Been told

[from scratch]

Nice up to date summary, thank you Scratch! A follower of the sda, of course. Good luck with that. I was saved from out of a Jewish persuasion myself. So much pride and man made thought patterns... it is identical to what Jesus suffered at the hands of the Pharisees it seems. All their unenlightened reliance upon the law and the old covenant. Now I see what's going on... You have your work cut out for you it appears dear brother I think Paul was stoned a number of times by them so put on your armor of God!
Blessings in Christ

Thanks. I do understand the almost impossible task. But there have been some progress since I have been active in posting over the last 5 years. Since I have been visiting forums I have even seen an SDA pastor who participates here leave the bondage. I catch nothing compared to the change in which they have been treated by their former associates. Love clearly becomes something one does only to those of like persuasion. I guess they think we don't see these things happen. I rarely get surprized and am always amazed. Makes life very interesting.

We sure would welcome your participation here especially considering your back ground. The discussion doesn't seem to work in the open, but there are folks who really sincere in seeking the truth. And I do get asked sincere questions by PM from lurkers.

 

[Frogster]

Grace pusher? I don't understand. Who is johnrabbit Is he a non believer or an unregenerated jew or something? What don't you understand about that old covenant scratch? Or is that a way of saying he doesn't agree with these things?

If you don't understand the first covenant, I'd be happy to share with you privately if you like?
It is a great study really. It is all about how God chose a wife out from the gentiles, and then she broke her marriage vows to him on her wedding day by committing adultery against Him. So Moses broke the tables of stone, signifying that the marriage covenant was broken and was over before it even really started. She was destined for divorce, then finally widowed when she killed her husband.
The mosaic covenant was all a "type". Temporary until He who was the fulfillment would come. It meant nothing other than turning the Israelites' hearts to their future coming Messiah, whom they were to prepare as virgins for their bridegroom. When Jesus came, those faithful received Him. Those who didn't, die under that old marriage law. There is no "oil in that lamp" for sure.
The unregenerate, like the Jews and their "other gospel" and "jewish fables" that destroyed Christians in the N.T., don't understand the law as being fulfilled and of no more affect on the planet.
The only value the Old mosaic law had, was to demonstrate spiritual things amongst carnal and physical people and buildings and "observances", by which eyes would open to recognizing the reality of those things in Christ.
You understand these things so far scratch? I see that frogster and son of israel comprehend these things now, in review... hmmm, your questions appear to have been thoroughly answered with excellent truth...

Hi also frogster, Soi pleased to meet you

Howdy pardner, nice to meet u too!

 

[JohnRabbit]

Are you talking about this post? http://www.christianforums.com/t7525386-47/#post56548638

that's it, i told you i've already answered the frogboy.

 

[JohnRabbit]

ok, after all your avoidance and spin, i will teach you, by example how to give a direct answer, I will play along..

The rule was don't eat.

finally, you answered a question!

i don't agree with your answer, but nevertheless, you answered.




i answered your question already. from scratch looked it up even.

so i'll repost my answer to your question here:

once again, for the "hard of reading":

Romans 7:5 ( NKJV ) 5For when we were in the flesh, the sinful passions which were aroused by the law were at work in our members to bear fruit to death.

read the verse.

it says, "the sinful passions were at work in our members to bear fruit to death."

but, what you want to concentrate on is "which were aroused by the law".

see my point? you want to concentrate on the "law" aspect rather than the "sin" aspect.

now look at the sentence again:

"the sinful passions were at work in our members to bear fruit to death." notice the focus of the verse, it's sin.

now, "which were aroused by the law".

i think you liken that to one popping in a porn tape, getting excited, and wanting to go fornicate.

in other words, mention the law and one wants to go sin.

that is not what the verse is saying.

"which were aroused by the law", simply means that paul was now aware of the fact that he was sinning.

the law aroused him out of a slumber, so to speak, that what he was doing was sin according to God. 1 jn 3:4, gen 39:9, rom 7:7.

the law doesn't cause anyone to sin. we sin.

the law let's us know what sin is 1jn 3:4.

that's why your question

"how do you preach law, without arousing sin?"

don't even make sense to me.

the purpose of the ten commandments is to define sin! (rom 7:8)

this was my answer to your question, like it or lump it, it's my answer.

