1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Private Member only forums for more serious discussions that you may wish to not have guests or search engines access to.
    • Your very own blog. Write about anything you like on your own individual blog.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

IF THE LAW OF MOSES WAS SET ASIDE , WHY ROM 13:9?

Discussion in 'Sabbath and The Law' started by Dan Perez, Apr 5, 2022.

  1. Mark Quayle

    Mark Quayle Well-Known Member Supporter

    +3,745
    United States
    Reformed
    Widowed
    Since you will not listen to her, perhaps you will listen to me. Where do you get the notion that Paul only says death reigned from Adam to Mosheh? His whole book of Romans, and indeed his whole use of 'Gospel' is built on the dire need (during his time and our time too) for salvation from the effects of the sin of Adam, to include our bondage to sin. Or if you mean by death, physical, temporal death, is it not obvious to all, including to Paul, that physical death has yet to cease being the norm?
     
  2. Mark Quayle

    Mark Quayle Well-Known Member Supporter

    +3,745
    United States
    Reformed
    Widowed
    Seems to me that you are not only misrepresenting what @Clare73 is trying to say, but you are attributing purposes to her you know nothing about. She is more than aware, I'm sure, of the proscriptions against teaching abolishment of the law.
     
  3. daq

    daq Messianic

    +589
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Private
    Is it me who will not listen to her or is it you and her that have not heard Paul? It is right there in the passage that was under discussion.

    Romans 5:14 KJV
    14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.

    So I ask you the same: can you explain why Paul says that death only reigned from Adam unto Mosheh? What was it that happened in the time of Mosheh that causes Paul to say such a thing? Was it not the giving of the Torah? How is it that Paul doesn't say what you suggest? that death still reigned unto his day, or even until now, to this day?

    In other words, why does Paul not say that death reigned from Adam unto the Messiah? Shouldn't that be more correct if the mainstream theology rendering the Torah obsolete is correct?

    The point is this: death no longer reigns with the giving of the Torah, for those who understand its true purpose, and who walk in it accordingly and trust in Elohim for the mercy and grace which the Elders, Pharisees, Sadducees, and Scribes, omitted in their incorrect and carnal interpretations of the Torah.

    The Torah is spiritual, just as Paul says in Romans 7:14a, and there is the way of walking in the Torah according to the Spirit, which is found in the Testimony of the Messiah in the Gospel accounts: and there is also a way that seems right to a man, but the end thereof is death.
     
  4. daq

    daq Messianic

    +589
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Private
    I would suggest that you catch up with some of her statements in other places, such as the other thread I just quoted her from in a previous post above, and find out what she actually says and believes about the Torah. She's made it quite clear on many occasions.
     
  5. Mark Quayle

    Mark Quayle Well-Known Member Supporter

    +3,745
    United States
    Reformed
    Widowed
    Answer my question first, that I asked you. What makes you think Paul says that only death reigned during that time period.
     
  6. daq

    daq Messianic

    +589
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Private
    I just answered it for you. Here is my answer again: Paul says so because with the giving of the Torah death no longer reigned for those who truly understood and to this day understand its true purpose. This refers right back to what I originally said to Clare73. The Torah does much more than simply define sin for us. And as Paul also says, again, the Torah is our tutor or schoolmaster to/into/unto Messiah. One is not going to reach the point where the promise is received without first doing the will of Elohim, (Hebrews 10:35-39), and the will of Elohim is for us to cut off sin from ourselves and in our "members", (Romans 7, 1 Thessalonians 4:1-8). This is part of what it means to use the law lawfully, (1 Timothy 1:7-11). And anyone who truly desires to do the will of the Father will no doubt come to understand the doctrine, (John 7:16-17).
     
  7. Clare73

    Clare73 Blood-bought

    +3,213
    Christian
    Married
    US-Republican
    Understood. . .I'm not expecting answers, I'm only presenting information, and feeling for you here.
    Maybe the bits and pieces I present will jog something lose and open it up for you. . .and maybe not.
    As in "paid for" by faith's application of Christ's payment for all of one's sin.
    Are we aware of all the sin we've committed to which Christ's payment is applied?
    Do we have to be aware of it for him to pay for it?
    Not understanding how anything is overlooked in the application by faith of Christ's payment for anyone's sin.
    Are you viewing sin as a matter of God's abhorence, to all of which man is not privy, or as a matter of his justice?
    Abhorence is undefined, justice is codified.
    Does Paul intend they be covenantal law? Does he not clearly state in Romans 5:12-14 that they are not law?
    Not being covenantal law (Genesis 2:17; Mosaic law), there was no death penalty attached to those commands at the time. Keeping in mind, however, that the death penalty from the get-go for all is due to Adam (Romans 5:18), not to their own sin.

