Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Your response here...LoveGodsWord said: ↑ 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.
Did I really say that or did I ask you a question that you did not answer by asking you "Can you obey Gods Word before you know what God's Word says and choose to believe Gods Word?" Then go on to answer the question for you by saying "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 letter of Gods' Word comes after." How does this not answer your question?I asked about "in order for the spirit to work". But you responded with "Can you obey Gods Word".
Partly, the majority of my posts to you are saying that the letter of Gods' Word comes before faith and faith in God's Word lead's us to the Spirit of Gods Word *John 6:63; John 17:17.I think what your posts are saying is that it is important to believe and obey God's word. And I agree with that.
Faith in the letter of Gods' Word leads us to the Spirit of God's Word *John 6:63. They are all connected and not separate from each other. Each one leads to the other. Are you following me now?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?
Readers familiar with proper debate techniques will understand what is happening here.Where does it say in scripture say that God’s law or the commandments don’t include God’s Ten Commandments written by God’s own finger?
SabbathBlessings said:Walking in the Spirit (the newness of the Spirit from Romans 7:6) is not hostile to God and keeps the law of God.
expos4ever said:Where does scripture anywhere state that the Spirit helps up keep 10 commandments.
SabbathBlessings said:Where does it say in scripture say that God’s law or the commandments don’t include God’s Ten Commandments written by God’s own finger?
How can you not know that "repeating the content of a law verbatim" is not, on its own, evidence indicating that the particular law is still in effect.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.
You have been caught in error and are trying to dance away.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
Again, 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!LoveGodsWord said:One on your claims in regards to God's 10 commandments not being referred to in Romans 3:20; and Romans 7:7
Brother, happy Sabbath! I don't see the need to travel to Jerusalem. Jesus before the incarnation is no longer in the earthly temple copy in Jerusalem to "appear before" Him until Jesus returns.Okay... Do you travel to Jerusalem to celebrate the festival of shelters as Jesus did? Do you believe that is a law that didn't end at the cross? Exodus 34: Three times in the year all your males shall appear before the Lord God, the God of Israel. For I will drive out nations before you and enlarge your borders; neither shall any man desire your land when you go up to appear before the Lord, your God, three times in the year.
Well aren't you the funny one, and no dear friend I am not dancing, I am as peace in Gods Word. What error was I caught in? You were the one trying to claim earlier and argue that Romans 3:20 and Romans 7:7 is not saying that God's 10 commandments give us a knowledge of what sin is when broken were you not and making posts to try and argue there scriptures were talking about something else? I do not think you have thought these arguments through very well. For example, just the fact that according to the scriptures the purpose of Gods' 10 commandments in the new covenant gives us a knowledge of what sin is when broken means that they have not been abolished.You have been caught in error and are trying to dance away. Again, 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!
Because your taking parts of my posts out of context to the rest of the posts and scriptures that you are micro-quoting while ignoring the context to the rest of the post and the scriptures that support it just like you do with the scriptures as shown in my posts to you. Context matters and your disregarding it.You complain about "micro-quoting". Well, explain this to me: how could the rest of your post conceivably change the demonstrable fact that you made a manifestly false statement at the outset where you clearly assert that I have claimed that the 10 are not referred to in these verses?
Your claim is that God's 10 commandments are abolished and this is what most of my posts to you are showing is not true according to the scriptures. Again let the reader decide. I hope only the best for you.I have, of course, never claimed any such thing. Again, readers who are following along carefully - and there are some - will know that I never made such a claim.
Please address the following. If you post material that does not squarely and directly address the content of what I am saying below, even if that material is "correct" (and it may well be), I will remind you of your obligation to not evade the content of my argument.God wrote His law in our hearts and minds
Obvious bait and switch! Again, readers will see this, if they have even one eye open.You were the one trying to claim earlier and argue that Romans 3:20 and Romans 7:7 is not saying that God's 10 commandments give us a knowledge of what sin is when broken
This is false, and I suggest you know this - I never claimed that the 10 were not referred in these texts.LoveGodsWord said:One on your claims in regards to God's 10 commandments not being referred to in Romans 3:20; and Romans 7:7
This is an entirely different claim!LoveGodsWord said:You were the one trying to claim earlier and argue that Romans 3:20 and Romans 7:7 is not saying that God's 10 commandments give us a knowledge of what sin is when broken
More evasion. Again, how does the context of your post justify your demonstrably misrepresenting me when you claimed that I have said that the 10 were not referred to in Romans 3:20 and Romans 7:7?Because your talking parts of my posts out of context to the rest of the posts and scriptures that you are micro-quoting while ignoring the context to the rest of the post and the scriptures that support it just like you do with the scriptures. Context matters and your disregarding it.
