Who did away with the law? (2)

[VictorC]

Vic, did you read PAUL?

Why won't you acknowledge that we have been delivered from the law that held the recipients in the past tense?

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

To do that, he would have to turn to Preterism

Oh my gosh!
I just now saw this other thread and can see why it is not on the Eschatology board

http://www.christianforums.com/t7490927-2/#post55468846
The second coming has already occured

 

[squint]

Why won't you acknowledge that we have been delivered from the law that held the recipients in the past tense?

You could stand to brush up on comprehension skills.

The EVIL in man remains UNDER LAW and CONDEMNED. The SIN in man remains SIN and as such NOT AUTHORIZED by LAW or CONDONED by GRACE.

The DEVILS are LAWLESS. The LAW remains firmly against THEM as does GRACE.

Paul was not THE SAME as the sin that indwelt him NOR was PAUL EVIL.

Scriptures are clear from the MOUTH of our LORD.

Where THE WORD is sown AN ENTITY that is NOT MANKIND enters the hearts to STEAL, to insert SIN AND EVIL THOUGHTS and that is SATAN.

Satan remains CONDEMNED under LAW and under GRACE.

Believers are NOT that working.

I accept the facts of the workings of SATAN in my own mind, and that that action has also resulted in SIN in thought, word and deed. That working of Satan is NEVER off the hook in these regards, even though I AM not attributed them UNDER GRACE.

Sins are NOT counted against MANKIND. 2 Cor. 5:19

SINS will be FULLY COUNTED against SATAN...he is LAWLESS. The LAW and GRACE are made to bring this realization to US. Both positions not only CAN but ARE true.

Grace removes SIN from attribution to BELIEVERS.

GRACE counts SINS against DEVILS.

Both workings are ACTIVE in ONE LUMP. One is freed, one is CONDEMNED.

enjoy!

s

 

[VictorC]

You could stand to brush up on comprehension skills.

So far all you can do is avoid what Paul wrote.
Why won't you acknowledge that we have been delivered from the law that held the recipients in the past tense?

 

[squint]

So far all you can do is avoid what Paul wrote.
Why won't you acknowledge that we have been delivered from the law that held the recipients in the past tense?

5th time Vic. Paul was not the same as the sin that indwelt him.

What can be true for Paul is NOT true for the power of sin.

Repeating the question will not produce a different answer.

 

[VictorC]

5th time Vic. Paul was not the same as the sin that indwelt him.

What can be true for Paul is NOT true for the power of sin.

Repeating the question will not produce a different answer.

And I'm not going to chase you anymore in the vain hope that you will ever acknowledge what Paul wrote in Romans 7:6 and the other passages that have been cited or quoted. You reached a conclusion not found by the author, in deference to what he clearly stated.

 

[squint]

And I'm not going to chase you anymore in the vain hope that you will ever acknowledge what Paul wrote in Romans 7:6 and the other passages that have been cited or quoted. You reached a conclusion not found by the author, in deference to what he clearly stated.

Were Paul alone in these matters you'd have a point.

Vic, I believe that SATAN inserts SIN THOUGHTS into the minds of BELIEVERS and BLINDS the minds of UNbelievers. This means MAN is not ALONE in the views of LAW or of GRACE.

I believe those THOUGHTS are SINS. I believe SATAN is LAWLESS.

IF the LAW is against those workings and GRACE is against those workings and against SATAN I really am quite OK with that.

What is TRUE for Paul is NOT true for SATAN, SIN OR EVIL.

IF both workings transpired IN THE FLESH/MIND of Paul that does NOT make PAUL the same as those workings.

Paul understood this quite well imho. Paul was OUT FROM UNDER the condemnation of LAW and the requirements to 'keep' the intracacies physically defined therein or for lack of same to be sinning even while the power of SIN or the presence of THE DEVIL was doing the exact opposite and remained condemned under LAW AND GRACE.

Because the LAW IS SPIRITUAL I understand it to be working AGAINST evil, sin and SATAN and fully applicable AGAINST those workings. Those workings transpire IN MAN but are NOT man.

Slice it up from there however you want. IT'S NOT CHANGING.

The instant you acknowledge SATAN inserting A SIN THOUGHT in your mind you'll know it's NOT JUST YOU that is involved in these matters. IF you never see that, you are simply not meant to understand because of that same POWER over the MIND. I can't count that working against any believer because I KNOW where it IS attributed to in ANY.

Mark 4:15
And these are they by the way side, where the word is sown; but when they have heard, Satan cometh immediately, and taketh away the word that was sown in their hearts.

Matthew 13:19
When any one heareth the word of the kingdom, and understandeth it not, then cometh the wicked one, and catcheth away that which was sown in his heart. This is he which received seed by the way side.

Luke 8:12
Those by the way side are they that hear; then cometh the devil, and taketh away the word out of their hearts, lest they should believe and be saved.

s

 

[Deut 5:29]

Can you show me one post, where anyone says they want to sin?

But just for the record, your own posts shows we still do sin, so apparetly the commands don't stop it.

Since God's Law defines sin, anyone who thinks they can do away with it or live without or outside of it obviously want to go their way which leads to sin. So in short yes I can show many posts where people claim they want to sin.

The commands were never intended to stop people from sinning. The commands are to show us what sin is. We must choose whether to sin or not. Only we, with God's help, can keep from sinning.

