Why Believers are not under the Old Covenant Law of Moses

[Theo Book]

1. Cain is cursed for the sin - the crime - of murder ... before any written law existed.

The law of Murder and its consequence was not spoken into law until the ninth chapter of genesis - 5 "And surely your blood of your lives will I require; at the hand of every beast will I require it, and at the hand of man; at the hand of every man's brother will I require the life of man. 6 Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man."

Romans 5:13 "For until the law sin was in the world: but SIN IS NOT IMPUTED WHEN THERE IS NO LAW."

The law of murder/consequence was not in effect until an unknown period of time long after the sin of Cain; therefore it was not imputed to Cain, other than the Curse placed upon him by God at the time of the event.

2. Genesis 6 - all mankind condemned to death - the flood - before any written law existed

Written law is not the only law God puts into place. His instructions to Adam were "LAW" which Adam ignored at his peril. When God speaks, His words are true, therefore, what he speaks is truth, and is not to be ignored nor mitigated by the ignorance of Men who in the days ending the flood, were given God's spoken law for their standard of behaviour; even their survival.

Later, the Hebrew nation was punished for not keeping the spirit of the law, though they kept the letter thereof - The events depicted in Hosea and demonstrated in Mathew show what is involved better that I could ever invent -

"For I desired mercy, and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings."(Hosea 6:6)

This little gem from Hosea was quoted twice by Jesus and applied to the ignorance of the Pharisees, who were alledged to be knowledgeable of the law -

"And it came to pass, as Jesus sat at meat in the house, behold, many publicans and sinners came and sat down with him and his disciples. 11 And when the Pharisees saw it, they said unto his disciples, Why eateth your Master with publicans and sinners? 12 But when Jesus heard that, he said unto them, They that be whole need not a physician, but they that are sick. 13 But go ye and learn what that meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice: for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance." (Mat 9:10-13)

Upon a later occasion, when attacked again, Jesus quoted this same passage from Hosea, only this time, He accused them by saying "If ye had known what this meaneth ye would not have condemned the guiltless."

"At that time Jesus went on the sabbath day through the corn; and his disciples were an hungred, and began to pluck the ears of corn, and to eat. 2 But when the Pharisees saw it, they said unto him, Behold, thy disciples do that which is not lawful to do upon the sabbath day. 3 But he said unto them, Have ye not read what David did, when he was an hungred, and they that were with him; 4 How he entered into the house of God, and did eat the shewbread, which was not lawful for him to eat, neither for them which were with him, but only for the priests? 5 Or have ye not read in the law, how that on the sabbath days the priests in the temple profane the sabbath, and are blameless? 6 But I say unto you, That in this place is one greater than the temple.7 But if ye had known what this meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice, ye would not have condemned the guiltless".(Mat 12:1-7)

And it must be remembered, God commanded the sacrifices, but through Hosea, God says "mercy outranks sacrifice."

3. It was always wrong to take God's name in vain... and still is wrong to do that.

Genesis 26:5
5 because Abraham obeyed Me and kept My charge, My commandments, My statutes and My laws.”

The "charge, commandments, statutes and laws" Abraham kept had nothing to do wth the "charge, commandments, statutes, and laws" given to Moses
It is still wrong to take God's name in vain, but not because of a law given to Moses, to which even Abraham was not liable, because he was never an Israelite - He was Israel's GrandFather. Isaac was never an Israelite - he was Israel's Father. Jacob was never an Israelite - He was Israel. Only the children of Israel and their descendants, and proselyte's who joined themselves to Israel were subjects of the law given to Moses

THE COVENANT OF TEN COMMANDMENTS GIVEN TO MOSES WERE NOT AN EVERLASTING COVENANT
"The LORD our God made a covenant with us in Horeb. 3 The LORD made not this covenant with our fathers, but with us, even us, who are all of us here alive this day. (Deut 5:2)

"Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.(Gal 3:16)

Paul showed us in Gal 3:16, the timing of the end of the law - "Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, TILL the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator. (Gal 3:19)

And to whom were the promises made?
"Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.(Gal 3:16)

To ABRAHAM AND CHRIST. When Christ came, the law was fulfilled, because it fulfilled the promise.

But the problem will always remain, some, being not knowledgeable of nuances and meanings will argue from a translation that is faulted. In this case, some understand the use of the word "Everlasting," and they do well. But sometimes the word being translated does not reference eternity, but an age, "age-lasting" rather than "lasting beyond all ages."

