Gal 4 "under the Law" vs "under Grace" in Romans 6 and not sinning

[BobRyan]

Galatians chapter 4 verse 21-31
Tell me you who want to be under the law, are you not aware of what the law says? For it is written that Abraham had two sons,one by the slave woman and the other by the free woman. His son by the slave woman was born in the ordinary way; but his son by the free woman was born as the result of a promise.
These things may be taken figuratively, for the women represent two covenants. One covenant is from Mount Sinai and bears children who are to be slaves: This is Hagar. now Hagar stands for Mount Sinai in Arabia and corresponds to the present city of Jerusalem, because she is in slavery with her children. But the Jerusalem that is above is free, and she is our mother. For it is written: "be glad, O barren woman, who bears no children; break forth and cry aloud, you who have no labor pains; because more are the children of the desolate woman than of her who has a husband. Now you, brothers, like Isaac, are children of promise. At that time the son born in the ordinary way persecuted the son born by the power of the Spirit. It is the same now. But what does the Scripture say? Get rid of the slave woman and her son, for the slave woman's son will never share in the inheritance with the free woman's son Therefore, brothers, we are not children of the slave woman, but of the free woman.

The term "under the LAW" in Gal 4 -- in its most favorable light - means under the obligation of the ceremonial law apart from faith. But in general Paul uses the term with respect to condemnation under the moral of God without the Gospel benefit of salvation.

The end of Galatians 4 is not about condemning the Word of God in the OT - it is the use of an allegory to demonstrate that the LAW of God is not a second-gospel a competing-gospel and never was. Period.

Gal 4
21 Tell me, you who want to be under law, do you not listen to the law?

<Paul is not saying "tell me you want want to affirm scripture - the Word of God -- how dare you not condemn scripture" > Rather Paul is addressing those who want to use the Law as a gospel.

Gal 4
22 For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by the bondwoman and one by the free woman. 23 But the son by the bondwoman was born according to the flesh, and the son by the free woman through the promise. 24 This is allegorically speaking, for these women are two covenants: one proceeding from Mount Sinai bearing children who are to be slaves; she is Hagar. 25 Now this Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia and corresponds to the present Jerusalem, for she is in slavery with her children. 26 But the Jerusalem above is free; she is our mother. 27 For it is written,

“Rejoice, barren woman who does not bear;
Break forth and shout, you who are not in labor;
For more numerous are the children of the desolate
Than of the one who has a husband.”

NOTE: "Jerusalem above" was there in both OT and NT times. This is not a condemnation of the OT text of scripture. In fact it is in the OT that we find the NEW Covenant "I will write My LAWS on their heart and mind" Jer 31:31-33 - what is more "for it is written" is a reference to the still-authoritative OT text - as scripture.

Gal 4
28 And you brethren, like Isaac, are children of promise. 29 But as at that time he who was born according to the flesh persecuted him who was born according to the Spirit, so it is now also. 30 But what does the Scripture say?

“Cast out the bondwoman and her son,
For the son of the bondwoman shall not be an heir with the son of the free woman.”

31 So then, brethren, we are not children of a bondwoman, but of the free woman.

NOTE: "Him who is born of the Spirit" is the same pre-cross teaching we see from Christ in John 3 - speaking to Nicodemus. Far from being a condemnation of pre-cross teaching - it affirms it.


================================
Rom 9
30 What shall we say then? That Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness of faith; 31 but Israel, pursuing the law of righteousness, has not attained to the law of righteousness. 32 Why? Because they did not seek it by faith, but as it were, by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumbling stone.

1 John 3:4 - "SIN IS transgression of the LAW" both in OT and also by NT standards

So then in Rom 6 Paul speaks about the obligation not to SIN - even though not "under the law" -- not under the condemnation of the LAW.

Rom 6
15 What then? Shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? Certainly not! 16 Do you not know that to whom you present yourselves slaves to obey, you are that one’s slaves whom you obey, whether of sin leading to death, or of obedience leading to righteousness? 17 But God be thanked that though you were slaves of sin, yet you obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine to which you were delivered

1 john 2:1 "these things I write to you that you sin NOT"

The Covenant at Sinai with Israel included
"Love your neighbor as yourself" Lev 19:18

And 40 years later Moses reminds them --
"Love God with all your heart" Deut 6:5

Christ continues to affirm them in Matt 22 , pre-cross - the Law of Moses upheld.

