What did Sha'ul (Paul) Say was Nailed to the Pale (Cross)?

[HARK!]

Are you, Hark, no longer under a schoolmaster?

I wouldn't be so presumptuous as to make a judgement on that. YHWH is the judge of that. I'm praying for teaching; I'm thankful for his forgiveness; I'm thankful for my brother Yahshua; I'm praying that YHWH gives me strength to do his will; I pray that he be merciful; but I will accept his justice with love for him.

Does your righteousness (keeping YHWH's law) exceed that of the Pharisees?

 

[kcmonseysr]

I wouldn't be so presumptuous as to make a judgement on that. YHWH is the judge of that. I'm praying for teaching; I'm thankful for his forgiveness; I'm thankful for my brother Yahshua; I'm praying that YHWH gives me strength to do his will; I pray that he be merciful; but I will accept his justice with love for him.

Does your righteousness (keeping YHWH's law) exceed that of the Pharisees?

YES! Yes, by what was imputed to me by the sacrifice of Messiah on the tree! If you cannot also answer your question in the same affirmative, then you should very, very worried!

 

[BobRyan]

Colossians 2:14 (CLV)

erasing the handwriting of the decrees against us, which was hostile to us, and has taken it away out of the midst, nailing it to the cross,


Lexicon :: Strong's G1378 - dogma

δόγμα
Transliteration
dogma
Pronunciation
do'g-mä (Key)

Part of Speech
neuter noun
Root Word (Etymology)
From the base of δοκέω (G1380)
Dictionary Aids
Vine's Expository Dictionary: View Entry

TDNT Reference: 2:230,178

KJV Translation Count — Total: 5x
The KJV translates Strong's G1378 in the following manner: decree (3x), ordinance (2x).
Outline of Biblical Usage [?]

1. doctrine, decree, ordinance
   1. of public decrees
      
      
   2. of the Roman Senate
      
      
   3. of rulers
2. the rules and requirements of the law of Moses; carrying a suggestion of severity and of threatened judgment
   
   
3. of certain decrees of the apostles relative to right living

Strong’s Definitions [?](Strong’s Definitions Legend)
δόγμα dógma, dog'-mah; from the base of G1380; a law (civil, ceremonial or ecclesiastical):—decree, ordinance.
Thayer's Greek Lexicon [?] (Jump to Scripture Index)
STRONGS NT 1378: δόγμα
δόγμα, δογματος, τό (from δοκέω, and equivalent to τό δεδογμενον), an opinion, a judgment (Plato, others), doctrine, decree, ordinance;
1. of public decrees (as τῆς πόλεως, Plato, legg. 1, p. 644 d.; of the Roman Senate (Polybius 6, 13, 2); Herodian, 7, 10, 8 (5, Bekker edition)): of rulers, Luke 2:1; Acts 17:7; Hebrews 11:23 Lachmann (Theod. in Daniel 2:13; Daniel 3:10; Daniel 4:3; Daniel 6:13, etc. — where the Sept. uses other words).
2. of the rules and requirements of the law of Moses, 3Macc. 1:3; διατήρησις τῶν ἁγίων δογμάτων, Philo, alleg. legg. i., § 16; carrying a suggestion of severity, and of threatened punishment, τόν νόμον τῶν ἐντολῶν ἐν δογμασι, the law containing precepts in the form of decrees (A. V. the law of commandments contained in ordinances), Ephesians 2:15; τό καθ' ἡμῶν χειρόγραφον τοῖς δογμασι equivalent to τό τοῖς δογμασι (dative of instrument) by ὄν καθ' ἡμῶν, the bond against us by its decrees, Colossians 2:14; cf. Winers Grammar, § 31, 10 Note 1 (Buttmann, 92 (80); on both passages see Lightfoot on Colossians, the passage cited).
3. of certain decrees of the apostles relative to right living: Acts 16:4. (Of all the precepts of the Christian religion: βεβαιωθῆναι ἐν τοῖς δόγμασιν τοῦ κυρίου καί τῶν ἀποστόλων, Ignatius ad Magnes. 13, 1 [ET]; of the precepts (`sentences' or tenets) of philosophers, in the later secular writings: Cicero, acad. 2, 9, 27de suis decretis, quae philosophi vocant dogmata.) (On the use of the word in general, see Lightfoot as above; (cf. 'Teaching' etc. 11, 3 [ET]).)


