Contemporary Judaizers

[Barny]

So how exactly do you commit spiritual adultery/fornication?
If unbelief is the only sin we can commit, how can we commit adultery or fornication?

Hi B-A-C,

Remember it was Jesus who said that the sin the world is convicted of is unbelief in him, John 16:9.
Jesus did not include the sin of transgression of the law (1John 3:4,) when he said this.

This is because both these types of sin speak of differing paths to righteousness.
It's either salvation by grace, where our faith is counted for righteousness (Rom 4:5).
OR
Self-righteousness by works of the law.

Note Rom 11:6
if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then it is no more grace: otherwise work is no more work.

As you can see, grace and works of the law cannot be mixed.
If one is under the law then whatever the law says it says to them because they are under the law, Rom 3:19.
And to mix grace with works of the law is to be lukewarm, which God rejects and calls such persons to repent from, Rev 3:15-19.

So the scriptures above show that if one is under the law or even mixing grace with works of the law, then they are in the sin of unbelief. They may claim to be believers, but the doctrine they follow demanding works of the law as evidence of alleged "ïmparted" righteousness and salvation, shows that they never knew Christ.

A Christian's works that shows their faith is to believe on Jesus, John 6:29.

If unbelief is the only sin I can commit, and I believe in Jesus, then what does it matter if I'm committing "spiritual adultery"?

Note Eph 5:30-32, to see the spiritual marriage that God is looking to in scriptures
.
For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones.For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh.
This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church.

Christians are married to Christ. We believe on Jesus. Our faith in Christ is counted for righteousness, Rom 4:5. We're saved by grace. This is a spiritual marriage.

And who is the alternative way to righteousness by faith?
See Gal 4:21-24
Tell me, you who desire to be under the law, do you not hear the law? For it is written that Abraham had two sons: the one by a bondwoman, the other by a freewoman. But he who was of the bondwoman was born according to the flesh, and he of the freewoman through promise, which things are symbolic. For these are the two covenants: the one from Mount Sinai which gives birth to bondage, which is Hagar

Anyone who then turns to the law for righteousness (even mixing grace with works of the law) is fornicating with Hagar ( symbolic for righteousness by works of the law,Gal 4:24).

There are many scriptures warning us not to turn back to the law. We are not even to mix grace with works of the law as that cannot be, Rom 11:6.
There are many warnings in scriptures describing this in spiritual terms of spiritual fornication.

Consider 1Cor 5:1
.It is reported commonly that there is fornication among you, and such fornication as is not so much as named among the Gentiles, that one should have his father's wife.

This is again speaking about spiritual fornication
.
The "father" referred to in 1Cor 5:1 is the devil. Jesus revealed this when addressing legalists (under the law for righteousness by works) in John 8:44
Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do.

And the "father's wife" in 1Cor 5:1, is referring to Hagar (who is symbolic of righteousness by works of the law).

Note also 1Cor 5:7, as confirmation of this.

Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us:

What is this "leaven" that confirms the spiritual fornication spoken of in 1Cor 5 ?

Jesus tells us in Matt 16:6,12
Then Jesus said unto them, Take heed and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.
And they reasoned among themselves, saying, It is because we have taken no bread.
Which when Jesus perceived, he said unto them, O ye of little faith, why reason ye among yourselves, because ye have brought no bread?
Do ye not yet understand, neither remember the five loaves of the five thousand, and how many baskets ye took up?
Neither the seven loaves of the four thousand, and how many baskets ye took up?
How is it that ye do not understand that I spake it not to you concerning bread, that ye should beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees?
Then understood they how that he bade them not beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.

So we see that legalist doctrines that determine righteousness by works of the law, or even the lukewarm mix of grace with works of the law, is described in various ways in scripture.
It's described as fornication/adultery, and even leaven.

Consider also the warning in Gal 5:9
A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump.