So then why is Paul associating Sinai with the old covenant in Gal 4?

Because the ceremonial law is no longer in effect.

1 Cor 7:19 "what matters is KEEPING the Commandments of God" as compared to the ceremonial laws such as circumcision - as we see in this example from 1Cor 7:19

notice how Christ upholds what "Moses said" in Mark 7 calling it "The WORD of GOD"

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.

John 14:15 "IF you Love Me - KEEP My Commandments"

"Love ME and KEEP My Commandments" Ex 20:6 -- from the TEN Commandments.

No wonder NT authors affirm the TEN Commandments as part of the moral law of God for the saints even in the NT as we see here
14 minutes ago #1


Heb 8:6-10 Christ's New Covenant and His TEN Commandments at Sinai
6 But now He has obtained a more excellent ministry, by as much as He is also the mediator of a better covenant, which has been enacted on better promises.

A New Covenant
7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no occasion sought for a second. 8 For finding fault with them, He says,

“Behold, days are coming, says the Lord,
When I will effect a New Covenant
With the house of Israel and with the house of Judah;
9 Not like the covenant which I made with their fathers
On the day when I took them by the hand
To lead them out of the land of Egypt;
For they did not continue in My covenant,
And I did not care for them, says the Lord.
10 “For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel
After those days, says the Lord:
I will put My laws into their minds,
And I will write them on their hearts.
And I will be their God,
And they shall be My people.

 

[disciple1]

The term "under the LAW" in Gal 4 -- means under the obligation of the ceremonial law apart from faith.

Rom 9
30 What shall we say then? That Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness of faith; 31 but Israel, pursuing the law of righteousness, has not attained to the law of righteousness. 32 Why? Because they did not seek it by faith, but as it were, by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumbling stone.

1 John 3:4 - "SIN IS transgression of the LAW" both in OT and also by NT standards

So then in Rom 6 Paul speaks about the obligation not to SIN - even though not "under the law" -- not under the condemnation of the LAW.

Rom 6
15 What then? Shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? Certainly not! 16 Do you not know that to whom you present yourselves slaves to obey, you are that one’s slaves whom you obey, whether of sin leading to death, or of obedience leading to righteousness? 17 But God be thanked that though you were slaves of sin, yet you obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine to which you were delivered

1 john 2:1 "these things I write to you that you sin NOT"

The Covenant at Sinai with Israel included
"Love your neighbor as yourself" Lev 19:18

And 40 years later Moses reminds them --
"Love God with all your heart" Deut 6:5

Christ continues to affirm them in Matt 22 , pre-cross - the Law of Moses upheld.

So then why is Paul associating Sinai with the old covenant in Gal 4?

Because the ceremonial law is no longer in effect.

1 Cor 7:19 "what matters is KEEPING the Commandments of God" as compared to the ceremonial laws such as circumcision - as we see in this example from 1Cor 7:19

notice how Christ upholds what "Mpses said" in Mark 7 calling it "The WORD of GOD"

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.

John 14:15 "IF you Love Me - KEEP My Commandments"

"Love ME and KEEP My Commandments" Ex 20:6 -- from the TEN Commandments.

No wonder NT authors affirm the TEN Commandments as part of the moral law of God for the saints even in the NT as we see here
14 minutes ago #1

This is the only law you should always try to keep even though you can't.
Galatians chapter 5 verse 14 the entire law is summed up in a single command love your neighbor as yourself.
Teaching anything else is only Hypocrisy, no one ever obeyed the law except Christ and if you commit one sin your guilty of every sin.
1 peter chapter 4
8 Above all, love each other deeply, because love covers over a multitude of sins.
Jeremiah chapter 22 verse 16
He defended the cause of the poor and needy,
and so all went well.
Is that not what it means to know me?”
declares the Lord.

 

[Bob S]

The term "under the LAW" in Gal 4 -- means under the obligation of the ceremonial law apart from faith.

