Who did away with the law?

[JohnRabbit]

In an illustration, it is best to go by the surrounding context, and the conclusion, to get the full meaning of the passage. Written code was de law.

4 Likewise, my brothers, you also have died to the law through the body of Christ, so that you may belong to another, to him who has been raised from the dead, in order that we may bear fruit for God. 5 For while we were living in the flesh, our sinful passions, aroused by the law, were at work in our members to bear fruit for death. 6 But now we are released from the law, having died to that which held us captive, so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit and not in the old way of the written code.


Also, we have it here, to get more perspective.

Gal 2:19 For through the law I died to the law, so that I might live to God.

Also, while we are at it, Sabbath laws abolished. Remember gal 4:10.

Eph 2:15 by abolishing the law of commandments expressed in ordinances, that he might create in himself one new man in place of the two, so making peace,

i'm trying to stay out of your circle!

 

[Frogster]

i'm trying to stay out of your circle!

I prefer to call it a pond.

Well..we do have one thing in common. We both have strong rear legs.

Your always welcome to hop around the perimeter of the pond, I know a few gators that just love rabbits!

Anyway bro..God bless, nice chatting. frogster.

 

[YosemiteSam]

ok, like i said, we disagree.

contrary to what you say, the Sabbath rest of God has not happened yet, don't forget that we are currently living in the times of the gentiles.

the Sabbath rest will be ushered in at the establishment of the kindom. so, the sabbath is still binding pointing to that time. the sabbath is still the sign that identifies God's people, the church.

i'm just glad, that i'm not one who dares to post, that the law of the living God is done away with and we currently have no way to define sin. believe you, me, i don't want to be in that number.

you say that there was no law in the garden of eden, yet i showed proof that they were married, gen 3:4. i showed where paul mentioned that there was a law that bound them together in rom 7. there was a law in eden that bound their marriage.

like i told you before, i'm not going for the banana in the tailpipe. you can, but i won't.

Matthew 19:3-9 ( NKJV ) 3The Pharisees also came to Him, testing Him, and saying to Him, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for just any reason?”
4And He answered and said to them, “Have you not read that He who made them at the beginning ‘made them male and female,’ 5and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? 6So then, they are no longer two but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate.”
7They said to Him, “Why then did Moses command to give a certificate of divorce, and to put her away?”
8He said to them, “Moses, because of the hardness of your hearts, permitted you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so. 9And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is divorced commits adultery.”

you can parse all you want, but marriage was instituted by God from the beginining, like verse 4 said.


and remember?

Genesis 1:27-28 ( NKJV ) 27So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. 28Then God blessed them, and God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it; have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over every living thing that moves on the earth.”

now we know He didn't mean go fornicate. they were married and there were laws in place to govern, rom 7:2.

now, look at how Jesus answered the question posed to Him in verse 7, "wasn't like that from the beginning"! obviously, in the beginning you couldn't just up and divorce your wife.

that had to be according to the law! the law did not permit it!

the ten commandments were in force then, because it is the law against adultery that binds the marriage by law rom 7:2. this is the same way the COI was bound to the living God, but we know that they commited spiritual adultery.


the law was in force in eden, way before mediation at mt. sinai.

Oops there it is!

 

[squint]

Because all were condemend and sinned in uncle adam.

Adam was GODS son. As such he is our BROTHER. Our BRETHREN.

WHO THEN in MAN accuses ADAM but the ACCUSER OF THE BRETHREN?

It says the law was added to increase the trespess, and that had to be Adams

No, SINS ARE NOT COUNTED AGAINST MANKIND....2 Corinthians 5:19

Sin ENTERED Adam and SIN IS OF THE DEVIL

How did THE DEVIL enter ADAM? Jesus told us HOW. The Word of BLESSING was SOWN IN ADAM (when Eve was yet within him) and THERE SATAN ENTERED HIM, deceived him and stole from Adam. Immediately AFTER that BLESSING was bestowed ON ADAM what do we find BUT A LAW...that included DEATH PENALTY. That LAW was for THE LAWLESS ONE who had ENTERED ADAM immediately after GODS WORD was sown just as Jesus taught us happens.

And in this way SIN passed into ALL mankind and that SIN is OF THE DEVIL, not of ADAM, Gods son.

Not of the carnal nature, not of the flesh, not of the ego, not of the self, not of the Adamic nature, not of the old nature, not of any number of FALSE REPLACEMENT CAUSES for the REAL FACT which is THE DEVIL.

if we use proper context, so the nature had the full blown SIN DWELLING EVIL PRESENT, and the law was added to increase it, and to imput it.