 

[BobRyan]

The purpose of the law was to increase THE AWARENESS OF SIN.

There was already sin in the world, and it was wherever MAN was found; For "All have sinned..." is not just a slogan, it is a scriptural spiritual fact.

But there are two other FACTS which must be factored in;
1) Where there was no law, sin was not IMPUTED. Nothings is said about it not being COMMITTED. It was not IMPUTED because God had not made Men aware of the fact their deeds and thoughts were unrighteous, and all unrighteousness is sin. BUT, "There is a sin not unto death."
.

1. Cain is cursed for the sin - the crime - of murder ... before any written law existed.
2. Genesis 6 - all mankind condemned to death - the flood - before any written law existed
3. It was always wrong to take God's name in vain... and still is wrong to do that.

Genesis 26:5
5 because Abraham obeyed Me and kept My charge, My commandments, My statutes and My laws.”

The law of Murder and its consequence was not spoken into law until the ninth chapter of genesis

True.

And "Sin IS transgression of the LAW" 1 John 3:4 -- such that where there is no LAW there is no sin.

Genesis 4 God says to Cain "SIN is crouching at your door... you must master it". This is the sin of hate and murder... not yet written as law. Still Cain is accountable for it -- apparently he knew about it. And of course Genesis 1-7 is not an exhaustive record of every word spoken for 1600 years.

The law of murder/consequence was not in effect until an unknown period of time long after the sin of Cain; therefore it was not imputed to Cain

Yet Genesis 4 tells us the exact opposite of that conclusion. Your argument is "with the text"

Written law is not the only law God puts into place. His instructions to Adam were "LAW"

True - and from His statements to Cain we may know that God had also addressed that issue of hate and murder - as law. Even Cain knows that others will try to kill him for punishment of his evil deed inspired by Satan.

This is also seen in Genesis 6 and 7 when Noah enters the ark -- Clean animals in pairs of 7 and unclean in pairs. What was the distinguishing detail to identify clean from unclean? Moses writes Genesis 6 and 7... and Moses writes Leviticus 11 where the definition for those terms is given in the Bible. Moses' readers had access to both and would therefore know what was meant in Genesis 6.

But how did Noah know? Clearly more evidence that Genesis 1-7 is not an account of every word spoken for those 1600 years.

 

[listed]

1. Cain is cursed for the sin - the crime - of murder ... before any written law existed.
2. Genesis 6 - all mankind condemned to death - the flood - before any written law existed
3. It was always wrong to take God's name in vain... and still is wrong to do that.

Genesis 26:5
5 because Abraham obeyed Me and kept My charge, My commandments, My statutes and My laws.”

Please identify the above items of Genesis 26:5. Abraham didn't have the law issued to Israel (Deuteronomy 5:3)

 

[FreeAtLast]

@FreeAtLast
@bekkilyn
If we aren't under the 10 commandments, does that mean we can actually break them without concern/repentance and we are covered by grace, and will still get to heaven?

Since we, if we are truly born again Believers in Yeshua, are no longer under the OLD Covenant Law of Moses, does not mean we are not under ANY Law. it simply means, as we've been saying, that we are now under Yeshua's NEW Covenant, with His commands. And HE repeats 9 of the 10 OLD Covenant Laws, but noticeably, leave out the 4th commandment - the 7th day Sabbath.

So, no, we are not free sin without repentance and expect to be forgiven.

But that can't be, that's in the New Testament where we are under the new covenant supposedly covered by grace...Jesus must have been mistaken...right?

Mocking? Condescending? "Jesus must have been mistaken"? Disrespectful much?
Hmmmm. Very telling of intent. If you TRULY want to know, why mock?

 

[Theo Book]

1. Cain is cursed for the sin - the crime - of murder ... before any written law existed.
2. Genesis 6 - all mankind condemned to death - the flood - before any written law existed
3. It was always wrong to take God's name in vain... and still is wrong to do that.

Genesis 26:5
5 because Abraham obeyed Me and kept My charge, My commandments, My statutes and My laws.”



True.

And "Sin IS transgression of the LAW" 1 John 3:4 -- such that where there is no LAW there is no sin.

Genesis 4 God says to Cain "SIN is crouching at your door... you must master it". This is the sin of hate and murder... not yet written as law. Still Cain is accountable for it -- apparently he knew about it. And of course Genesis 1-7 is not an exhaustive record of every word spoken for 1600 years.