Prove it please. If that is true then thumping the ceremonial (ritual) Sabbath is for naught just like we all have been telling you..

No wonder NT authors affirm the TEN Commandments as part of the moral law of God for the saints even in the NT as we see here

Where?

 

[Soyeong]

The term "under the LAW" in Gal 4 -- means under the obligation of the ceremonial law apart from faith.

Rom 9
30 What shall we say then? That Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness of faith; 31 but Israel, pursuing the law of righteousness, has not attained to the law of righteousness. 32 Why? Because they did not seek it by faith, but as it were, by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumbling stone.

1 John 3:4 - "SIN IS transgression of the LAW" both in OT and also by NT standards

So then in Rom 6 Paul speaks about the obligation not to SIN - even though not "under the law" -- not under the condemnation of the LAW.

Rom 6
15 What then? Shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? Certainly not! 16 Do you not know that to whom you present yourselves slaves to obey, you are that one’s slaves whom you obey, whether of sin leading to death, or of obedience leading to righteousness? 17 But God be thanked that though you were slaves of sin, yet you obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine to which you were delivered

1 john 2:1 "these things I write to you that you sin NOT"

The Covenant at Sinai with Israel included
"Love your neighbor as yourself" Lev 19:18

And 40 years later Moses reminds them --
"Love God with all your heart" Deut 6:5

Christ continues to affirm them in Matt 22 , pre-cross - the Law of Moses upheld.

So then why is Paul associating Sinai with the old covenant in Gal 4?

Because the ceremonial law is no longer in effect.

1 Cor 7:19 "what matters is KEEPING the Commandments of God" as compared to the ceremonial laws such as circumcision - as we see in this example from 1Cor 7:19

notice how Christ upholds what "Mpses said" in Mark 7 calling it "The WORD of GOD"

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.

John 14:15 "IF you Love Me - KEEP My Commandments"

"Love ME and KEEP My Commandments" Ex 20:6 -- from the TEN Commandments.

No wonder NT authors affirm the TEN Commandments as part of the moral law of God for the saints even in the NT as we see here
14 minutes ago #1

According to Deuteronomy 4:2, is it a sin to add to or subtract from God's law, so if you try to subtract the ceremonial laws, then you are sinning. Furthermore, according to Deuteronomy 13:4-6, anyone who says not to obey any of God's laws, which includes ceremonial laws, is a false prophet. On top of that, according to 1 Peter 1:14-16, we are told to have a holy conduct, which inherently refers to ceremonial laws.

Romans 6:14 For sin will have no dominion over you, since you are not under law but under grace.

Paul spoke about the law of God (Romans 3:31), the law of sin (Romans 7:23-25), the law of sin and death (Romans 8:2), the law of the Spirit of life (Romans 8:2), the law of faith (Romans 3:27), the law of righteousness (Romans 9:31), and the law of Christ (1 Corinthians 9:21), so in order to correctly understand what law we are not under in Romans 6:14, we need to know which law he was talking about. There is something about the law that we are not under which relates to sin having no dominion over us, so it is straightforward that the law that we are not under is the law of sin, which is the opposite of the law of God. If Paul had been meaning that we are not under the law of God because we are not under sin, then he would have been equating the law of God with sin, but he made it clear that the law of God was not sin (Romans 7:7), and as you already quoted, sin is in fact the transgression of the law (1 John 3:4).

Romans 6:8-9 Now if we have died with Christ, we believe that we will also live with him. 9 We know that Christ, being raised from the dead, will never die again; death no longer has dominion over him.

Faith in Messiah frees us from bondage to sin and allows us to overcome death, so we are no longer under the law of sin and death, but under grace. Strong's defines "grace" as "the divine influence upon the heart, and its reflection in the life" so it is by God's grace through faith that we are able to obey His will, which is instructed in His law.

1 John 2:4-6 Whoever says “I know him” but does not keep his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him, 5 but whoever keeps his word, in him truly the love of God is perfected. By this we may know that we are in him: 6 whoever says he abides in him ought to walk in the same way in which he walked.

