Holiness

[Frogster]

mownin!

 

[from scratch]

mownin!

How's de coffee? Clear skies today after 2 days of drizzle. On both counts.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

How's de coffee? Clear skies today after 2 days of drizzle. On both counts.

We have seen more clouds here the past 2 days than we have seen in 3 months put together!

NKJV) Jeremiah 4:13 "Behold, He shall come up like clouds, and His chariots like a whirlwind.
His horses are swifter than eagles. Woe to us, for we are plundered!"

Matt 26:64 Jesus Is saying to him "thou say, moreover I am saying to ye, from present/now ye shall be seeing the Son of the Man sitting out of rights of the power and coming upon the clouds of the heaven".
[Jeremiah 4:13/Daniel 7:13/Reve 1:7/6:16]

 

[YosemiteSam]

no they weren't there, this shows there was a time where there was no law, loud and clear. And if u understood federal headship, and what he was teaching, u would totally understand why that had to be.

5;13for sin indeed was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not counted where there is no law.


What does 430 years later, and "which came" mean to u?


3;17This is what I mean: the law, which came 430 years afterward, does not annul a covenant previously ratified by God, so as to make the promise void.

Okay..."sin is not counted where there is no law"! So if there is no law against something there is no sin. One would not KNOW what sin is cause there is no law forbidding such! ... Makes sense to me. Totally understandable.

Now would you care to explain Gen 4:7 Gen 18:20 and Gen 20:9, Gen 31:36 Gen 39:9.... All of which address sin before the events of Mt. Sinai! How could this be, if there was no law?

Second, I would like to add another point. Viewing the post it seems that people think that the law "caused" sin. All the law can do is point to the offense. Knowing that God gave the commandments lets look at Matt 7:9 - 12...

"Or what man is there of you, whom if his son ask bread, will he give him a stone? Or if he ask a fish, will he give him a serpent? If you then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children, how much more shall your Father which is in heaven give good things to them that ask him? Therefore all things whatsoever you would that men should do to you, do you even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets."

See, God didn't give them something that would do them harm, he gave them something "just, holy and good." He would not give them something that would bring harm to them just as you wouldn't give your 3 year old a razor blade. Jesus said it himself in verse 12. You don't want someone to murder you, do you? NO you don't...The law says, "thou shall not kill"...

 

[YosemiteSam]

You disagree with the premise of Scripture?

It's not that hard; the law was never given to give life, but to include all under sin. That's our initial access to Christ, who became sin, for us. We just renew our minds to the fact we ARE in Him

and rise with him, walking in newness of Life

I think Johnrabbit said, "I disagree with YOUR premise."

 

[from scratch]

Looking at others sin but not your own, tearing them down instead of building them up. To seek holiness is Gods will, you just turn it into a mockery with this contention. Why not describe holiness instead of the same old tired argument over law? Isn't this thread about Holiness? How about talking about that for a change.

Along with the examination of the law comes application. If some one here addresses your sin it either by accident or the Holy Spirit.

Now why shouldn't that is promoting the law be held accountable for confromance thereto? If a law promoting individual doesn't conform to the law what right do they have to ask someone else to do such? NONE! This blasphemes God's name. Just read Romans 2. Even Jesus talks about this saying something like ye make him twofold the child of hell than yourselves.

 

[from scratch]

Okay..."sin is not counted where there is no law"! So if there is no law against something there is no sin. One would not KNOW what sin is cause there is no law forbidding such! ... Makes sense to me. Totally understandable.

Now would you care to explain Gen 4:7 Gen 18:20 and Gen 20:9, Gen 31:36 Gen 39:9.... All of which address sin before the events of Mt. Sinai! How could this be, if there was no law?

Second, I would like to add another point. Viewing the post it seems that people think that the law "caused" sin. All the law can do is point to the offense. Knowing that God gave the commandments lets look at Matt 7:9 - 12...

"Or what man is there of you, whom if his son ask bread, will he give him a stone? Or if he ask a fish, will he give him a serpent? If you then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children, how much more shall your Father which is in heaven give good things to them that ask him? Therefore all things whatsoever you would that men should do to you, do you even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets."

See, God didn't give them something that would do them harm, he gave them something "just, holy and good." He would not give them something that would bring harm to them just as you wouldn't give your 3 year old a razor blade. Jesus said it himself in verse 12. You don't want someone to murder you, do you? NO you don't...The law says, "thou shall not kill"...

Hi Y Sam long time no see um.

