What have you understood about the charcater of The Ten Commandments??

[squint]

How can God forgive when you confess your sins to him (1 John 1:9) if what you say is truth? That would also have to mean that Jesus paid for the devil's sins, since you claim all sins are a team effort.

I think we've examined this subject enough to find the facts of same

or not.

Satan is against the LAW.

 

[GenemZ]

I think we've examined this subject enough to find the facts of same

or not.

Satan is against the LAW.

If one could be truly righteous? The Law would be no issue. Only Jesus fulfilled the Law. In contrast, sinful men had their sinfulness exposed by trying to fulfill the Law. The Law showed man that he needed a Savior.

So, how can Satan be against the Law? Why should he be? No fallen man can fulfill it anyway! If they could? There would be no need for salvation.

The Law is not a goal to be reached by man. Its there to show man that they need outside help if they are ever to be found righteous in God's sight. It exposes their unrighteousness.

One good thing that comes out from the Law... Its the means to condemn all who reject God's grace.

1 Timothy 1:9
​

We also know that the law is made not for the righteous
but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful,
the unholy and irreligious, for those who kill their fathers
or mothers, for murderers...
​

The Law is not for the righteous! So? How can Satan be against the Law???

And.. How can a fallen man be made righteous by following the Law? How!? The Law is NOT for the righteous!

The way to righteousness is the Filling of the Spirit! We are to be filled with the Spirit and continuously growing in grace and knowledge of Christ - who is the Word!

Galatians 5:18

But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law.
​

Wake UP! We have nothing to do with the Law if we are doing God's will for our lives! Which is? Be filled with the Spirit and to be led into all truth!

So, how can Satan be against you if you are walking in the Spirit!? How can he be against the Law when for a Spirit led believer the Law is not an issue of concern?

 

[Elder 111]

Sin is falling short of the Glory of God..

So the Biblical definition is faulty?
4 Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.
5 And ye know that he was manifested to take away our sins; and in him is no sin. To take away sins not the law!

i

For God is love and those who know God have His love in them. For one who does not love does not know God.. Pretty simple. It is not breaking a rule that sin abides it is in doing things that does not show the Love Christ has shown us that while we were yet sinners Christ died for us... Rules will be broken. Have been broken and will always be broken. It is human nature. Even speed limit rules are broken. Even rules to be quiet in a library are broken. This is why we are to walk in His Love and not in rules that cannot be abided by.. So many try to walk,, and put on believers rules that they themselves cannot even keep..

Do you notice what you are saying here? Your position is that because you are going to break the rules there should be no rules. Is that really how God is? Should you not give your children rules because they will break them anyway? Continuing with your example, there should be no speed limit because people will exceed it anyway. God gave the Ten Commandments, if that was just the problem Jesus had no need to die, all God had to do was to remove the law. As a matter of fact since He is the all knowing God he did not need to put it there in the first place hen to have to remove it. God made a mistake and then He had to correct it with His life? Think again!

It is called pharasee and hypocrites in scripture. Jesus speaks plainly about this.. I follow Christ. Not rules and regulations that keep one thinking they are better than because they try to keep the rules. I follow a living and Loving God who proved to the world that only one could keep the rules..

My precious sisiter, it is God that gave the rules. You feed that he did not know what he was doing?

He did. He fulfilled them. It is finished. We are in Him forgiven and set free from rules and regulations.. For now we have Him that indwells us and causes us to love as we should.. But when we sin, and not love as He has does He is just and faithful to forgive us of our sin and cleanse us from all unrightousness.. Two rules.. Love and Love.. He even gives us His love in our hearts to walk in these rules so it is a win win situation..

We are not set free from God requirements, not to steal or lie or commetting adutery. Your set free from the penalty of death after you have done such. Knowing that we have sinned we trun in repentance to God and recieves His forgiveness and golry Halelu, He saves us. My sister, don't you thing love has something to do with a wife not committing adutery? Don't you thing that love has something to do with worshipiing God an dHm alone? Don't you thing that Love has something to do with Honoring you parents? The Ten commandments is about love. That was always the case. Deut 6: 5 And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might.
Mat. 22: Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
Look above. Jesus spoke the same message in Deuteronomy with the Ten commandments so why do you thing that because He repeated it again that it suddenly replaces the Ten Commandments?
It is a theology that we have developed not one that Jesus gave. Look at the passage in Mathew carefully and see that Jesus was answering a question and that the lawyer knew the answer. It was a test by the Lawyer to trap Jesus and not a Statement that Jesus was making of a new position.