    If we are born condemned by Adam's (imputed) guilt (Romans 5:18, as we are made righteous by Christ's imputed righteousness--Romans 1:17, Romans 3:20-21), everything else is window dressing, because we are headed to the gallows no matter what--with or without our own sin accounted to us, if we don't trust on and believe in the blood of Jesus Christ (Romans 3:25).
    Because of Adam, our condemnation was in place before we ever sinned on our own. (Romans 5:18)
    One is covenant, and the other is not.
    Is it Paul. . .or is it his revelation from Jesus Christ personally (Galatians 1:11-12) that does not consider, and his trip to the throne of God in the third heaven (2 Corinthians 12:1-8) that does not consider, and which "not considering" we are to receive and believe.
    Would your question not really be, "why does God have two kinds of 'laws," covenantal under penalty of death (Genesis 2:17; Mosaic law), and non-covenantal carrying no penalty of death?
    Or is it Jesus' reasoning revealed to Paul personally, or by the Holy Spirit?
    I'm not really seeing what your issue is there.
    Would you share it with me when you get around to it?
    However, our conscience is to be in-formed (formed from within) by the word of God.
    A conscience that is not informed by the word of God is referred to as "weak faith" in the NT, for its failure to form itself according to God's revelation (Romans 14:1-2) rather than according its personal notions not in agreement with that word.
    And we are to accommodate those of "weak faith" by not scandalizing that faith.
    But it is good for those of "weak faith" to strengthen their faith by receiving and believing NT apostolic teaching which informs it.

    You also touch here on what conscience "has up til now condemned" and "misleading another."
    However, to inform your brother of the apostolic teaching of the Christian faith is not excusing him from no longer regarding what he regards as sin, it is informing his "weak faith" (Romans 14:1-2) according to apostolic teaching that it may grow in truth and apprehension of the true faith.
    I'm not understanding why there would be an exception of any sin? All sin of the believer is paid for by faith in Christ's atonement, whether he is aware of that sin or not.
    If I didn't know that eating bananas on Tuesday was sin, would God account sin to me for doing so?
    If they didn't know it was sin to murder someone who had murdered their own, or to steal from someone in retaliation for their stealing from them, or to bear false witness against someone who was spreading lies about them, etc., would God account sin to them for doing so?
    Sin against their conscience was their only "sin the world" (Romans 5:13), and did not Christ pay for it for those who believe in him?
    It saved those who believe in him from permanent physical death and from eternal death (damnation).
    Is "Blessed is the man whose sin the Lord will never count against him" (Romans 4:8) just a formality, or is it a consequential actuality?
    The issue is the innate enmity, not its actions.
    Those between Adam and Moses were still God's enemies even though no personal sin was accounted to them. And that is the issue between God and man. You are born God's enemy, by nature an object of his wrath. (Ephesians 2:3)
    Yes, there is our condemnation due to Adam's imputed guilt which makes everything else pretty much irrelevant, because you can be condemned only once. any way.

    We are letting the process of God imputing Adam's guilt to all mankind (Romans 5:18), which is the cause of everyone's sentence to eternal death, become confused with the consequences of personal sin in that process, which is just an add-on to our imputed guilt, where even the absence of personal sin would not alter our eternal destiny.
    We are born condemned, by nature objects of wrath (Ephesians 2:3), whether me move a muscle, have a thought, or not.
    Only those to whom God applies Christ's payment for sin are exempt from that condemnation.
    All of which pales in light of being born in condemnation (Romans 5:18) and by nature objects of wrath (Ephesians 2:3).
    I'm not understanding why the exceedingly plain statements:
    1) "sin is not reckoned (charged) when there is no law" (not being law), Romans 5:13,
    2) those between Adam and Moses "did not sin like the transgression of Adam" (breaking a command), Romans 5:14,
    must be stated more than once to be true.

    I ask the same about God's predestination of "those he foreknew" (Romans 8:29) being stated anywhere else in Scripture?
    And the objects of God's wrath by whom his power is made known for the sake of making the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy (Romans 9:22-23) being presented anywhere else in Scripture?
    You were able to swallow those, which most cannot.

    Hang in there, my dear brother!
     
    Last edited: May 22, 2022
  8. Clare73

    Clare73 Blood-bought

    +3,213
    Christian
    Married
    US-Republican
    Previously litigated. . .will not be relitigating it.

    However, feel free to address my following linked post, to which you never responded, regarding your charge of supposed alterations in Galatians 3:17 and Luke 20:20 demonstrating that Hebrews 8:13 refers to a "renewal of the law," rather than the "new covenant."

    Galatians 3 - shows New Covenant Gospel is before Sinai
     
    Last edited: May 15, 2022
  9. Clare73

    Clare73 Blood-bought

    +3,213
    Christian
    Married
    US-Republican
    .
     
  10. Mark Quayle

    Mark Quayle Well-Known Member Supporter

    +3,745
    United States
    Reformed
    Widowed
    She has made it quite clear on many occasions that death has reigned from Adam to the present, but for Christ. That is my objection.

    Perhaps you mean to say that she claims that sins were not accounted to those before Sinai.
     
  11. Clare73

    Clare73 Blood-bought

    +3,213
    Christian
    Married
    US-Republican
    It has everything to do with litigating the past.