Yet Genesis 4 tells us the exact opposite of that conclusion. Your argument is "with the text"

O.K. - Let's examine Genesis 4 -
First confrontation between God and Cain following death (murder) of Abel-
Gen 4:9 "And the LORD said unto Cain, Where is Abel thy brother? And he said, I know not: Am I my brother's keeper? 10 And he said, What hast thou done? the voice of thy brother's blood crieth unto me from the ground. 11 And now art thou cursed from the earth, which hath opened her mouth to receive thy brother's blood from thy hand; 12 When thou tillest the ground, it shall not henceforth yield unto thee her strength; a fugitive and a vagabond shalt thou be in the earth."

Different from when the earth opened up and swallowed breakers of the law of Moses.

Weeds? Thorns? Thistles? And you don't see a difference? You see it as a contradiction of my position?
Korah, Dathan, Abiram, etc.

Numbers 16:27 So they gat up from the tabernacle of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram, on every side: and Dathan and Abiram came out, and stood in the door of their tents, and their wives, and their sons, and their little children.32 And the earth opened her mouth, and swallowed them up, and their houses, and all the men that appertained unto Korah, and all their goods.33 They, and all that appertained to them, went down alive into the pit, and the earth closed upon them: and they perished from among the congregation.

God slew Korah, Dathan, Abiram, and their wives, children, possessions perished with them; but God protected Cain from his fellow-Men; Cain - 13 And Cain said unto the LORD, My punishment is greater than I can bear. 14 Behold, thou hast driven me out this day from the face of the earth; and from thy face shall I be hid; and I shall be a fugitive and a vagabond in the earth; and it shall come to pass, that every one that findeth me shall slay me. 15 And the LORD said unto him, Therefore whosoever slayeth Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold. And the LORD set a mark upon Cain, lest any finding him should kill him.

16 And Cain went out from the presence of the LORD, and dwelt in the land of Nod, on the east of Eden.

I don't know what version you are reading, but I do not see your position in your reference material.

This is also seen in Genesis 6 and 7 when Noah enters the ark -- Clean animals in pairs of 7 and unclean in pairs. What was the distinguishing detail to identify clean from unclean? Moses writes Genesis 6 and 7... and Moses writes Leviticus 11 where the definition for those terms is given in the Bible. Moses' readers had access to both and would therefore know what was meant in Genesis 6.

But how did Noah know? Clearly more evidence that Genesis 1-7 is not an account of every word spoken for those 1600 years.

Certainly Moses' readers would comprehend, because Moses read the law to them, and they did not agree until every one of them comprehended with comprehension. THAT tells you nothing whatsoever about what preceded the flood. Their understandings and comprehensions were of a very different nature, as is evidenced by the very flood you reference; "The earth also was corrupt before God, and the earth was filled with violence.12 And God looked upon the earth, and, behold, it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth.13 And God said unto Noah, The end of all flesh is come before me; for the earth is filled with violence through them; and, behold, I will destroy them with the earth." (Gen 6:11-13)

Significance of clean and unclean animals has nothing to do with Man's understanding of God's standard for behaviour, pre-flood. And NOTHING post-flood had any effect upon pre-flood comprehension of God's standards. You may be mixing pre and post-flood understanding. I am not sure, but you might consider it.

 

[FreeAtLast]

In my opinion you have thrown out half the Work of God in the heart of man. By cutting off the meaningful and significant work of God's Moral Law in our heart, you commit spiritual abortion.

The OLD Covenant Law, in its entirety, has been fulfilled (completed) by Yeshua. We, if we are truly born again Believers in Yeshua) are under His NEW Covenant. Jeremiah 31:31-34 and Luke 22:20.


T

he work of God is a birth of both Word and Spirit. By denying one or the other is a savage insult to God. In I Kings 3:16-28 King Solomon ordered the baby to be cut in half. In my opinion this is the result of rejecting the Law.

No one is "denying" the Word, this is a false accusation. What is being said is that the The OLD Covenant Law, in its entirety, has been fulfilled (completed) by Yeshua. We, if we are truly born again Believers in Yeshua) are under His NEW Covenant. Jeremiah 31:31-34 and Luke 22:20. And Yeshua has given us the Holy Spirit (Who was not given to us before) to live inside us and guide us.

 

[FreeAtLast]

I once asked if anyone wants to appear at the final judgment with a bunch of dead faith? Seems I never got a reply.

