Been told

[Frogster]

Mosaic Law = Sin and death.
Jesus Law = Love and eternal life.

Did I miss anything?

well..it is 2011 now, as far as missing anything.

 

[from scratch]

I fully agree with your statement of actions telling who one obeys. Do you obey Jesus or the law of Moses which includes the 10 commandments, not seperastes them? So who's slave are you? The law's or Jesus? Jesus owns me by purchase with blood bought from the law.

So is it sin that leads one to death? It appears that way if you only consider your cited verse. The previous 2 verses claim that we're not subject to or bound to the law. How are we said to be servants of sin? Is it because we are incapable of observing the law as Jesus pointed out? Our disobedience to our owner the law makes us a slave to sin. We simply can't submit to the law without flaw. It you steal you will always be a theif and maybe a forgiven theif, but still a theif. Same goes for the rest of the law. Forgivness doesn't make one righteous. Forgiveness is not what Jesus offers. Jesus offers total obliteration of your sin as in it doesn't exist. OK seeing what you have presented please tell me how Jesus isn't a parrot as I have charged. Thanks.

example: in post #251 you said,

"If I remember correctly you hold that the 10 commandments are from God and the rest of the law isn't."

i never said that, so i wonder where did you get that from?[/quote]Really? Don't you hold that the 10 commandments are from God written with His own finger and the the rest of the law is written by Moses? Please stop and think about that question for a minute. I think that you can see that I understand you to say that what Moses wrote is from him or his doing and not from God. You claim the 10 commandments belong to God becasue He wrote them and you attribute the rest of the law to Moses because he wrote them. It seems to me that you clearly make a distinction of ownership and charge that the rest of the law isn't from God. You have repeatedly ignored my comments that such is not true. I have given examples like this: And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, Speak unto the children of Israel.Yes see above presentation on the matter.I guess you don't because you clearly said Moses wrote the rest of the law. The manner in which you use the word wrote indicates origin and ownership.Sure if we connect the correct dots. Just because dots are connected, doesn't mean anything, especially properly connected.I agree if you mean the whole Bible without agenda. That is believe something and then go and find something in the Bible that seems to support that idea while ignoring everything else.Yes the law deals with the Spirit and makes demands on the flesh. The law isn't the Spirit. And if one follows the Spirit they don't perform the lust fo the flesh - Gal 5:16-21 which you have seen me quote here and in GT. Here it is again - This I say then, Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil the lust of the flesh.17For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would.18But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law.19Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,20Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,21Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.

This deals very effectively with your behavior requirements of the law. The focus is vastly different. Effort (work) is required to follow the law and following the Spirit leaves no desire or temptation to do those things. One does what they think about. The verse has nothing to do with the law.When did eating pork become a sin? When did trimming your beard become a sin? When did wearing mixed thread garments become a sin? Need more? Is Moses making thins sin? If so why should we listen to him? Is having sex or marrying your first cousin, neice, your deceased father's wife, or your deceased wife's sister adultery? Are they sin? Are those laws nailed to the cross? Hmmm! they must not be sin any more. They sure aren't mentioned in the 10 commandments. Just more of what I don't understand about the law - first covenant.Yes it certianly takes no effort to obey those commandments. I guess that is why false witness is used so often by the law pusher in these forums.Beats me. But that certianly doesn't mean that God wrote the COI on our hearts does it? At least not according to Jeremiah. He clearly says God cuts a new different covenant. That doesn't mean that God just declared sin holy, does it? Neither do I. The law pusher charges that we say such as a manipilation tatic.Good assessment.[/quote]

i'm sorry, but some of your questions don't even make sense to me![/quote] Which ones please. Your statement doesn't say anything except you have no intention of responding to anything.[/quote]

the "works of law" were nailed to the cross![/quote]Now that's new. How novel. And as usual no Scripture. So where did you get the idea from?[/quote]

i feel like we are getting too many irons in the fire at this point, and maybe we should concentrate on one thing at a time. that way, we can sort a lot of this out.

we are introducing too many things right now.

read my post #355, maybe that will clear up some of this from my perspective.[/quote] Evidently not or I wouldn't be asking questions. So why don;t you try again?

you said:"when did eating pork become sin? "

when did not eating pork become spiritual? it broke a physical law, eating pork is not good for you to this day, is it? break that law by eating swine, and you increase your chances of dying this physical death. the doctors even say so.

I guess that you have passed over Gen 9:3.This changes at Mt Sinai only for the COI for a reason. It is not for health or because it is sinful. It became sinful to eat pork for an Isrealite only. One never eats swine. Swine squeals, pork doesn't. One never eats cow either. Cows moo and beef doesn't. When I drove a big rig I would pick up squeal no more, not swine. BTW they were squeelin when I got there. Talk about fresh. I could even sometimes watch them be herded off the truck.

Waiting for you to answer my questions.

I love the color blue, but I'm not holding my breath.

BTW the quote with JohnRabbit's name on it is not his. It is mine as are a lot of the rest of the post. I just got tired of correcting his stuff.

