What have you understood about the charcater of The Ten Commandments??

[Rev Randy]

Grace has authorized no sin the last time I checked Randy.

Care to go on record otherwise have at it.

s

It is not my contention that Grace authorizes sin. Grace is an expression of the love of God. The very reverse of condemnation.

I have a question I'm wanting to ask you but I'll do it via PM as it could be taken wrongly if I'm assuming incorrect.

 

[squint]

It is not my contention that Grace authorizes sin.

I would certainly hope NOT.

Therefore your intentions that direction are not one bit different than the Law.

(pardon my attempts at finding common ground for all believers. it's not that difficult to find IF one desires to harmonize between believers)

Grace is an expression of the love of God. The very reverse of condemnation.

Paul in Galatians 5 as one example is every bit against the illegal activity he lists there as the law is, and yes, that IS applied to believers.

I have a question I'm wanting to ask you but I'll do it via PM as it could be taken wrongly if I'm assuming incorrect.

No problem.

s

 

[Rev Randy]

I would certainly hope NOT.

Therefore your intentions that direction are not one bit different than the Law.

(pardon my attempts at finding common ground for all believers. it's not that difficult to find IF one desires to harmonize between believers)



Paul in Galatians 5 as one example is every bit against the illegal activity he lists there as the law is, and yes, that IS applied to believers.



No problem.

s

We are looking at this much differently. I do not view Grace as the other side of the Law coin. Comparing the two is as comparing apples and dead fish.

I see a few posting suggesting that we(Christians) will be judged by the Law.
I do not agree with that concerning the final Judgement. I'm fine with self examination by the Law. But the Law offers no remedy. Only condemnation. No forgivness, but only temporal appeasement.

 

[squint]

We are looking at this much differently. I do not view Grace as the other side of the Law coin. Comparing the two is as comparing apples and dead fish.

Shall we sin under Grace? You know the answer to that equation.

Grace is every bit against sin as law is. That was my point.

I see a few posting suggesting that we(Christians) will be judged by the Law.

There is a working within all of us that WILL BE JUDGED under the law and in fact has already been judged and sentenced to final execution, which we await by Gods Hand.

Paul identifies this as the 'evil present with him' in Romans 7:21. The indwelling sin that is not him, also in Romans 7. The 'messenger of Satan' he identifies as in his own flesh in 2 Corinthians 12:7, and it is also that same cause that caused Paul to rightfully say he was the chief of sinners AFTER salvation in 1 Tim. 1:15. It is the same matter when Paul taught that there is a vessel of honor and dishonor in the same lump Paul called me in Romans 9. It is the same vessel of dishonor that Paul calls us to divide from in 2 Tim. 2:20-21. It is the same as the temptation that Paul carried in his own flesh in Gal. 4:14.

and of course this can be taken on quite further and longer in any serious study of the text.

Both law and grace remain FIRMLY AGAINST that working in ALL. Neither authorizes the activity of that other party.

These matters of judgment and of law are not merely matters of us as 'freestanding' individuals.

I do not agree with that concerning the final Judgement. I'm fine with self examination by the Law. But the Law offers no remedy. Only condemnation. No forgivness, but only temporal appeasement.

All vessels of dishonor will be condemned in the final judgment. It is the same judgment shown in Matthew 25 in the separation of the sheep and goats. So, yes, you and I will be 'separated' from that resistance.

The judgment IS TRUE. And man will live by EVERY WORD of God, just as Jesus Promised us. (Luke 4:4)

Those who deny Gods Words, even His Words of JUDGMENT, are not doing themselves any favors.

s

 

[GenemZ]

Jesus was sent to the world and for the world. He was our example and set the example for us, including the Sabbath. Jesus did not do things simply because He was a Jew our was living with them.

Matthew 10:5-7

These twelve Jesus sent out with the following instructions:
“Do not go among the Gentiles or enter any town of the Samaritans.
Go rather to the lost sheep of Israel.As you go, proclaim this message:
‘The kingdom of heaven has come near.’