A word to undecided onlookers....you are the reason some of us are here battling this. Just keep an eye open, things usually become pretty clear when we consistently see some of the questions here are not answered, the same questions that prove it's not the way.

Watch this...

Can any one of the opposing end of this tell me what exactly was meant by "Faith without works is dead" if works are not part of our salvation? Seems to me that's makes things very very clear, but normally there is some type of comeback for these stumpers, just wondered what it is for that part of Scripture.

"Watch this" "Comeback for these stumpers"? WOW. How rude.

 

[FreeAtLast]

The Bible would disagree, it's not idle, it's dead faith....plain and simple. Do I really need to back that up with scripture? Either way will you back up that it is only "idle faith" and not dead faith, as the bible clearly teaches?

Well, at least I got an answer, but yikes....

You mean you got an answer that doesn't agree with your beliefs?

 

[FreeAtLast]

you "quoted you" then slapped a Bible text after it??

Excuse me, what are you talking about?

 

[BobRyan]

O.K. - Let's examine Genesis 4 -
First confrontation between God and Cain following death (murder) of Abel-
Gen 4:9 "And the LORD said unto Cain, Where is Abel thy brother? And he said, I know not: Am I my brother's keeper? 10 And he said, What hast thou done? the voice of thy brother's blood crieth unto me from the ground. 11 And now art thou cursed from the earth, which hath opened her mouth to receive thy brother's blood from thy hand; 12 When thou tillest the ground, it shall not henceforth yield unto thee her strength; a fugitive and a vagabond shalt thou be in the earth."

Different from when the earth opened up and swallowed breakers of the law of Moses.

He was a fugative from justice -

Gen 4
6 Then the Lord said to Cain, “Why are you angry? And why has your countenance fallen? 7 If you do well, will not your countenance be lifted up? And if you do not do well, sin is crouching at the door; and its desire is for you, but you must master it.” 8 Cain told Abel his brother. And it came about when they were in the field, that Cain rose up against Abel his brother and killed him.

No law - no sin.. but there is sin. so ... there is law.

13 Cain said to the Lord, “My punishment is too great to bear! 14 Behold, You have driven me this day from the face of the ground; and from Your face I will be hidden, and I will be a vagrant and a wanderer on the earth, and whoever finds me will kill me.” 15 So the Lord said to him, “Therefore whoever kills Cain, vengeance will be taken on him sevenfold.” And the Lord appointed a sign for Cain, so that no one finding him would slay him.


Cain.. the fugitive .. needed protection from being slain as punishment for his sin.

Adam and Eve were not supposed to murder each other.
Adam was not supposed to murder his children.
Cain was not supposed to murder his brother.

Korah, Dathan, Abiram, etc.

Numbers 16:27 So they gat up from the tabernacle of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram, on every side: and Dathan and Abiram came out, and stood in the door of their tents, and their wives, and their sons, and their little children.32 And the earth opened her mouth, and swallowed them up,

Turns out -- a lot of people who murder today still don' t get swallowed up by the Earth.
Those who killed Gideon's children get swallowed up by the earth.

Yet - sin is still sin.

Significance of clean and unclean animals has nothing to do with Man's understanding of God's standard for behaviour

If Noah did not comply -- it would be sin. And to comply the definition for the term had to be known.. obviously.

It is a clear case of violating the rule you appear to set which is that they cannot know any part of God's will that does not get written by Moses in Genesis prior to that chapter even though Moses is writing 1000's of years later.

Clearly that rule -- does not work at all.

Exegesis - Moses knew murder was sin - so also did his readers.. no need to explain it to them.
Exegesis - Moses knew what clean vs unclean animals were..so did his readers.. no need to explain it to them when he wrote the book of Genesis for them.

This is irrefutable.

 

[BobRyan]

Acts
The law is an unbearable yoke. (Acts 15:10)

you "quoted you" then slapped a Bible text after it??

Excuse me, what are you talking about?

I am talking about your statement above.. you merely quote "you" -- not the actual Bible.

 

[FreeAtLast]

I agree that believers are no longer under its yoke--we are under Jesus' yoke. He said, "Take my yoke upon you...for my yoke is easy and my burden is light." (Matthew11:29-30) Jesus' Jewish hearers were used to the difficult yoke and heavy burden of 1st century Judaism. It must have been amazing for them to hear Him say this. And so it is both demanding in its requirement to love even our enemies, and yet, with our "Helper," the Holy Spirit, is not difficult.

