True Justification, works of the Law of Moses, & Conditional Security

[stuart lawrence]

No hostility. Just disappointed that you yourself can't answer a simply question, of which you have argued extensively about.

It would seem that you present yourself as "knowing" all about "this grace" that Paul taught, as if it were a different grace that what Jesus or Peter or John or James taught.

Jesus is full of both Grace and Truth.

We never compromise Truth in favor of Grace.

Grace is the power of God to walk in Truth.


JLB

Grace is the empowerment to overcome sin. The holy spirit leads us into truth

 

[expos4ever]

If you don't agree with what I stated i would sincerely suggest you further contemplate on it.

Please do not patronize me. You will discover, whether we agree or not, that I have studied this issue extensively.

.. it is correct I assure you

This is a discouraging thing to read. No one should be in a position to simply declare their position to be correct.

 

[expos4ever]

Please tell me why sinful passions are aroused in us by the law when we live under it(rom7:5)

First, I believe that we are not under the Law (I think the Law in Romans 7 is the Law of Moses, and this law, I believe, has been retired and was only for Jews in the first place). You may need to know something: I believe that the "I" in Romans 7 is an unbelieving Jew.

Second, I will note that it is Paul, not me, who states that the Law arouses sin:

For while we were in the flesh, the sinful passions, which were aroused by the Law, were at work in the members of our body to bear fruit for death.

Do you deny Paul is saying the law arouses sin?

 

[stuart lawrence]

Please do not patronize me. You will discover, whether we agree or not, that I have studied this issue extensively.


This is a discouraging thing to read. No one should be in a position to simply declare their position to be correct.

I'm sorry but over this it has to be correct. Sin is transgression of the law1john 3:4. If you have a righteousness before God apart from the law,(rom3:21&22) you MUST have a righteousness before God apart from sin in your life
Observing the law is not committing sin. Therefore if you have no righteousness/justification before God of observing the law Jesus MUST have died for all your sins at Calvary, past, present and future. That is undeniable

 

[stuart lawrence]

First, I believe that we are not under the Law (I think the Law in Romans 7 is the Law of Moses, and this law, I believe, has been retired and was only for Jews in the first place). You may need to know something: I believe that the "I" in Romans 7 is an unbelieving Jew.

Second, I will note that it is Paul, not me, who states that the Law arouses sin:

For while we were in the flesh, the sinful passions, which were aroused by the Law, were at work in the members of our body to bear fruit for death.

Do you deny Paul is saying the law arouses sin?

So thou shalt not covet has been retired? Paul mentions that commandment in rom ch 7. The ten commandments have been retired, is that what you believe?(rom7:7-11)
Are you antinomian?
So because Paul states-not you that sinful passions are aroused in us by the law if we live under it. Does that mean you disagree with Paul?

 

[expos4ever]

So thou shalt not covet has been retired?

It has been retired in the sense that this "rule" or "commandment" is no longer needed now that we have the indwelling Spirit.

But now we have been released from the Law, having died to that by which we were bound, so that we serve in newness of the Spirit and not in oldness of the letter.

Obviously (I am not a whacko), I certainly believe that the Christian should not covet. But we no longer learn this from the Law of Moses, we learn it from the indwelling Spirit. I may wish to nuance this answer, so please bear this in mind when you answer. I will give you a sense of the nuance: Paul sees the Law of Moses as highly problematic in virtue of its Jewish specificity - the Law of Moses was given to the Jews and the Jews only. Since Paul sees all humanity united in Christ, he has strong motivation to "move beyond" the Law of Moses.

Paul mentions that commandment in rom ch 7. The ten commandments have been retired, is that what you believe?(rom7:7-11)

See above. Same principal.

Are you antinomian?

Never heard this term, but I looked it up and, yes, it appears that I am. But, this part is key:

The distinction between antinomian and other Christian views on moral law is that antinomians believe that obedience to the law is motivated by an internal principle flowing from belief rather than from any external compulsion

So because Paul states-not you that sinful passions are aroused in us by the law if we live under it. Does that mean you disagree with Paul?

I don't follow you. I agree with Paul - the Law of Moses, when it was in force 2000 years ago and earlier, did indeed arouse sinful passions in the Jew.

The fact that you would ask this question shows that there are some important misunderstandings we need to clear up.

 

[expos4ever]

I'm sorry but over this it has to be correct.

I understand you as suggesting that you cannot be mistaken. Are you saying you cannot be mistaken?

Sin is transgression of the law1john 3:4. If you have a righteousness before God apart from the law,(rom3:21&22) you MUST have a righteousness before God apart from sin in your life
Observing the law is not committing sin. Therefore if you have no righteousness/justification before God of observing the law Jesus MUST have died for all your sins at Calvary, past, present and future. That is undeniable

I find this hard to understand. I think you are mistaken if you claim that sin can only exist if the Law of Moses is in effect. There was no Law of Moses in the Garden of Eden, and yet Adam and Eve definitely sinned. Also see Romans 5 - Paul clearly says sin was in the world before the Law of Moses came into effect.

 

[expos4ever]

Hi Stuart,

I am convinced that there are deep fundamental differences between us that have not been adequately talked through. As time permits, I will try to show you what I mean.

 

[JLB777]

Grace is the empowerment to overcome sin. The holy spirit leads us into truth

Yes sir!

 

[stuart lawrence]

It has been retired in the sense that this "rule" or "commandment" is no longer needed now that we have the indwelling Spirit.

But now we have been released from the Law, having died to that by which we were bound, so that we serve in newness of the Spirit and not in oldness of the letter.