 

[Elder 111]

One small little problem, ie, Satan is in hell at this moment, and has been since the Cross (Rev.12:7, etc.; Rev.20:2). At the Cross the 1,000 years began. He is forced to work through his agancies, ie, the beast and antichrist until loosed soon at Rev.20:7, ie, Nowism.

Jack - we are in the end time of the Jesuit "Millennial" where most looking forward to it, ie, astonishing to say the least, eg, IIThess.2:10b occuring this very moment.

More than a thousand years has passed since the Cross. You have a problem here.

 

[Rev Randy]

So the Biblical definition is faulty?
4 Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.
5 And ye know that he was manifested to take away our sins; and in him is no sin. To take away sins not the law!

i Do you notice what you are saying here? Your position is that because you are going to break the rules there should be no rules. Is that really how God is? Should you not give your children rules because they will break them anyway? Continuing with your example, there should be no speed limit because people will exceed it anyway. God gave the Ten Commandments, if that was just the problem Jesus had no need to die, all God had to do was to remove the law. As a matter of fact since He is the all knowing God he did not need to put it there in the first place hen to have to remove it. God made a mistake and then He had to correct it with His life? Think again!
My precious sisiter, it is God that gave the rules. You feed that he did not know what he was doing?
We are not set free from God requirements, not to steal or lie or commetting adutery. Your set free from the penalty of death after you have done such. Knowing that we have sinned we trun in repentance to God and recieves His forgiveness and golry Halelu, He saves us. My sister, don't you thing love has something to do with a wife not committing adutery? Don't you thing that love has something to do with worshipiing God an dHm alone? Don't you thing that Love has something to do with Honoring you parents? The Ten commandments is about love. That was always the case. Deut 6: 5 And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might.
Mat. 22: Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
Look above. Jesus spoke the same message in Deuteronomy with the Ten commandments so why do you thing that because He repeated it again that it suddenly replaces the Ten Commandments?
It is a theology that we have developed not one that Jesus gave. Look at the passage in Mathew carefully and see that Jesus was answering a question and that the lawyer knew the answer. It was a test by the Lawyer to trap Jesus and not a Statement that Jesus was making of a new position.

I want to address what I bolded in your response.

That is not the position being made. You have used logic to come up with a false conclusion.

it is the belief of most orthodox minded Christians that The price for sin has been paid. That it is now our place to come to Christ to receive forgiveness and go and sin no more. Yes the law defines sin just as Love defines godliness.
If the Law was made to be perfectly kept only one has kept it. But that was not the purpose of the Law. The Law was to teach us. Not how to be perfect but show us that we are not.

I think every Christian (whether knowingly or not) has attempted at least a few times to follow the Law. Failure bring us back to reality. Even as we attempt and really focus on it we fail. The problem, my friend is the focus. Our focus should be upon Christ. I have also found that when I take my focus off Christ, I sin just the same as when I take my focus off the Law. But knowing full well that the Law cannot save me I'll live on in Christ as the remedy is with Christ and not the Law.
The Law is cold and dead. Written on cold dead stone. Christ is risen offering love. Written upon our hearts with His Holy Blood.

Merry Christmas Elder 111. May the Advent bring your family peace and may love (Christ) abound in your household.

 

[MamaZ]

Elder. Loving God does not mean you follow after the law and the 10. Sorry but that has been proven that it cannot be accomplished. Only one man was able to fulfill the law and He nailed it to the cross. We now have a new order and a new Head. Christ is the Head and Love is the Order.. Anything done without love is sin.. One may try and not commit adultry. Good for them they don't sleep around nor do they lust after another. But yet pass by a man crying in the street and wonder what his problem is... Why is he crying in the street? He has committed adultry and has found himself out in the cold and does not even know God.. Then one who also has committed adultry that has been saved by the mighty hand of Gods grace comes along and leads this man to the cross of Christ where he was forgiven and gives this man a hope and a future. Does this man go around and preach do not commit adultry? No this man goes around and preaches Christ and Him crucified.. To the very saving of the soul. For no man will be made righteous by living the law nor the 10, It is futile. For even if you break one little bit of the 10 my friend you have broken the whole law and the only justice for the breaking of the law is death. So you keep preaching your death theory and I will keep preaching the One who came to set us free from it. For only by Grace through Faith can any man be saved and it is not by works of the law..