 

[squint]

Since God's Law defines sin, anyone who thinks they can do away with it or live without or outside of it obviously want to go their way which leads to sin. So in short yes I can show many posts where people claim they want to sin.

The commands were never intended to stop people from sinning. The commands are to show us what sin is. We must choose whether to sin or not. Only we, with God's help, can keep from sinning.

The presentation of sinless flesh or mind is not available in the scriptures.

 

[7steps]

Since God's Law defines sin, anyone who thinks they can do away with it or live without or outside of it obviously want to go their way which leads to sin. So in short yes I can show many posts where people claim they want to sin.

The commands were never intended to stop people from sinning. The commands are to show us what sin is. We must choose whether to sin or not.

I agree and I also think that people miss the bigger picture of the Torah. The Torah was not 613 rules that people had to follow to be able to be redeemed. That to be justified you had to follow them or else. That is Rabbinical Law and one of the things that Jesus was trying to get across. Gamaliel and all other Rabbi where presenting a religion not God's intention. The Tanach has so much more to teach that is totally ignored because people believe that the Torah was for "them" and we don't have to follow it because we are not saved by it. "They" were not saved by it either. It shows us God's plan of redemption in metaphor after metaphor. It is an instruction manual to live by. It is the instructions of a loving parent telling them how they can live healthy and happy lives. How he planned on saving humanity. How we can have a relationship with him.

 

[VictorC]

To do that, he would have to turn to Preterism

No - he would have to accept Scripture as an authority without changing its message to fit a preclusion the authors didn't write. You know perfectly well that Preterism is a deviant eschatological view that isn't welcome on this sub-forum.

 

[VictorC]

Since God's Law defines sin, anyone who thinks they can do away with it or live without or outside of it obviously want to go their way which leads to sin. So in short yes I can show many posts where people claim they want to sin.

The commands were never intended to stop people from sinning. The commands are to show us what sin is. We must choose whether to sin or not. Only we, with God's help, can keep from sinning.

Classic works-based soteriology, that Jesus showed wasn't going to work.

Matthew 5:20
For I say to you, that unless your righteousness exceeds the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven.​

That's the model of compliance you need to do better than under the first covenant. The Pharisees and scribes actually complied with the requirements dictated under the law regarding the burnt offerings ordained since Sinai for the oblations, and added later for the sabbath and new moons. You aren't compliant with that level they complied with.

 

[squint]

No - he would have to accept Scripture as an authority without changing its message to fit a preclusion the authors didn't write. You know perfectly well that Preterism is a deviant eschatological view that isn't welcome on this sub-forum.

For the record I do not hold to any form of Preterism. It is an extremely blinded understanding that has too many holes in it to even count (imho.)

 

[Deut 5:29]

Matthew 5:20 For I say to you, that unless your righteousness exceeds the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven.

That's the model of compliance you need to do better than under the first covenant. The Pharisees and scribes actually complied with the requirements dictated under the law regarding the burnt offerings ordained since Sinai for the oblations, and added later for the sabbath and new moons. You aren't compliant with that level they complied with.

Oh my aching VictorC:
Actually the scribes and Pharisees did not keep God's Law, they kept their preverted misunderstanding of it. That is why Jesus was always in conflict with them about how, not whether, to keep God's Laws.

 

[VictorC]

Oh my aching VictorC:
Actually the scribes and Pharisees did not keep God's Law, they kept their preverted misunderstanding of it. That is why Jesus was always in conflict with them about how, not whether, to keep God's Laws.

I mentioned the law where they were compliant, and you are not. You don't keep the law that God ordained, and the only remaining claim is for a perversion that isn't compliant.

 

[VictorC]

For the record I do not hold to any form of Preterism. It is an extremely blinded understanding that has too many holes in it to even count (imho.)

You can't respond to a post, and your endorsement doesn't inspire my sympathy any longer.

 

[squint]

You can't respond to a post, and your endorsement doesn't inspire my sympathy any longer.

Your critique was not successful. Sorry it didn't work out for ya.

 

[VictorC]

Your critique was not successful. Sorry it didn't work out for ya.

Uh, failing to respond ever since post #964 to Biblical critiques doesn't annul them.

 

[squint]

Uh, failing to respond ever since post #964 to Biblical critiques doesn't annul them.

Oh, another one now? lol I'll spare you your own measure on the unresponsiveness quotient.

When you figure out how to authorize SIN, EVIL and LAWLESSNESS in anyone under Grace do give me a holla.

 

[VictorC]

Oh, another one now? lol I'll spare you your own measure on the unresponsiveness quotient.

When you figure out how to authorize SIN, EVIL and LAWLESSNESS in anyone under Grace do give me a holla.

Did you think I wouldn't notice another switch-and-bait tactic you employed to avoid answering a direct question? And, you're doing the same thing here - with no regard for the topic that several have tried to engage you on. Authorizing sin, evil, and lawlessness is a contribution that no one other than you has introduced. When you rejected the basic tenet of the Gospel found in God's redemption, your credibility became damaged by your own actions. After 90 posts added to the thread, you have still determined Arbiter01 and myself to be liars, and then added the apostle Paul to your list. When Scripture no longer is accepted as an authority to you, the endorsements you offered are no longer desired.