Did all the laws end at the cross- Part 2

[Leaf473]

There is no salvation outside of faith in God's Word according to the scriptures *see John 3:36; Ephesians 2:8-9; Hebrews 11:6; Romans 14:23; Romans 10:17.

So... is that a Yes? Does a person have to read a law in the Bible before God can write it on their heart, in your view?

 

[expos4ever]

I am pretty sure covertness was not removed from God's law (or any of the commandments of God) as shown:

This seems clear enough:


Ephesians 5:5
For this you know, that no fornicator, unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and God.

I don't understand how you cannot acknowledge that with the indwelling Spirit, we do not need a law to tell us not to steal! How is this not unbelievably obvious?

Don't believe me on this? Well I copied the idea from our old buddy Paul:

But now we have been released from the Law, having died to that by which we were bound, so that we serve in newness of the Spirit and not in oldness of the letter.

and

For when Gentiles who do not have the Law instinctively perform the requirements of the Law, these, though not having the Law, are a law to themselves, 15 in that they show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience testifying and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them

Have you guys ever offered an explanation as to why we would need a law when the Spirit is there to guide us?

It would be a giant strawman to suggest that my view on this requires me to say that coveting is acceptable.

 

[expos4ever]

Walking in the Spirit (the newness of the Spirit from Romans 7:6) is not hostile to God and keeps the law of God.

Where does scripture anywhere state that the Spirit helps up keep 10 commandments.

Again, Paul seems to take issue with you on this:

but our adequacy is from God, 6 who also made us adequate as servants of a new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.7 But if the ministry of death, engraved in letters on stones, came with glory so that the sons of Israel could not look intently at the face of Moses because of the glory of his face, fading as it was, 8 how will the ministry of the Spirit fail to be even more with glory?

If we are to believe Paul, the path of following the Law leads to, yes, death.

Is that is the position you want to defend?

 

[expos4ever]

Paul is speaking to those who understand the law - Romans 7:1

• The law has dominion over a man as long as we live - Romans 7:1
• Example of marriage and a woman being bound to her husband as long as she lives - Romans 7:2
• If the husband dies then she is free to marry another - Romans 7:2-3
• We are to become dead to the law (of our first husband) by the body of Christ - Romans 7:2-4
• For when we were in the flesh (first husband sinful nature) the motions of sins, which were by the law, did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death - Romans 7:5
• We are to die to what has bound us which is sin - Romans 7:5-6
• Dying to that which has bound us (sin and death) we can serve in newness of life of the Spirit - Romans 7:6 compare Galatians 5:16 with Romans 8:1-4 and Romans 8:13.
• It is through the law of God we have the knowledge of what sin is - Romans 7:7

You are simply reposting material that contains the same error as it did the last time.

Let's revisit. In the second to last bullet, you try to slip something past the unwary reader: you declare that Paul is saying that what bound us is sin and death.

Well, lets look at the actual text in a literal translation (Youngs):

for when we were in the flesh, the passions of the sins, that [are] through the law, were working in our members, to bear fruit to the death; 6 and now we have ceased from the law, that being dead in which we were held, so that we may serve in newness of spirit, and not in oldness of letter.

It is clear that Paul is saying we were not only bound to sin and death, we were bound, yes, to Law.

For some odd reason, you appear to believe that because we are indeed bound to sin and death, that Paul's clear declaration that we have been released from bondage from the law can be ignored.

The one does not preclude the other.

 

[expos4ever]

What this translates as to me as I read it is that you did not like the detailed scripture responses you were provided that show the scripture context you left out of your earlier posts that show that your claims in regards to Romans 3:20 were not supported in the scriptures.

Let me try to pin you down on this.

Is this verse not a reference to an event in history, the giving of the law of Israel?;

indeed, that they were entrusted with the oracles of God;

Yes or no answer please. Don't drown us with other texts, just answer the question, please.

Is this verse not a reference to Israel's history not living up to their covenantal obligations after the giving of the law?

What then? If some did not believe, their unbelief will not nullify the faithfulness of God, will it?

Yes or no answer please. Don't drown us with other texts, just answer the question, please

Finally, there is this:

But now apart from the Law the righteousness of God has been revealed,

Is this not a reference to the present - the entry of Jesus into the picture?