 

[VictorC]

So the Biblical definition is faulty?
4 Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.
5 And ye know that he was manifested to take away our sins; and in him is no sin. To take away sins not the law!

This ignores what imputes sin via transgression (see Romans 5:13).
We have already seen that your definition of sin is faulty, not even taking into account the tense of the verbs John uses in his first epistle, and dismissing his own proclamation that "All unrighteousness is sin" in v.5:17 of the same epistle. It is a Adventism's misapplication of one verse that argues against the Law's testimony of the limited tenure and scope of the Law's jurisdiction, demanding that the Law existed when and where it didn't exist.

Adventism teaches sinless perfection, rather than the Gospel's message of Christ's redemption of our transgressions under the Law, as Hebrews 9:15 affirms. This mutilation is apparent in the doctrines they came up with, which even include their sinless perfection necessary to attain before the second advent can even happen.

In the last generation God gives the final demonstration that men can keep the law of God and that they can live without sinning. God leaves nothing undone to make the demonstration complete. The only limitation He puts on Satan is that he may not kill the saints of God. He may tempt them, he may harass and threaten them; and he does his best. But he fails. He cannot make them sin. They stand the test, and God puts His seal on them. Through the last generation of saints God stands fully vindicated. (M.L. Andreasen The Sanctuary Service, Review and Herald, 1969 printing, pp. 318-19)
​

The Gospel shows that God saves man.
Adventism has replaced this with a message of man vindicating God.
And that is according to this prominent SDA theologian. Bio--> ML Andreasen

Do you notice what you are saying here? Your position is that because you are going to break the rules there should be no rules. Is that really how God is? Should you not give your children rules because they will break them anyway? Continuing with your example, there should be no speed limit because people will exceed it anyway. God gave the Ten Commandments, if that was just the problem Jesus had no need to die, all God had to do was to remove the law. As a matter of fact since He is the all knowing God he did not need to put it there in the first place hen to have to remove it. God made a mistake and then He had to correct it with His life? Think again!

My very first contribution on this thread observed that you have taken it on yourself that the Law wasn't Holy, as soon as you posted questions that reduce the Ten Commandments to a list of 'principles' six times. That mindset continues unabated, and you would rather blame God for the mistake that you made.

My precious sisiter, it is God that gave the rules. You feed that he did not know what he was doing?
We are not set free from God requirements

I think that's far enough. The Ten Commandments wasn't a list of 'rules', and you have never provided any evidence that shows that the Gentiles in Barbados were ever given the old covenant from Mount Sinai - which is what the Ten Commandments really was. Yet this demand of yours that 'we are not set free from' the old covenant reveals the true nature of Adventism: a soteriology of works according to the Law. The quote above from Andreasen shows this error continues in modern Adventist theology.

You have made two distinctive claims in this thread that you need to address.

God says keep the Sabbath.

The Sabbath is the test. The tree in the mist of the Garden. That person have to decide on.

Neither one of these is true. If you cannot support them, you need to retract them in concession to Scripture's testimony that these ideas are foreign to the Gospel.

 

[VictorC]

For only by Grace through Faith can any man be saved and it is not by works of the law..

I agree with you!
However...
That isn't consistent with the SDA church's 'prophet' Ellen White, who Elder111 has shown to be his source of information in the language he uses in his posts. It is unlikely he is going to accept your statement.

It means eternal salvation to keep the Sabbath holy unto the Lord. God says: "Them that honor Me I will honor." 1 Samuel 2:30. {6T 356.4}

But if we turn aside from the fourth commandment, so positively given by God, to adopt the inventions of Satan, voiced and acted by men under his control, we cannot be saved. We cannot with safety receive his traditions and subtleties as truth. {RH, July 6, 1897 par. 4}

No one who disregards the fourth commandment, after becoming enlightened in regard to the claims of the Sabbath, can be held guiltless in the sight of God. {RH, July 6, 1897 par. 14}

All will be judged according to the light that has shone upon them. If they have light upon the Sabbath, they cannot be saved in rejecting that light.{HS 234.3}

As persons become convinced from the Scriptures that the claims of the fourth commandment are still binding, the question is often raised, Is it necessary in order to secure salvation that we keep the Sabbath? This is a question of grave importance. If the light has shone from the word of God, if the message has been presented to men, as it was to Pharaoh, and they refuse to heed that message, if they reject the light, they refuse to obey God, and cannot be saved in their disobedience. {RH, January 5, 1886 par. 2}

God requires of all His subjects obedience, entire obedience to all His commandments. He demands now as ever perfect righteousness as the only title to heaven. Christ is our hope and our refuge. His righteousness is imputed only to the obedient! (Review & Herald, Sept. 21, 1886)​

 

[squint]

Adventism teaches sinless perfection, rather than the Gospel's message of Christ's redemption of our transgressions under the Law, as Hebrews 9:15 affirms. This mutilation is apparent in the doctrines they came up with, which even include their sinless perfection necessary to attain before the second advent can even happen.

