The ten commandments Old covenant, and the law "done away" and "abolished" as paul said

[Elder 111]

I know the ten commandments were written with the finger of God. But the thing is I just quoted Jesus and you have issue, take it up with Jesus.

I never said it was ok to have idols or sin or lie etc. This is where people misunderstand. Lets take a person who is not saved yet and the hear the law says not to steal or kill etc dont dont dont, but it gives them no power to not do this of themselves. The simply exposes sin and brings us to the need of faith. And the law is not of faith. The law shows us that we are not in Gods love and truth.Then when a person gets saved by grace through faith, the love of God is shed abroad in their heart and now they fulfill the whole intent of the law which was to love God and your neighbour. Love fulfills and love works no evil to his neighbour. Love covers every aspect of life and our walk, our faith works by love. But if a man in this of love in the spirit state tries to go back to the law and keep it he is not in need of it. It simply showed him that he was not in the love, it never gave any power to keep it. The law is saying love God and your neighbour, and so it points out specifics that men do that would show them they are selfish and in sin, like dont lie or covet or have idols etc. In Christ we cannot sin as we abide in Him he gives us the victory and makes us perfect unto every good work, and he does this from within. The law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus makes us free from the law of sin and death.

When we are in Christ we keep the law. The man that is in Christ does not steal lie kill or commit adultery which are the requirements of the law. So to say there is no law for the Christian is not accurate.
Jesus states that we who are His keeps the commandments. Rev. 12:17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.

 

[LoveofTruth]

You misunders

When we are in Christ we keep the law. The man that is in Christ does not steal lie kill or commit adultery which are the requirements of the law. So to say there is no law for the Christian is not accurate.
Jesus states that we who are His keeps the commandments. Rev. 12:17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.

You misunderstand all bievers have the law of the Spirit office in Christ Jesus that makes them free from the law of sin and death , go find out the difference of the two laws and how they are applied to men.

Also the law is not saying if you do this then you will be righteous . It is showing that men cannot walk in the love of of God in their present state and that they are not able to fulfill the law in their own righteousness, it exposes sin and brings them to the need of Gods righteousness . Then when they come to God by faith God dwells in them and makes them perfect unto every good work . God directly in believers not them following an outward tables of stone or trying to . The ministration of death and condemnation in tables of stone kills them it doesn't give life . And as Psul said the law is not made for a righteous man but for sinners

Still some wrongly desire to be teachers of the law and the veil is in the heart when reading the OT as Paul said in 2 Cor 3

 

[Cribstyl]

You misunders


You misunderstand all bievers have the law of the Spirit office in Christ Jesus that makes them free from the law of sin and death , go find out the difference of the two laws and how they are applied to men.

Also the law is not saying if you do this then you will be righteous . It is showing that men cannot walk in theice of God in thier present state and that they are not able to fulfill the law in thier own righteousness, it exposes sin and brings them to the need of Gods righteousness . Then when they come to Gid by faith God dwells in them and makes them perfect unto every good work . God directly in believers not them following an outward tables of stone or trying to . The ministration of death and condemnation in tables of stone kills them it doesn't give life . And as Psul said the law is not made for a righteous man but for sinners

Still some wrongly desire to be teachers of the law and the veil is in the heart when reading the OT as Paul said in 2 Cor 3

Great thread and great truths are coming from your posts......

 

[LoveofTruth]

Great thread and great truths are coming from your posts......

This is a hard issue for many. Because we can still use the law lawfully to expose sin etc as Paul said in 1 Timothy 1, many think that this means the law is still for us as righteous men. But Paul said the law is not made for a righteous man.

The law is done away, abolished, a ministration of death and condemnation, we are free from the law, dead to the law, not under the law, and the end of the law is charity out of a pure heart. By the law is the knowledge of sin. If there had been a law given that could have given life then Christ did not need to come.

Anyway God bless

 

[Cribstyl]

This is a hard issue for many. Because we can still use the law lawfully to expose sin etc as Paul said in 1 Timothy 1, many think that this means the law is still for us as righteous men. But Paul said the law is not made for a righteous man.