Actually no I see your post here is only more evasion on your side I am still waiting for you to address my posts and the scripture contexts that disagree with your teachings of lawlessness (without law) that your unwilling to discuss with me.More evasion. Again, how does the context of your post justify your demonstrably misrepresenting me when you claimed that I have said that the 10 were not referred to in Romans 3:20 and Romans 7:7?
Yes, you really said that.Your response here...
Did I really say that or did I ask you a question that you did not answer by asking you "Can you obey Gods Word before you know what God's Word says and choose to believe Gods Word?" Then go on to answer the question for you by saying "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 letter of Gods' Word comes after." How does this not answer your question?
Partly, the majority of my posts to you are saying that the letter of Gods' Word comes before faith and faith in God's Word lead's us to the Spirit of Gods Word *John 6:63; John 17:17.
Faith in the letter of Gods' Word leads us to the Spirit of God's Word *John 6:63. They are all connected and not separate from each other. Each one leads to the other. Are you following me now?
Take Care.
Obvious bait and switch! Again, readers will see this, if they have even one eye open.
Your initial claim was this (I added bold):
This is false, and I suggest you know this - I never claimed that the 10 were not referred in these texts.
Now you are trying to evade by trying to dupe readers into thinking that this is the claim I am objecting to:
This is an entirely different claim!
Yes, you really said that.
You did ask a question. However that was in response to my asking a question.
You went on to answer your question, but not my question imo.
It doesn't answer my question, it answers a different question.
I agree that the work of the spirit and obeying God's word are connected. But which comes first, in your view?
I think I am following your posts. However, I don't think they are closely related to what I was asking.
May the Lord bless you and give you peace.
Yep, making an assertion and then requiring the other person to prove the negative. A common issue in discussions.Readers familiar with proper debate techniques will understand what is happening here.
Here is the history:
First, You asserted the Spirit helped us keep the 10 commandments:
Next, I challenged you to defend this assertion of yours:
Finally, you give us this:
You are (1) not following through on your obligation to defend your claim; and (2) you make this even worse, but trying to make it my obligation to "prove a negative" - this is a well know illicit move.
Imagine this exchange:
SabbathBlessings: There is a duck in my backyard.
expos4ever: Provide evidence.
SabbathBlessings: You need to provide evidence that there is not a duck in my backyard.
See the problem? Objective reader will see the problem.
I will deal with the rest of your post in a moment.
Obvious bait and switch! Again, readers will see this, if they have even one eye open.
Your initial claim was this (I added bold):
This is false, and I suggest you know this - I never claimed that the 10 were not referred in these texts.
Now you are trying to evade by trying to dupe readers into thinking that this is the claim I am objecting to:
This is an entirely different claim!
So is avoiding scripture and not answering questions and asking questions and pretending questions have not been answered when they haveYep, making an assertion and then requiring the other person to prove the negative. A common issue in discussions.
Please address the following. If you post material that does not squarely and directly address the content of what I am saying below, even if that material is "correct" (and it may well be), I will remind you of your obligation to not evade the content of my argument.
How is it not obvious that to interpret the metaphor of the "law written on the heart" the way you are doing in this thread completely eviscerates the metaphor of any power - saying that we simply "internalize" the words of an otherwise written code is but a trivial change of form. This does great violence to a rich metaphor which, as you say, points to an instinctive knowing.
I wonder who else holds this view that the "law written on the heart" is really about an instinctive knowing?
Answer: no less than the apostle Paul:
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
Who else here is having a problem with their tassels?
“You are to make tassels on the corners of your garments, with a blue cord on each tassel” (Numbers 15:38).
My garden is so small and yet I can't plant more than one kind of seed. Bummer.
“Do not mate different kinds of animals. Do not plant your field with two kinds of seed. Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material” (Leviticus 19:19; also found in Deuteronomy 22:11).
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?