In the last generation God gives the final demonstration that men can keep the law of God and that they can live without sinning. God leaves nothing undone to make the demonstration complete. The only limitation He puts on Satan is that he may not kill the saints of God. He may tempt them, he may harass and threaten them; and he does his best. But he fails. He cannot make them sin. They stand the test, and God puts His seal on them. Through the last generation of saints God stands fully vindicated. (M.L. Andreasen The Sanctuary Service, Review and Herald, 1969 printing, pp. 318-19)
​

I think that's far enough. The Ten Commandments wasn't a list of 'rules', and you have never provided any evidence that shows that the Gentiles in Barbados was ever given the old covenant from Mount Sinai - which is what the Ten Commandments really was. Yet this demand of yours that 'we are not set free from' the old covenant reveals the true nature of Adventism: a soteriology of works according to the Law. The quote above from Andreasen shows this error continues in modern Adventist theology.

Thanks for pointing that out. I don't think the majority of the members who post here know or understand that is the SDA teaching.

Patently false understanding of sin, as it is.

 

[Rev Randy]

This ignores what imputes sin via transgression (see Romans 5:13).
We have already seen that your definition of sin is faulty, not even taking into account the tense of the verbs John uses in his first epistle, and dismissing his own proclamation that "All unrighteousness is sin" in v.5:17 of the same epistle. It is a Adventism's misapplication of one verse that argues against the Law's testimony of the limited tenure and scope of the Law's jurisdiction, demanding that the Law existed when and where it didn't exist.

Adventism teaches sinless perfection, rather than the Gospel's message of Christ's redemption of our transgressions under the Law, as Hebrews 9:15 affirms. This mutilation is apparent in the doctrines they came up with, which even include their sinless perfection necessary to attain before the second advent can even happen.

In the last generation God gives the final demonstration that men can keep the law of God and that they can live without sinning. God leaves nothing undone to make the demonstration complete. The only limitation He puts on Satan is that he may not kill the saints of God. He may tempt them, he may harass and threaten them; and he does his best. But he fails. He cannot make them sin. They stand the test, and God puts His seal on them. Through the last generation of saints God stands fully vindicated. (M.L. Andreasen The Sanctuary Service, Review and Herald, 1969 printing, pp. 318-19)
​

The Gospel shows that God saves man.
Adventism has replaced this with a message of man vindicating God.
And that is according to this prominent SDA theologian. Bio--> ML Andreasen


My very first contribution on this thread observed that you have taken it on yourself that the Law wasn't Holy, as soon as you posted questions that reduce the Ten Commandments to a list of 'principles' six times. That mindset continues unabated, and you would rather blame God for the mistake that you made.


I think that's far enough. The Ten Commandments wasn't a list of 'rules', and you have never provided any evidence that shows that the Gentiles in Barbados was ever given the old covenant from Mount Sinai - which is what the Ten Commandments really was. Yet this demand of yours that 'we are not set free from' the old covenant reveals the true nature of Adventism: a soteriology of works according to the Law. The quote above from Andreasen shows this error continues in modern Adventist theology.

You have made two distinctive claims in this thread that you need to address.


Neither one of these is true. If you cannot support them, you need to retract them in concession to Scripture's testimony that these ideas are foreign to the Gospel.

Ahhh the Great Sabbath Test. The very one and only command that really decides if your headed for heaven or hell to be annihilated. Can't quite find the Gospel in there now can we?

(satire)Gotta love this pet sin we need to save those silly people from. Don't worry about the Gospel cause it just get's in the way of saving these silly people from their papal Sunday sin. (satire)

 

[squint]

If one could be truly righteous? The Law would be no issue. Only Jesus fulfilled the Law. In contrast, sinful men had their sinfulness exposed by trying to fulfill the Law. The Law showed man that he needed a Savior.

The fact that transgression of the law is a sin is beyond question. It is a fact of many scriptures. The fact that sin is of the devil is also beyond question and is a fact of many scriptures.