These verses associate keeping Messiah's commands with walking as he walked, he it walked in perfect obedience to the law. Messiah didn't preach one thing and live differently, but rather he practiced what he preached and preached what he practiced. The Father, Son, and Spirit are not in disagreement with each other, so the law of Messiah is the same as the law of the Spirit, which is the same as the law of God, which He gave to Moses.

 

[BobRyan]

According to Deuteronomy 4:2, is it a sin to add to or subtract from God's law, so if you try to subtract the ceremonial laws, then you are sinning. .

I don't subtract anything. I let God say whatever he wants.

In Heb 10 God says this about the animal sacrifice based ceremonial laws.

8 After saying above, “Sacrifices and offerings and whole burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin You have not desired, nor have You taken pleasure in them” (which are offered according to the Law), 9 then He said, “Behold, I have come to do Your will.” He takes away the first in order to establish the second.

We dare not delete that text.

But God never says that he takes away the moral law - rather "Sin IS transgression of the LAW" 1 John 3:4 -- still... in the NT.

And Eph 6:2 the 5th commandment is STILL "the FIRST commandment with a promise" in that still-valid unit of TEN.

 

[BobRyan]

Faith in Messiah frees us from bondage to sin .

And since sin is still " transgression of the LAW " 1 John 3:4 - that Faith is not redefining or abolishing the definition of sin - but rather freeing us from slavery to it.

 

[Soyeong]

I don't subtract anything. I let God say whatever he wants.

In Heb 10 God says this about the animal sacrifice based ceremonial laws.

8 After saying above, “Sacrifices and offerings and whole burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin You have not desired, nor have You taken pleasure in them” (which are offered according to the Law), 9 then He said, “Behold, I have come to do Your will.” He takes away the first in order to establish the second.

We dare not delete that text.

But God never says that he takes away the moral law - rather "Sin IS transgression of the LAW" 1 John 3:4 -- still... in the NT.

And Eph 6:2 the 5th commandment is STILL "the FIRST commandment with a promise" in that still-valid unit of TEN.

If you interpret the author of Hebrews 10 as subtracting ceremonial laws, then according to Deuteronomy 13:4-6, you should think that he was not speaking for God, but was rather a false prophet that should be disregarded. If God says to perform sacrifices and man says not to do them, then we should obey God rather than man, so either the author of Hebrews was wrong or your interpretation of them is wrong.

The Bible never makes any distinction between moral and non-moral laws, but rather all of God's laws are inherently moral laws and disobeying any of them is sin. The Israelites who transgressed God's ceremonial laws were sinning and so is anyone else who does that.

 

[BobRyan]

The term "under the LAW" in Gal 4 -- in its most favorable light - means under the obligation of the ceremonial law apart from faith. But in general Paul uses the term with respect to condemnation under the moral of God without the Gospel benefit of salvation.

Rom 9
30 What shall we say then? That Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness of faith; 31 but Israel, pursuing the law of righteousness, has not attained to the law of righteousness. 32 Why? Because they did not seek it by faith, but as it were, by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumbling stone.

1 John 3:4 - "SIN IS transgression of the LAW" both in OT and also by NT standards

So then in Rom 6 Paul speaks about the obligation not to SIN - even though not "under the law" -- not under the condemnation of the LAW.

Rom 6
15 What then? Shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? Certainly not! 16 Do you not know that to whom you present yourselves slaves to obey, you are that one’s slaves whom you obey, whether of sin leading to death, or of obedience leading to righteousness? 17 But God be thanked that though you were slaves of sin, yet you obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine to which you were delivered

1 john 2:1 "these things I write to you that you sin NOT"

The Covenant at Sinai with Israel included
"Love your neighbor as yourself" Lev 19:18

And 40 years later Moses reminds them --
"Love God with all your heart" Deut 6:5

So then why is Paul associating Sinai with the old covenant in Gal 4?

Because the ceremonial law is no longer in effect.

1 Cor 7:19 "what matters is KEEPING the Commandments of God" as compared to the ceremonial laws such as circumcision - as we see in this example from 1Cor 7:19

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

In Heb 10 God says this about the animal sacrifice based ceremonial laws.