 

[from scratch]

finally, you answered a question!

i don't agree with your answer, but nevertheless, you answered.




i answered your question already. from scratch looked it up even.

so i'll repost my answer to your question here:

once again, for the "hard of reading":

Romans 7:5 ( NKJV ) 5For when we were in the flesh, the sinful passions which were aroused by the law were at work in our members to bear fruit to death.

read the verse.

it says, "the sinful passions were at work in our members to bear fruit to death."

but, what you want to concentrate on is "which were aroused by the law".

see my point? you want to concentrate on the "law" aspect rather than the "sin" aspect.

now look at the sentence again:

"the sinful passions were at work in our members to bear fruit to death." notice the focus of the verse, it's sin.

now, "which were aroused by the law".

i think you liken that to one popping in a porn tape, getting excited, and wanting to go fornicate.

in other words, mention the law and one wants to go sin.

that is not what the verse is saying.

"which were aroused by the law", simply means that paul was now aware of the fact that he was sinning.

the law aroused him out of a slumber, so to speak, that what he was doing was sin according to God. 1 jn 3:4, gen 39:9, rom 7:7.

the law doesn't cause anyone to sin. we sin.

the law let's us know what sin is 1jn 3:4.

that's why your question

"how do you preach law, without arousing sin?"

don't even make sense to me.

the purpose of the ten commandments is to define sin! (rom 7:8)

this was my answer to your question, like it or lump it, it's my answer.

Is this an example of what you say I don't understand about the frist covenant?

 

[JohnRabbit]

let's recap what i've stated so far.

from post #61 http://www.christianforums.com/t7527007-7/#post56563040

discussed the terms and conditions of the covenant.

from post #92 http://www.christianforums.com/t7527007-10/

discussed how the COI was already living under the terms and conditions of the covenant before they reached sinai.

from posts #133-138 i listed the 613 ( i guess it should be 614 if you include frogster's rule) and yes, i copied and pasted them from some website.

from post #143 http://www.christianforums.com/t7527007-15/

discussed how the law of God existed before sinai.

from post #144 http://www.christianforums.com/t7527007-15/

some definitions for reference about statutes and judgments.


i noticed that you (from scratch) tried get Heavens up to date in post #239, however, this is how we got to this thread:

in the thread "10 commandments are meant to be broken" page 32, in your post #320 you said:

from scratch: So then in reality there is no law from Moses and doesn't belong to him as orgininator. Thus the implication created by saying the laws of Moses being from him is simply not true.


and i responded on the next page with:

JohnRabbit: exactly my point.

like Frogster still asking me about "arousing sin", your last post to me, proves to me, that you and Frogster don't understand the first covenant.

you can post what you want after this.

you've proven it!




that's how it went down.

anywho, the ten commandments were in existence before sinai has already been proven.

the COI was to be a nation of kings and priests (ex 19:5-6)

God gave this nation laws to live by and even allowed for the ministration of death (ex 21:12). this is no different than our laws here in the united states of america, where we still have the "ministration of death" in some states. in some states, you break the law and they will execute you.

they built the tabernacle nine months after they received the law at sinai (ex 40:2, 17). most scholars believe that moses may have written the book of leviticus during that first month of the second year (ex 40:17).

with the priesthood set up and the tabernacle built the COI was given the ceremonial laws.

these laws are different than the ten commandments, the statutes, and judgments, in that, it takes physical effort to accomplish. these are the "works of law" that paul is talking about in galatians 3.

this is the law that was added 430 years after abraham, because:

Genesis 26:5 ( NKJV ) 5because Abraham obeyed My voice and kept My charge, My commandments, My statutes, and My laws.”

the commandments, statutes, and laws already existed!

in gen 39:9, how is joseph able to say that he would commit adultery, a sin against God, if there was no law? abraham taught his family God's ways and that's how they knew.

look at what God said to the COI (ex 19:5), "if you will indeed obey My voice", notice that the rhetoric is the same as in gen 26:5!

the ceremonial laws were temporary, a shadow of things to come, and to teach the habit of obedience. of course the sacrifice pointed to the Christ and the washings pointed to the Holy Spirit.

there was law before sinai.

frogster said that adam broke a rule.

we know that adam broke the law.

adam broke the first commandment, he listened to satan over God. (broke a rule, give me a break!)

adam broke the fifth commandment, disobeyed his parent, God

adam broke the eighth commandment, he stole from God

and adam broke the tenth commandment, he lusted for what was on the tree.

so, in gal 3:19, we know what law was added, it was the ceremonial law.

it was added because of transgressions, the COI had sinned. the only way they could have had transgressions, is if there were law already.

because, rom 4:15, last part, "where there's no law, there's no transgression.

so, i always ask, if there was no law before sinai, how could law be added because of transgressions?

it's the darnedest thing to me.

this is why i said you (from scratch) don't understand the covenant, because you would have known what law was added at sinai and you proved that you didn't know.