Satan/devils and LAW are just as intimately linked as man is.

So, how can Satan be against the Law?

Uh, because Satan and devils resist God? Do you think Satan is termed the adversary for no cause?

I've cited to you several times now to read 'our' Gospels. Matt. 13, Mark 4, Luke 8 and many other scriptures show that Satan automatically resists Gods Words where they are sown.

Satan reacts adversely to LAW, does so primarily through the thought realm via TEMPTATIONs and every sin is connected to Satan.

How much more linkage do you want?

Why should he be? No fallen man can fulfill it anyway! If they could? There would be no need for salvation.

The law was not made to save THEM, but to CONVICT and to DAMN THEM.

The Law is not a goal to be reached by man. Its there to show man that they need outside help if they are ever to be found righteous in God's sight. It exposes their unrighteousness.

Why is it you can't seem to get the fact that Satan/devils and mankind overlap on matters of sin? Does it offend you, the fact of our sin being linked to Satanic slaveship?

Scriptures leave all of us who claim to be 'christians' only ONE PATH out of the MESS of Satanic slaveship. It is found (among other places) in Romans 13:8-10, which is the spiritual fulfillment of the LAW by/in everyone who does that. When believers do this they prove that Christ is in them, LOVING.

Satan and devils assuredly can not perform that. That is one way to determine who is a slave and who is a free man.

One good thing that comes out from the Law... Its the means to condemn all who reject God's grace.

1 Timothy 1:9
​

We also know that the law is made not for the righteous
but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful,
the unholy and irreligious, for those who kill their fathers
or mothers, for murderers...
​

The Law is not for the righteous! So? How can Satan be against the Law???

Seriously? Do you even understand this subject matter? IT's one of the most basic foundational christian theological principles there is.

Satan is the enemy of God.

And.. How can a fallen man be made righteous by following the Law? How!? The Law is NOT for the righteous!

Where do you get the idea I ever promoted that? Never have. Have always said the exact opposite. Who are you reading? Someone else?

Stay on cue.

The way to righteousness is the Filling of the Spirit! We are to be filled with the Spirit and continuously growing in grace and knowledge of Christ - who is the Word!

No argument from me. My main point in these matters is that under either LAW or GRACE that the tempter is not justified under either flag and all of us are subject to temptation after salvation.

Therefore we can not claim the tempter is legal or the tempter is under grace. For any reason.

Your avenue out of that fact was to claim you are void of internal temptation of the tempter. That is where you fell off the viable conversation list.

s

 

[VictorC]

Ahhh the Great Sabbath Test. The very one and only command that really decides if your headed for heaven or hell to be annihilated. Can't quite find the Gospel in there now can we?

Few people -including most SDA members- understand how their own Sanctuary Doctrine permeates their theological perspective. Their dependence on a non-event in 1844 goes so far that it introduced a dispensation that mandates sabbath-keeping after this date.

Testimonies for the Church
Volume Two, page 692,
paragraph 2
Chapter Title: No Probation After Christ Comes

As we have followed down the chain of prophecy, revealed truth for our time has been clearly seen and explained. We are accountable for the privileges that we enjoy and for the light that shines upon our pathway. Those who lived in past generations were accountable for the light which was permitted to shine upon them. Their minds were exercised in regard to different points of Scripture which tested them. But they did not understand the truths which we do. They were not responsible for the light which they did not have. They had the Bible, as we have; but the time for the unfolding of special truth in relation to the closing scenes of this earth's history is during the last generations that shall live upon the earth. Special truths have been adapted to the conditions of the generations as they have existed. The present truth, which is a test to the people of this generation, was not a test to the people of generations far back. If the light which now shines upon us in regard to the Sabbath of the fourth commandment had been given to the generations in the past, God would have held them accountable for that light. When the temple of God was opened in heaven, John saw in holy vision a class of people whose attention was arrested and who were looking with reverential awe at the ark, which contained the law of God. The special test upon the fourth commandment did not come until after the temple of God was opened in heaven. Those who died before the light was given upon the law of God and the claims of the fourth commandment were not guilty of the sin of violating the seventh-day Sabbath. The wisdom and mercy of God in dispensing light and knowledge at the proper time, as the people need it, is unsearchable. Previous to His coming to judge the world in righteousness, He sends forth a warning to arouse the people and call their attention to their neglect of the fourth commandment, that they may be enlightened, and may repent of their transgression of His law, and prove their allegiance to the great Lawgiver. He has made provision that all may be holy and happy if they choose. Sufficient light has been given to this generation, that we may learn what our duties and privileges are, and enjoy the precious and solemn truths in their simplicity and power.​

Christianity affirms Jesus Christ as our Redeemer.
Redemption is set aside in Adventism, to focus God's role as law-giver in the old covenant they haven't experienced redemption from.