 

[Frogster]

Romans 8:14 ( NKJV ) 14For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God.

this is the christian. he who walks with God.

the christian trusts in Jesus, and believes Him, and believes in Him.

the Spirit opens our minds to His understanding. without that Spirit, we are unable to know the things of God.

the Spirit gives us power over our temptations and helps us overcome.

2 Timothy 1:7 ( NKJV ) 7For God has not given us a spirit of fear, but of power and of love and of a sound mind.

but all of this is only possible if we repent (act 2:38) and accept the sacrifice of the Christ.

then we do what God intended for the nation of israel, walk in His law (ex 16:4)! but not in the letter of the law, rather, in the spirit of the law.

Romans 7:6 ( NKJV ) 6But now we have been delivered from the law(the death penalty), having died to what we were held by (sin, remember who we are a slave to (jn 8:34), wasn't law (rom 7:12)), so that we should serve in the newness of the Spirit and not in the oldness of the letter ("oldness of the letter" is how the law was kept in the old covenant).

Jesus came to show the law's spiritual intent:

Matthew 5:27-28 ( NKJV ) 27“You have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ 28But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

i find, "in his heart", as being significant, see (jer 3:15, 11:8, 11:20, 17:9-10). God is concerned with the heart of man (deut 5:29, jer 31:33)

now, we can't keep the law, but Jesus can. He is willing to do this for us also, by the Spirit.

Galatians 2:20 ( NKJV ) 20I have been crucified with Christ; it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself for me.

and we have faith everyday that He will do this. so you see, the christian is to live by faith. the law defines sin and we know how to walk, live our lives that is pleasing to God.

sure, the christian will sin, but we can go to God for forgiveness and be able to continue to grow in grace. we must endure until the end and then we will be saved.

notice what paul said:

Galatians 5:18 ( NKJV ) 18But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law.

now if you are not led by the Spirit you are under the law. notice that paul is talking about salvation here, so under the law in this case means it's penalty (rom 6:23) and not necessarily "obligation to".

i'm not "pushing law", it's just that i know like paul (rom 7:7). the law defines sin so that i know what it is.

actually if you read the context of 5:18, it was talking about sin not dominating over us, as per the flesh vs Spirit verses prior, so it confirms that under law, sin is aroused, as per our unfinished, avoided conversation.

16 But I say, walk by the Spirit, and you will not gratify the desires of the flesh. 17 For the desires of the flesh are against the Spirit, and the desires of the Spirit are against the flesh, for these are opposed to each other, to keep you from doing the things you want to do. 18 But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law.

 

[from scratch]

Romans 7:6 ( NKJV ) 6But now we have been delivered from the law(the death penalty), having died to what we were held by (sin, remember who we are a slave to (jn 8:34), wasn't law (rom 7:12)), so that we should serve in the newness of the Spirit and not in the oldness of the letter ("oldness of the letter" is how the law was kept in the old covenant).

Let's try this: I truly don't understand what you're trying to say here. I offer no comment at great restraint. I don't wish to put words in you mouth nor twist what you said. It simply doesn't make sense to me.

Please consider what you said very closely.

 

[from scratch]

Jesus came to show the law's spiritual intent:

Are you sure about this point? I need a Scripture to back it up. Gen 3:15 doesn't say this? I read every where that a Messiah (read Deliver/Redeemer) was to come everywhere in Scripture. I find no place where someone was to come to explain the law or its intent.

 

[from scratch]

and we have faith everyday that He will do this. so you see, the christian is to live by faith. the law defines sin and we know how to walk, live our lives that is pleasing to God.

Will try once more. How is it that God gave permission to Noah to eat pork in Gen 9:3 and it is sin for everyone in Leviticus. Did God tell Noah to sin? Looking for your help in undersatanding here. I didn't twist anything you said nor did I take you out of context. I truly don't understand something.

 

[from scratch]

sure, the christian will sin, but we can go to God for forgiveness and be able to continue to grow in grace. we must endure until the end and then we will be saved.

Is this what Paul told the Philipian jailer when he asked what must I do to be saved? Please see Acts 16:31. So when is salvation effective? When one believes or after one dies?

You didn't give a clear verst to back your statement up.

 

[from scratch]

notice what paul said:

Galatians 5:18 ( NKJV ) 18But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law.

now if you are not led by the Spirit you are under the law. notice that paul is talking about salvation here, so under the law in this case means it's penalty (rom 6:23) and not necessarily "obligation to".

i'm not "pushing law", it's just that i know like paul (rom 7:7). the law defines sin so that i know what it is.

So if I follow (observe) the law am I following the leading of the Spirit? Your verse sure seems to say the opposite. Under means subject to. It appears to me that you plainly said we're under (subject to) the law only if we're not led by the Spirit. Did I read that wrong? If the law can't convict so a sentence can be given, where is its power? To me you just said there is no penalty for violation. Why then keep/observe the law? It has no force and can do nothing.

 

[JohnRabbit]

So if I follow (observe) the law am I following the leading of the Spirit? Your verse sure seems to say the opposite. Under means subject to. It appears to me that you plainly said we're under (subject to) the law only if we're not led by the Spirit. Did I read that wrong? If the law can't convict so a sentence can be given, where is its power? To me you just said there is no penalty for violation. Why then keep/observe the law? It has no force and can do nothing.

seems like. the more i explain, the more, the more you get lost!

go figure!