​

Jesus came for the Jews. He taught the Jews as an excellent rabbi. He taught Jews according to sound rabbinical teachings.

As for the the Gentiles? God was to have that accomplished later through the Church. Jesus did not teach Church age teachings. He taught Jews, as a Jew. He taught as a Jew who was obedient to the Law in the truest sense. Just the same, certain Gentiles did hear his message as he traveled throughout the land.

Acts 11:17-18

So if God gave them the same gift he gave us who believed in the Lord
Jesus Christ, who was I to think that I could stand in God’s way?” When
they heard this, they had no further objections and praised God, saying,
“So then, even to Gentiles God has granted repentance that leads to life.”


​

The Apostles were quite surprised to see Gentiles being openly accepted by God. It was big lesson in humility that they had to learn at first.

Jesus had come to the Jews. Not to set an example for the world.. Though, his example was excellent for all.

Matthew 15:24

He answered, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel.”
​

Jesus did make contact with certain Gentiles. But, he never taught the mystery doctrines destined for the Church age. He always taught as a Jew who followed the Torah.

 

[Elder 111]

You have a point there. But I think you're missing a point.
With the immediate punishment gone, it does tend to work that way. Does that make our sinfulness proper? No, it simply shows our rebelliousness.
Now on the Sabbath issue: Does God examine the intent of our heart or demand we hold to the letter of the Law?

It iis totally about the heart. Keeping the Sabbath is not about earning Salvation, it is about doing what God requires. Keeping the Sabbath while hating your bother will not get you to heaven either.

 

[Elder 111]

Let me get this straight - you insist that the broken chair isn't broken, and you're just going to hide it under a table you introduced and pretend it isn't broken anymore. Instead of addressing the analogy I presented, you want to change the chair into a table.

No, let us address the chair instead, for it is the chair I introduced to represent the broken covenant from Mount Sinai, which Moses named the Ten Commandments.

Hebrews 8 describes the old chair:

• The old chair is faulty: if that first covenant had been faultless, then no place would have been sought for a second.
• The old chair was violated, i.e. broken: they did not continue in My covenant.
• The old chair is obsolete: In that He says, “A new covenant, ” He has made the first obsolete.
• The old chair is ready for disposal: Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.

Both Jeremiah 31 and Hebrews 8 contain a narrative of God making a new covenant, or a new chair, that is not according to the pattern of the old chair: I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah - not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt.

While you assert that hiding the chair under the table somehow made it new (which is absurd), the narrative you're confronted with tells a entirely different story: the old chair is disposed of, and God made a new chair of an entirely different design.

I will say no more than the fact that the same passage you are quoting states that the people were at fault not the Law. The table not the chair.

 

[Elder 111]

I think those promoting the Law would disagree with you that Grace is against sin, instead they would contend that Grace ALLOWS free sinning and thus the Law is superior to Grace and trumps it.

A misrepresentation.

 

[VictorC]

I will say no more than the fact that the same passage you are quoting states that the people were at fault not the Law.

Of course you dismissed the fact that God promised to make a new covenant, and the inspired author of the epistle to the Hebrews caught God's meaning to indicate the first covenant was replaced, and not moved to a new location. God did not replace the people, nor did He say anything about replacing them; He laid the blame on the first covenant from Mount Sinai.

The table not the chair.

There is no 'table'.

 

[Sophrosyne]

A misrepresentation.

not really.... when you wish to replace grace with the Law you end up trumping it

 

[GenemZ]

I think those promoting the Law would disagree with you that Grace is against sin, instead they would contend that Grace ALLOWS free sinning and thus the Law is superior to Grace and trumps it.

Grace does not allow for free sinning anymore than the Law. Why should it? In what way? Explain what you mean, please.

Grace is superior to the Law in that the Law can not give anyone power to overcome sin with inner peace. Virtue. Grace has an intent to free one to serve God, not sin. Under Law, one had to serve the Law as his God.