ADAM had BLESSING....SATAN GOT LAW INCLUDING THE PENALTY OF DEATH. BOTH SIDES were delivered into ONE MAN by surface appearances but in fact scripturally speaking there were TWO ENTITIES therein...Adam, Gods son and Satan, the serpent.

The body then and today DIES because of the PRESENCE OF SIN which is OF THE DEVIL. How many BILLIONS of FLESH HABITATIONS has the DEVIL SEEN turn into DUST IN THE WIND? This is PART OF SATAN'S PENALTY. He LOSES his TEMPORARY TEMPLES continually, over and over and over again nearly countless times as MANKIND is REAPED from the EARTH and returned TO GOD. (Eccl. 12:7)

See..that is why this froggy taint walkin under law.

The Law is in continual provocation with THE LAWLESS regardless of what you think about it. You want to transition to ROMANS 8 yet?

Romans 8:7
Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.

The CARNAL MAN does not KNOW that HIS SIN, his BLINDNESS is OF THE DEVIL who has BLINDED him to NOT SEE this fact. It is THE DEVIL who RESISTS and DENIES Gods LAW and will CONTINUE to do so because IN THAT LAW the DEVIL, the LAWLESS ONE is revealed to be IN MAN.

10 And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin;

It is DEAD because of WHO IS IN IT! A SINNING LAWBREAKER who will NEVER change or be obedient.

When I look in the mirror, I see a forthcoming PILE OF DUST and I rejoice!

Rev. 12:
9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.
10 And I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ: for the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before our God day and night.
11 And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony; and they loved not their lives unto the death.


enjoy!

s

 

[JohnRabbit]

Think all and what you want. That is your privilage. If Jesus is the entity that Moses talked to then he and God (the Father) are both liars (Ex 33:20).

I think you are incorrect about the words I AM being translated from. My resources show hayah which means to exist ie to be or become. The I AM in "I AM hath sent' phrase part of the verse is supplied and not in the Hebrew. The word Lord does not appear in the KJV, NKJV, NIV, ESV, ASV, HCSB or Darby. I don't know where you are getting your information from. It sure doesn't agree with anything I can locate. The word that does appear in 3:14 is God and the word is elohyim. The word Lord in reference to God is most commonly Yehovah. Another word for Lord in reference to God is Adonay. It does not appear in 3:14 either.

Now for the word 'Lord' from Ex 6:2-3. It is Yehovah which means self Existant or Eternal.

bugkiller

you are correct in the meaning of the word "hayah". however, the verse quoted was from the greek text of matthew.

here's the word:

I am, G1510 (from strong's)
εἰμί
eimi
i-mee'
First person singular present indicative; a prolonged form of a primary and defective verb; I exist (used only when emphatic):—am, have been, X it is I, was. See also G1488, G1498, G1511, G1527, G2258, G2071, G2070, G2075, G2076, G2771, G2468, G5600.

the word they used in the greek conveys the same meaning as the word "hayah". it is clear that the word is translated correctly in the nkjv.

the reference, that Jesus Himself made, was that He was "I AM".

the jews understood what he meant:

John 8:59 ( NKJV ) 59Then they took up stones to throw at Him; but Jesus hid Himself and went out of the temple, going through the midst of them, and so passed by.

this is the word used in ex 3:14:

H1961 (from strong's)
הָיָה
hâyâh
haw-yaw'
A primitive root (compare H1933); to exist, that is, be or become, come to pass (always emphatic, and not a mere copula or auxiliary):—beacon, X altogether, be (-come, accomplished, committed, like), break, cause, come (to pass), continue, do, faint, fall, + follow, happen, X have, last, pertain, quit (one-) self, require, X use.

and this is the word used in ex 6:2:

H3068 (from stong's)
יְהֹוָה
yehôvâh
yeh-ho-vaw'
From H1961; (the) self Existent or eternal; Jehovah, Jewish national name of God:—Jehovah, the Lord. Compare H3050, H3069.

you can still believe what you want.

moses saw God! how awsome that must've been. verse 20 does say that no man can look on God's face and live. but:

Exodus 33:23 ( NKJV ) 23Then I will take away My hand, and you shall see My back; but My face shall not be seen.”

moses saw God! how do we know it wasn't God the Father?

1 John 4:12 ( NKJV ) 12No one has seen God at any time. ...

you can do the math. i hope.