And also consider God's will described in 1Thess 4:3
For this is the will of God, even your sanctification (which we have through Christ's sacrifice, when we believe on him, Heb 10:10, ), that ye should abstain from (spiritual) fornication (with Hagar, symbolic for righteousness by works of the law, Gal 4:24)

And finally Note Rev 17:1, 2
Then one of the seven angels who had the seven bowls came and talked with me, saying to me,“Come, I will show you the judgment of the great harlot who sits on many waters, with whom the kings of the earth committed fornication, and the inhabitants of the earth were made drunk with the wine of her fornication.

Unbelief in Jesus is the sin that the world is convicted of, John 16:9.
And anyone fornicating with Hagar (righteousness by works of the law, Gal 4:24) is in unbelief, rejecting the will of God.

That is why we should abstain from fornication. God is speaking through scriptures in spiritual terms about a christian's spiritual marriage with Christ.

Sorry for the long post

 

[Barny]

I would say that 490 transgressions would probably constitute a habit, yes. Wouldn't you?

So are you claiming that we as Christians only have to forgive another 490 times only?

Is 490 the limit to God's forgiveness too?

And if you are claiming that "habitual" is 490 offenses, then over what period of time can this be judged over? Is it 490 offenses per year or 3 years or 7 years?

Also, I have not seen any scriptures speaking on "habitual" sin? Do you have any references to support this "habitual" sin doctrine?

That would depend on whether he repents and turns away from that habit

.

Repentance is what Christians did when we received Christ. We repented of our "dead works" of self-righteousness, when we were in unbelief. This is a once only repentance, as described in Heb 6:4.
Heb 6:1
Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God,

Now let me ask a question of my own. You claimed a few posts ago that it is impossible for man to fully overcome sin in this life. My question is why?

Actually I said that the physical will never be perfect. Here's my quote below from my earlier post and note how I said that Christians "cannot sin".

BTW, just to clarify for any newcomers to this topic, even though scripture states that Christians cannot be charged with "sin", this is not to say we are perfect in the physical. The physical will never be perfect. And when a Christian does wrong God chastises us.

What scripture refers to in saying Christians "cannot sin", is that our position in Christ is just as if we have no sin. What God sees is Christ in us, and in him there is no sin, 1John 3:5.

I realize though that your focus is on one's behavior as a Christian.
As Christians we love one another, as Jesus commanded us. And love does no ill to another. Love also forgives 7x70 (in other words, always forgive).

I've been a Christian for several decades and I have yet to come across any professing Christian who is truly perfect in behavior.
Are you perfect brakelite?

 

[NoHype]

Hello NoHype.

Not sure what you meant to say NoHype.

I read your post and did not understand your post NoHype.

Can you expand on the line you wrote above, below is the scripture your referring to.

Colossians 2
11 and in Him you were also circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, in the removal of the body of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ;
12 having been buried with Him in baptism, in which you were also raised up with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead.
13 When you were dead in your transgressions and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He made you alive together with Him, having forgiven us all our transgressions,
14 having canceled out the certificate of debt consisting of decrees against us, which was hostile to us; and He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross.

This is the Scripture I was referring to, and clearly it reads different than yours...

Col 2:14
14 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;
(KJV)

The ordinances in God's law were not His laws against murder, perjury, thefts, etc., the list that Apostle Paul gave in 1 Timothy 1:8-11 which you bypassed. Paul also covered some of those things still in effect at the end of Galatians 5. I've already covered many of those in-depth in other posts.

 

[DHC]

This is the Scripture I was referring to, and clearly it reads different than yours...

Col 2:14
14 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;
(KJV)

The ordinances in God's law were not His laws against murder, perjury, thefts, etc., the list that Apostle Paul gave in 1 Timothy 1:8-11 which you bypassed. Paul also covered some of those things still in effect at the end of Galatians 5. I've already covered many of those in-depth in other posts.

Hello NoHype.

Too busy this weekend to reply, will reply soon.