Yes or no answer please. Don't drown us with other texts, just answer the question, please.

It is clear that Romans 3 is, among other things, a re-telling of the history of Israel from the giving of the Law till the present moment.

And where does Romans 3:20 appear? It appears before the "but now". And the use of the "but" in "but now" is clearly a way of saying that things have changed.

No one would say "The Law gives knowledge of sin, but now apart from the Law.......and not expect to be understood as saying that things have changed with respect to the law.

You never squarely addressed the essence of this line of reasoning. You have bombarded us with all sorts of material that may well be correct, but which artfully evades the argument about the progression of time in Romans 3 and the "but now" that clearly puts 3:20 in the rear view mirror.

 

[expos4ever]

YOUR ARGUMENTS REFUTED BY SCRIPTURE CONTEXT PROVIDED HERE...

1. Post # 208 linked

All right, I am more than happy to go over this again:

Here is an excerpt from your post 208, with my response:

One on your claims in regards to God's 10 commandments not being referred to in Romans 3:20; and Romans 7:7

False - I never denied that that the 10 were being referred to in either 3:20 or 7:7; quite the contrary, I have repeatedly affirmed that 7:7 refers to the 10! To wit:

Let me try this. When Paul wrote these words, what, exactly, was he trying to tell us:

But now we have been released from the Law, having died to that by which we were bound, so that we serve in newness of the Spirit and not in oldness of the letter.

Please do not bury us with other texts and other arguments, just explain exactly what Paul is saying here about the law (which obviously includes the 10 because of the immediately following reference to the "thou shalt not covet" law.

Well?

 

[LoveGodsWord]

All right, I am more than happy to go over this again:

Here is an excerpt from your post 208, with my response:


False - I never denied that that the 10 were being referred to in either 3:20 or 7:7; quite the contrary, I have repeatedly affirmed that 7:7 refers to the 10! To wit:


Well?

I believe your best to stop micro-quoting my posts out of their context while simply repeating yourself while ignoring the rest of the posts shared with you that already addresses what your saying with scripture context your disregarding. If you disagree with my posts please address them. You haven't

 

[LoveGodsWord]

Let me try to pin you down on this.

Is this verse not a reference to an event in history, the giving of the law of Israel?;

indeed, that they were entrusted with the oracles of God;

Yes or no answer please. Don't drown us with other texts, just answer the question, please.

Is this verse not a reference to Israel's history not living up to their covenantal obligations after the giving of the law?

What then? If some did not believe, their unbelief will not nullify the faithfulness of God, will it?

Yes or no answer please. Don't drown us with other texts, just answer the question, please

Finally, there is this:

But now apart from the Law the righteousness of God has been revealed,

Is this not a reference to the present - the entry of Jesus into the picture?

Yes or no answer please. Don't drown us with other texts, just answer the question, please.

It is clear that Romans 3 is, among other things, a re-telling of the history of Israel from the giving of the Law till the present moment.

And where does Romans 3:20 appear? It appears before the "but now". And the use of the "but" in "but now" is clearly a way of saying that things have changed.

No one would say "The Law gives knowledge of sin, but now apart from the Law.......and not expect to be understood as saying that things have changed with respect to the law.

You never squarely addressed the essence of this line of reasoning. You have bombarded us with all sorts of material that may well be correct, but which artfully evades the argument about the progression of time in Romans 3 and the "but now" that clearly puts 3:20 in the rear view mirror.

Repetition already addressed in previous posts you have not been responsive to. Go read them.

 

[LoveGodsWord]

You are simply reposting material that contains the same error as it did the last time.

Let's revisit. In the second to last bullet, you try to slip something past the unwary reader: you declare that Paul is saying that what bound us is sin and death.

Well, lets look at the actual text in a literal translation (Youngs):

for when we were in the flesh, the passions of the sins, that [are] through the law, were working in our members, to bear fruit to the death; 6 and now we have ceased from the law, that being dead in which we were held, so that we may serve in newness of spirit, and not in oldness of letter.

It is clear that Paul is saying we were not only bound to sin and death, we were bound, yes, to Law.

For some odd reason, you appear to believe that because we are indeed bound to sin and death, that Paul's clear declaration that we have been released from bondage from the law can be ignored.