Source: Genesis 1:1 (NASB)

Now why would Sha'ul use the word δόγμα in this verse?

I believe that he meant what he said, and said what he meant.

Anytime Paul is referring to THE LAW of Yahweh he used the phrase ho nomos which is
“The Law” in Greek.

So if THE LAW wasn't nailed to the (stake) pale; what was?


DECREE - Definition from the KJV Dictionary
DECREE, n. L. To judge; to divide.
1. Judicial decision or determination of a litigated cause; as a decree of the court of
chancery. The decision of a court of equity is called a decree; that of a court of law, a
judgment.

This is the gift of grace. Put into context, Sha'ul is not contradicting Yahshua, who said that the LAW will not pass away before heaven or earth. He's not telling us that we can live like lawless Hellians under grace because the LAW has been demolished. He's telling us that the judgements (under penalty of death) of our past sins are covered, through Yahshua, by the grace of Yahweh.


Grace be to you.

Glory to Yahweh.

NASB "our certificate of debt" - NASB

Christ paid our debt and nailed it to the cross as "paid in full" rather than deleting God's Word

 

[sparow]

So the law became powerless. What use does the law have if it can't be enforced? Romans 8 There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death.

3 For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:

4 That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

5 For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit.

6 For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.

7 Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.

8 So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.

9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.

The law only tries to regulate the flesh. It doesn't change the heart (will or desires).

The new covenant is where God writes the Law in ones heart, in the OT one had to put the Law in his own heart. God may only do that after one has been called and chosen.

As I see it the difference between us is the pretext we begin with; I presume the Law is not abrogated and you presume it is.

As an exercise let us follow the thinking of those who use Paul to justify the Law is not abrogated.

1. "So the law became powerless. What use does the law have if it can't be enforced?" What we presume is this is not a criticism of the perfect Law or of God's power, but rather it is a criticism of the imperfect Law of the Pharisees and their power to not enter into the covenant themselves and not let anyone else enter either.

2. Jesus give us rest from the Law of the Pharisees.

Here is an interesting prophesy, has it been fulfilled or is this still future?
Hosea 9:7 (ASV)
7 The days of visitation are come, the days of recompense are come; Israel shall know it: the prophet is a fool, the man that hath the spirit is mad, for the abundance of thine iniquity, and because the enmity is great.

3. Paul seems to be saying to the Jews, "it wasn't your fault it was the fault of the Law"; could it be Paul was trying not to offend them.

4. "That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit." What Paul is saying is that those to whom he is speaking keep the Law but those other Guys walking in the flesh do not.

I wont take this further lest I violate forum rules, but do you really believe God set Israel an impossible task, how could a loving God do that.

 

[kcmonseysr]

I wont take this further lest I violate forum rules, but do you really believe God set Israel an impossible task, how could a loving God do that.

Maybe a loving God could do that in order to cause Israel, when they honestly looked at their failure to keep the Law, to seek His mercy instead? I think that king David understood this.

For thou desirest not sacrifice; else would I give it: thou delightest not in burnt offering.The sacrifices of God area broken spirit: a broken and a contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise. (Ps. 51:16,17)
​

 

[sparow]

Some of us believe Scripture.

Luke 16:16 The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it.

Romans 7:6 But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter.

There are more and some even quote Jesus (God). Gospel of John is great on this.

What most seem to be doing is taking the scriptures literally, that is out of context, as if each and every verse can stand by itself. This is a system of interpretation that can be explained by a secular example. In Australia a legislation is a legal document and the government tries to make it stand on it's own feet that it only has one interpretation. The legislation is preceded by a preamble which is a history of why the legislation, what it addresses and every thing about it. When the interpretation of the Law is disputed it goes to the High court where Judges, after disregarding the preamble and the intentions of the government, determine what the words mean, and the judges interpretation becomes law. This is what a lot of Christians are doing; taking verses out of context they have the words speaking and not the prophet.

"Luke 16:16 The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it."

This is not talking about what is nailed to the cross or what is finished it is talking about what is preached. The old priesthood peached the Law and the Prophets, the new priesthood preached (not necessarily today) the kingdom of God. It is the OT fulfilled; it is a grub turned into a butterfly, but the butterfly is still the grub, further developed.