What do you do with this - Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.

And this - The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it.


Speaking oif the law harming, what do we read in Romans 7 on the subject?

 

[Frogster]

Okay..."sin is not counted where there is no law"! So if there is no law against something there is no sin. One would not KNOW what sin is cause there is no law forbidding such! ... Makes sense to me. Totally understandable.

Now would you care to explain Gen 4:7 Gen 18:20 and Gen 20:9, Gen 31:36 Gen 39:9.... All of which address sin before the events of Mt. Sinai! How could this be, if there was no law?

Second, I would like to add another point. Viewing the post it seems that people think that the law "caused" sin. All the law can do is point to the offense. Knowing that God gave the commandments lets look at Matt 7:9 - 12...

"Or what man is there of you, whom if his son ask bread, will he give him a stone? Or if he ask a fish, will he give him a serpent? If you then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children, how much more shall your Father which is in heaven give good things to them that ask him? Therefore all things whatsoever you would that men should do to you, do you even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets."

See, God didn't give them something that would do them harm, he gave them something "just, holy and good." He would not give them something that would bring harm to them just as you wouldn't give your 3 year old a razor blade. Jesus said it himself in verse 12. You don't want someone to murder you, do you? NO you don't...The law says, "thou shall not kill"...

I don't understand all the fuss? It is right in rom 5, sin entered by the one man, and sin spread by the one man.

If ya just understand federal headship, you will see that Paul was proving that it was all by adam, by the one man, and by the other one man, all are justified, in the last Adam, a corporate vieew of the sin issue.


However, the was added, 430 years later, Gal 3:17, Rom 5:20, to increase the trespass, sin increased, making it a legal known offense etc.


Ok, now please tell me why Paul says there was a time, where there was no law?


5:13for sin indeed was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not counted where there is no law.

 

[razeontherock]

I think Johnrabbit said, "I disagree with YOUR premise."

Yup. And the context of that seemed like Scripture, to me. What premise exactly he was disagreeing with could use some clarification, but clearly it wasn't anything I wrote.

 

[Frogster]

15But the free gift is not like the trespass. For if many died through one man’s trespass, much more have the grace of God and the free gift by the grace of that one man Jesus Christ abounded for many. 16And the free gift is not like the result of that one man’s sin. For the judgment following one trespass brought condemnation, but the free gift following many trespasses brought justification. 17For if, because of one man’s trespass, death reigned through that one man, much more will those who receive the abundance of grace and the free gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man Jesus Christ.

18Therefore, as one trespass[e] led to condemnation for all men, so one act of righteousness[f] leads to justification and life for all men. 19For as by the one man’s disobedience the many were made sinners, so by the one man’s obedience the many will be made righteous.

 

[Frogster]

Okay..."sin is not counted where there is no law"! So if there is no law against something there is no sin. One would not KNOW what sin is cause there is no law forbidding such! ... Makes sense to me. Totally understandable.

Now would you care to explain Gen 4:7 Gen 18:20 and Gen 20:9, Gen 31:36 Gen 39:9.... All of which address sin before the events of Mt. Sinai! How could this be, if there was no law?

Second, I would like to add another point. Viewing the post it seems that people think that the law "caused" sin. All the law can do is point to the offense. Knowing that God gave the commandments lets look at Matt 7:9 - 12...

"Or what man is there of you, whom if his son ask bread, will he give him a stone? Or if he ask a fish, will he give him a serpent? If you then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children, how much more shall your Father which is in heaven give good things to them that ask him? Therefore all things whatsoever you would that men should do to you, do you even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets."

See, God didn't give them something that would do them harm, he gave them something "just, holy and good." He would not give them something that would bring harm to them just as you wouldn't give your 3 year old a razor blade. Jesus said it himself in verse 12. You don't want someone to murder you, do you? NO you don't...The law says, "thou shall not kill"...

For Paul's point to stick, where he was showing that the whole sin issue was by Adam, and sin spread to all, killing all from Adam, he had to show all died even though they did not do the exact sin of Adam, and they did not die because of their own personal sin, hence, the imputation from law.


It is like saying if Obama got thrown out of the country for a crime, all of the democrats would have to leave too, even though they did not do the crime of Obama. It is federal headship.

If there was the law prior, he could not prove that it was all by Adam. Because it would have been personal sin, via the law.