(satire)Gotta love this pet sin we need to save those silly people from. Don't worry about the Gospel cause it just get's in the way of saving these silly people from their papal Sunday sin. (satire)

You make an interesting point. Adventism is reliant on the Roman Catholic church, concurrent with their claim that Rome 'changed' the sabbath. However, when someone asks them how the Roman Catholic church reinstated the sabbath after Christ took it away, their eyes glaze over in confusion. The sabbath is a component of the first covenant from Mount Sinai, and it doesn't exist in the absence of the first covenant: "He takes away the first that He may establish the second" (Hebrews 10:9).

 

[shturt678s]

More than a thousand years has passed since the Cross. You have a problem here.

Problem reconciled: Let's eyeball Rev.20:2, ie, "1,000 years." All Greek to me but let's begin, ie, the accusative xilia ete, "for a 1,000 years" simply expresses extent of time. Revelation is full, not only of symbolical numbers, but of symbols of all kinds. It would be strange, indeed, if "1,000 years" were here it occurs in so marked a way all of six times, to be understood in a literal sense.

Again the 1,000 years began with the binidng and the imprisonment of Satan in his person (person, using the limited English to convey thet sense); during the entire 1,000 years he is not to decieve (planesa, aorist) the nations as he once did; these years end when mikron xronon, "a little length of time, sets in," Satan loosed in his person at Rev.20:7 - soon!

One binding occurred, ie, Lk.11:21, 22 that interferred most decisively with his deceiving the nations (Isa.53:12; Col.2:15), ie, last temptation (Lk.4:1-13). This is the binding of Satan that is here symbolized. It is in part and for a different purpose (namely as regards the woman and the continuous existence of the church in spite of the devil) symbolized already in Rev.12:7-17.

It took place when Jesus cried triumphantly on the Cross: "It has been finished!" at the Cross.

Sorry, got carried away again,

Jack

 

[Rev Randy]

The fact that transgression of the law is a sin is beyond question. It is a fact of many scriptures. The fact that sin is of the devil is also beyond question and is a fact of many scriptures.

Satan/devils and LAW are just as intimately linked as man is.

Uh, because Satan and devils resist God? Do you think Satan is termed the adversary for no cause?

I've cited to you several times now to read 'our' Gospels. Matt. 13, Mark 4, Luke 8 and many other scriptures show that Satan automatically resists Gods Words where they are sown.

Satan reacts adversely to LAW, does so primarily through the thought realm via TEMPTATIONs and every sin is connected to Satan.

How much more linkage do you want?
The law was not made to save THEM, but to CONVICT and to DAMN THEM.

Why is it you can't seem to get the fact that Satan/devils and mankind overlap on matters of sin? Does it offend you, the fact of our sin being linked to Satanic slaveship?

Scriptures leave all of us who claim to be 'christians' only ONE PATH out of the MESS of Satanic slaveship. It is found (among other places) in Romans 13:8-10, which is the spiritual fulfillment of the LAW by/in everyone who does that. When believers do this they prove that Christ is in them, LOVING.

Satan and devils assuredly can not perform that. That is one way to determine who is a slave and who is a free man.

Seriously? Do you even understand this subject matter? IT's one of the most basic foundational christian theological principles there is.

Satan is the enemy of God.

Where do you get the idea I ever promoted that? Never have. Have always said the exact opposite. Who are you reading? Someone else?

Stay on cue.

No argument from me. My main point in these matters is that under either LAW or GRACE that the tempter is not justified under either flag and all of us are subject to temptation after salvation.

Therefore we can not claim the tempter is legal or the tempter is under grace. For any reason.

Your avenue out of that fact was to claim you are void of internal temptation of the tempter. That is where you fell off the viable conversation list.

s

There seems to be a deep chasm on both sides of the Law that people can fall into. Seems when you point to the good of the Law people confuse it with salvation coming from The Law. The Law is not bad. Seeking Salvation in the Law is bad.
I did not get the impression that you were promoting anything other than being truthful to ourselves.
Good morning Squint.