 

[sparow]

"...In other words, the law was made for those who would commit acts which would violate the law..." Agreed! And "those" would indeed be all of us who were born sons of Adam. But, PTL, it is now true that:

"..For ye (us) are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus..." Gal. 3:26​

And this we also know:

"...Therefore, since we have been declared righteous by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ..." Rom. 5:1​

I, for one, am willing to settle for being "declared righteous", and believe that as a result of that fact:

"...we are no longer under a schoolmaster..." Gal. 3:25​

Are you, Hark, no longer under a schoolmaster? Or are you of those about whom it is written:

They want to be teachers of the law, but they do not know what they are talking about or what they so confidently affirm. 1 Tim. 1:7

​

Quote.

Jesus said fornicators will not enter the kingdom, they wont be declared righteous unless they rectify the problem.

"..For ye (us) are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus..." Gal. 3:26
.

Paul is talking to a few who have passed through a process and have qualified; he is talking to them not us.


<<..In other words, the law was made for those who would commit acts which would violate the law..." Agreed! And "those" would indeed be all of us who were born sons of Adam.>>

Does this mean that those who have not sinned have not kept the Law?​

 

[sparow]

"...In other words, the law was made for those who would commit acts which would violate the law..." Agreed! And "those" would indeed be all of us who were born sons of Adam. But, PTL, it is now true that:

"..For ye (us) are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus..." Gal. 3:26​

And this we also know:

"...Therefore, since we have been declared righteous by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ..." Rom. 5:1​

I, for one, am willing to settle for being "declared righteous", and believe that as a result of that fact:

"...we are no longer under a schoolmaster..." Gal. 3:25​

Are you, Hark, no longer under a schoolmaster? Or are you of those about whom it is written:

They want to be teachers of the law, but they do not know what they are talking about or what they so confidently affirm. 1 Tim. 1:7
​

May it not be so. Blessings. Ken

Jesus said fornicators will not enter the kingdom, they wont be declared righteous unless they rectify the problem.

"..For ye (us) are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus..." Gal. 3:26
.

Paul is talking to a few who have passed through a process and have qualified; he is talking to them not us.


<< ..In other words, the law was made for those who would commit acts which would violate the law..." Agreed! And "those" would indeed be all of us who were born sons of Adam.>>

Does this mean that those who have not sinned have not kept the Law?

 

[HARK!]

YES! Yes, by what was imputed to me by the sacrifice of Messiah on the tree! If you cannot also answer your question in the same affirmative, then you should very, very worried!

Yahshua's sacrifice covers what you did before you repented, and were reborn. Yahshua's sacrifice does not cover those who continue to practice lawlessness. I'm not worried. I love YHWH. I'm thankful for all he has given me. I accept his justice. He's given me more than I deserve; and I trust that he will be merciful.

 

[sparow]

Maybe a loving God could do that in order to cause Israel, when they honestly looked at their failure to keep the Law, to seek His mercy instead? I think that king David understood this.

For thou desirest not sacrifice; else would I give it: thou delightest not in burnt offering.The sacrifices of God area broken spirit: a broken and a contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise. (Ps. 51:16,17)
​

I believe God does not make mistakes and prophesy is unfolding on cue.

 

[HARK!]

Jesus said fornicators will not enter the kingdom, they wont be declared righteous unless they rectify the problem.

No surprise there.

Why would Yahshua marry an unrepentant harlot for all eternity?

 

[listed]

Reply to post #43:

Hi, listed. Just to clarify, my post was intended only to explore this one passage (Colossians 2:14), i.e. WHAT this passage is referring to by the word "it". The "it" that was taken away and nailed to the cross. I believe that the word "it" in this passage is referring back to - "...the handwriting of the decrees against us..." as Hark quotes the CLV; "...the charge of our legal indebtedness..." in the NIV; "...the certificate of debt consisting of decrees against us..." in the NAS; "...the certificate of debt..." in the HCSB; etc. - as being taken away and nailed to the cross. I don't see the Law itself mentioned here, just the (long, I'm sure) list of (our) transgressions against the Law.

What is an ordinance? Is it a charge or accusation? No. It's a law. The word used in Colossians 2:14 and 20 is dogma. The definition is:

1. doctrine, decree, ordinance
   
   1. of public decrees
      
      
   2. of the Roman Senate
      
      
   3. of rulers
      
2. the rules and requirements of the law of Moses; carrying a suggestion of severity and of threatened judgment
   
   
3. of certain decrees of the apostles relative to right living
   

The definition of ordinance is: a piece of legislation enacted by an authority.