 

[11822]

Seeking to perfect Holiness is not the same as perfecting the flesh. One cannot perfect the flesh, but they can abstain from works of the flesh thereby heeding Gods call to holiness. By the power of the Holy Spirit and the written word we can hear Gods call to be holy, And we can repent of our filthy works of flesh and abstain from them, thereby heeding Gods call to perfect holiness in Godly Fear. Even if it takes the rest of my life i will continue to heed Gods call to perfect holiness. God has brought me a long way already and He will continue His good work in me until i leave this world. Its Gods Will for us and because He loves me enough to create me and send His Son Jesus Christ to die for for my sins, i will love Him back by obeying Him.


Works of the flesh are found in Galatians 5

Gal 5:19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,
Gal 5:20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,
Gal 5:21 Envyings, 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.
Gal 5:22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith,
Gal 5:23 Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law.
Gal 5:24 And they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts.
Gal 5:25 If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit.

 

[YosemiteSam]

For Paul's point to stick, where he was showing that the whole sin issue was by Adam, and sin spread to all, killing all from Adam, he had to show all died even though they did not do the exact sin of Adam, and they did not die because of their own personal sin, hence, the imputation from law.

If there was the law prior, he could not prove that it was all by Adam. Because it would have been personal sin, via the law.

Yes, sin entered through one man...easy enough...however, by what was said earlier, the bible states that it was "sin"...If it were sin, then there was law... As Paul said, "I would not have known sin, except for the law." So law existed even in the time of Adam...Adam knew he had sinned. Adam and Eve were cut off from the tree of life. So all those after Adam were cut off from the tree of life as well. Remember, if there were no law then there could not have been sin. So sin existed and thus law existed as well.

Have you ever thought how could could these be judged by a law as sinners but yet it was almost what 1700 years before Sinai. Yes, law certainly existed, the bible is clear on that point. So what was "added 430 later"? Why does it not say it was added 1700 years later? Certainly all those prior to Moses sinned also. All of them.

How did they know what sin was? You argue that there was NO LAW, but the fallacy of that argument is not consistent and contradicts what the bible says. Abel was a preacher of righteousness. How could this be if there were no law? How could this be if it were Moses who wrote the first five books of the bible 1700 years later? What did Abel preach from? How did they know what sin was prior to Sinai? But yet God tells us Abel was a minister of righteousness. How can that be. According to your view the only sin was that Adam ate an apple. Really?

Sin was in the world before the law, most assuredly. Paul states that fact. Why don't you tell us how sin was in the world before the law?

 

[JohnRabbit]

Along with the examination of the law comes application. If some one here addresses your sin it either by accident or the Holy Spirit.

Now why shouldn't that is promoting the law be held accountable for confromance thereto? If a law promoting individual doesn't conform to the law what right do they have to ask someone else to do such? NONE! This blasphemes God's name. Just read Romans 2. Even Jesus talks about this saying something like ye make him twofold the child of hell than yourselves.

FYI:
you know that there's no definite article, the, in the original greek!

and the greek word for "law" is like ours in english. you have to know the context to understand which law you're talking about!

 

[JohnRabbit]

Yup. And the context of that seemed like Scripture, to me. What premise exactly he was disagreeing with could use some clarification, but clearly it wasn't anything I wrote.

if you want clarification, ask frogster to explain what he's talking about! (i don't want to put words in his mouth)

 

[JohnRabbit]

Hi Y Sam long time no see um.

What do you do with this - Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.

And this - The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it.


Speaking oif the law harming, what do we read in Romans 7 on the subject?

"added because of transgressions" ?

why don't you explain "transgressed what?"???

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Originally Posted by from scratch Hi Y Sam long time no see um.

What do you do with this - Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.

"added because of transgressions" ?

why don't you explain "transgressed what?"???

Perhaps Hebrews 9:15 can shed more light on that

http://www.christianforums.com/t7411599-18/#post53494411
Galatians 3:19

3:19 What then the law of the transgressions/parabasewn <3847>?
Grace was added/placed until which may be coming the seed to whom He has promised being prescribed/charged thru messengers in hand of a mediator

Blue Letter Bible - Lexicon
Strong's Number G3847 matches the Greek &#960;&#945;&#961;&#8049;&#946;&#945;&#963;&#953;&#962; (parabasis), which occurs 7 times in 7 verses in the Greek concordance
This particular form of the word used in Gala 3/Hebrews 9

Young) Hebrews 9:15 And because of this, of a new covenant he is mediator, that death having come for redemption of the transgressions/parabasewn <3847> under the first covenant, those called may receive the promise of the age-during inheritance,

 

[fhansen]

If you have faith you will obey the commandments of the one you have faith in and will not go back to your old ways of breaking His commands.