 

[JohnRabbit]

I never said fine, but it gets aroused.

People are doing this to the flesh, when they walk under law. They are trying to make him behave. Now Adam..you try harder.

so, is this a correct example:

the law says "thou shalt not steal", and then i read that and i get aroused, and then all of a sudden i have a tremendous urge to go steal something.

is that how it works?

 

[VictorC]

ok, like i said, we disagree.

contrary to what you say, the Sabbath rest of God has not happened yet, don't forget that we are currently living in the times of the gentiles.

The sabbath was instituted 3500 years ago, and was prophetically fulfilled 2000 years ago. I think you missed the boat before you were born.

the Sabbath rest will be ushered in at the establishment of the kindom. so, the sabbath is still binding pointing to that time. the sabbath is still the sign that identifies God's people, the church.

I notice there is no support for this unBiblical claim you offered.

i'm just glad, that i'm not one who dares to post, that the law of the living God is done away with and we currently have no way to define sin. believe you, me, i don't want to be in that number.

But you're also glad that there is no redemption in God's adoption, as well. You're apparently glad there is no Gospel, and you're content to remain in Judaism. Romans 10 describes this form of zeal you portray:

1 Brethren, my heart’s desire and prayer to God for Israel is that they may be saved. 2 For I bear them witness that they have a zeal for God, but not according to knowledge. 3 For they being ignorant of God’s righteousness, and seeking to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted to the righteousness of God. 4 For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes.​

you say that there was no law in the garden of eden, yet i showed proof that they were married, gen 3:4. i showed where paul mentioned that there was a law that bound them together in rom 7. there was a law in eden that bound their marriage.

No, you haven't. Paul's discourse in the first half of Romans 7 addresses the law, meaning the covenant mediated by Moses. He uses an allegory based on marriage to show that one cannot belong to the law and to Christ concurrently, and an attempt to do so is a form of adultery. As you noted, marriage has its origin in the Genesis account 2500 years before the law existed. You nullified your own point.

like i told you before, i'm not going for the banana in the tailpipe. you can, but i won't.

This is a strange expression that means nothing to anyone other than you.

Matthew 19:3-9 ( NKJV ) 3The Pharisees also came to Him, testing Him, and saying to Him, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for just any reason?”
4And He answered and said to them, “Have you not read that He who made them at the beginning ‘made them male and female,’ 5and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? 6So then, they are no longer two but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate.”
7They said to Him, “Why then did Moses command to give a certificate of divorce, and to put her away?”
8He said to them, “Moses, because of the hardness of your hearts, permitted you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so. 9And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is divorced commits adultery.”

you can parse all you want, but marriage was instituted by God from the beginining, like verse 4 said.


and remember?

Genesis 1:27-28 ( NKJV ) 27So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. 28Then God blessed them, and God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it; have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over every living thing that moves on the earth.”

Marriage existed long before the law did. I don't understand why such a simple recognition of the historical account eludes you as it does.

now we know He didn't mean go fornicate. they were married and there were laws in place to govern, rom 7:2.

Don't you think that you should find this law, since Romans 7:2 doesn't help your argument one bit?

now, look at how Jesus answered the question posed to Him in verse 7, "wasn't like that from the beginning"! obviously, in the beginning you couldn't just up and divorce your wife.

that had to be according to the law! the law did not permit it!

Perhaps you should tell us why you're consumed by the origin of marriage, rather than the topic of the law that this thread was meant to address.

the ten commandments were in force then, because it is the law against adultery that binds the marriage by law rom 7:2. this is the same way the COI was bound to the living God, but we know that they commited spiritual adultery.

There was no law against adultery before the law was ordained, and your eisegesis is a poor attempt to fabricate utter nonsense that has no relevance to the topic you have been faced with.

the law was in force in eden, way before mediation at mt. sinai.

You're quite content to consider the testimony Moses gave in Deuteronomy 5:2-3 to be a lie, as he testified the covenant law was never given to anyone prior to his own generation. You can't find the law in Eden, and this whole post is an appeal to marriage, which has nothing relative to the topic of our last conversation. You didn't address one iota of content that was presented to you, and I would appreciate an attempt at discussion rather than repeating the same error you hope will elude accountability:

i understand that the ten commandments are a spiritual law.

The entire law had spiritual roots, and imposing an artificial division to set the ten commandments apart from the rest of the law causes you to deny what the ten commandments was.

it was part of the covenant with the COI.