An ordinance isn't a list of violations.

Verse 20 says: Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances,

This isn't a list or even mentions against us. But what is against us? Isn't it the law? Thou shalt not.... How could it be understood any other way? Those shalt nots are are handwritten with God's finger in stone tablets.

Let's approach this from another angle. There must be some cause (authority) for a charge of wrong doing. What is the authority source for this so called certificate against us implying list of our wrong doing? Isn't it the law? If there can be no charge of wrong doing what purpose is the authority (the law)? What is the difference if one wants those charges dropped from there being no law? Isn't the authority also voided? Going back to verse 20 one is or isn't subject to ordinances. These ordinances are the law if I read the chapter correctly.

Romans 8 says:

There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death.

3 For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:

4 That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

5 For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit.

6 For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.

7 Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.

8 So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.

Have a real hard time stopping here with the quote from Romans. What does verse 1 include or exclude? Isn't Paul talking about the law? What does he say about it in its relationship to us? Isn't it about regulating the body of flesh? Doesn't Paul make this same inference in Colossians 2:20?

Just don't see "Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;" as some sort of list of real or vague charges. The verse is self defining. The problem comes from the lifting (severing) words form the text so people can manipulate others and lead them astray.

So is the law valid today? If so, for whom?

1 Timothy 1:8 But we know that the law is good, if a man use it lawfully;

9 Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,

10 For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;

11 According to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, which was committed to my trust.

Those but fors don't describe the Christian. The Christian is declared righteous (see Romans 3 and 4).

And I believe that that list includes all of our past, present, and future transgressions - and, please, please, do not accuse me of saying that we are therefore free to sin freely. Abba will have none of that sort of willful nonsense from any of His.

I surely wouldn't do such a thing. Grace is no license to do evil.

Not really. If there is no debt (charge of sin) the law has no further purpose because it's become powerless over the believer.

I agree with you that there is no longer, nor will ever be, any debt or charge of sin placed on our account, and, as a result of this, we look forward:

When the perishable puts on the imperishable, and the mortal puts on immortality, then shall come to pass the saying that is written:

“Death is swallowed up in victory.”
“O death, where is your victory?
O death, where is your sting?”​

The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law. But thanks be to God, who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ. (1 Cor. 15:54-57 - ESV)​

I don't think the above is talking about the demise of the fleshly body.

However, I would hesitate to maintain that something described in such a manner as Paul does in Rom. 7:12 ("...So then, the Law is holy, and the commandment is holy and righteous and good...") as having no further purpose. And it is over just what that purpose is (or may be) that is the bone of much contention (see Acts 15 - some things seem to never change).

The schoolmaster is unemployed when it comes to the Christian. We have thes words of Jesus: A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another.

When it comes to behavior a person complying with the above can't be in violation of the law. This doesn't mean that person serves the law.

Only for those to whom are obligated to it. The Christians isn't (see 1 Timothy 1:9)

Actually, this passage teaches us (v.8) that the Law has some sort of a legitimate use.

6 Some have deviated from these and turned aside to fruitless discussion. 7 They want to be teachers of the law, although they don’t understand what they are saying or what they are insisting on. 8 But we know that the law is good, provided one uses it legitimately. 9 We know that the law is not meant for a righteous person, but for the lawless and rebellious, for the ungodly and sinful, for the unholy and irreverent, for those who kill their fathers and mothers, for murderers, 10 for the sexually immoral and homosexuals, for kidnappers, liars, perjurers, and for whatever else is contrary to the sound teaching 11 based on the glorious gospel of the blessed God, which was entrusted to me. HCSB​

I see no reason to think that the "...one (who) uses is legitimately" could be any but a believer in the Lord Yeshua. Are not the others in this world still blind?

Agreed. Verse 8 is very significant to what goes on here at CF. Christians are being charged with evil deeds simply because they don't keep the 7th day sabbath.

I once had a very good English Grammar teacher (I only wish I had paid more attention...) in High School. At the time, he had the authority to grade my ability to follow the rules that he was presenting - he could pass or fail me, and even though it wasn't a life or death matter, he certainly had to power to severely affect my life. Once I was graduated from his class, even though I still held him in the greatest respect for his wisdom, he no longer had any authority over me. But I certainly did not hesitate to consult him on matters of grammar - although I was never tempted to fawn at his feet, so to speak.