Heb 10
8 After saying above, “Sacrifices and offerings and whole burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin You have not desired, nor have You taken pleasure in them” (which are offered according to the Law), 9 then He said, “Behold, I have come to do Your will.” He takes away the first in order to establish the second.

We dare not delete that text.

But God never says that he takes away the moral law - rather "Sin IS transgression of the LAW" 1 John 3:4 -- still... in the NT.

And Eph 6:2 the 5th commandment is STILL "the FIRST commandment with a promise" in that still-valid unit of TEN.

 

[BobRyan]

According to Deuteronomy 4:2, is it a sin to add to or subtract from God's law, so if you try to subtract the ceremonial laws, then you are sinning. .

I don't subtract anything. I let God say whatever he wants.

In Heb 10 God says this about the animal sacrifice based ceremonial laws.

Heb 10
8 After saying above, “Sacrifices and offerings and whole burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin You have not desired, nor have You taken pleasure in them” (which are offered according to the Law), 9 then He said, “Behold, I have come to do Your will.” He takes away the first in order to establish the second.

We dare not delete that text.

But God never says that he takes away the moral law - rather "Sin IS transgression of the LAW" 1 John 3:4 -- still... in the NT.

And Eph 6:2 the 5th commandment is STILL "the FIRST commandment with a promise" in that still-valid unit of TEN.

If you interpret the author of Hebrews 10 as subtracting ceremonial laws, then according to Deuteronomy 13:4-6, you should think that he was not speaking for God, but was rather a false prophet .

We get that a lot from atheists trying to pit one part of the bible against another instead of seeing the glaringly obvious harmony in the two -- There may be a tiny few here that go for that kind of speculation - I doubt that many Bible students will go for it.

 

[Soyeong]

We get that a lot from atheists trying to pit one part of the bible against another instead of seeing the glaringly obvious harmony in the two -- There may be a tiny few here that go for that kind of speculation - I doubt that many Bible students will go for it.

I do not think there is any discord between Deuteronomy 13 and Hebrews 10, but rather the discord is between Deuteronomy 13 and your interpretation of Hebrews 10. Deuteronomy 13 shows that your interpretation of Hebrews 10 is wrong, but if you refuse to accept that, then you must accept that the author of Hebrews 10 is wrong, but either way it is false that God has removed even the smallest part from His law.

 

[BobRyan]

I do not think there is any discord between Deuteronomy 13 and Hebrews 10,

Agreed.

Animal sacrifices and offerings were introduced by God as "Shadows" pointing to the death of Christ. Then as Heb 10 points out -- with the sacrifice of Christ "He takes away the first and establishes the second" pointing to Christ as the true sacrifice for sin - to which all other sacrifices pointed as shadows.

rather the discord is between Deuteronomy 13 and your interpretation of Hebrews 10.

Deuteronomy 13 shows that your interpretation of Hebrews 10 is wrong, but if you refuse to accept that, then you will come up with odd constructs about "the author of Hebrews 10 is wrong", but either way it is false that God has removed even the smallest part from His moral law.

And as even the majority of pro-sunday scholars admit - the moral law of God including the TEN Commandments remain - whereas animal sacrifices, civil law under the theocracy, ceremonies based in animal sacrifice - ended.

Irrefutable.

 

[Soyeong]

Agreed.

Animal sacrifices and offerings were introduced by God as "Shadows" pointing to the death of Christ. Then as Heb 10 points out -- with the sacrifice of Christ "He takes away the first and establishes the second" pointing to Christ as the true sacrifice for sin - to which all other sacrifices pointed as shadows.

The OT is full of shadows that are important teachings about the Messiah, and the Messiah came to bring substance to those shadows. For example, he brings substance or full meaning to Passover to by being our Passover Lamb, and Passover is a shadow or rehearsal of what is to come, or what we will be doing during his reign. Taking away the first order and establishing a second refers to a new administration where he is our mediator and high priest, not to a different form of conduct. The way to have a holy, righteous, and good conduct did not change, just as God's holiness, righteousness, and goodness did not change.

rather the discord is between Deuteronomy 13 and your interpretation of Hebrews 10.

