164 BCE.

[AB]

The biggest thing to remember about Daniel is most scholars date it between 161 and 165 bce. Writing about a 'future' even after it happens isn't a prophecy.

Most? I know many Biblical scholars put it at this date. But there are also many who have the writing around the 530 bc date. Needless to say, there is too much evidence and problems with the 165 bc dating to discard the 530 bc date. And even if the majority is in favor of the 165 bc date. Plus, Daniels seventy-sevens prophesy includes Christ's death on the cross. That didn't happen before 165 bc.

There is also too much evidence and problems with the 530 BCE date. There is no metion of Christ's death or a cross. An anounted one (Onias III) gets cut off and it happens after a period of time.
Given he gets the facts wrong about the empires and Darius the Mede didn't take the kingdom, it was Cyrus the Great (the Lord's Anointed), followed by Darius the Persian.
The unknown author of Daniel was reintepreting Jeremiah. It is 49 years , 434 years and 7 years taking us to 171 and 164 BCE.

The math works to perfect from the decree to Nehemiah to 31 AD and the cross. Also, there are too many problems with the 165 bc dating to consider it reality. Sorry, your explanation falls short and is a stretch at best.

[Goat]

The biggest thing to remember about Daniel is most scholars date it between 161 and 165 bce. Writing about a 'future' even after it happens isn't a prophecy.

Most? I know many Biblical scholars put it at this date. But there are also many who have the writing around the 530 bc date. Needless to say, there is too much evidence and problems with the 165 bc dating to discard the 530 bc date. And even if the majority is in favor of the 165 bc date. Plus, Daniels seventy-sevens prophesy includes Christ's death on the cross. That didn't happen before 165 bc.

There is also too much evidence and problems with the 530 BCE date. There is no metion of Christ's death or a cross. An anounted one (Onias III) gets cut off and it happens after a period of time.
Given he gets the facts wrong about the empires and Darius the Mede didn't take the kingdom, it was Cyrus the Great (the Lord's Anointed), followed by Darius the Persian.
The unknown author of Daniel was reintepreting Jeremiah. It is 49 years , 434 years and 7 years taking us to 171 and 164 BCE.

The math works to perfect from the decree to Nehemiah to 31 AD and the cross. Also, there are too many problems with the 165 bc dating to consider it reality. Sorry, your explanation falls short and is a stretch at best.

The math works out perfectly for 164 bc too.. just worrying about Jeremaih instead. And .. well you have to fudge the Nhemiah.

Also, according to Josphus, John the Baptist was executed in 36 c.e. and according to the NT, Jesus's ministry started a year after that, which would have put his cruxifiction in 37 c.e, not 31. Typical biblical scholars put the cruxifiction at 33 c.e.

So, I guess the math doesn't work out for you at all