The one does not preclude the other.

Your repeating yourself again while ignoring the posts and scriptures that have added the context back into your claims here that are in disagreement with you. Your post here has already been addressed with detailed scriptures responses you are refusing to discuss and ignore while simply repeating what you said the first time. Until you want to engage in a discussion I do not see our conversation going anywhere so we will have to agree to disagree. I hope only the best for you.

 

[LoveGodsWord]

So... is that a Yes? Does a person have to read a law in the Bible before God can write it on their heart, in your view?

No a person has to believe Gods' Word in order to be saved because we have all sinned and fall short of the glory of God *see John 3:36; Romans 3:9-31.

 

[LoveGodsWord]

Up to yesterday, I had given no thought to the notion that the Sabbath might be a signpost - something that gives us advance notice of another thing that we will encounter "down the road".

I am now convinced it is indeed a signpost that is now in the rear view mirror, to continue the metaphor.

Consider this from Jesus: Come to Me, all who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest

Sound familar?

but the seventh day is a Sabbath of the Lord your God; on it you shall not do any work,

It appears that some in this debate will have to say this yet another coincidence. Just as it is a coincidence - so some here have to maintain - that Jesus' last words were "it is finished" after having said the Law will end when "all is accomplished"

It certainly seems to me that Jesus is effectively saying "I am the new Sabbath, the very thing that the old Sabbath pointed to."

No doubt you will hear the objection "there is no scripture that says the Sabbath was abolished"

That may be true, but the fable about the goose that laid the golden egg never explicitly declares that it is a morality tale about greed. Yet, one cannot miss this as the underlying message.

Scripture teaches us many great truths that cannot be isolated down to single proof text. One of these is that Jesus comes to take on the covenantal role of Israel - she was charged to be the means by which the nations will be blessed but has proven faithless. And now Jesus takes on this role. This cannot be proven by "a verse", but the theme is there for all with open eyes to see.

A claim that Jesus is a Sabbath is a false teaching. According to the scriptures the Sabbath is defined as "the seventh day" of the creation week in Exodus 20:10 that God blessed and set aside as a holy day of rest *Genesis 2:1-3. Jesus is the Lord and creator of the Sabbath that he made for all mankind according to Mark 2:27-28. Jesus therefore according to the scriptures is not "the seventh day" of the week. He is the creator and Lord of it.

 

[LoveGodsWord]

Ah yes, the old "God does not change so this means the way He cannot possibly implement a redemption plan that evolves over time" argument. This is not convincing. Yes, our God does not change, but that does not that He cannot do different things at different times.

As shown in the scriptures already the Sabbath points backwards not forward to thing to come as a memorial (Remember - Exodus 20:8) and is one of Gods' eternal laws that give us the knowledge of what sin is *Romans 3:20; Romans 7:7; 1 John 3:4 and according to the scriptures, if we knowingly break anyone of them we stand guilty before God of sin *James 2:10-11. Gods' Sabbath as one of Gods' eternal laws will be continued to be kept in the new heavens and new earth by God's people who are all those who choose to believe and follow what Gods' Word says according to the scriptures (see Isaiah 66:22-23; Revelation 12:17; Revelation 14:12; Revelation 22:14). Gods' Word does not teach lawlessness (without law). According to the scripture God does not change *Matthew 24:35; Isaiah 40:8; Psalm 33:11; Numbers 23:19; Hebrews 13:8; Malachi 3:6. Our opinions do not mean much in God's eyes. Only Gods' Word is true and we should believe and follow it according to the scriptures *Romans 3:4; Acts of the Apostles 5:29. Gods Word does not teach lawlessness (without law) and no Jesus is not a Sabbath. Gods' Word says defines the Sabbath as the "seventh day" in Exodus 20:10 that Jesus is the Lord and creator of as shown in Mark 2:27-28.

 

[LoveGodsWord]

Let's start with the easy stuff first. You claim that God's law is needed today to tell us what sin is. Well. let's look at Paul's exact wording in Romans 7:7

What shall we say then? Is the Law sin? Far from it! On the contrary, I would not have come to know sin except through the Law; for I would not have known about coveting if the Law had not said, “You shall not covet

Note the past tense: Paul is referring to the fact that, yes, in the past, the law gave him knowledge of sin. Based on this text alone, it is impossible to draw any conclusions about whether that role continues. Hmm, I wonder if Paul writes anything else that would allow us to settle the question as to whether that role continues today?