The law is done away, abolished, a ministration of death and condemnation, we are free from the law, dead to the law, not under the law, and the end of the law is charity out of a pure heart. By the law is the knowledge of sin. If there had been a law given that could have given life then Christ did not need to come.

Anyway God bless

That's what I read also. Paul asked the pop quiz and then gave the answers about the law.
Jesus established that the law and the prophets would not be the rules of the faith, but rather the gospel of the kingdom would be.
Luk 16:16 The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it.

 

[nomadictheist]

There's been a lot said, and once again a lot of misunderstanding...

We are no longer under the law. If we were under the law, then we woul d have to depend on the law for salvation. We depend on Jesus and His sacrifice for our salvation.

However, the law has not passed away. Nor has it been abolished. And anyone who freely breaks the law unrepentantly shows that he does not know God.

Cribstyl quoted Luke 16:16, but left out verse 17 because it creates an apparent contradiction without proper understanding. Verse 17 reads "And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass [away], than one tittle of the law to fail" (KJV)

This is the second place where we are told that Jesus tells us not a single tittle of the law shall perish.

What it means to be free from the law means that we no longer have to depend on the law for salvation. It does not mean that the law is null and void or that it doesn't tell us what's right and wrong.

When we had to depend on the law for salvation, salvation was impossible. Now that we are free from the law, salvation has been made possible through Jesus Christ. But that doesn't mean that we can just ignore the law and pretend that it no longer tells us what's right.

The law can't give us salvation. Never could, never will be able to. But it can tell us God's standards of right and wrong - which it does. These standards are the same, and as His children we need to put effort into conforming to His standards even though we know that we'll fail and that following His standards won't save us.

 

[bugkiller]

According to James in Acts 15 - the Christians attended to hear Moses being preached. --- "scripture" .

That may be because Christians followed the teaching of Christ.

And Christ said this about Moses -

QUOTE="BobRyan, post: 68311812, member: 235244"]So then what is the specific point -- Christ makes here "in his own words"??

=========================

Mark 7

7 Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.
8 For laying aside the Commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do.
9 And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.
10 For Moses said, Honour thy father and thy mother; and, Whoso curseth father or mother, let him die the death:
11 But ye say, If a man shall say to his father or mother, It is Corban, that is to say, a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; he shall be free.
12 And ye suffer him no more to do ought for his father or his mother;
13 Making the Word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.

Notice that it is identified as "Moses said" and as "The Word of God"

AND as the "Commandment of God"??
=========================================

Notice that "Moses said" is also called "The Commandment of God" by Christ and also "The Word of God".

So trashing the Bible was not part of the first century Christian agenda.

These were Jews and Gentile proselytes, not Christians.

You take the Bible out of context to condemn and get compliance to your false teaching. There's nothing in the NT or the words from Jesus requiring worship on the Venerable Day of Saturn. You've never quoted it yet for some reason. Why is this? I suggest it doesn't exist.

bugkiller

 

[bugkiller]

If you can't explain who the 'we' in Romans 7:6 is then how can you say that practicing the Law of Moses is Not for the non-Jew let alone For the Jew only?


You appear to believe that the ruling of the Council was a ruling that effected what the Jewish Christians did. It didn't.
So if you are trying to use it to state that the Jews still had to follow the Law of Moses because of this ruling, you are mistaken. They have nothing to do with each other.

It isn't because she can't. It is because if she does her whole argument sinks even for the Jew.

bugkiller

 

[bugkiller]

There's been a lot said, and once again a lot of misunderstanding...

We are no longer under the law. If we were under the law, then we woul d have to depend on the law for salvation. We depend on Jesus and His sacrifice for our salvation.

However, the law has not passed away. Nor has it been abolished. And anyone who freely breaks the law unrepentantly shows that he does not know God.

Cribstyl quoted Luke 16:16, but left out verse 17 because it creates an apparent contradiction without proper understanding. Verse 17 reads "And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass [away], than one tittle of the law to fail" (KJV)

This is the second place where we are told that Jesus tells us not a single tittle of the law shall perish.

What it means to be free from the law means that we no longer have to depend on the law for salvation. It does not mean that the law is null and void or that it doesn't tell us what's right and wrong.