 

[Frogster]

finally, you answered a question!

i don't agree with your answer, but nevertheless, you answered.




i answered your question already. from scratch looked it up even.

so i'll repost my answer to your question here:

once again, for the "hard of reading":

Romans 7:5 ( NKJV ) 5For when we were in the flesh, the sinful passions which were aroused by the law were at work in our members to bear fruit to death.

read the verse.

it says, "the sinful passions were at work in our members to bear fruit to death."

but, what you want to concentrate on is "which were aroused by the law".

see my point? you want to concentrate on the "law" aspect rather than the "sin" aspect.

now look at the sentence again:

"the sinful passions were at work in our members to bear fruit to death." notice the focus of the verse, it's sin.

now, "which were aroused by the law".

i think you liken that to one popping in a porn tape, getting excited, and wanting to go fornicate.

in other words, mention the law and one wants to go sin.

that is not what the verse is saying.

"which were aroused by the law", simply means that paul was now aware of the fact that he was sinning.

the law aroused him out of a slumber, so to speak, that what he was doing was sin according to God. 1 jn 3:4, gen 39:9, rom 7:7.

the law doesn't cause anyone to sin. we sin.

the law let's us know what sin is 1jn 3:4.

that's why your question

"how do you preach law, without arousing sin?"

don't even make sense to me.

the purpose of the ten commandments is to define sin! (rom 7:8)

this was my answer to your question, like it or lump it, it's my answer.

The other day in school, the teachers asked a question, and the answer that the young student gave, was wrong, and he said.."like it or lump it". He felt vindicated in his own mind, but when the report card came, he got an F.

So in his subjective view, he thought he was fooling all the other students on the forum, he thought by going circular, that the other students were fooled, but really, he did not. He got an F!

 

[Frogster]

5 For while we were living in the flesh, our sinful passions, aroused by the law, were at work in our members to bear fruit for death

5 For while we were living in the flesh, our sinful passions, aroused by the law, were at work in our members to bear fruit for death


5 For while we were living in the flesh, our sinful passions, aroused by the law, were at work in our members to bear fruit for death

 

[from scratch]

OK let us see what I can do with what you said so far.

let's recap what i've stated so far.

from post #61 http://www.christianforums.com/t7527007-7/#post56563040

discussed the terms and conditions of the covenant.

Excellent. no quibble.

from post #92 http://www.christianforums.com/t7527007-10/

discussed how the COI was already living under the terms and conditions of the covenant before they reached sinai.

How? the covenant wasn't made yet. If they were living under the covenant then the 10 commandments aren't the covenant according to Deut 4:13 and Moses is lying and unreliable. Unless you're referring to some other covenant not mentioned in Scripture. Here is the verse - And He declared unto you His covenant, which he commanded you to perform, even ten commandments; and He wrote them upon two tables of stone. This should be very self explainatory. God declared His covenant and wrote it on 2 tablets of stone.

Furthermore it hadn't ever been issued before arriving at Horeb (Mt Sinai)according to Deut 5:1-5 - And Moses called all Israel, and said unto them, Hear, O Israel, the statutes and judgments which I speak in your ears this day, that ye may learn them, and keep, and do them.2The LORD our God made a covenant with us in Horeb.3The LORD made not this covenant with our fathers, but with us, even us, who are all of us here alive this day.4The LORD talked with you face to face in the mount out of the midst of the fire,5(I stood between the LORD and you at that time, to shew you the word of the LORD: for ye were afraid by reason of the fire, and went not up into the mount saying,

Who was Moses talking to? V 1 says he called all Israel.

What does the Scripture say Moses told them? The LORD our God made a covenant. Where was this covenant made? in Horeb. How could they be keeping some the covenant not yet made? They couldn't have possibly keeping it before arriving in or at Horeb. Horeb is where the covenant was made according to Moses and the Scripture.