We need not look far - Romans 7:6

But now we have been released from the Law, having died to that by which we were bound, so that we serve in newness of the Spirit and not in oldness of the letter.

Already addressed in earlier posts you have ignored. You have a bit of catching up to do.
Everyone of your arguments have been refuted by Gods Word from the scriptures, by adding the scripture context back into the discussion you have left out of your posts the disagree with your claims and teachings of lawlessness (without law). I am still awaiting for you to address them. You can find them here in

YOUR ARGUMENTS REFUTED BY SCRIPTURE

1. Post # 208 linked
   
2. Post # 209 linked
3. Post # 241 linked
   
4. Post # 274 linked
5. Post # 275 linked
   
6. Post # 317 linked
7. Post # 318 linked
   
8. Post # 319 linked
9. Post # 320 linked
   
10. Post # 321 linked
11. Post # 322 linked
    
12. Post # 325 linked
13. Post # 333 linked
    
14. Post # 360 linked
15. Post # 363 linked

All of the posts above show why your teachings of lawlessness (without law) are not biblical by providing the scripture contexts you leave out. There is not a single one of these listed posts above that you have bothered to addressed. I am still waiting for you to address these posts that are in disagreement with your teachings here. Of course you do not have to if you do not want to. They were only sent in love and as a help for you..

Lets talk more when you want to address the content of the listed posts above that provide the context you are leaving out from the scriptures that are in disagreement with you. Until then we will agree to disagree. No where in the bible does God's Word teach lawlessness (without law) which is what your teaching.

Take Care now.

 

[Leaf473]

No a person has to believe Gods' Word in order to be saved because we have all sinned and fall short of the glory of God *see John 3:36; Romans 3:9-31.

So... It's No, then? A person does not have to read a law in the Bible before God can write it on their heart, in your view.

Is that what you're saying?

 

[LoveGodsWord]

So... It's No, then? A person does not have to read a law in the Bible before God can write it on their heart, in your view.

Is that what you're saying?

Its neither. A person has to believe Gods' Word in order to be saved because we have all sinned and fall short of the glory of God so cannot be saved by the letter of the law *see John 3:36; Romans 3:9-31. The law only show us that we are sinners in need of God's grace that we receive through faith which leads us to Christ who died for our sins so that we can receive Gods' forgiveness of sins and walk in newness of life in obedience to God's Word as we walk in His Spirit through faith *Galatians 3:22-25; Galatians 5:16; Romans 6:1-23. What do you not understand in the posts that have been shared with you? Do you think we do not have to believe God's Word and do not need faith in Gods' Word and we will receive God's forgiveness for our sins when this is all revealed through Gods' Word and we can be saved from our sins without faith when faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God? Faith in God's Word that we are saved by is not separate from Gods' Word that we a saved by through faith. We receive faith as we believe Gods' Word (the letter). Faith leads us to the Spirit of the Word of God which saves us (John 6:63; John 17:17; John 8:31-36).

 

[Leaf473]

Its neither. A person has to believe Gods' Word in order to be saved because we have all sinned and fall short of the glory of God so cannot be saved by the letter of the law *see John 3:36; Romans 3:9-31. The law only show us that we are sinners in need of God's grace that we receive through faith which leads us to Christ who died for our sins so that we can receive Gods' forgiveness of sins and walk in newness of life in obedience to God's Word as we walk in His Spirit through faith *Galatians 3:22-25; Galatians 5:16; Romans 6:1-23. What do you not understand in the posts that have been shared with you? Do you think we do not have to believe God's Word and do not need faith in Gods' Word and we will receive God's forgiveness for our sins when this is all revealed through Gods' Word and we can be saved from our sins without faith when faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God? Faith in God's Word that we are saved by is not separate from Gods' Word that we a saved by through faith. We receive faith as we believe Gods' Word (the letter). Faith leads us to the Spirit of the Word of God which saves us (John 6:63; John 17:17; John 8:31-36).

