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.
I will give you a hint: "Sin shall not have dominion (future tense) over you, for you are not (present tense) under law but under grace".Please answer this one question (it is ok if you just say you don't know what it means): How does being under grace and not under law prevent sin from having dominion over you/us?
Sorry, I missed this.Please answer this one question (it is ok if you just say you don't know what it means): How does being under grace and not under law prevent sin from having dominion over you/us?
Did you mean this to be the answer to my question? I don't see how your response explains how being under grace and not law prevents sin from having dominion over us.Sorry, I missed this.
How can someone not be under the control of sin if it is continually causing them to sin? It doesnt matter if they confess it and are forgiven if they keep on sinning. They are still under the control of sin.
Brother, the grace of having many forgivenesses through our High Priest Jesus is not the answer to sin, but the means to gain "dominion" over sin by growing in obedience through practice of God's Eleven Commandments that remove sin when obeyed. We grow out of sin like a child who learns to walk by getting up again and again until he no longer falls. The "law" Paul speaks of that we are no longer under is the human "law" of Judaism that sabotaged God's "order" through the prophets to not remove sin. For example, Judaism is cursed because instead of obeying God by learning to use His name properly, Judaism replaced God's Third Commandment with their own human "law" to not utter God's name at all, thus disobeying to learn to use God's name properly. We do the same thing Judaism did by replacing the Sabbath in the Fourth Commandment with Sunday, started by the bishops of Rome, replacing what God asks with human tradition that does not remove the sin that leads to death. The translators always attributing "law" alone to God is a misrepresentation of Paul's message and Jesus' words in the second passage. Most "law" comes from humans and not from God, who uses different words for what comes from Him, so as not to confuse his "order" through the prophets with the "law" of Judaism that mainly comes from humans.Did you mean this to be the answer to my question? I don't see how your response explains how being under grace and not law prevents sin from having dominion over us.
My answer isn't hard to understand. I'm in agreement with you on that.Did you mean this to be the answer to my question? I don't see how your response explains how being under grace and not law prevents sin from having dominion over us.
You certainly are a solid proponent of obedience to the law through grace. I'm going to leave you to it.Brother, the grace of having many forgivenesses through our High Priest Jesus is not the answer to sin, but the means to gain "dominion" over sin by growing in obedience through practice of God's Eleven Commandments that remove sin when obeyed.
To me it is hard to understand. How does not being under law prevent sin from having dominion over a person?My answer isn't hard to understand. I'm in agreement with you on that.
Cos you belong to a new man i.e. the ONE that raised from the grave. You are under Him now. Romans 7:4Did you mean this to be the answer to my question? I don't see how your response explains how being under grace and not law prevents sin from having dominion over us.
Brother, when the "law" referred to keeps people in "sin" by making them disobey God! No longer being under that human "law" in Judaism allows people to obey God, who does take away sin, as we practice the correct use of God's name. Doing what God asked instead of the human "law" of Judaism that prevents people from obeying God. Those who still follow the human "law" of Judaism, instead of obeying God by not uttering God's name at all, disobey to learn to use God's name correctly and gain "dominion" over the sin that is prevalent among the disobedient.To me it is hard to understand. How does not being under law prevent sin from having dominion over a person?
Paul is not referring to the Holy Spirit as the translators force by adding the word holy before the word Spirit not found in the original. Jesus is the model "Spirit" to follow Paul speaks of in obedience to the Ten Commandments when compared to Judaism's sabotage to not remove the sin that the Ten Commandments were written in "letters" in stone to remove. Judaism prevented the removal of sin in God's "order" through the prophet Moses by substituting God's Ten Commandments with their own human "law", that Jesus has freed us from in Paul's message and not from God's "order" through the prophet Moses like our sinful human nature wants. For example, Judaism is cursed because instead of obeying God by learning to use His name properly, Judaism replaced God's Third Commandment for those who would be the sons of Sarah, with their own human "law" to not utter God's name at all in the resulting sons of Hagar, thus disobeying to learn to use God's name properly. Like them, the human excuse today for disobeying the Ten Commandments is to say that we now follow the Holy Spirit, in a misunderstanding of Paul's use of the word "Spirit" in the following passage, where Jesus is the model Spirit to follow in obedience to the Ten Commandments, instead of Judaism's human tradition replacing the letters written in stone. Paul is not referring to the Holy Spirit as a substitute to disobey Jesus’ Eleven Commandments, forced by the translators by adding the word holy before the word “Spirit”, when the word holy is not found in the original. Paul tells us the word "Spirit" is Jesus and not the Holy Spirit by saying in the passage: "the Lord—who is the Spirit—makes us more and more like him as we are changed into his glorious image". Following Jesus as the model "Spirit" who obeyed the Ten Commandments as the example for the sons of Sarah, rather than Judaism's replacement of human law in the resulting sons of Hagar, will result in obeying "all" the Ten Commandments that Judaism did not obey. Judaism, like us today, did not obey the Ten Commandments by instead replacing what God asked with human traditions, like us replacing the Sabbath with Sunday. People use the word "Spirit" in this passage to refer to the Holy Spirit instead of Jesus, because they want to do away with the Ten Commandments when that is not Paul's message but what our sinful human nature wants. Paul's message wants us to obey "all" the Ten Commandments by having us follow Jesus as the model "Spirit" in the following passage instead of Judaism's tradition of not obeying "all" the Ten Commandments when they replaced the Ten Commandments with human "law".Sin’s ability to adversely affect our future relationship with God is destroyed because we are not currently under law, but under grace. We are free now to serve God in the newness of the Spirit, and not the oldness of the letter.
Ok. Scripture says exactly that.To me it is hard to understand. How does not being under law prevent sin from having dominion over a person?
Joh_8:34 Jesus answered them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whosoever committeth sin is the servant of sin.