Amen, amen!

On the other hand, the unbelieving world is under the Law and the Judgment of God because of it. All who are condemned for sin at the Last Judgment. They will be judged by how well they kept to the Law of God. For those who have few infractions, their punishment will be light. For those who have many infractions, it would be better for them if they had never been born.

I think I understand what you're trying to say, but no, their punishment will not be light if they are unbelievers in Yeshua as G-d. They are not judged on how well they kept the Law, they will be judged solely on whether they accepted Yeshua or not. Yes, and they have eternal life. No and they have eternal damnation. There are no degrees of that

 

[FreeAtLast]

you "quoted you" then slapped a Bible text after it??



I am talking about your statement above.. you merely quote "you" -- not the actual Bible.

Ummm, not true. Just read the verses listed. Actual Bible Verses.

 

[BobRyan]

Certainly Moses' readers would comprehend, because Moses read the law to them, and they did not agree until every one of them comprehended with comprehension. THAT tells you nothing whatsoever about what preceded the flood. .

On the contrary - when they are confronted with well-known details of life --
Murder
Clean vs unclean
And they either comply or are judged for being in sin - the conclusion is obvious which is
1. Not every word spoken for 1600 years from Genesis 1-8 on planet earth was recorded by Moses.
2. They had to have had understanding conveyed to them on those details for them to react the way they did.
3. Obviously nobody argues that Adam should be killing Eve ... neither could they go around taking God's name in vain all day long in Eden or making images and worshiping false gods -- so clearly the moral law applied

 

[BobRyan]

Ummm, not true. Just read the verses listed. Actual Bible Verses.

10 Now therefore why do you put God to the test by placing upon the neck of the disciples a yoke which neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear?

A good text example to NOT find "The law is an unbearable yoke."

1 John 5
2 By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God and observe His commandments. 3 For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments; and His commandments are not burdensome.

 

[Kenny'sID]

Since we, if we are truly born again Believers in Yeshua, are no longer under the OLD Covenant Law of Moses, does not mean we are not under ANY Law. it simply means, as we've been saying, that we are now under Yeshua's NEW Covenant, with His commands. And HE repeats 9 of the 10 OLD Covenant Laws, but noticeably, leave out the 4th commandment - the 7th day Sabbath.

So, no, we are not free sin without repentance and expect to be forgiven.

There are a few flavors to this...Some would disagree with you and say we are not under any law, but I guess we'll see if they answer for themselves.

Jusus told the rich man who wanted know how to attain eternal life to follow the commandments, he named a few to make his point but never even hinted the Sabbath was stricken from the commandments. Follow THE commandments.

Mocking? Condescending? "Jesus must have been mistaken"? Disrespectful much?
Hmmmm. Very telling of intent. If you TRULY want to know, why mock?

Whatever it takes.

Flaming and Goading
● Please treat all members with respect and courtesy through civil dialogue.
● Do not personally attack (insult, belittle, mock, ridicule) other members or groups of members on CF. Address the content of the post and not the poster personally.

But no worries, I don't have any problem at all with your post, it's how you feel. If I may, I do think you are using it more as an opportunity/ammunition than you are actually appalled by it, but that's just my opinion. Either way, it's what people do, it's real life, and to try to stop that except in extreme cases, just never worked for me.

 

[Kenny'sID]

"Watch this" "Comeback for these stumpers"? WOW. How rude.

Telling an undecided onlooker to watch as I try to determine the truth, is not at all rude, It's part of teaching/getting the attention of those interested.

As to the "comeback for these stampers" protest, generally speaking, sometimes when I get into these arguments, posters tend to clutch as straws for a way to discredit their opponent....I'm used to it. There just isn't a thing wrong with what I said.

You mean you got an answer that doesn't agree with your beliefs?

Read the post, carefully, that is if you are truly interested in what happened there. I got an answer that completely disagreed with what was biblical. The answer was kinder, gentler, more acceptable to some, but it just wasn't the truth, and exactly what some beliefs are based on, twists of the truth. Again, look, see for yourself

 

[BobRyan]

The purpose of the law was to increase THE AWARENESS OF SIN.

There was already sin in the world, and it was wherever MAN was found; For "All have sinned..." is not just a slogan, it is a scriptural spiritual fact.