Well... I think it is a question that can be answered with a Yes or a No. If you don't think it's a yes or no question, then it looks like this part of our discussion has come to an end.

I will look back through our exchange to see if there is a different part to pick up on.

############
Edit: This post has been thoroughly reworked. I decided my previous response was too far from the thread topic.

 

[Leaf473]

Agreed however, no one can have anything written in their hears without first knowing the letters (the Word of God) because our faith comes by hearing those letters *Romans 10:17 and Gods' Spirit works through the letters as we believe them *John 6:63. It is faith in the truth of God's Word that saves us from our sins *see John 17:17; compare John 8:31-36. So if you do not know the letters how can you have faith when you do not believe *Hebrews 11:6; John 3:36; Romans 14:23? According to the scriptures therefore if we do not have faith in Gods' Word (the letter) you cannot have Gods' Spirit that changes the heart to love and obey what Gods' Word says. This is why Paul says we are saved by God's grace through faith and not of works lest any man should boast *Ephesians 2:8-9 but genuine faith does not abolish Gods law it establishes Gods' law through love *see Romans 3:31; Romans 13:8-10. Faith is how we enter into God's new covenant promise of Hebrews 8:10-12 from Jeremiah 31:31-34 and Ezekiel 36:24-27.

God bless.

Let's try picking it up here:

...and Gods' Spirit works through the letters as we believe them *John 6:63.

In order for the Spirit to work, is it enough to believe the letters in God's word, or do we need to obey certain laws first? Specifically, those laws which didn't end at the cross, if any.

 

[LoveGodsWord]

Let's try picking it up here:

In order for the Spirit to work, is it enough to believe the letters in God's word, or do we need to obey certain laws first? Specifically, those laws which didn't end at the cross, if any.

Can you obey Gods Word before you know what Gods' Word says and choose to believe Gods Word? - Nope, because faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of God *Romans 10:17. So the Word (letter) comes first then faith in the truth of Gods' Word comes after. Perhaps you can tell me what it is you do not understand or better yet what do you think my posts are saying so I can understand how you interpret what I have written to you? I think that might be helpful.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

Where does scripture anywhere state that the Spirit helps up keep 10 commandments.

Again, Paul seems to take issue with you on this:

but our adequacy is from God, 6 who also made us adequate as servants of a new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.7 But if the ministry of death, engraved in letters on stones, came with glory so that the sons of Israel could not look intently at the face of Moses because of the glory of his face, fading as it was, 8 how will the ministry of the Spirit fail to be even more with glory?

If we are to believe Paul, the path of following the Law leads to, yes, death.

Is that is the position you want to defend?

Where does it say in scripture that God’s law or the commandments don’t include God’s Ten Commandments written by God’s own finger? It doesn’t, but God established My (God) commandments right in the Ten- Exodus 20:6 which is repeated throughout the scripture verbatim John 14:15, 1 John 5:3 and many others scriptures. God wrote His law in our hearts and minds (not deletes them) in the New Covenant Hebrews 8:10 and every one of the Ten Commandments is repeated for every day Christian living as shown here and the example Jesus left for us by keeping and teaching the Commandments of God quoting directly from the Ten. Matthew 5:17-30, Matthew 19:17-19, John 14:15, John 15:10

You might consider prayerfully reading the post you are responding to in regards to who is in the Spirit and who is hostile to God. God’s Spirit and obiedence to God’s commandments are in harmony along with those who follow and obey God.

God bless and take care

 

[Leaf473]

Can you obey Gods Word before you know God's Word and choose to believe Gods Word? - Nope, because faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of God *Romans 10:17. Yes as need faith in the truth of Gods' Word. Perhaps you can tell me what it is you do not understand or better yet what do you think my posts are saying so I can understand how you interpret what I have written to you? I think that might be helpful.

I asked about "in order for the spirit to work".

But you responded with "Can you obey Gods Word".

I think what your posts are saying is that it is important to believe and obey God's word. And I agree with that.

So getting into details about believing and obeying God's word:

You had asserted that
"...Gods' Spirit works through the letters as we believe them *John 6:63."
In order for the Spirit to work through the letters, is it enough to believe the letters in God's word, or do we need to obey certain laws first?