Who did God make this covenant with? It wasn't with their fathers, So Abraham, Isaac or Jacob didn't keep it. So who is the us? Could it be those who are who are alive today? Hmmm! does that include Scratch, JohnRabbit and Frogster? I don't think any of the named were alive then. And verse 1 qualifies the us to be all Isreal. Are you Israel? Now there is another thread, because you probably will say that all Christians are Israel. So do you wish to discuss that as well? Make a thread on it or I will if you wish to challegne. No fear!

Where are they - the us? They are here. Where is here? Horeb.

from posts #133-138 i listed the 613 ( i guess it should be 614 if you . include frogster's rule) and yes, i copied and pasted them from some website.

I know and have no problem with the list. I assume and accept that all those laws were/are part of the covenant under discussion. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

from post #143 http://www.christianforums.com/t7527007-15/

discussed how the law of God existed before sinai.

Here is where you and I run into a very serious dificulty. You are calling the law the 10 commandments everywhere the word law, commandments or a transgression is recorded. Is this correct as you imply? Not according to Scripture, even from the book of the law which doesn't include Paul. You must claim that Paul isn't inspired and Moses is putting out a bunch of false information. Every time the word law appears in the NT it refers to the first covenant only and as a single undivisible unit. See James 2:10, Gal 3:10, 5:3. Gal 5:3 leaves no doubt as it says whole law. Moses clearly said that the 10 commandments didn't exist prior to Horeb - Deut 5:1-5. Paul says it was 430 years after Abraham - Gal 3:17. Here it is for convience - And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect.

from post #144 http://www.christianforums.com/t7527007-15/

some definitions for reference about statutes and judgments.

I have no problem with your definitions. It is the statement following that causes a headace. You play on the word remember. For me you you have severely abused the word. Since you don't know when my birthday is I instruct you to remember it. Your wife might tell you to remember to pick up the bread and milk (soy milk in your case). Is she talking about the bread and milk you picked up last week or something entirely new that you have been informed of? Now to whom does this remember the Sabbath apply to? All mankind? How? The 10 commandments were only given to Israel. We have a little difficulty with Exodus being spoken to the children of Israel (COI) because of the narrative. There was a lot happening and only one thing at a time can be stated. We have the COI coming out of Egypt in Ex 19. Who is coming out? the COI. The whole group is called the COI. These are the people God told Moses to go sanctify. It is a selected group as identified in Deut 5:1-5. Starting in v 16 we have the preliminary thunder and lightnings followed by the 10 commandments being spoken in Cahpter 20. Incidently it was not everything (613) Just the 10 words in the covenant. The prior test in chapter 16 isn't the covenant.

I need to break this response in half to make sure it fits within th 5,000 word limit. And this is the best place to make the break.

 

[Frogster]

OK let us see what I can do with what you said so far.

Excellent. no quibble. How? the covenant wasn't made yet. If they were living under the covenant then the 10 commandments aren't the covenant according to Deut 4:13 and Moses is lying and unreliable. Unless you're referring to some other covenant not mentioned in Scripture. Here is the verse - And He declared unto you His covenant, which he commanded you to perform, even ten commandments; and He wrote them upon two tables of stone. This should be very self explainatory. God declared His covenant and wrote it on 2 tablets of stone.

Furthermore it hadn't ever been issued before arriving at Horeb (Mt Sinai)according to Deut 5:1-5 - And Moses called all Israel, and said unto them, Hear, O Israel, the statutes and judgments which I speak in your ears this day, that ye may learn them, and keep, and do them.2The LORD our God made a covenant with us in Horeb.3The LORD made not this covenant with our fathers, but with us, even us, who are all of us here alive this day.4The LORD talked with you face to face in the mount out of the midst of the fire,5(I stood between the LORD and you at that time, to shew you the word of the LORD: for ye were afraid by reason of the fire, and went not up into the mount saying,

Who was Moses talking to? V 1 says he called all Israel.

What does the Scripture say Moses told them? The LORD our God made a covenant. Where was this covenant made? in Horeb. How could they be keeping some the covenant not yet made? They couldn't have possibly keeping it before arriving in or at Horeb. Horeb is where the covenant was made according to Moses and the Scripture.

Who did God make this covenant with? It wasn't with their fathers, So Abraham, Isaac or Jacob didn't keep it. So who is the us? Could it be those who are who are alive today? Hmmm! does that include Scratch, JohnRabbit and Frogster? I don't think any of the named were alive then. And verse 1 qualifies the us to be all Isreal. Are you Israel? Now there is another thread, because you probably will say that all Christians are Israel. So do you wish to discuss that as well? Make a thread on it or I will if you wish to challegne. No fear!