But there are two other FACTS which must be factored in;
1) Where there was no law, sin was not IMPUTED. Nothings is said about it not being COMMITTED. It was not IMPUTED because God had not made Men aware of the fact their deeds and thoughts were unrighteous, and all unrighteousness is sin. BUT, "There is a sin not unto death."
.

1. Cain is cursed for the sin - the crime - of murder ... before any written law existed.
2. Genesis 6 - all mankind condemned to death - the flood - before any written law existed
3. It was always wrong to take God's name in vain... and still is wrong to do that.

Genesis 26:5
5 because Abraham obeyed Me and kept My charge, My commandments, My statutes and My laws.”

The "charge, commandments, statutes and laws" Abraham kept had nothing to do wth the "charge, commandments, statutes, and laws" given to Moses

Sounds like by-faith-alone speculation. Exegesis demands that we note that both examples are "Moses speaking" same author, same audience, same subject.

Inserting "totally different" as the qualifier is merely bias and eisegesis that inserts for the sake of preference. Exegesis won't allow that.

It is still wrong to take God's name in vain,

As it would have been for Adam and for all mankind to this very day. It is the moral law of God that defines what sin is.

but not because of a law given to Moses, to which even Abraham was not liable...Only the children of Israel and their descendants, and proselyte's who joined themselves to Israel were subjects of the law given to Moses

Less speculation -- more exegesis please.

Christ and Paul affirm that scripture - even what Moses wrote was "the Word of God" -- the "Commandment 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.

So then "yes" we do not take God's name in vain - because this complying with that command is to honor the Word of God rather than be in rebellion against it. And as we are reminded in the OT "The NEW Covenant" has the "LAW of God" of the OT "written on the heart and mind" Jeremiah 31:31-33

 

[FreeAtLast]

Whatever it takes.

Flaming and Goading
● Please treat all members with respect and courtesy through civil dialogue.
● Do not personally attack (insult, belittle, mock, ridicule) other members or groups of members on CF. Address the content of the post and not the poster personally.

It's YOUR comments that are flaming, insulting and goading and I DO have a problem with them as they DO violate the rules here. I will let the Mods decide if your "whatever it takes" is acceptable to them, because it's not to me. I've spoken to you about your insults before. Again, you aren't qualified to know what's inside my head, so your "opinion" of me and my thoughts is another insult, therfore no, you may not. Again, another violation. Please stop. For someone who is insists on obeying the Law, why would you not obey the Law here on this board?

PS, if the Mods are OK with your violations, I will be the one to stop, by placing you on IGNORE and you won't have to deal with my replies again. If they ask you to stop goading and insulting people, you stop. Agreed?

 

[GrammyJ]

It does not seem that you are open to gracious discussion; because you do not answer questions that are asked of you like;

1. How do you know what sin is if God's Law has been Abolished?

2. Is a Christian who is living a life of known unrepentant in a saved state before God or an unsaved state before God?

3. Where in God's Word does it say that God's 4th commandment has been ABOLISHED and we are now commanded to keep Sunday as a Holy day?

If you believe your interpretation of scripture is correct you should be able to answer those simple questions above.

My prayer for you my friend is that you may take it to God in prayer and study God's Word asking Jesus as we all need to do. The scripture already presented make your OP fall apart as do the questions above. They are written however in love and only as a help to you that you may seek him who loves all.

May God bless you as you seek him who loves us and washed us in His own blood. To him be all glory forever and ever. Amen

1. A born-again believer in Christ is now led by the Holy Spirit, not a list of laws or rules. Is God's Holy Spirit incapable of leading us aright and guiding/instructing us, or does He (who is God, by the way) need the law as His "script?" Answer: The law has become unnecessary to the born-again believer.

2. The born-again believer in Christ does not wantonly commit known sin, but in fact loathes it, and has absolutely NO DESIRE to "sin and get away with it," as you have implied in your question.

3. The Sabbath was never "abolished," but was a mere shadow (Col. 2:16-18) of what was to come (Christ, and resting fully in Him and His finished work on the cross - resting ALL day, EVERY day). Why would anyone want to remain in the dark of a shadow when s/he could be in the Marvelous Light of the REAL THING? My advice: Trade up to the Real Thing!! Oh, and there is nothing holy about Sunday, or any other day resting in Jesus under the New Covenant.

We are told WHOM to worship. We are told HOW to worship (in Spirit and in truth), but we are NEVER told anywhere in scripture WHEN to worship. I want my entire life to be lived in worship of Him, not just one 24-hour period a week!