 

[JohnRabbit]

Let's try this: I truly don't understand what you're trying to say here. I offer no comment at great restraint. I don't wish to put words in you mouth nor twist what you said. It simply doesn't make sense to me.

Please consider what you said very closely.

dude,

i have a verse cited, with an explanation of the verse inserted in the verse with verses backing up the explanation and you don't understand?

i hate it for you.

besides, i thought you said that you could state my case for me, so this should have been a cinch!

 

[JohnRabbit]

The problem with internet debating is that, one makes scrolling posts, that look cool, but really, if the reply was in person, in a debate hall, the public would see right through it, but on the net, behind a screen, one feels like he looks cool, but really...he is not, the post just becomes a part of endless semantics.

I mean this in a general sense, as an observation of forums in general.

We have all seen a politician do that, asked a simple question, then comes a circular speeech.

Can we just imagine all the unanswered questions, and ducking that happens, after just on page!? Then the respondant, has to answer silly diversional questions, and battle knew falsehoods raised, totally forgeting the prvious stuff, that gets left out, due to the diversions.

Thought for thought, is a challenge, because the topic is not diverted, shows who has what on a forum, toe to toe...

i answered your question.

why can't you say "i don't like your answer" or "you are wrong", rather than write this diatribe?

 

[JohnRabbit]

So if I follow (observe) the law am I following the leading of the Spirit? Your verse sure seems to say the opposite. Under means subject to. It appears to me that you plainly said we're under (subject to) the law only if we're not led by the Spirit. Did I read that wrong? If the law can't convict so a sentence can be given, where is its power? To me you just said there is no penalty for violation. Why then keep/observe the law? It has no force and can do nothing.

in connection with salvation, what do you think "under the law" means?

you do realize that "under the law" has varying meanings, depending on it's connotation within the text?

 

[Frogster]

i answered your question.

why can't you say "i don't like your answer" or "you are wrong", rather than write this diatribe?

yea right..ok, watch, here is an swer, if I were asked, I wouls say...

"I would do fine, because the Spirit washed me by faith, like peter said in Acts 15, and the same Spirit , that in experienced in Gal 3, is the same power that sustains me now. I didn't get the Spirit by works, but by faith. I didn't know squat about the law, when i got saved, I did not need it, because paul told me I am in Christ now, but it wasn't until law people came, and started telling me to follow law, that the commandment revived sin, then I came into bondage, and lost connection with Christ, as per gal 5."

There ya go..

 

[Frogster]

in connection with salvation, what do you think "under the law" means?

you do realize that "under the law" has varying meanings, depending on it's connotation within the text?

Then do u understand, by all definitions, we are not under it, as per gal 5, and rom 6? lets clarify that, before squabbling about definitions please.

 

[Frogster]

in connection with salvation, what do you think "under the law" means?

you do realize that "under the law" has varying meanings, depending on it's connotation within the text?

Show the different meanings.

 

[JohnRabbit]

[/COLOR]Are you sure about this point? I need a Scripture to back it up. Gen 3:15 doesn't say this? I read every where that a Messiah (read Deliver/Redeemer) was to come everywhere in Scripture. I find no place where someone was to come to explain the law or its intent.

the scripture was right there in the post!

here again:

Matthew 5:27-28 ( NKJV ) 27“You have heard that it was said £to those of old, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ 28But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

and another:

Matthew 5:21-22 ( NKJV ) 21“You have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not murder, and whoever murders will be in danger of the judgment.’ 22But I say to you that whoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment. And whoever says to his brother, ‘RacaRaca!’ shall be in danger of the council. But whoever says, ‘You fool!’ shall be in danger of hell fire.

He says when your're angry with your brother..., think about it.

 

[Frogster]

the scripture was right there in the post!

here again:

Matthew 5:27-28 ( NKJV ) 27“You have heard that it was said £to those of old, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ 28But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

and another:

Matthew 5:21-22 ( NKJV ) 21“You have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not murder, and whoever murders will be in danger of the judgment.’ 22But I say to you that whoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment. And whoever says to his brother, ‘RacaRaca!’ shall be in danger of the council. But whoever says, ‘You fool!’ shall be in danger of hell fire.

He says when your're angry with your brother..., think about it.

Did law stop one from doing that?

 

[JohnRabbit]

Show the different meanings.

answer one of my questions.

Isaiah 2:3 ( NKJV ) 3 Many people shall come and say,

“Come, and let us go up to the mountain of the Lord,

To the house of the God of Jacob;

He will teach us His ways,

And we shall walk in His paths.”

For out of Zion shall go forth the law,

And the word of the Lord from Jerusalem.



what law will go forth from Zion?

 

[JohnRabbit]

Did law stop one from doing that?

do you understand what Jesus was pointing out?

 

[JohnRabbit]

Then do u understand, by all definitions, we are not under it, as per gal 5, and rom 6? lets clarify that, before squabbling about definitions please.

you felt that you had to post this?

interesting.