Where are they - the us? They are here. Where is here? Horeb.I know and have no problem with the list. I assume and accept that all those laws were/are part of the covenant under discussion. Please correct me if I'm wrong.Here is where you and I run into a very serious dificulty. You are calling the law the 10 commandments everywhere the word law, commandments or a transgression is recorded. Is this correct as you imply? Not according to Scripture, even from the book of the law which doesn't include Paul. You must claim that Paul isn't inspired and Moses is putting out a bunch of false information. Every time the word law appears in the NT it refers to the first covenant only and as a single undivisible unit. See James 2:10, Gal 3:10, 5:3. Gal 5:3 leaves no doubt as it says whole law. Moses clearly said that the 10 commandments didn't exist prior to Horeb - Deut 5:1-5. Paul says it was 430 years after Abraham - Gal 3:17. Here it is for convience - And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect.I have no problem with your definitions. It is the statement following that causes a headace. You play on the word remember. For me you you have severely abused the word. Since you don't know when my birthday is I instruct you to remember it. Your wife might tell you to remember to pick up the bread and milk (soy milk in your case). Is she talking about the bread and milk you picked up last week or something entirely new that you have been informed of? Now to whom does this remember the Sabbath apply to? All mankind? How? The 10 commandments were only given to Israel. We have a little difficulty with Exodus being spoken to the children of Israel (COI) because of the narrative. There was a lot happening and only one thing at a time can be stated. We have the COI coming out of Egypt in Ex 19. Who is coming out? the COI. The whole group is called the COI. These are the people God told Moses to go sanctify. It is a selected group as identified in Deut 5:1-5. Starting in v 16 we have the preliminary thunder and lightnings followed by the 10 commandments being spoken in Cahpter 20. Incidently it was not everything (613) Just the 10 words in the covenant. The prior test in chapter 16 isn't the covenant.

I need to break this response in half to make sure it fits within th 5,000 word limit. And this is the best place to make the break.

That will show em!

 

[from scratch]

i noticed that you (from scratch) tried get Heavens up to date in post #239, however, this is how we got to this thread:

in the thread "10 commandments are meant to be broken" page 32, in your post #320 you said:

from scratch: So then in reality there is no law from Moses and doesn't belong to him as orgininator. Thus the implication created by saying the laws of Moses being from him is simply not true.

Here is what that response is to:

oh, and i don't know that the civil law came from God? all i said was, that he wrote it.

it is obvious he got it from God.

what you guys fail to understand, is the "ministration of death" was part of the covenant.


Exodus 24:3-4 ( NKJV ) 3So Moses came and told the people all the words of the Lord and all the judgments. And all the people answered with one voice and said, “All the words which the Lord has said we will do.” 4And Moses wrote all the words of the Lord. And he rose early in the morning, and built an altar at the foot of the mountain, and twelve pillars according to the twelve tribes of Israel.

If I remember correctly you hold that the 10 commandments are from God and the rest of the law isn't. IOW Moses is the originator of the rest of the law called the laws of Moses. So that when the law is spoken of it is referred to as belonging to Moses and not God. I have no idea how many times God spoke to Moses and said what to write or tell the people. They go something like And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying as found in Ex 25:1. So I maintain that these words aren't from Moses at all but God. I think that should clear the matter up for this discussion exactly what I mean by my previouly quoted post. If it doesn't please indicate with a response and quote exactly what you might be talking about, please.

and i responded on the next page with:

exactly my point.

like Frogster still asking me about "arousing sin", your last post to me, proves to me, that you and Frogster don't understand the first covenant.

you can post what you want after this.

you've proven it!

that's how it went down.

anywho, the ten commandments were in existence before sinai has already been proven.

How is that seeing my above discussion of Deut 4:13, 5:1-5; Gal 3;17? What have you done to prove your point? All I see is a misapplication of words on your part. Sorry. I don't believe that the Scripture contradicts itself anywhere. You have to deny Scripture to come to your conclusion. I have said more than once we have a definitions problem and it is severe.

the COI was to be a nation of kings and priests (ex 19:5-6)

I have no objection to that statement.

God gave this nation laws to live by and even allowed for the ministration of death (ex 21:12). this is no different than our laws here in the united states of america, where we still have the "ministration of death" in some states. in some states, you break the law and they will execute you.