 

[squint]

There seems to be a deep chasm on both sides of the Law that people can fall into. Seems when you point to the good of the Law people confuse it with salvation coming from The Law. The Law is not bad. Seeking Salvation in the Law is bad.
I did not get the impression that you were promoting anything other than being truthful to ourselves.
Good morning Squint.

Well good morning to you Randy.

I'm all for honest christians. I don't try to justify the tempter between my own 2 ears under either law or grace, that's for sure.

I often remind that bad actor what's coming for him. So in this way I use both LAW and DAMNATION texts firmly applied therein.

Many christians just don't understand the principle that where the Word is sown, Satan resists and does so in 'any' person, believer or unbeliever, in the predetermined role of THE TEMPTER.

Therefore the LAW is rightfully against that lawless one who happens to operate 'in man' as the scriptures clearly show us all.

It's one of the more interesting facts of christianity that seems to be overlooked by the bulk of theologians.

s

 

[squint]

Problem reconciled: Let's eyeball Rev.20:2, ie, "1,000 years." All Greek to me but let's begin, ie, the accusative xilia ete, "for a 1,000 years" simply expresses extent of time. Revelation is full, not only of symbolical numbers, but of symbols of all kinds. It would be strange, indeed, if "1,000 years" were here it occurs in so marked a way all of six times, to be understood in a literal sense.

Again the 1,000 years began with the binidng and the imprisonment of Satan in his person (person, using the limited English to convey thet sense); during the entire 1,000 years he is not to decieve (planesa, aorist) the nations as he once did; these years end when mikron xronon, "a little length of time, sets in," Satan loosed in his person at Rev.20:7 - soon!

One binding occurred, ie, Lk.11:21, 22 that interferred most decisively with his deceiving the nations (Isa.53:12; Col.2:15), ie, last temptation (Lk.4:1-13). This is the binding of Satan that is here symbolized. It is in part and for a different purpose (namely as regards the woman and the continuous existence of the church in spite of the devil) symbolized already in Rev.12:7-17.

It took place when Jesus cried triumphantly on the Cross: "It has been finished!" at the Cross.

Sorry, got carried away again,

Jack

Jack, you keep dragging that dead horse to the table of discussions.

Look, the 'god of this world' continues to blind the minds of everyone who does not believe. 2 Cor. 4:4.

We also were thusly blinded prior to belief.

Ephesians 2:2
Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience:

To say that Satan is not active in this present world is simply not true or truthful from a christian perspective.The basis of eschatology is an understanding that that bad actor and all his minions are going to fall under FINAL JUDGMENTS unto permanent eradication in the Lake of Fire.

and no, that did not happen yet. It will.

s

 

[shturt678s]

Well good morning to you Randy.

I'm all for honest christians. I don't try to justify the tempter between my own 2 ears under either law or grace, that's for sure.

I often remind that bad actor what's coming for him. So in this way I use both LAW and DAMNATION texts firmly applied therein.

Many christians just don't understand the principle that where the Word is sown, Satan resists and does so in 'any' person, believer or unbeliever, in the predetermined role of THE TEMPTER.

Placing Jesus back up on the Cross, ie, "It has been finished!", Satan in his person doesn't operate, however does through his agencies.

Therefore the LAW is rightfully against that lawless one who happens to operate 'in man' as the scriptures clearly show us all.

The reason for my response is you unknowingly here pinned the tail on the donkey, ie, the Antichrist reveals himself as the Antichrist by this pagan act of seating himself in the true God's own Sanctuary (not "Temple") - within us where the Holy Spirit is suppose to be, now, this moment (IIThess.2:10b).

It's one of the more interesting facts of christianity that seems to be overlooked by the bulk of theologians.

s

One of the more facts of christianity is unveiling the dark, horrid pall of forever doom overhead most oblivious to where the dupes unknowingly are worshipping the effigy.

Jack

btw I wonder how many times I actually posted the Truth, and wasn't aware of it?

 

[squint]

Placing Jesus back up on the Cross, ie, "It has been finished!", Satan in his person doesn't operate, however does through his agencies.

Jesus did not eradicate Satan at the cross Jack. I have no idea where you get that notion quite frankly unless you are into preterism of some sort.

The reason for my response is you unknowingly here pinned the tail on the donkey, ie, the Antichrist reveals himself as the Antichrist by this pagan act of seating himself in the true God's own Sanctuary (not "Temple") - within us where the Holy Spirit is suppose to be, now, this moment (IIThess.2:10b).

