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.
Do you have some other explanation? I didn't see it. I don't see how if you observe or keep the law you're not under it. Especially since it seems to be a condition of salvation for you. If one isn't obedient to the law, I take your position is that they aren't a Christian or in possession of salvation called eternal life. Perhaps you can explain this.So you agree with Frogster and think that the term 'under the law' as referenced throughout Romans and Galatians is in reference to everyone who is obedient to the Holy Torah of G-d?
So to make this discussion crystal clear - you believe that everyone (Jew or Gentile believers) who obey the Torah of G-d (after salvation) are 'under the law' and not 'under grace'... si?
I wonder why the end of the movie isn't liked much.Say, just out of curiousity. Why is there so little NT theology you can post, without plucking a verse here or there to support Gentiles living under law, and in a sense, "becoming Jewish", trying to keep festivals that they never even kept 2000 years ago, and food laws that they never listened to, 2000 years ago?
And as far as morals, can you post 1 NT verse, to show how law stops sin in the heart? I ask because all the evidence posted by scrath and myself, shows all the opposite to what you say.
Try to see the scriptures as a narrative, the Torah was just the beginning, like the movie analogy we spoke of, ya gotta see the end of the movie, to get the whole story.
As the Father delights in His only begotten Sonyou're totally forgetting that 7 opened with died to law, released from WHAT BOUND, and the holy law aroused sin, so ye need not press your romans 7 citation the way you do. How much could he delight in what he died to. Who delights in their dead husband?
you're totally forgetting that 7 opened with died to law, released from WHAT BOUND, and the holy law aroused sin, so ye need not press your romans 7 citation the way you do. How much could he delight in what he died to. Who delights in their dead husband?
Grace goes all the way back to NoahApparently Paul does in Romans 7:22 and 25.
Do you consider David, Daniel, John the Baptist, Paul and John to be under grace?
Apparently Paul does in Romans 7:22 and 25.
Do you consider David, Daniel, John the Baptist, Paul and John to be under grace?
NO!So what you are saying then is that everyone who obeys and keeps the Torah of G-d is under the law and therefore not under grace?
Ah yes so here are a couple -If this argument is true then:
Jehu did not keep the Torah of G-d, therefore he mustve been under grace
Everyone that the L-rd gave discretion and understanding to give charge over Israel, wouldve not been under grace, if they kept the Torah of G-d.
The whole kingdom of Rehoboam forsook the Torah of G-d and did no longer keep them, therefore they mustve been under grace
All the people living in Jerusalem that devoted themselves to the Torah of G-d, were not under grace
Ezra set his heart to not only study Torah, but to practice and teach it; he definitely was not under grace.
All of those who read and kept the feasts of the L-rd according to the Torah were definitely not under grace
What in the world is David purporting here? He is telling us to delight in the Torah of G-d. Doesnt He know that to do that would be to not be under grace??
Davids at it again. Why would I want to walk in the Torah of G-d, if it would mean that I would not be under grace???
Those who have rejected the Torah of the L-rd or hosts, mustve been under grace.
Couple of NT ones
Why is Paul joyfully concur with something that would = not under grace?
Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, on the one hand I myself with my mind am serving the law of God, but on the other, with my flesh the law of sin. Worse, serve something that would put him not under grace.
Just letting Scripture prove Scripture.
by the way..first..good morning..
They had to be under the reign of sin and death, there is not getting around it. John said "the lamb" that takes away the sin, John was still in Adam in the reign of sin and death, like the rest. How could I be wrong?
Good morning.
Do you believe David, Daniel, John the Baptist and Paul were "under grace"?
Good question!Good morning.
Do you believe David, Daniel, John the Baptist and Paul were "under grace"?
I know a few. And on both sides of the issue - spiritually and carnally.you're totally forgetting that 7 opened with died to law, released from WHAT BOUND, and the holy law aroused sin, so ye need not press your romans 7 citation the way you do. How much could he delight in what he died to. Who delights in their dead husband?
NO!Ah yes so here are a couple -
17For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ. John 1
16The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it. LK 16
4Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.
The law is the antithesis of grace and grace is the antithesis of the law. One cancels the other and thus make it void having no value. I didn't repeat again all the Scriptures showing the law is over and for a limited time. One should consider Isa 28:10 when studying or considering the facts of salvation as it unfolds. I still think the major problem is the refusal to accept Jeremiah 31:31-33 as it unfolds in Acts.
Your line of reasoning is way out of focus. Grace is not provided for in the law.
no, because the reign of grace did not happen till the cross, they had to be in sin and death..
Did God in his gracious attribute, grant grace here and there? Yes.
But answer me this, how could they not be in the sphere of sin and death, before the cross?
Don't forget, Rom 4;5, says God justifies the ungodly, not the graced, so even Abe, and David, right in 4, were still in Adam. Adam, our old nature that we all had, ONLY ended at the cross, rom 6;6, unless you can show otherwise.
I know a few. And on both sides of the issue - spiritually and carnally.
Do we have another disconnect here?Apparently Paul does in Romans 7:22 and 25 and the tens of thousands of zealous Jewish believers in Acts 21.
Do you consider David, Daniel, John the Baptist, Paul and John to be under grace?
Answering a question with a question is the simpler way to avoid answering a questionDo we have another disconnect here?
Read Romans 4:16 and re-answer the question.
I'll include Abraham in the pool as well.
Were Abraham, David, Moses, John the Baptist, Paul "under grace"?
Does that make it part of the law or something. We aren't denying that grace existed. We are plainly stating that grace voids the law and the law voids grace as demonstrated in the Scripture.Grace goes all the way back to Noah
Blue Letter Bible - Search Results for KJV
"grace"
occurs 170 times in 159 verses in the KJV
1st time used:
NKJV) Genesis 6:8 But Noah found grace in the eyes of the LORD
Read Romans 4:16 and re-answer the question.
I'll include Abraham in the pool as well.
Were Abraham, David, Moses, John the Baptist, Paul "under grace"?
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?