Obviously (I am not a whacko), I certainly believe that the Christian should not covet. But we no longer learn this from the Law of Moses, we learn it from the indwelling Spirit. I may wish to nuance this answer, so please bear this in mind when you answer. I will give you a sense of the nuance: Paul sees the Law of Moses as highly problematic in virtue of its Jewish specificity - the Law of Moses was given to the Jews and the Jews only. Since Paul sees all humanity united in Christ, he has strong motivation to "move beyond" the Law of Moses.


See above. Same principal.


Never heard this term, but I looked it up and, yes, it appears that I am. But, this part is key:

The distinction between antinomian and other Christian views on moral law is that antinomians believe that obedience to the law is motivated by an internal principle flowing from belief rather than from any external compulsion


I don't follow you. I agree with Paul - the Law of Moses, when it was in force 2000 years ago and earlier, did indeed arouse sinful passions in the Jew.

The fact that you would ask this question shows that there are some important misunderstandings we need to clear up.

Thou shalt not covet has not been retired, the law on stone got transferred onto the heart of the believer(2cor3:3) it is still as active as it ever was

 

[stuart lawrence]

I understand you as suggesting that you cannot be mistaken. Are you saying you cannot be mistaken?


I find this hard to understand. I think you are mistaken if you claim that sin can only exist if the Law of Moses is in effect. There was no Law of Moses in the Garden of Eden, and yet Adam and Eve definitely sinned. Also see Romans 5 - Paul clearly says sin was in the world before the Law of Moses came into effect.

No I cannot be mistaken as all on another website accept. If you do not understand the principal Tha if Christ is the end of the law unto righteousness, this MUST mean he died for all your sibs at Calvary, past present and future you are failing to understand the basic core of Paul's message. And you would have to fail to understand what sin is, and also observing the law is.

 

[stuart lawrence]

Hi Stuart,

I am convinced that there are deep fundamental differences between us that have not been adequately talked through. As time permits, I will try to show you what I mean.

May I respectfully suggest you consider the posts I have written to you this evening concerning righteousness and Christ dying for all our sins at Calvary. Why not ask someone else about these points if you cannot understand the implications of rom 10:4&rom3:19-22.
I am categorical I am correct over this, not trying to boast at all, but it I and must be the spiritual reality I am afraid

 

[expos4ever]

Thou shalt not covet has not been retired, the law on stone got transferred onto the heart of the believer(2cor3:3) it is still as active as it ever was

I think we are saying exactly the same thing - we no longer need a "law" in the sense of an external authority to tell us not to covet, we now have the Spirit.

 

[stuart lawrence]

Yes sir!

But this is the concept most find impossible to understand.
Only by removing a law of righteousness shall sin not be your master (rom6:14) I wonder I you understand what espos4ever does not understand. The only way a law of righteousness can be removed is if Christ died for all your imperfections concerning the law(your sin) at Calvary, past, present and future

 

[expos4ever]

May I respectfully suggest you consider the posts I have written to you this evening concerning righteousness and Christ dying for all our sins at Calvary. Why not ask someone else about these points if you cannot understand the implications of rom 10:4&rom3:19-22.
I am categorical I am correct over this, not trying to boast at all, but it I and must be the spiritual reality I am afraid

This is a very condescending and patronizing statement. We have barely begun to interact, you know almost nothing of what I believe, and you come across as if you are somehow above the rest of us - any rational person will accept the reality that we all can be mistaken.

We will have the necessary discussions and I am happy to let the content of my posts disclose to readers the level of my understanding of Paul's thinking.

 

[stuart lawrence]

I think we are saying exactly the same thing - we no longer need a "law" in the sense of an external authority to tell us not to covet, we now have the Spirit.

We have the spirit, and under the core terms of the new covenant, he has written the law on our minds and placed it on our hearts that God desires us to keep(heb10:16&17) that is the way the covenant is worded

 

[expos4ever]

But this is the concept most find impossible to understand.
Only by removing a law of righteousness shall sin not be your master (rom6:14) I wonder I you understand what espos4ever does not understand. The only way a law of righteousness can be removed is if Christ died for all your imperfections concerning the law(your sin) at Calvary, past, present and future

I cannot get into the details right now, but I am prepared to argue that when Paul declares that Christ is the "end of the Law for righteousness, he is not saying:

A believer will be declared righteous no matter how much he or she sins.

....he is instead saying:

Righteousness is not a privilege restricted to Jews.

Bottom Line: Paul sees "doing the law" more as an ethnic badge rather than as a measure of "doing morally good things".

 

[stuart lawrence]

This is a very condescending and patronizing statement. We have barely begun to interact, you know almost nothing of what I believe, and you come across as if you are somehow above the rest of us - any rational person will accept the reality that we all can be mistaken.

We will have the necessary discussions and I am happy to let the content of my posts disclose to readers the level of my understanding of Paul's thinking.

I'm sorry if it sounds patronising, but it I a spiritual fact that if Christ is the end of the law unto righteousness he MUST have died for all your sins at Calvary, past, present and future. And i have spent much Tim explaining why Thi is so. If I believe anything else I reject the truth. This is at the very core/heart of the new covenant. If we fail build a house on the correct foundation, Jesus tells us the house will collapse!

 

[expos4ever]

We have the spirit, and under the core terms of the new covenant, he has written the law on our minds and placed it on our hearts that God desires us to keep(heb10:16&17) that is the way the covenant is worded

Not sure if you are agreeing or disagreeing with my post 1393.

 

[expos4ever]

I'm sorry if it sounds patronising,...

Well, let's see how the discussion goes.