It is beyond N.T. question that Satan remains active as noted to you prior via cited texts. It is also no question that 'believers' continue to sin after salvation, that 'we' are all subject to temptations and that sin is in fact of the devil. So again, none of that indicates that Satan is locked away somewhere, although some branches of millenium eschatology speculate that to be the case. It's not the case.

One of the more facts of christianity is unveiling the dark, horrid pall of forever doom overhead most oblivious to where the dupes unknowingly are worshipping the effigy.

You are welcome to claim that the anti-Christ spirit whom ARE Satan and devils are not 'anti-spiritual' in nature and no longer operating, but that notion can not hold N.T. scriptural water.

btw I wonder how many times I actually posted the Truth, and wasn't aware of it?

You have a somewhat indirect method of communication that is what I might call non-linear-logic based that can be problematic to engage with a 'get to the point' style I employ.

s

 

[from scratch]

The fact that transgression of the law is a sin is beyond question. It is a fact of many scriptures. The fact that sin is of the devil is also beyond question and is a fact of many scriptures.

Satan/devils and LAW are just as intimately linked as man is.

Uh, because Satan and devils resist God? Do you think Satan is termed the adversary for no cause?

I've cited to you several times now to read 'our' Gospels. Matt. 13, Mark 4, Luke 8 and many other scriptures show that Satan automatically resists Gods Words where they are sown.

Satan reacts adversely to LAW, does so primarily through the thought realm via TEMPTATIONs and every sin is connected to Satan.

How much more linkage do you want?
The law was not made to save THEM, but to CONVICT and to DAMN THEM.

Why is it you can't seem to get the fact that Satan/devils and mankind overlap on matters of sin? Does it offend you, the fact of our sin being linked to Satanic slaveship?

Scriptures leave all of us who claim to be 'christians' only ONE PATH out of the MESS of Satanic slaveship. It is found (among other places) in Romans 13:8-10, which is the spiritual fulfillment of the LAW by/in everyone who does that. When believers do this they prove that Christ is in them, LOVING.

Satan and devils assuredly can not perform that. That is one way to determine who is a slave and who is a free man.

Seriously? Do you even understand this subject matter? IT's one of the most basic foundational christian theological principles there is.

Satan is the enemy of God.

Where do you get the idea I ever promoted that? Never have. Have always said the exact opposite. Who are you reading? Someone else?

Stay on cue.

No argument from me. My main point in these matters is that under either LAW or GRACE that the tempter is not justified under either flag and all of us are subject to temptation after salvation.

Therefore we can not claim the tempter is legal or the tempter is under grace. For any reason.

Your avenue out of that fact was to claim you are void of internal temptation of the tempter. That is where you fell off the viable conversation list.

s

So who are you talking about if it isn't the Christian? And why do you say the Christian is bound to the law? Are you implying we're not Christians? Is the Christian righteous in God's eyes?

 

[squint]

So who are you talking about if it isn't the Christian? ->And why do you say the Christian is bound to the law? ->Are you implying we're not Christians? ->Is the Christian righteous in God's eyes?

I'd suggest a closer read of content followed by credible questions.

->Did I say that believers are bound to the law? No. That does not account for the entire equation presented as there is 'more' to the believer than just the believer. I understand this is where you will continue to not see.

->Am I implying you are not christians? No. Where in the world did you come up with that one? I've NEVER made or implied anything of that sort.

->The last question is more credible.

If we observed how Paul defines and describes himself we should all be able to see the following facts:

-Paul had indwelling sin that was 'not him.'
-Paul had evil present with him.
-Paul had temptation in his flesh.
-Paul had a messenger of Satan in his flesh.

Do you see just Paul? I don't as that is not how Paul shows us himself.

When you get this far get back to me. Otherwise you see just Paul and that is not the case that Paul makes. If you ever do understand 'how' Paul describes himself we can move along on the scale of mutual understandings.

Paul's understanding of LAW and how that relates to us directly relates to how Paul showed us himself. It's also why Paul is hard to understand.

A believer is entirely under Grace.

The lawlessness that is present with all of us in the form of indwelling sin, of evil present, of the tempter remains illegal under the law and is not under grace. This is not a difficult concept once a believer 'truthfully' comes to the conclusion that temptation is internal and is of the tempter.

At that point the believer sees that it is not just a question of 'themselves alone' nor are the subjects Paul dealt with done in that manner. Paul accounted himself accurately. He was entirely saved, entirely under grace. But that was not 'all' that Paul consisted of nor is it for any of us.

s