 

[rizen1]

I've been reviewing this conversation and I must say as an outsider with no emotional attachment, the interpersonal communication is low. If we enter discussions with our own preconceived notions, biases, past experiences, judgments and attach it to people’s words to add meaning, we will never truly understand what the other person is trying to say. It may be a defensive mechanism or reflex to respond in such a manner, but if it’s, “ the word of GOD,” you are defending or discussing then no offense should be taken, but if it’s, “the word of YOU,” then pride is leading the conversation.

Let us remove the personal examinations of others, and the assumptions from this discussion and stick to the topic. If clarification is needed, ask do not assume, do not predict. Everyone’s beliefs were influenced by the interpretation of men before us, from a different era and culture, so it is wise for the Christians of today to use the technology of today to examine everything, to test all things to find truth. Both sides must be willing to test their beliefs not use the discussion to challenge others only.

Have a bless day.

 

[DHC]

This is the Scripture I was referring to, and clearly it reads different than yours...
Col 2:14
14 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;
(KJV)
The ordinances in God's law were not His laws against murder, perjury, thefts, etc., the list that Apostle Paul gave in 1 Timothy 1:8-11 which you bypassed.
Paul also covered some of those things still in effect at the end of Galatians 5. I've already covered many of those in-depth in other posts.

Hello NoHype.

This is a very complex thread and I have not bypassed your quotation from Timothy.
Just need to attend to more pressing matters at this stage of the conversation.

You picked up on the fact that we are using different translations of the Koine
Greek for (Colossians 2:14). I had quoted from (Colossians 2:14) and you realized
that the NASB translation was different to the KJV translation. Here is what you stated NoHype.

This is the Scripture I was referring to, and clearly it reads different than yours...

There are a number of very different translations of (Colossians 2:14) and we will examine the
reason why there are different translations in time.

Colossians 2:14 (KJV)
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;

Colossians 2:14 (NASB)
having canceled out the certificate of debt consisting of decrees against us, which was hostile
to us; and He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross.

There is a phrase used in the Greek text that is translated differently in these two translations
shown above. The KJV uses the translation 'handwriting of ordinances'. Whereas the NASB uses the
phrase 'certificate of debt consisting of decrees'. This troubled me, NoHype, we should have a clear and straight
forward translation, there should not be numerous different translations.

The way that the KJV has translated the Greek does create the idea that Jesus died only for
the requirements of the 'ordinances' (i.e., ceremonial law or minor laws). Meaning that
Christ did not die for the demands of the ten commandments that were against us. Which
you claimed NoHype.

The ordinances in God's law were not His laws against murder, perjury,
thefts, etc., the list that Apostle Paul gave in 1 Timothy 1:8-11 which you bypassed.

Then we have the NASB translation that gives the impression that Christ died for all
the decrees (laws) against us. In other words NoHype, the NASB is saying that Christ died
for the ten commandments too.

So which translation of the verse (Colossinas 2:14) is a reliable and accurate translation?

This is the million dollar question NoHype!

We will examine the KJV (very literal) translation of the Koine Greek text, NoHype.

Here is the phrase 'handwriting of ordinances' (KJV), notice that the KJV uses the word 'ordinances'.

Below is the KJV translation of the Koine Greek 'dogmasin' into the English 'ordinances'.

KJV, 'ordinances', dogmasin, G1378, Strongs: doctrine, decree, ordinance.

So instead of using 'ordinances' the KJV could have used 'doctrines' or 'decrees'.
There is no hard and fast rule that enables us to choose between these three
possibilities.

Which word would you choose NoHype, and why?

Also NoHype, how would you translate the phrase 'handwriting of ordinances'
and why?

 

[james1523]

Col 2:14 refers to the ceremonial law, not the moral law (10 commandments). Notice that previous verses speak about circumcision and future verses speak about what we handle, taste, touch
Col 2:20 onwards
20 If with Christ you died to the elemental spirits of the world, why, as if you were still alive in the world, do you submit to regulations—21 “Do not handle, Do not taste, Do not touch”

Jesus did not nail the 10 commandments to the cross, that is saying that Christians do not have to obey the moral laws which includes idoltry, adultery, stealing etc.