The ten commandments was the only covenant from Mount Sinai.

i also use the definition of the word covenant and understand that the covenant is a marriage relationship.

Imposing a false definition from an English dictionary that doesn't define a Suzerainty covenant causes you to misunderstand what the ten commandments was. A sovereign dictates his terms of ownership to the vassal that he rescues or defends, and compliance on the part of the vassal is requisite for the sovereign's continued ownership and defense. God is that Sovereign, and the children of Israel were that vassal He rescued from Egyptian bondage.

i also use logic when reading the scriptures.

Your "logic" is forcing a preclusion on what the Scriptures mean, rather than allowing the author to convey his own meaning.

putting everything i've read about the covenant, i understand that the laws were tenets of the agreement.

The law in this case is the content of the covenant dictated to the vassal, that the Sovereign demands compliance to as a condition to live and possess the promised land.

it is don't make sense to me, for God to give us a spiritual law that He Himself wrote and then kick it to the curb, because the principles of the ten commandments convey love toward God and love toward neighbor.

You still haven't explained to me how slaughtering lambs conveys love. In case you haven't noticed, the Sinai covenant contains an ordinance demanding that Israel keep the sabbath holy - and that ordinance was ceremonial as well as prophetic in nature. It reminded Israel of God's rest that Hebrews 4:1 reminds the reader was a promise yet to be attained. The sabbath didn't provide God's rest, but was a shadow that was fulfilled in Jesus Christ.

so, i don't think that has been abolished and never will.

We aren't interested in what you think, when you have determined to conclude something completely contrary to the narratives describing the Gospel.

now, if you have a hard time with how i veiw the covenant based how i read the bible, then i hate it for you.

You hate the Bible?
I hope that isn't your goal, and you just had a hard time composing this sentence.

 

[JohnRabbit]

Then according to you God no longer spoke or conveyed information to mankind. So much for EGW claim. Your statement is one of dismissal and unbelief.

bugkiller

all i said was that the apostles only had the law and the prophets when they started. now, how you come up with:

Then according to you God no longer spoke or conveyed information to mankind.

i did not say what YOU conveyed. so you can keep spinning all you want.

 

[YosemiteSam]

Marriage, being a covenant or an agreement between two parties would have to have terms. If there were no law and marriage existed from the beginning, could you tell me what the terms where? Could you tell me what binds the marriage?

 

[VictorC]

Marriage, being a covenant or an agreement between two parties would have to have terms. If there were no law and marriage existed from the beginning, could you tell me what the terms where? Could you tell me what binds the marriage?

Marriage isn't the covenant from Mount Sinai. Neither you nor JohnRabbit have lent any support for marriage having an origin at Mount Sinai, and even JohnRabbit has posted evidence that marriage existed long before the law did. There is no "if" concerning the timing of the law; your point has absolutely no merit.

 

[VictorC]

Oops there it is!

Please note that JohnRabbit doesn't show any interest in defending anything he has written.

 

[Cribstyl]

Please note that JohnRabbit doesn't show any interest in defending anything he has written.

I noticed that too...He just want to restate all the familiar points of contention that SDA make and cannot prove as truth.

 

[Cribstyl]

so let me get this straight, the flesh is fine until the law comes around and makes you sin?

No, law does not make you sin, the law only gives a name (label) to the sin and pronounces the punishment for breaking that commandment against it. Rom 3:20Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law [is] the knowledge of sin.

People who keep the ten commandments think they're meet God's standards. They're the ones who judge and condemn other people as if they're righteous and other are not. They persue righteousness by the law.
Another fact is, by the actions they feel they've earn there way into heaven.


The first error made by some them, is to isolate the law to only the ten commandments. This causes them to misapply what the New Testament calls "The Law."

It is true that what we call the 10 commandments, were spoken first from Mt Sinai. And Yes they were written in stone tablets, They were called the testimonies and also as the words of the covenant.

The judgments are also commandments......they give the punishments.

Exd 21:1¶Now these [are] the judgments which thou shalt set before them.

In the law, an eye for and eye, a tooth for a tooth, hand for hand, foot for a foot,Exd 21:24 is of the commandments given from Mt Sinai. Mat 5:38




A scribe had ask Jesus which was the first commandment.Mar 12:28

The first and second commandments of the law are actually........

#1​

Mar 12:29 And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments [is], Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord:
Mar 12:30 And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this [is] the first commandment

#2​

Mar 12:31And the second [is] like, [namely] this, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. There is none other commandment greater than these.