That is exactly and absolutely correct - this nation (meaning of course Israel). It didn't allow for the ministration of death it is the ministration fo death II COr 3:7. This ministration of death is written on stones. What is written on stones? The 10 commandments!

I'm sorry but the contents of Ex 21:12 is not written on stone.

they built the tabernacle nine months after they received the law at sinai (ex 40:2, 17). most scholars believe that moses may have written the book of leviticus during that first month of the second year (ex 40:17).

So what! That does not prove that it was added to the law. The tabernacle is not an after though by or from God. And it wasn't Moses' idea. Moses wrote all the words of the Lord in a book as instructed by God. How long it took Moses to do has no bearing on how long it took to erect the Tabernacle.

with the priesthood set up and the tabernacle built the COI was given the ceremonial laws.

This isn't additional covenantal requirements as in an addenum. It is an original part of the covenant. God didn't indicate Opps I forgot guys here is more for you. If it is there I want to see it give a Scripture reference.

these laws are different than the ten commandments, the statutes, and judgments, in that, it takes physical effort to accomplish. these are the "works of law" that paul is talking about in galatians 3.

That is for sure but it is part of the covenant required of the Isrealite. It is not an oppsie I forgot thing. Moses wrote all God said in a book.

this is the law that was added 430 years after abraham, because:

Genesis 26:5 ( NKJV ) 5because Abraham obeyed My voice and kept My charge, My commandments, My statutes, and My laws.”

the commandments, statutes, and laws already existed!

Nope. Are you familiar with a couple of people - Danny Shelton and Shelly J. Quinn SDA on the 3ABN? It doesn't matter if they offically represent the SDA church or not. They are or have been indorsed by the SDA church. They wrote a book 'The Antichrist Agenda Ten commandments Twice Removed -ISBN o-9720888-3-0? They make this statement on page 42 'The Book of the Law embraced the Ten Commandments as the central part of the covenant.' This means to me that the 10 commandments are part of and not different from the law (covenant). This would include all the law.

in gen 39:9, how is joseph able to say that he would commit adultery, a sin against God, if there was no law? abraham taught his family God's ways and that's how they knew.

All I'm willing to tell you at this times is that it wasn't the covenant made with Israel and no one else ever per Moses Deut 5:1-5. It is not even part of the issue because it is not the first covenant. You're trying to prove something that is none of your business and doesn't mater in your salvation. You're meddling in God's business trying to figure out how everything works. You refuse to accept that the law was for a period of time and for a purpose. You chose to esplain away or flat out deny Scriptures like Romans 11:32; Gal 3:19. Or consider ones like Hebrews 7:12 in light of James 2:10; Gal 3:;10, 5:3.

look at what God said to the COI (ex 19:5), "if you will indeed obey My voice", notice that the rhetoric is the same as in gen 26:5!

That doesn't make the first covenant retoactive to Adam or anybody else. The law wasn't given to anybody else besides Israel. Sin was in the world before the law - Rom 5:13 and Gal 3:19.

the ceremonial laws were temporary, a shadow of things to come, and to teach the habit of obedience. of course the sacrifice pointed to the Christ and the washings pointed to the Holy Spirit.

All the law was temporary Gal 3:19. Jesus did not offer the Israelites something they already had in Matt 11:28-30. Hebrews also goes into this. I simply can't be exhasutive here. If you want more ask and ye shall receive.

there was law before sinai.

That is not the issue. What is called the law wasn't before Mt Sinai per Scripture.

frogster said that adam broke a rule.

And my buddy Frogster is correct. In fact Adam did break the only commandment he was responsible for honoring and it is not found in the law anywhere.

we know that adam broke the law.

But not what is called the law in Scripture. It doesn't matter whether you admit this or not it will never change the facts. The reality is Adam didn't break the law or any part of it. There is nothing in the law about eating from the tree of good and evil.

adam broke the first commandment, he listened to satan over God. (broke a rule, give me a break!)

That is odd,I don't recall that commandment at all.

adam broke the fifth commandment, disobeyed his parent, God

How it didn't exist till after Abraham - Gal3:17.

adam broke the eighth commandment, he stole from God

How it didn't exist till after Abraham - Gal3:17.

and adam broke the tenth commandment, he lusted for what was on the tree.

