UNDER THE LAW!

HARK! said:

Again, there is a difference between YHWH's law, and 'works of law'. According to your previous statement you should have no trouble finding a verse that makes your point clear.

Click to expand...

works of the law are being equated with continuing to do everything in the book of the law in Gal3:10&11, in other words obeying what is written in the law

We who are Jews by birth and not sinful Gentiles 16 know that a person but is not justified by the works of the law,by faith in Jesus Christ. So we, too, have put our faith in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the law, because by the works of the law no one will be justified.

17 ‘But if, in seeking to be justified in Christ, we Jews find ourselves also among the sinners, doesn’t that mean that Christ promotes sin? Absolutely not! 18 If I rebuild what I destroyed, then I really would be a law-breaker.
Gal2:15-18
It really is so very plainly written. Why is Paul relentlessly stating by works of the law no one will be justified? Because under the old covenant justification/righteousness was obeying the law. He would not keep stressing something that had never existed, there would be no grounds to do so. Jesus died for your sins/your transgressions of the law. Hence your righteousness has changed
The worlds sin is unbelief in me John16:9

topher694 said:

So, what are you saying?

Click to expand...

There are no important parts of theology covered by only one writer.
God is WAY smarter than to leave important points to one writer.
This may help:
John 8:12
Again Jesus spoke to them, saying, “I am the light of the world.
Whoever follows me will not walk in darkness, but will have the light of life.”

Dkh587 said:

Acts 15:5 is a different statement made by a different group of people, then the statement made in Acts 15:1.

Acts 15:1 is teaching salvation only if you adhere to Judaism(the oral law and all its requirements) First... it just says “certain men”. They most likely were not followers/believers of the Messiah.

Acts 15:5 is made by Pharisees who believe in the Messiah. Different group. They were teaching that Gentiles coming into the fold should be circumcised and obey the law of God... they weren’t arguing or making a statement regarding salvation...

that is why Peter spoke, and then James spoke.. they addressed the 2 different statements.

Click to expand...

A different group of people? No way! They said the same thing and were the same group. The Circumcision Group whom you are supporting and the Apostle Paul spoke against.

Acts 15:1
Certain people came down from Judea to Antioch and were teaching the believers: “Unless you are circumcised, according to the custom taught by Moses, you cannot be saved.”

Acts 15:5
Then some of the believers who belonged to the party of the Pharisees stood up and said, “The Gentiles must be circumcised and required to keep the law of Moses.”

Galatians 2:12
For before certain men came from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles. But when they arrived, he began to draw back and separate himself from the Gentiles because he was afraid of those who belonged to the circumcision group.

Titus 1:10
For there are many rebellious people, full of meaningless talk and deception, especially those of the circumcision group.

Dkh587 said:

No. I didn’t say that everywhere that you see “the law” that it’s talking about the oral law...

Click to expand...

Without consistent definitions you make it seem to say anything you want. Your argument is just as man made as the Talmud.

Dkh587 said:

It’s a common error to think Paul isalways talking about “the law of Moses/God” when you see “the law”.

Click to expand...

On what basis do you claim otherwise?
Give me two (only two) great examples. Thanks.
Preferably not examples of a reference to the books of the law. If you know the difference.
Nor OBVIOUSLY any example where the word "of" follows "the law". As in "the law of..."

HARK! said:

I'm going to release my Acts 15 study soon.

Click to expand...

Will it never end?

Acts 15:24
We have heard that some went out from us without our authorization and disturbed you, troubling your minds by what they said.

HARK! said:

Nope. Paul doesn't say law/works of law. He specifically says "works of law." Again, he is the only one in the Bible to use this expression.

Click to expand...

This verse defines it.
The same law that defines sin is the law that works are of.
Which law defines sin? BINGO!

Romans 3:20
Therefore no one will be declared righteous in God’s sight by the works of the law; rather, through the law we become conscious of our sin.

HARK! said:

25 I thank God, through Jesus Christ, our Lord. Consequently, then, I myself, with the mind, indeed, am slaving for God's law, yet with the flesh for Sin's law."