I don&#8217;t think faith guarantees one will obey the commandments-but love does.
&#8220;If you love me, you will keep my commandments&#8221; John 14:15
And this is Gods goal for us, because this is true justification for man.

But aren't you guys sort of saying the same thing anyway? One side says we must keep the commandments while the other side says that we don't need to be conscious of them because we keep them ipso facto if we have genuine faith.

Either way, IMO, we must keep them-faith is not a one-for-one replacement for obedience- it must result in obedience, or better said, must lead to love, which results in obedience by its nature.

"Under the Law", "bondage to the Law", "yoke of the Law"; these terms all apply to a mentality that believes that the Law, itself, can justify us-as if mere external obedience could make us internally clean, pleasing to God. But we'll still be judged by the Law, according to the whole context of Rom 2, IMO, especially in light of all the other NT admonitions to be vigilant, persist in doing good, persevere, feed the poor, be perfect, be holy, invest ones talents, feed the poor, clothe the naked, keep oil in ones lamp, generally with dire consequences if we don&#8217;t.

We can&#8217;t avoid the need for having a sense of moral obligation. Isn't that, for all practical purposes, what Adam & Eve objected to after all? It&#8217;s not a matter of whether we&#8217;ll obey-it&#8217;s a matter of how we&#8217;ll obey-either by Gods&#8217; Spirit, or by our own efforts, as if we were good enough to do it without His help, which is another way of describing[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]the attitude of man that resulted in Original Sin.

But in any case man doesn&#8217;t need the Law, first of all, he needs God, first of all. IOW, man doesn&#8217;t need the Law in order to please God, rather man needs God in order to fulfill the Law.

 

[from scratch]

Seeking to perfect Holiness is not the same as perfecting the flesh. One cannot perfect the flesh, but they can abstain from works of the flesh thereby heeding Gods call to holiness. By the power of the Holy Spirit and the written word we can hear Gods call to be holy, And we can repent of our filthy works of flesh and abstain from them, thereby heeding Gods call to perfect holiness in Godly Fear. Even if it takes the rest of my life i will continue to heed Gods call to perfect holiness. God has brought me a long way already and He will continue His good work in me until i leave this world. Its Gods Will for us and because He loves me enough to create me and send His Son Jesus Christ to die for for my sins, i will love Him back by obeying Him.


Works of the flesh are found in Galatians 5

Gal 5:19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,
Gal 5:20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,
Gal 5:21 Envyings, 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.
Gal 5:22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith,
Gal 5:23 Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law.
Gal 5:24 And they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts.
Gal 5:25 If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit.

Then pray tell me do you require the flesh to comply with the law?

We have been spouting this very reference for the longest. You should note that these things are sin and a violation of the law. But you should also notice thay aren't called by the name of sin in Galatians. These thing are delt with on a different level. They aren't dealt with as violations of the law.

 

[from scratch]

Yes, sin entered through one man...easy enough...however, by what was said earlier, the bible states that it was "sin"...If it were sin, then there was law... As Paul said, "I would not have known sin, except for the law." So law existed even in the time of Adam...Adam knew he had sinned. Adam and Eve were cut off from the tree of life. So all those after Adam were cut off from the tree of life as well. Remember, if there were no law then there could not have been sin. So sin existed and thus law existed as well.

Have you ever thought how could could these be judged by a law as sinners but yet it was almost what 1700 years before Sinai. Yes, law certainly existed, the bible is clear on that point. So what was "added 430 later"? Why does it not say it was added 1700 years later? Certainly all those prior to Moses sinned also. All of them.

How did they know what sin was? You argue that there was NO LAW, but the fallacy of that argument is not consistent and contradicts what the bible says. Abel was a preacher of righteousness. How could this be if there were no law? How could this be if it were Moses who wrote the first five books of the bible 1700 years later? What did Abel preach from? How did they know what sin was prior to Sinai? But yet God tells us Abel was a minister of righteousness. How can that be. According to your view the only sin was that Adam ate an apple. Really?

Sin was in the world before the law, most assuredly. Paul states that fact. Why don't you tell us how sin was in the world before the law?

The first thing is that sin was in the world before the law - Rom 5:13 and Gal 3:19. It says the law was added because of transgressions (sins) and states the law was added after Abraham in 3:17. It says nothing about ceremony. It says the law.