Deuteronomy 13 shows that your interpretation of Hebrews 10 is wrong, but if you refuse to accept that, then you will come up with odd constructs about "the author of Hebrews 10 is wrong", but either way it is false that God has removed even the smallest part from His moral law.

1.) Do you agree Deuteronomy 13 say that anyone who teaches them against obeying any of God's commands is a false prophet?
2.) Do you agree that the author of Hebrews 10 teaches against obeying God's sacrificial commands.
3.) If you agree to both, then you should conclude that therefore that the author of Hebrews is a false prophet.

I agree to 1.), but disagree with 2.), but if you also agree with 2.), then your conclusion is problematic and you should reconsider your interpretation of Hebrews 10.

And as even the majority of pro-sunday scholars admit - the moral law of God including the TEN Commandments remain - whereas animal sacrifices, civil law under the theocracy, ceremonies based in animal sacrifice - ended.

The majority of Christians don't worship on Saturday, but that doesn't mean they are correct. As I have pointed out, the Bible makes no distinctions between disobedience to God that is sin and not sin or between moral and nonmoral commands, but rather disobedience to any of God's commands is sin and all of God's commands are inherently moral commands. Morality is in regard to what we ought to do and we ought to obey God's commands. The sacrifices did not stop with the death or resurrection of Jesus, but have stopped only because there is no temple, and according to the Bible, they will resume when the third temple is built. Furthermore, we are told to have a holy conduct (1 Peter 1:14-16), which inherently includes ceremonial laws.

 

[disciple1]

According to Deuteronomy 4:2, is it a sin to add to or subtract from God's law, so if you try to subtract the ceremonial laws, then you are sinning. Furthermore, according to Deuteronomy 13:4-6, anyone who says not to obey any of God's laws, which includes ceremonial laws, is a false prophet. On top of that, according to 1 Peter 1:14-16, we are told to have a holy conduct, which inherently refers to ceremonial laws.

Romans 6:14 For sin will have no dominion over you, since you are not under law but under grace.

Paul spoke about the law of God (Romans 3:31), the law of sin (Romans 7:23-25), the law of sin and death (Romans 8:2), the law of the Spirit of life (Romans 8:2), the law of faith (Romans 3:27), the law of righteousness (Romans 9:31), and the law of Christ (1 Corinthians 9:21), so in order to correctly understand what law we are not under in Romans 6:14, we need to know which law he was talking about. There is something about the law that we are not under which relates to sin having no dominion over us, so it is straightforward that the law that we are not under is the law of sin, which is the opposite of the law of God. If Paul had been meaning that we are not under the law of God because we are not under sin, then he would have been equating the law of God with sin, but he made it clear that the law of God was not sin (Romans 7:7), and as you already quoted, sin is in fact the transgression of the law (1 John 3:4).

Romans 6:8-9 Now if we have died with Christ, we believe that we will also live with him. 9 We know that Christ, being raised from the dead, will never die again; death no longer has dominion over him.

Faith in Messiah frees us from bondage to sin and allows us to overcome death, so we are no longer under the law of sin and death, but under grace. Strong's defines "grace" as "the divine influence upon the heart, and its reflection in the life" so it is by God's grace through faith that we are able to obey His will, which is instructed in His law.

1 John 2:4-6 Whoever says “I know him” but does not keep his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him, 5 but whoever keeps his word, in him truly the love of God is perfected. By this we may know that we are in him: 6 whoever says he abides in him ought to walk in the same way in which he walked.

These verses associate keeping Messiah's commands with walking as he walked, he it walked in perfect obedience to the law. Messiah didn't preach one thing and live differently, but rather he practiced what he preached and preached what he practiced. The Father, Son, and Spirit are not in disagreement with each other, so the law of Messiah is the same as the law of the Spirit, which is the same as the law of God, which He gave to Moses.

If you believe you have to obey the law, it doesn't mean if your born of god or not.