How it didn't exist till after Abraham - Gal3:17.

so, in gal 3:19, we know what law was added, it was the ceremonial law.

That isn't what the Scripture says. I have found no translation that so states. You have not cited one either.

it was added because of transgressions, the COI had sinned. the only way they could have had transgressions, is if there were law already.

Yep worship was added because we sinned for sure. And worship certianly is against us and contrary to us. We have all kinds of ceremonies that are not religious in nature but are techincally worship.

because, rom 4:15, last part, "where there's no law, there's no transgression.

Yes sir and I refer you to Romans 11:32. And Gal 3:19 is then not inspired by God.

so, i always ask, if there was no law before sinai, how could law be added because of transgressions?

Beats me. All I know is what the Scripture says and it clearly says that the law was added becasue of transgression - Gal 3:19. There is just no getting around that. You can say part of the law was added if you want. All I can say is that Moses wrote all that the Lord said in a book called the Book of the law which included the 10 commandments with no disticntion of of not being the law.

it's the darnedest thing to me.

this is why i said you (from scratch) don't understand the covenant, because you would have known what law was added at sinai and you proved that you didn't know.

So what about the covenant don't I understand? I think the problem is you refuse to accept the new covenant that Jeremiah spoke of and Jesus testified is current and sealed it with His blood, symbolically in Mat 26:28, MK 14:24 and LK 33:20 and afterwards with His actual blood.

There is no Scripture that you can present that changes the facts in your favor. Not a single jot or tittle of one. I challenge you to come up with even an implication.

 

[Heavens]

finally, you answered a question!

i don't agree with your answer, but nevertheless, you answered.




i answered your question already. from scratch looked it up even.

so i'll repost my answer to your question here:

once again, for the "hard of reading":

Romans 7:5 ( NKJV ) 5For when we were in the flesh, the sinful passions which were aroused by the law were at work in our members to bear fruit to death.

read the verse.

it says, "the sinful passions were at work in our members to bear fruit to death."

but, what you want to concentrate on is "which were aroused by the law".

see my point? you want to concentrate on the "law" aspect rather than the "sin" aspect.

now look at the sentence again:

"the sinful passions were at work in our members to bear fruit to death." notice the focus of the verse, it's sin.

now, "which were aroused by the law".

i think you liken that to one popping in a porn tape, getting excited, and wanting to go fornicate.

in other words, mention the law and one wants to go sin.

that is not what the verse is saying.

"which were aroused by the law", simply means that paul was now aware of the fact that he was sinning.

the law aroused him out of a slumber, so to speak, that what he was doing was sin according to God. 1 jn 3:4, gen 39:9, rom 7:7.

the law doesn't cause anyone to sin. we sin.

the law let's us know what sin is 1jn 3:4.

that's why your question

"how do you preach law, without arousing sin?"

don't even make sense to me.

the purpose of the ten commandments is to define sin! (rom 7:8)

this was my answer to your question, like it or lump it, it's my answer.

Uh, Mr Rabbit, I don't know you, but there is some grave error here. Sorry
In that first covenant, we all know that sin didn't come but by the law. That is what Paul is plainly stating.

Many things that people did prior to the law wasn't sin until after the law came and made it sin. We all know that. "Law" 101.

To make it simple, here's a question to prove that point;

Would Jesus have been cursed and made sin for us if it wasn't the law itself specifically that cursed him into being made sin for us?

(Gal 3:13) Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree:

So then? What cursed Him and made Him sin for us?

Thanks

(froggy put your hand down, I know you know)

 

[from scratch]

I have a very strong desire to respond to this post in yet another way.

finally, you answered a question!

i don't agree with your answer, but nevertheless, you answered.




i answered your question already. from scratch looked it up even.

so i'll repost my answer to your question here:

once again, for the "hard of reading":

Romans 7:5 ( NKJV ) 5For when we were in the flesh, the sinful passions which were aroused by the law were at work in our members to bear fruit to death.

read the verse.

it says, "the sinful passions were at work in our members to bear fruit to death."

but, what you want to concentrate on is "which were aroused by the law".

see my point? you want to concentrate on the "law" aspect rather than the "sin" aspect.

now look at the sentence again:

"the sinful passions were at work in our members to bear fruit to death." notice the focus of the verse, it's sin.