Rom 6:14 For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace.
2Pe 2:20 For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, they are again entangled therein, and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the beginning.
2Pe 2:21 For it had been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than, after they have known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered unto them.
2Pe 2:22 But it is happened unto them according to the true proverb, The dog is turned to his own vomit again; and the sow that was washed to her wallowing in the mire.
Ok. Scripture says exactly that.
Joh_8:34 Jesus answered them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whosoever committeth sin is the servant of sin.
What you said and quoted is literally the opposite of Romans 6:14.2Pe 2:20 For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, they are again entangled therein, and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the beginning.
2Pe 2:21 For it had been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than, after they have known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered unto them.
2Pe 2:22 But it is happened unto them according to the true proverb, The dog is turned to his own vomit again; and the sow that was washed to her wallowing in the mire
I don't know how scripture can make it any clearer that to be overcome by sin is to be controlled by sin and lasds to death.
What you said and quoted is literally the opposite of Romans 6:14.
Rom 6:14 For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace.
Mat 1:20 But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost.
Mat 1:21 And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins.
I don't think you said the opposite on purpose to make a point. I think you said the opposite because you believe the opposite.You've never heard of proving something by saying the opposite just to make a point? Sin has dominion over you if we sin because .we are under grace Jesus grace enables us to obey just as Matthew tells us.
Jesus saves us from our sins, not in our sins.
I'll just respond this way to this as I figured I would probably have to.I don't think you said the opposite on purpose to make a point. I think you said the opposite because you believe the opposite.
It is true that Jesus said, "whoever commits sin is a slave of sin" (Jn 8:34). But that is not what Romans 6:14 is about. It is about sin not having dominion over us because we are not under law (which convicts us as sinners) but we are under grace (under which our failures to obey the law are forgiven). John 8:34 paints the desparate situation that all human beings face prior to salvation in Christ. And Jesus' point was not to condemn all sinners to hell, it was to let them know that "if the Son makes you free, you shall be free indeed". (Jn 8:36). That is the point of Romans 6:14 -- we are free indeed because Jesus set us free from the law and it's condemation for our sin.
Likewise, your quotes from 2 Peter have nothing to do with being under grace and not under law resulting in no conedmnation for sin. They have to do with unrighteousness leading to eternal judgment.
Again, you are not saying the opposite on purpose to prove a point. You're saying the opposite because you believe the opposite. You do not believe that we are not under law. You do not believe grace is greater than all our sins (as the old hymn says). You believe grace is the means by which we obey the law (because we are under law), and if we sin in spite of the grace given to us resist sin, then we are not saved. Again, this is the opposite of what Romans 6:14 says. Maybe you can show me how my reading of your posts is wrong. I hope so.
I am sorry for hurting your feelings. That was not my intention. I wanted to help you see past the law to the Savior who died on the cross with all our sins laid on Him. There is no gospel without the forgiveness of sins, and I don't want you to miss that point.I'll just respond this way to this as I figured I would probably have to.
Back in 2001 or 2002 I went back to school and took a class in logic. In one of the first papers we had to write the proff read my paper in class. He prefaced what he said by saying when I first read Gary's paper I was really puzzled by what he wrote. I had to think on it quite a while before I understood what he was doing. He started off by addressing the weakness of the position he had to defend and then moved on to actually defending the position he was supposed to defend. He said he'd never seen it done before and I had a very strong defense of my position.
So my logic often escapes people. You're not the first one this has happened to. nor will you be the last.
God gave me a remarkable mind so that I able to pick out logical inconsistencies. I got whipped as a 2nd through 4th grade kid because my old man didn't like his little kid pointing out the obvious flaws in his logic. It infuriated him.
I started out to point out the obvious mistakes in your reasoning but decided it wasn't worth infuriating you so I'll just bow out of this discussion and you can say I was too much of an idiot to understand you.
Talk to you later some time.
You didn't hurt my feelings. I was afraid I would hurt yours with what I said.I am sorry for hurting your feelings. That was not my intention. I wanted to help you see past the law to the Savior who died on the cross with all our sins laid on Him. There is no gospel without the forgiveness of sins, and I don't want you to miss that point.
Maybe we have more in common than I think. I think we agree that God giving birth to us by His Spirit creates in us a "new man" that is wed to Him and is a slave of righteousness. I could be wrong, but I don't think we agree that the new man we became in Christ must live in the same physical body with the completely corrupt old man whose death we were an integral part of before Jesus gave us His life. I'm not sure we agree that all the past present and future sins and sinfulness of the flesh is completely forgiven. And I could be wrong about your position on the call to godly living, but I disagree with the notion that living out the new lives we have in Christ is a death sentence for those who do not always fulfil that calling.You didn't hurt my feelings. I was afraid I would hurt yours with what I said.
Where would you get the idea that I think that. I have made it abundantly clear in everything I have ever said here that salvation is by grace. It's this that tells me you're so convinced your position is correct that anyone who disagrees with you has to not believe in the grace of God. That is what makes it impossible for you to understand my position.
We don't disagree on a single belief you listed. The only possible things I can think of might be Judas where we can grieve away the HS and thus lose our salvation, and the seventh day Sabbath.Maybe we have more in common than I think. I think we agree that God giving birth to us by His Spirit creates in us a "new man" that is wed to Him and is a slave of righteousness. I could be wrong, but I don't think we agree that the new man we became in Christ must live in the same physical body with the completely corrupt old man whose death we were an integral part of before Jesus gave us His life. I'm not sure we agree that all the past present and future sins and sinfulness of the flesh is completely forgiven. And I could be wrong about your position on the call to godly living, but I disagree with the notion that living out the new lives we have in Christ is a death sentence for those who do not always fulfil that calling.
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?