I can appreciate your analogy. I don't need to consult the schoolmaster because I am lead by the Spirit (Galatians 5:18). The holy Spirit doesn't lead met to the law. I believe He leads me much higher kinda like the Sermon on the Mount when it comes to the law. Especially the "but I say" phrases.

You just said this debt was crucified on the cross with Jesus. That certificate no longer exists.

I don't know if I would say that it no longer exists, I certainly still remember a large portion of my own charges, and take comfort in the fact that God has promised: "...I WILL BE MERCIFUL TO THEIR INIQUITIES, AND I WILL REMEMBER THEIR SINS NO MORE..." (Heb. 8:12 NASB). But I certainly believe, as you do, that this debt is no longer taken into a believer's account.

I can accept that. Remember Romans 8:1. The law can rage against me all it wants. So can its promoters. Remember those posting in this section are supposed to be Christians.

In a presidential pardon a person has paid some oft he debt. They just got a discount on it.

Agreed in general, although I don't remember that Nixon ever did any jail time . I do believe that I stated that this presidential pardon thingy wasn't a perfect example, but it was the best that I could come up with at the time...

Understood.

Blessings to you, Ken. I think you're on the right track.

 

[listed]

According to John 3:10, those who do not practice righteousness are not children of God, so would would you agree that children of God are required to follow God's instructions for how to practice righteousness?

Your verse has nothing to do with practicing righteousness.

Can you please site which verse you are referring to? I would agree that good works are not necessarily works of law, but works of law can be good works. It is not like all of the works of law were bad.

I have James 2 in my sights. nothing said in that chapter is about requiring obligation to the law. But then I love Ephesians 2. We weren't created to serve the law issued to Israel.

7 That in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus.

8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:

9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.

10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.

 

[listed]

Posting #54

Excellently put, Free! You have well illustrated the problems that such teachings have caused me (and, I am sure, others) quite often when I (a 93% Gentile ) have tried speak with the brethren about the Jewishness of "Christianity", especially concerning the writings of the NT and how they (maybe) were understood at the time. The most common, almost immediate, first question to me is "Do you believe that the Jews are saved by Christ only?", closely followed by "What? Are you trying to make yourself into/become (choose your word) a Jew?" And trust me, neither of these questions is at all for the purpose of the questioner's understanding, but are indeed sometimes-not-so-subtle accusations. Why, one could sort of feel like an "Uncle Tom" in some circles .

My hope is that maybe here on this thread we can at least make some progress with maybe someone in understanding just what the Scripture itself actually says; as opposed to what we were taught or may think it says, or implies.

BTW, I've much enjoyed your postings. תודה רבה - Ken

I'm personally not here to reach the law contingency with the truth. That would be a great bonus. I'm here because of them and to help anyone having the problems I had with the mixed law/grace practices and teaching of most if not all organized churches. It nearly cost me my soul.

 

[listed]

Everyone is obligated to it.

1 Timothy 1:9
9 as knowing this, that law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and unruly, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,

In other words, the law was made for those who would commit acts which would violate the law. If everyone knew what sin was, and didn't sin; we wouldn't need to be told what sin is.

righteous

adjective righ·teous \ ˈrī-chəs \

Definition of righteous
1 :acting in accord with divine or moral law : free from guilt or sin

Have you ever sinned? If not, the law wasn't made for you.

No sir, the Christian isn't obligated to the law (Romans 6:14, 15; 7:6; Galatians 4:30 are valid inspired Scripture).

 

[listed]

Q.) What is righteousness?

A.) Obedience to the law

Have you read Romans 4 where Abraham and David are called righteous yet while the Scripture clearly points out sins of both of them? Romans says righteousness apart from the law.

But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets;

Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:

Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works,

For if by one man's offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.)

But Israel, which followed after the law of righteousness, hath not attained to the law of righteousness.


For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth.

All these verses are from Romans. They clearly show the righteousness God requires dosn't come from obedience to the law.