When we had to depend on the law for salvation, salvation was impossible. Now that we are free from the law, salvation has been made possible through Jesus Christ. But that doesn't mean that we can just ignore the law and pretend that it no longer tells us what's right.

The law can't give us salvation. Never could, never will be able to. But it can tell us God's standards of right and wrong - which it does. These standards are the same, and as His children we need to put effort into conforming to His standards even though we know that we'll fail and that following His standards won't save us.

Then salvation isn't a free gift.

bugkiller

 

[nomadictheist]

Then salvation isn't a free gift.

bugkiller

Not true. Just because those who are saved become God's children and therefore through His Spirit are being conformed to the image of Jesus Christ doesn't mean that the gift is not free. If the gift were not free, then there would have to be something that we have to do in order to receive it, when, in fact, there's absolutely nothing that we can do to be worthy of it. Therefore, it is offered freely.

However, if a gift is offered freely, that doesn't affect what comes after. For example, if I give my daughter a free corvette when she turns 16, it's a free gift. If I tell her to drive responsibly and obey the rules of the road, it doesn't make it any less free. And if she chooses to disobey the rules of the road and gets caught, there will be monetary penalties. If she disobeys enough rules of the road and gets caught often enough, she eventually won't be able to legally drive it.

Just as in this scenario, our choices after receiving the free gift of salvation affect every area of our lives. If we choose to live as though we still belonged to the world, not submitting ourselves to the Law of God and the direction of the Spirit, we will suffer the consequences. In fact, there are some passages in the Bible that indicate that someone can at least appear to possess salvation and then lose that salvation. While there is a lot of scholarly debate over whether this means you can "lose" your salvation or it wasn't real in the first place, the outcome is the same whether it's "lost" or just "not real."

 

[bbbbbbb]

Not true. Just because those who are saved become God's children and therefore through His Spirit are being conformed to the image of Jesus Christ doesn't mean that the gift is not free. If the gift were not free, then there would have to be something that we have to do in order to receive it, when, in fact, there's absolutely nothing that we can do to be worthy of it. Therefore, it is offered freely.

However, if a gift is offered freely, that doesn't affect what comes after. For example, if I give my daughter a free corvette when she turns 16, it's a free gift. If I tell her to drive responsibly and obey the rules of the road, it doesn't make it any less free. And if she chooses to disobey the rules of the road and gets caught, there will be monetary penalties. If she disobeys enough rules of the road and gets caught often enough, she eventually won't be able to legally drive it.

Just as in this scenario, our choices after receiving the free gift of salvation affect every area of our lives. If we choose to live as though we still belonged to the world, not submitting ourselves to the Law of God and the direction of the Spirit, we will suffer the consequences. In fact, there are some passages in the Bible that indicate that someone can at least appear to possess salvation and then lose that salvation. While there is a lot of scholarly debate over whether this means you can "lose" your salvation or it wasn't real in the first place, the outcome is the same whether it's "lost" or just "not real."

Out of curiosity, how can "someone can at least appear to possess salvation and then lose that salvation"? If, in fact, they merely appear to possess it, how can they lose what, in fact, they never possessed?

 

[nomadictheist]

Out of curiosity, how can "someone can at least appear to possess salvation and then lose that salvation"? If, in fact, they merely appear to possess it, how can they lose what, in fact, they never possessed?

The phrasing is not improper, since the adverbial clause "at least" modifies the verb "appears." The sentence thus means that there was certainly an appearance of the salvation being there, and the salvation may actually have been there. I simplified the end of the sentence to "lose that salvation" rather than "lose that salvation or lose that appearance of salvation" because I believed there to be a reasonable expectation that people would get the intended meaning.

But thank you for pointing that out - by which I mean submitting a post on this forum that made me aware of the possible lack of understanding. Perhaps we should all be careful to police - by which I mean examine and make changes where necessary - our phraseology so that every idea in every sentence is spelled out - by which I mean carefully worded with no omissions for the sake of expediency, words or phrases that have multiple possible meanings, cliches, or similar literary devices - and no expectation of the readers' understanding is ever made.