If someone under grace abuses his calling, as having been placed by God? That should make any difference from what the prodigal son did, who chose to sin while under the Law. Free sin, is free sin. The only difference is what one must get around and through in order to sin. Those who want to sin, will sin. Makes no difference if it was under Law, or grace. Rebellion against God is not eliminated by the means to live what is required by God for his approval.

 

[Sophrosyne]

Grace does not allow for free sinning anymore than the Law. Why should it? In what way? Explain what you mean, please.

Grace is superior to the Law in that the Law can not give anyone power to overcome sin with inner peace. Virtue. Grace has an intent to free one to serve God, not sin. Under Law, one had to serve the Law as his God.

If someone under grace abuses his calling, as having been placed by God? That should make any difference from what the prodigal son did, who chose to sin while under the Law. Free sin, is free sin. The only difference is what one must get around and through in order to sin. Those who want to sin, will sin. Makes no difference if it was under Law, or grace. Rebellion against God is not eliminated by the means to live what is required by God for his approval.

Actually sin under the Law is supposed to carry (in many cases) the penalty of death while under grace Jesus took that penalty already.

 

[squint]

Actually sin under the Law is supposed to carry (in many cases) the penalty of death while under grace Jesus took that penalty already.

Jesus condemned sin in sinful flesh no differently than the law.

Romans 8:3
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:

The formula many hyper grace adherents suppose is that sin is now OK because of that action. It isn't. Never was. Under either measure, law or grace, sin remains condemned.

 

[GenemZ]

Actually sin under the Law is supposed to carry (in many cases) the penalty of death while under grace Jesus took that penalty already.

Sins involving the penalty of death carries the same penalty under the dispensation of grace. Why should that be different?

1 John 5:16

If you see any brother or sister commit a sin that does not lead to death,
you should pray and God will give them life. I refer to those whose sin does
not lead to death. There is a sin that leads to death. I am not saying that
you should pray about that.


​

God does not let anything get by Him. But, maybe you prefer taking your fellow believer outside and stone him to death as they did under the Law? Is that what you miss?

 

[Sophrosyne]

Sins involving the penalty of death carries the same penalty under the dispensation of grace. Why should that be different?

1 John 5:16

If you see any brother or sister commit a sin that does not lead to death,
you should pray and God will give them life. I refer to those whose sin does
not lead to death. There is a sin that leads to death. I am not saying that
you should pray about that.


​

God does not let anything get by Him. But, maybe you prefer taking your fellow believer outside and stone him to death as they did under the Law? Is that what you miss?

No, Christians are not required to stone adulterers etc... try again

 

[Rev Randy]

It iis totally about the heart. Keeping the Sabbath is not about earning Salvation, it is about doing what God requires. Keeping the Sabbath while hating your bother will not get you to heaven either.

Well then we agree. Now as nearly every poster has told you they keep Christ in their heart as their Sabbath, why are you insistent that we must attend Church on Saturday? Sure seems the letter of the Law is more important to you.

Please help my confusion.

 

[GenemZ]

No, Christians are not required to stone adulterers etc... try again

You keep sidestepping.

 

[GenemZ]

I think those promoting the Law would disagree with you that Grace is against sin, instead they would contend that Grace ALLOWS free sinning and thus the Law is superior to Grace and trumps it.

Trumps it? HOW?

 

[from scratch]

Jesus condemned sin in sinful flesh no differently than the law.

Romans 8:3
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:

The formula many hyper grace adherents suppose is that sin is now OK because of that action. It isn't. Never was. Under either measure, law or grace, sin remains condemned.

I just don't see any pro grace poster making such a claim here in this forum. Would you kindly point me to an example of this with a shortcut to that post?

 

[squint]

I just don't see any pro grace poster making such a claim here in this forum. Would you kindly point me to an example of this with a shortcut to that post?

I've asked you before that if that is the case, how then is grace any different regarding sin?