 

[listed]

"...In other words, the law was made for those who would commit acts which would violate the law..." Agreed! And "those" would indeed be all of us who were born sons of Adam. But, PTL, it is now true that:

"..For ye (us) are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus..." Gal. 3:26​

And this we also know:

"...Therefore, since we have been declared righteous by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ..." Rom. 5:1​

I, for one, am willing to settle for being "declared righteous", and believe that as a result of that fact:

"...we are no longer under a schoolmaster..." Gal. 3:25​

Are you, Hark, no longer under a schoolmaster? Or are you of those about whom it is written:

They want to be teachers of the law, but they do not know what they are talking about or what they so confidently affirm. 1 Tim. 1:7
​

May it not be so. Blessings. Ken

Let me throw in John 3 and Romans 6 about being born again. We Christians are new creatures. That isn't our bodies.

 

[listed]

The new covenant is where God writes the Law in ones heart, in the OT one had to put the Law in his own heart. God may only do that after one has been called and chosen.

The New Covenant has nothing to do with the law given to Israel (see Jeremiah 31:31-33, specifically verses 31 and 32).

 

[kcmonseysr]

Yahshua's sacrifice covers what you did before you repented, and were reborn. Yahshua's sacrifice does not cover those who continue to practice lawlessness. I'm not worried. I love YHWH. I'm thankful for all he has given me. I accept his justice. He's given me more than I deserve; and I trust that he will be merciful.

I do not believe that those who have repented and were reborn will continue to practice lawlessness. That is not to say that they/we will never sin. But they will not be comfortable in, nor embracing of, nor walking as a practice in, sin. From the time of our cleansing in our rebirth in our Savior until we actually see Him in our flesh (see Job 19:26,27), we still have growing to do. We have been declared righteous by virtue of what took place on the cross and Yeshua's being raised from the dead. But we are not yet fully sanctified. We still walk in this world in the flesh of our old nature and we have struggles. I believe that this is what John was conveying in his letter:

This is the message we have heard from Him and announce to you, that God is Light, and in Him there is no darkness at all. If we say that we have fellowship with Him and yet walk in the darkness, we lie and do not practice the truth; but if we walk in the Light as He Himself is in the Light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus His Son cleanses us from all sin. If we say that we have no sin, we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar and His word is not in us. (1 John 1:5-10)​

To deny our sinfulness is to lie to ourselves and to God, it is the fruit of a "walk in the darkness". We are not to walk such. To recognize our shortcomings, our sins, is to "walk in the light", truthfully seeing ourselves as we really yet are. Seeing our shortcomings, our sins, we admit these failings to Him who can and will forgive us and cleanse us.

The Law can indeed help us to see such failings, and with the "tempering" (if that's a reasonable way of looking at it?) of the Holy Spirit indwelling us, we can look into the Law without being overwhelmed by it, without being made to think that we can follow it under our own power, without being made to think that we can be made righteous if we just simply follow the Law. We CANNOT at any time, much less all of the time, follow all of the Law perfectly (which standard is the Law's own requirement for righteousness), and to be led to think that we can do so is to be led in darkness, NOT in the light as we should be.

I rejoice in hearing of your love for YHWH, may it grow in leaps and bounds, and may you grow in wisdom and knowledge and in truth.

 

[Soyeong]

Your verse has nothing to do with practicing righteousness.

Please explain to me how this verse has nothing to do with practicing righteousness:

1 John 3:10 By this it is evident who are the children of God, and who are the children of the devil: whoever does not practice righteousness is not of God, nor is the one who does not love his brother.

I have James 2 in my sights.

Nothing in that chapter speaks about works of the law or about works of the law and certainly nothing that says that good works aren't works of law.

nothing said in that chapter is about requiring obligation to the law.

But then I love Ephesians 2. We weren't created to serve the law issued to Israel.

7 That in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus.

8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:

9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.

10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.

In James 2:1-13, James was encouraging people to do a better job of obeying the Law more consistently by not showing partiality. If you have no problem interpreting Ephesians 2:7-10 saying that that we are not justified by works as saying that we are not justified by the Law, then you should have no problem interpreting James 2:14-26 as saying that faith apart from obedience to the Law is dead. Furthermore, 2 Timothy 3:16-17 says that all OT Scripture is God-breathed and profitable for training in righteousness and equipping us to do every good work, which is primarily referring the code of conduct found in the Law, or at least inclusive of it. So again, following God's instructions for how to practice or train in righteousness is not option for children of God (1 John 3:10), and being new creations for the purpose of doing good works means that we are to follow God's instructions for how to do good works found in His Law.