Peter chapter 1
18 For you know that it was not with perishable things such as silver or gold that you were redeemed from the empty way of life handed down to you from your ancestors, 19 but with the precious blood of Christ, a lamb without blemish or defect. 20 He was chosen before the creation of the world, but was revealed in these last times for your sake. 21 Through him you believe in God, who raised him from the dead and glorified him, and so your faith and hope are in God.
But if you love your born of god.
1 John chapter 4
7 Dear friends, let us love one another, for love comes from God. Everyone who loves has been born of God and knows God. 8 Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love.
Galatians chapter 5
6 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision has any value. The only thing that counts is faith expressing itself through love.

 

[Soyeong]

If you believe you have to obey the law, it doesn't mean if your born of god or not.

1 John 3:4-10 Everyone who makes a practice of sinning also practices lawlessness; sin is lawlessness. 5 You know that he appeared in order to take away sins, and in him there is no sin. 6 No one who abides in him keeps on sinning; no one who keeps on sinning has either seen him or known him. 7 Little children, let no one deceive you. Whoever practices righteousness is righteous, as he is righteous. 8 Whoever makes a practice of sinning is of the devil, for the devil has been sinning from the beginning. The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the works of the devil. 9 No one born of God makes a practice of sinning, for God's seed abides in him, and he cannot keep on sinning because he has been born of God. 10 By this it is evident who are the children of God, and who are the children of the devil: whoever does not practice righteousness is not of God, nor is the one who does not love his brother.

It is pretty clear that we are not to practice lawlessness, but rather we are to practice righteousness in obedience to the law. No one born of God makes a practice of lawlessness and those who do not practice righteousness are not born of God.

Peter chapter 1
18 For you know that it was not with perishable things such as silver or gold that you were redeemed from the empty way of life handed down to you from your ancestors, 19 but with the precious blood of Christ, a lamb without blemish or defect. 20 He was chosen before the creation of the world, but was revealed in these last times for your sake. 21 Through him you believe in God, who raised him from the dead and glorified him, and so your faith and hope are in God.
But if you love your born of god.

Obedience to the law has never been about what we need to do to become redeemed, but rather it is about living by faith, for the righteous shall live by faith (Habakkuk 2:4).

1 John chapter 4
7 Dear friends, let us love one another, for love comes from God. Everyone who loves has been born of God and knows God. 8 Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love.

God's law is about how to love God and how to love your neighbor, so everyone who is born of God will love in the manner that the law instructs in accordance with the perfect example given to us by Jesus.

Galatians chapter 5
6 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision has any value. The only thing that counts is faith expressing itself through love.

Romans 3:1-2 Then what advantage has the Jew? Or what is the value of circumcision? 2 Much in every way.

Romans 2:26 For circumcision indeed is of value if you obey the law, but if you break the law, your circumcision becomes uncircumcision.

It's not that circumcision has no value or great value, but that it has no value for becoming justified and the value that it does have is dependent on whether you obey the law.

 

[disciple1]

1 John 3:4-10 Everyone who makes a practice of sinning also practices lawlessness; sin is lawlessness. 5 You know that he appeared in order to take away sins, and in him there is no sin. 6 No one who abides in him keeps on sinning; no one who keeps on sinning has either seen him or known him. 7 Little children, let no one deceive you. Whoever practices righteousness is righteous, as he is righteous. 8 Whoever makes a practice of sinning is of the devil, for the devil has been sinning from the beginning. The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the works of the devil. 9 No one born of God makes a practice of sinning, for God's seed abides in him, and he cannot keep on sinning because he has been born of God. 10 By this it is evident who are the children of God, and who are the children of the devil: whoever does not practice righteousness is not of God, nor is the one who does not love his brother.

It is pretty clear that we are not to practice lawlessness, but rather we are to practice righteousness in obedience to the law. No one born of God makes a practice of lawlessness and those who do not practice righteousness are not born of God.



Obedience to the law has never been about what we need to do to become redeemed, but rather it is about living by faith, for the righteous shall live by faith (Habakkuk 2:4).



God's law is about how to love God and how to love your neighbor, so everyone who is born of God will love in the manner that the law instructs in accordance with the perfect example given to us by Jesus.



Romans 3:1-2 Then what advantage has the Jew? Or what is the value of circumcision? 2 Much in every way.

Romans 2:26 For circumcision indeed is of value if you obey the law, but if you break the law, your circumcision becomes uncircumcision.