Just comparing your restatement of the quoted verse shows an altering of the sentence and thus the meaning. I checked several Bible versions and none -not a single one came even close to your restatement that you put in quotes. Very deceiving to those not paying attention to detail. Here are some examples:

the sinful passions aroused by the law were at work (NIV 84)

the law aroused these evil desires that produced a harvest of sinful deeds
now, "which were aroused by the law". (NLT 07)

aroused by the law (ESV 01)

were aroused by the Law (NASB 95)

by means of the law, (ISV 08)

Stirred up by Moses' laws (GWT 95)

the motions of sins, which were by the law, (AKJV)

which came into being through the law (BBE)

which were through the law (RSV)

sinful passions-- made sinful by the Law (WNT)

This is from the Jamiesons-Fausset-Brown bible commentary:

5. For when we were in the flesh-in our unregenerate state, as we came into the world. See on [2210]Joh 3:6 and [2211]Ro 8:5-9.
the motions-"passions" (Margin), "affections" (as in Ga 5:24), or "stirrings."
of sins-that is, "prompting to the commission of sins." which were by the law-by occasion of the law, which fretted, irritated our inward corruption by its prohibitions. See on [2212]Ro 7:7-9.

i think you liken that to one popping in a porn tape, getting excited, and wanting to go fornicate.

Oh could we get into serious trouble here or what? Just to many issues in that statement to touch.

in other words, mention the law and one wants to go sin.

Not quite that way. It is the think on the subject being addressed by the law thus the arousal. One is then entertaining thoughts on the subject, thus arousal.

that is not what the verse is saying.

"which were aroused by the law", simply means that paul was now aware of the fact that he was sinning.

Now I can buy that. However there is much more as already indicated above.

the law aroused him out of a slumber, so to speak, that what he was doing was sin according to God. 1 jn 3:4, gen 39:9, rom 7:7.

the law doesn't cause anyone to sin. we sin.

Technically that is correct. Indirectly that is very incorrect. But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. James 1:14

the law let's us know what sin is 1jn 3:4.

Romans 14:23 - And he that doubteth is damned if he eat, because he eateth not of faith: for whatsoever is not of faith is sin.

that's why your question

"how do you preach law, without arousing sin?"

don't even make sense to me.

the purpose of the ten commandments is to define sin! (rom 7:8)

this was my answer to your question, like it or lump it, it's my answer.

 

[JohnRabbit]

I Give Up!

Uncle!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Uncle!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Uncle!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[from scratch]

I Give Up!

Uncle!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Uncle!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Uncle!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Why is that? Don't you even have a comment on what I said about your post? Either pro or con? Are you think nothing I said makes any sense? Why? Show me why it doesn't make sense. Please define key words.

 

[RABBIT-HUNTER]

I Give Up!

Uncle!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Uncle!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Uncle!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I gave up talking with you last week, due to your spin. Scratch is a superior debater, and anyone watching this thread, as I have been, can clearly see that. With all due respect, you are outclassed. Thanks, and apologies if you were offended. Alex.

 

[JohnRabbit]

Why is that? Don't you even have a comment on what I said about your post? Either pro or con? Are you think nothing I said makes any sense? Why? Show me why it doesn't make sense. Please define key words.

it's an exercise in futility.

 

[JohnRabbit]

I gave up talking with you last week, due to your spin. Scratch is a superior debater, and anyone watching this thread, as I have been, can clearly see that. With all due respect, you are outclassed. Thanks, and apologies if you were offended. Alex.

no offense taken.

you spoke your speak and that's cool with me.

 

[Frogster]

Uh, Mr Rabbit, I don't know you, but there is some grave error here. Sorry
In that first covenant, we all know that sin didn't come but by the law. That is what Paul is plainly stating.

Many things that people did prior to the law wasn't sin until after the law came and made it sin. We all know that. "Law" 101.

To make it simple, here's a question to prove that point;

Would Jesus have been cursed and made sin for us if it wasn't the law itself specifically that cursed him into being made sin for us?

(Gal 3:13) Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree:

So then? What cursed Him and made Him sin for us?

Thanks

(froggy put your hand down, I know you know)

Frog lives!

they never equate the structure of galatians, and notice the comparison of the gospel as blessing, and the law a curse.

9 So then, those who are of faith are blessed along with Abraham, the man of faith.


10 For all who rely on works of the law are under a curse; for it is written, “Cursed be everyone who does not abide by all things written in the Book of the Law, and do them.”

 

[Frogster]

it's an exercise in futility.

no, it is futile to keep arguing against facts...