 

[bbbbbbb]

The phrasing is not improper, since the adverbial clause "at least" modifies the verb "appears." The sentence thus means that there was certainly an appearance of the salvation being there, and the salvation may actually have been there. I simplified the end of the sentence to "lose that salvation" rather than "lose that salvation or lose that appearance of salvation" because I believed there to be a reasonable expectation that people would get the intended meaning.

But thank you for pointing that out - by which I mean submitting a post on this forum that made me aware of the possible lack of understanding. Perhaps we should all be careful to police - by which I mean examine and make changes where necessary - our phraseology so that every idea in every sentence is spelled out - by which I mean carefully worded with no omissions for the sake of expediency, words or phrases that have multiple possible meanings, cliches, or similar literary devices - and no expectation of the readers' understanding is ever made.

Thank you for the clarification. For further clarification, how does one "lose" something which scripture tells us can never be taken from the recipient?

 

[nomadictheist]

Interesting question, because it assumes that scripture says one can't "lose" salvation.

I have not stated a firm position on either side. There are scholars who have studied the Bible for years who say we can, and scholars who have studied the Bible for years who say we can't. That's why in my post I was careful to explicitly avoid taking one side or the other, because I'm sure there are entire forums on that (which are not this one).

The point is, whether you can lose your salvation or it's just not real for some people, the end result is the same.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Interesting question, because it assumes that scripture says one can't "lose" salvation.

I have not stated a firm position on either side. There are scholars who have studied the Bible for years who say we can, and scholars who have studied the Bible for years who say we can't. That's why in my post I was careful to explicitly avoid taking one side or the other, because I'm sure there are entire forums on that (which are not this one).

The point is, whether you can lose your salvation or it's just not real for some people, the end result is the same.

I suppose my response to your point is that when a person is born of God he receives the Holy Spirit of God, by Whom he is sealed to the day of redemption. He, therefore, is a new person with a new nature. Although he still sins, his relationship to sin is amazingly different. Previously he was ignorant and indifferent to sin, but now he wants to please his Lord and Master, Jesus Christ, and, therefore, repents when he is convicted of his sin by God, the Holy Spirit.
Now I understand your ambiguity on this divisive issue which, as you say, is not central to your point. Thank you.

 

[Cribstyl]

There's been a lot said, and once again a lot of misunderstanding...

We are no longer under the law. If we were under the law, then we woul d have to depend on the law for salvation. We depend on Jesus and His sacrifice for our salvation.

However, the law has not passed away. Nor has it been abolished. And anyone who freely breaks the law unrepentantly shows that he does not know God.

Cribstyl quoted Luke 16:16, but left out verse 17 because it creates an apparent contradiction without proper understanding. Verse 17 reads "And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass [away], than one tittle of the law to fail" (KJV)

You're correct to say it's an apparent misunderstanding. The ones with the misunderstanding are those who are ignorant to the fact that Jesus is confirming all that Moses and the prophets wrote.

This is the second place where we are told that Jesus tells us not a single tittle of the law shall perish.

I could also point out that you changed the word "fail" to "perish" for a reason. Yes..the scriptures does reiterate that; if a dot or comma changes from what's written, then God's words to would fail. You, like many are focused on the glow of the ten and not understanding references to the entire scriptures.
Did Moses write in the law that the covenant is the ten commandments? YES
Is it not also spelled out in Jeremiah that God will give a new covenant unlike the one given the fathers? YES
THESE 2 MAJOR FACTS ARE ARGUED AWAY FROM WEAK CHRISTIANS. but it's written.
Luke16:16-17 Jesus is confirming that God's word (written in the law) will not fail. Paul also confirms that, written in the law and the prophets; God will call for righteousness without the law.
Rom 3:21 But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets

What it means to be free from the law means that we no longer have to depend on the law for salvation. It does not mean that the law is null and void or that it doesn't tell us what's right and wrong.

Really?? If you don't add to where Paul taught about being free from the law. You should be saying that the law cannot make you free from sin or death. Somehow you're teaching on the law's relationship to salvation in order to uphold your doctrine over what is written. (ripping my tunic)
Rom 8:2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death.