    If you want to litigate the past, feel free to address my following linked post, to which you never responded, regarding your charge of supposed alterations in Galatians 3:17 and Luke 20:20 demonstrating that Hebrews 8:13 refers to a "renewal of the law," rather than the "new covenant."

    Galatians 3 - shows New Covenant Gospel is before Sinai
     
  12. daq

    daq Messianic

    +589
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Private
    That post is from April 29 and yet you just edited it yesterday. I don't see any reason to bring the book you added there into this thread.
     
  13. daq

    daq Messianic

    +589
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Private
    That's great, she rated your post with a like, showing that she agrees with your statement, that she has made it quite clear that she disagrees with Paul when he says death reigned from Adam to Mosheh. Moreover I can see now that you either have no answer for my question or are not going to answer it even though I have now answered it for you twice. Oh well, nice chatting. Goodbye.
     
  14. Clare73

    Clare73 Blood-bought

    +3,213
    Christian
    Married
    US-Republican
    The "book" I added yesterday was a title to part of the post, to make it more convenient to new readers.

    And you don't have to bring that post into this thread, as you did my past posts from another thread,
    you can address it in the thread in which it is posted.

    We all know how to find it.
    So let's see if you address it.
    .
     
    Last edited: May 16, 2022
  15. Clare73

    Clare73 Blood-bought

    +3,213
    Christian
    Married
    US-Republican
    And which assertion is the resting of my case. . .here in post #415,

    as my case regarding Hebrews 8:13 was rested in post #415 in that thread.
    .
     
    Last edited: May 15, 2022
  16. daq

    daq Messianic

    +589
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Private
    You failed to acknowledge and address the fact that you have taken English translations, which have added words into the text that are not in the Greek text, and have built doctrine on premises based on those same statements, and then labeled your own understanding as "the NT apostolic teaching". That isn't correct, the truth is that it is merely your version of NT apostolic teaching, and your version requires the English translations which you put your trust in.

    It's the same problem you have here where you take the words of Paul, saying that death reigned from Adam unto Mosheh, and change them in your filtering process to make them say that "death has reigned from Adam to the present, but for Christ", (as poster Mark Quayle stated above and you agreed with).

    This is how it works with me if indeed you wish to understand what I believe:

    Romans 5:14 KJV
    14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.

    Romans 5:14 ASV
    14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam until Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the likeness of Adam's transgression, who is a figure of him that was to come.

    Clare73 remove-and-replace filtering process:

    Romans 5:14
    14 Nevertheless death has reigned from Adam to the present, but for Christ, even over them that had not sinned after the likeness of Adam's transgression, who is a figure of him that was to come.

    And many other like things you do in your mind whether you realize it or not. No thanks, I'll stay with what is actually written in the NT apostolic teachings and do my best not to create my own privately held version.
     
  17. Clare73

    Clare73 Blood-bought

    +3,213
    Christian
    Married
    US-Republican
    Previously litigated. . .will no be relitigating it.
     
  18. daq

    daq Messianic

    +589
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Private
    Spoken like a true lawyer.
    Nice chatting.
     
  19. Icyspark

    Icyspark Member

    151
    +137
    United States
    SDA
    Married

    Hi Claire,

    Before I proceed to address the specifics of this post I think I'll take a moment to reflect back what I'm understanding of your position. Please tell me if I'm understanding you correctly.

    You seem to acknowledge that "sin is transgression of the law. (1 John 3:4)" and that "Death is the wages of sin (Romans 6:23). Law (specific commands) carries the curse of death, as in the case of Adam." Then you go on to say that you are "dealing with Paul's doctrine which he received from Jesus Christ personally (Galatians 2:11-12) regarding the imputation of Adam's guilt to all those born of (the first) Adam (Romans 5:18)." If I'm understanding you correctly, your position is that those living before the law was given to Moses were condemned as sinners by the imputation of Adam's guilt? So up until the time the law was given there were no transgressions upon which to determine any sin guilt other than the guilt of all those born of Adam? IOW, all people are determined guilty of sin by the mere fact of born and were condemned to die for something in which they had no part?

    You say,
    "God's particular judgment was the punishment of wrong-doing where there was no specific law (commands)..." What do you mean by "wrong-doing"? If there is no known basis upon which to determine right and wrong how can you suppose that God would punish His creatures for something which you seem to arbitrarily determine is "wrong-doing" if the people knew nothing of God's intentions for them?

    I have lots more questions about your response but let's see if we can start with these.

    Thanks and God bless!

    But for the grace of God go I,cyspark
     
  20. Clare73

    Clare73 Blood-bought

    +3,213
    Christian
    Married
    US-Republican
    My compliments, you understand well. . .they are condemned for that in which they had no part and, likewise, they are saved and justified by that in which they had no part (Romans 5:18-19).
    They violated the law of their conscience (Romans 2:14-15) to which no death penalty was attached.
    God himself, as distinct from the curse of the law, declared and exercised his particular judgment in their case.

     
    Last edited: May 16, 2022
Loading...