It's not that circumcision has no value or great value, but that it has no value for becoming justified and the value that it does have is dependent on whether you obey the law.

Hebrews chapter 7 verses 11,12 If perfection could have been attained through the Levitical priesthood for on the basis of it the law was given to the people why was there still need for another priest to come one in the order of Melchizedek, not in the order of Aaron? For when there is a change of the priesthood, there must also be a change of the law.

 

[Soyeong]

Hebrews chapter 7 verses 11,12 If perfection could have been attained through the Levitical priesthood for on the basis of it the law was given to the people why was there still need for another priest to come one in the order of Melchizedek, not in the order of Aaron? For when there is a change of the priesthood, there must also be a change of the law.

The change is in the administration, not in the way to have a holy, righteous, and good conduct. God's holiness, righteousness, and goodness did not change between covenants.

 

[disciple1]

The change is in the administration, not in the way to have a holy, righteous, and good conduct. God's holiness, righteousness, and goodness did not change between covenants.

Christian forums doesn't believe you have to obey the law to be saved their right, on that point anyway.
I believe all you have to do is love to be saved, the more you love the greater the reward.
Matthew chapter 25 verses 31-46
When the Son of Man comes" in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his throne in heavenly glory. All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. he will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left. Then the King will say to those on his right, Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me. then the righteous will answer him, Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? When did we see you sick or in prison and got visit you? The King will reply, I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me. Then he will say to those on his left, Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.They also will answer, Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you? He will reply, I tell you the truth, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me. Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.

 

[Soyeong]

Christian forums doesn't believe you have to obey the law to be saved their right, on that point anyway.

I have never suggested that you have the obey the law in order to be saved, that was never the reason why God gave the law in the first place.

I believe all you have to do is love to be saved, the more you love the greater the reward.

Salvation is from sin, sin is the transgression of the law, the law instructs us how to love, and the wages of sin is death, so our salvation from sin involves both Christ paying the penalty for our transgressions of the law and causing us to come into obedience to the law. However, we are not saved by loving others, but rather we are saved for the purpose of loving others. We are saved by grace through faith, not by doing good works, but for the purpose of doing them by grace through faith (Ephesians 2:8-10) and God's law instructs us how to do every good work (2 Timothy 3:16-17).

 

[disciple1]

I have never suggested that you have the obey the law in order to be saved, that was never the reason why God gave the law in the first place.



Salvation is from sin, sin is the transgression of the law, the law instructs us how to love, and the wages of sin is death, so our salvation from sin involves both Christ paying the penalty for our transgressions of the law and causing us to come into obedience to the law. However, we are not saved by loving others, but rather we are saved for the purpose of loving others. We are saved by grace through faith, not by doing good works, but for the purpose of doing them by grace through faith (Ephesians 2:8-10) and God's law instructs us how to do every good work (2 Timothy 3:16-17).

Then why would you ever want to obey the law? To help someone is much more rewarding and useful, and you can't obey the law anyway.

 

[Soyeong]

Then why would you ever want to obey the law?

I love God, so I practice obedience to His law. I have faith in God that He knows how I should live, so I practice obedience to His law. The law is of the Spirit and God sent His Spirit to lead us in obedience to His law, so I practice obedience to His law. I abide in Christ, so I practice obedience to his law and practice walking as he walked. God sent His Son to die to save me from lawlessness, so I practice obedience to His law. The Bible speaks strongly against lawlessness, so I practice obedience to his law. The Bible speaks strongly against sin, so I practice obedience to His law. Those who practice righteousness are born of God, so I practice obedience to His law. Throughout the Bible God wants His chosen people to obey His law, and I am a member of God's chosen people through faith in Messiah, so I practice obedience to His law. I want to live abundantly and be someone whom God can bless, so I practice obedience to His law. I love the law and delight in it, as Paul and David did, so I practice obedience to the law. The Bible says to do what is holy, righteous, and good, so I practice obedience to His law. I am God's representative to the nations, so I practice obedience to His law. I am a follower of God, so I practice obedience to His law.

To help someone is much more rewarding and useful, and you can't obey the law anyway.

Helping others is not distinct from God's law because it instructs us to help others.