Mar 12:32 And the scribe said unto him, Well, Master, thou hast said the truth:

for there is one God; and there is none other but he:
Mar 12:33 And to love him with all the heart, and with all the understanding, and with all the soul, and with all the strength, and to love [his] neighbour as himself, is more than all whole burnt offerings and sacrifices.
Mar 12:34 And when Jesus saw that he answered discreetly, he said unto him, Thou art not far from the kingdom of God. And no man after that durst ask him [any question].

 

[JohnRabbit]

No, law does not make you sin, the law only gives a name (label) to the sin and pronounces the punishment for breaking that commandment against it. Rom 3:20Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law [is] the knowledge of sin.

People who keep the ten commandments think they're meet God's standards. They're the ones who judge and condemn other people as if they're righteous and other are not. They persue righteousness by the law.
Another fact is, by the actions they feel they've earn there way into heaven.


The first error made by some them, is to isolate the law to only the ten commandments. This causes them to misapply what the New Testament calls "The Law."

It is true that what we call the 10 commandments, were spoken first from Mt Sinai. And Yes they were written in stone tablets, They were called the testimonies and also as the words of the covenant.

The judgments are also commandments......they give the punishments.

Exd 21:1¶Now these [are] the judgments which thou shalt set before them.

In the law, an eye for and eye, a tooth for a tooth, hand for hand, foot for a foot,Exd 21:24 is of the commandments given from Mt Sinai. Mat 5:38




A scribe had ask Jesus which was the first commandment.Mar 12:28

The first and second commandments of the law are actually........

#1​

Mar 12:29 And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments [is], Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord:
Mar 12:30 And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this [is] the first commandment

#2​

Mar 12:31And the second [is] like, [namely] this, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. There is none other commandment greater than these.




Mar 12:32 And the scribe said unto him, Well, Master, thou hast said the truth:

for there is one God; and there is none other but he:
Mar 12:33 And to love him with all the heart, and with all the understanding, and with all the soul, and with all the strength, and to love [his] neighbour as himself, is more than all whole burnt offerings and sacrifices.
Mar 12:34 And when Jesus saw that he answered discreetly, he said unto him, Thou art not far from the kingdom of God. And no man after that durst ask him [any question].

that's all i've been saying.

the ten commandments expresses the sentiments you pointed out in your verses.

love toward God, first four, and love toward neighbor, last six.

and you disagree with this?

in mark 12:34 Jesus said " thou are not far from the kingdom of God".

when He returns and sets up the kingdom, the kingdom will need laws, right?

what better laws to have, like the ten, to show love toward God and love toward neighbor?

 

[Frogster]

Please note that JohnRabbit doesn't show any interest in defending anything he has written.

Noted.

 

[JohnRabbit]

I noticed that too...He just want to restate all the familiar points of contention that SDA make and cannot prove as truth.

he states what he believes and uses verses from the bible to show how he came to that conclusion.

i see what i believe don't measure up to what you think, which is cool.

i just didn't know that you were the authority that concludes what a person may believe.

and no matter what i've posted, it don't measure up to what you post.

because YOU know better.

you are the ones who say that there was no law before sinai, and then expect that the sin of adam wasn't against God's law.

the definition of sin is written in 1jn 3:4.

everything that i have posted has centered around that, if you can't see it, then that's your problem, not mine.

if you think what your posting makes sense, then i say, heaven help you to see the truth.

you don't have a monopoly on the truth, it belongs to God.

i find it interesting, being that this is a christian forum, that this is what the christian discourse is like.

 

[Frogster]

so, is this a correct example:

the law says "thou shalt not steal", and then i read that and i get aroused, and then all of a sudden i have a tremendous urge to go steal something.

is that how it works?

hmmmm..seems like you only select what "circle" you choose to respond to.

Rabbit,,it is becoming clear, that you do not follow up on de posts.

 

[JohnRabbit]

Noted.

and please, while you're noting, note that VictorC reads the bible and throws logic out of the window.

 

[JohnRabbit]

hmmmm..seems like you only select what "circle" you choose to respond to.

Rabbit,,it is becoming clear, that you do not follow up on de posts.

how can you say that, when all you're bringing up is stuff we've already covered and you know that.

get real and come with something new. that's why i said i'm not going in circles with you about the same verses and same conclusions.

i gave you an example of what i thought you meant and wanted to hear what your answer was.

 

[JacktheCatholic]

you know you've got a nerve!

At least one and probably millions and billions. Nerves are like that.


But without them we would have no feelings.