So you're saying that Paul wasn't slaving to YHWH's law nor Sin's law; when he wrote this verse?

I'm not buying it. Your reliable source will have to twist himself up into a pretzel to explain this verse.

Click to expand...

You don't understand it because you have watered down all the definitions. (making them meaningless)

What law is referred to in this scripture below? God's law, the law of human conscience.

Not to be confused with the law that God gave to the Israelites alone through Moses. (the law of Moses) This is what Paul is referring to in 1 Corinthians 9:21 (I am not free from God’s law) Which he differentiates from "the law" and "Christ's law".

Romans 2:13-15
For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God’s sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous. 14 (Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law. 15 They show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts sometimes accusing them and at other times even defending them.)

HARK! said:

Again, there is a difference between YHWH's law, and 'works of law'. According to your previous statement you should have no trouble finding a verse that makes your point clear.

Click to expand...

Is this YHWH's law?

Numbers 15:38-40
“Speak to the Israelites and say to them: ‘Throughout the generations to come you are to make tassels on the corners of your garments, with a blue cord on each tassel. 39 You will have these tassels to look at and so you will remember all the commands of the Lord, that you may obey them and not prostitute yourselves by chasing after the lusts of your own hearts and eyes. 40 Then you will remember to obey all my commands and will be consecrated to your God.

HARK! said:

Nope. Paul doesn't say law/works of law. He specifically says "works of law." Again, he is the only one in the Bible to use this expression.

Click to expand...

Well, no one in the Bible uses the term "YHWH's law". What scope do you assign to such a term? What is it? How do you define it?

Saint Steven said:

A different group of people? No way! They said the same thing and were the same group. The Circumcision Group whom you are supporting and the Apostle Paul spoke against.

Acts 15:1
Certain people came down from Judea to Antioch and were teaching the believers: “Unless you are circumcised, according to the custom taught by Moses, you cannot be saved.”

Acts 15:5
Then some of the believers who belonged to the party of the Pharisees stood up and said, “The Gentiles must be circumcised and required to keep the law of Moses.”

Click to expand...

2 different groups, 2 different statements, & 2 different responses.

I do not support Judaism(the circumcision group)

Saint Steven said:

Without consistent definitions you make it seem to say anything you want. Your argument is just as man made as the Talmud.

Click to expand...

it is used in a variety of ways, therefore the definition will vary (depending on its use)

not under law said:

IT IS NOT, and that is the third time I have told you that

Click to expand...

So then, by your own admission, the law, and the requirements of it are not (fully) written on your heart, and you are not (fully) conscious of sin, as you claim

Dkh587 said:

So then, by your own admission, the law, and the requirements of it are not (fully) written on your heart, and you are not (fully) conscious of sin, as you claim

Click to expand...

Galatians 5:14
For the entire law is fulfilled in keeping this one command: “Love your neighbor as yourself.”

Dkh587 said:

it is used in a variety of ways, therefore the definition will vary (depending on its use)

Click to expand...

I don't buy it.

Dkh587 said:

So then, by your own admission, the law, and the requirements of it are not (fully) written on your heart, and you are not (fully) conscious of sin, as you claim

Click to expand...

I see, so God has not yet written some law on my heart, he will do that at some point in the future.
But then, God did not write in your heart and put in your mind not to eat pork and to observe a set Saturday sabbath did he, you only came to that conclusion through reading law written in ink. That is not where the law is for the believer

not under law said:

I see, so God has not yet written some law on my heart, he will do that at some point in the future.
But then, God did not write in your heart and put in your mind not to eat pork and to observe a set Saturday sabbath did he, you only came to that conclusion through reading law written in ink. That is not where the law is for the believer

Click to expand...

You said the law is written in your heart, yet you do not obey what the law says.

This doesn’t make sense, because if you claim the law is written on your heart, yet you do not keep the requirements of the law, then the law is not(and can not be) written on your heart, if this is so.

Saint Steven said:

Well, no one in the Bible uses the term "YHWH's law". What scope do you assign to such a term? What is it? How do you define it?

Click to expand...

Is English your first language?