Rom 8:3 For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:

When we had to depend on the law for salvation, salvation was impossible. Now that we are free from the law, salvation has been made possible through Jesus Christ. But that doesn't mean that we can just ignore the law and pretend that it no longer tells us what's right.

The law can't give us salvation. Never could, never will be able to. But it can tell us God's standards of right and wrong - which it does. These standards are the same, and as His children we need to put effort into conforming to His standards even though we know that we'll fail and that following His standards won't save us.

The truth is not that complicated. Being free from the law and being dead to the law is really about the covenant you're under. It's explained by Paul as: your wife being dead and you're married to another. Somehow you see the law alive and don't understand the one who died for you. Dude you cant have two lovers.
Rom 7:4 Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God.

 

[LoveofTruth]

I've always said that there were a negligable amount of Jews there. You are the one who thinks the number of Jews was significant. So now I'm calling you on the numbers. Go ahead. I await with baited breath.

In Post 11 you said

"You have to remember that Paul was writing to Gentiles in Corinth, not to Jews"

Notice you didn't say to "mostly" gentiles and "some" Jews.

 

[Meowzltov]

In Post 11 you said

"You have to remember that Paul was writing to Gentiles in Corinth, not to Jews"

Notice you didn't say to "mostly" gentiles and "some" Jews.

Right. And Paul was writing to the majority. Not to the minority.

 

[Hank77]

What do you make of this quote from Paul about how the promise came to us?

Romans 4
13 It is clear, then, that God’s promise to give the whole earth to Abraham and his descendants was not based on obedience to God’s law, but on the new relationship with God that comes by faith.

I make of it just what he explained about the covenant. Who was the covenant made with? Not the seeds as many, but with the One Seed, with is Christ. Did He inherit the whole world from the Father? Yes, He did.

Sometimes when I share this with people they are so confused and troubled that they will even attack Paul and say , then Paul was wrong. But he was right

Paul clearly says that the law written on stones is done away and abolished for the believer now. 2 Cor 3 needs to be answered. We cant just avoid it and go to our own arguments.

Is the confusion because of language and translations?
When Jesus said that He did not come to destroy the Law and Paul says the Law is abolished, they use two different words with different meanings.

Verse 17 reads "And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass [away], than one tittle of the law to fail"

1Ti 1:8 and we have known that the law is good, if any one may use it lawfully;

Being free from the law and being dead to the law is really about the covenant you're under.

I agree. That is a problem for those in Judaism, seeing that the old covenant is obsolete.

Right. And Paul was writing to the majority. Not to the minority.

If there were just one Israelite in the crowd you can't tell me Paul didn't speak clearly to him/her as well. He would never ever say something that did not agree with their salvation and requirements.

Rom 9:2 that I have great grief and unceasing pain in my heart--
Rom 9:3 for I was wishing, I myself, to be anathema from the Christ--for my brethren, my kindred, according to the flesh,
Rom 9:4 who are Israelites, whose is the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the lawgiving, and the service, and the promises,
Rom 9:5 whose are the fathers, and of whom is the Christ, according to the flesh, who is over all, God blessed to the ages. Amen.

 

[bugkiller]

When we are in Christ we keep the law. The man that is in Christ does not steal lie kill or commit adultery which are the requirements of the law. So to say there is no law for the Christian is not accurate.
Jesus states that we who are His keeps the commandments. Rev. 12:17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.

No Jesus doesn't say keep the law AKA the 10 Cs. You've been shown more than once the current command of God is to keep the commandments of Jesus which aren't the 10 Cs. This proof is found in the writings of John a personal disciple which you reject. WE start right off with Jn 1:17 showing Jesus didn't bring the law. Then moving John 15:10 we see that Jesus said keep His commandments, not His father's commandments. Jesus says very clearly He kept His father's commandments while asking something else of His followers.

You've also been pointed to I Jn 3:23 and shown the proper assignment of the pronouns. The previous passages cited above make it clear John isn't talking about the 10Cs. You try to make keeping the law are requirement of salvation against Jesus' own words found in John 10. There Jesus makles it clear those who try to get into heaven or access the Father by keeping the are thieves.

bugkiller