 

[DHC]

Col 2:14 refers to the ceremonial law, not the moral law (10 commandments). Notice that previous verses speak about circumcision and future verses speak about what we handle, taste, touch
Col 2:20 onwards
20 If with Christ you died to the elemental spirits of the world, why, as if you were still alive in the world, do you submit to regulations—21 “Do not handle, Do not taste, Do not touch”

Jesus did not nail the 10 commandments to the cross, that is saying that Christians do not have to obey the moral laws which includes idoltry, adultery, stealing etc.

Hello James.

I must admit that I am surprised at your post James. Here James read the following extract.

Colossians 2
13 When you were dead in your transgressions and the non circumcision of your flesh,
He made you alive together with Him, having forgiven us all our transgressions,
14 having canceled out the certificate of debt consisting of decrees against us,
which was hostile to us; and He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross.
15 When He had disarmed the rulers and authorities, He made a public display of them,
having triumphed over them through Him.

Paul states 'having forgiven us all our transgressions'. Which means 'all' and not some part
thereof which is implied by the sterile, literal KJV translation of Colossians 2:14. Having cancelled
the 'certificate of debt' shows the depth and knowledge of the modern translations. That
is why Paul uses the phrase 'nailed to the cross', the Colossians knew what Paul meant.
But the ancient translators of the KJV did not know what the phrase meant.

James, Paul says 'decrees against us, which was hostile to us'. The ceremonial law was not
hostile to us in the degree that the commandments were. Paul lists many of the commandments
and they are very hostile and condemning. Who cares whether your oxen is properly fenced
in (ceremonial), compared with the decree against adultery.

 

[james1523]

Hello James.

I must admit that I am surprised at your post James. Here James read the following extract.

Colossians 2
13 When you were dead in your transgressions and the non circumcision of your flesh,
He made you alive together with Him, having forgiven us all our transgressions,
14 having canceled out the certificate of debt consisting of decrees against us,
which was hostile to us; and He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross.
15 When He had disarmed the rulers and authorities, He made a public display of them,
having triumphed over them through Him.

Paul states 'having forgiven us all our transgressions'. Which means 'all' and not some part
thereof which is implied by the sterile, literal KJV translation of Colossians 2:14. Having cancelled
the 'certificate of debt' shows the depth and knowledge of the modern translations. That
is why Paul uses the phrase 'nailed to the cross', the Colossians knew what Paul meant.
But the ancient translators of the KJV did not know what the phrase meant.

James, Paul says 'decrees against us, which was hostile to us'. The ceremonial law was not
hostile to us in the degree that the commandments were. Paul lists many of the commandments
and they are very hostile and condemning. Who cares whether your oxen is properly fenced
in (ceremonial), compared with the decree against adultery.

Sorry, I should have clarified, I am not "taking sides". I see that both yourself and NoHype are correct. The whole Mosaic law was nailed to the cross, that included the ceremonial laws as well as the written 10 commandments (see Deut 27:26; Neh 10:29). But did not include the moral law written on our hearts, which roughly corresponds to spirit of the 10 commandments. I have consulted a number of bible commentaries on this issue and they all agree that it refers to the whole law, not just the ceremonial law. But this does not mean there is no law against murder, adultery , etc.

 

[DHC]

Sorry, I should have clarified, I am not "taking sides". I see that both yourself and NoHype are correct. The whole Mosaic law was nailed to the cross, that included the ceremonial laws as well as the written 10 commandments (see Deut 27:26; Neh 10:29). But did not include the moral law written on our hearts, which roughly corresponds to spirit of the 10 commandments. I have consulted a number of bible commentaries on this issue and they all agree that it refers to the whole law, not just the ceremonial law. But this does not mean there is no law against murder, adultery , etc.

Hello James.

I am glad to see that you agree, though you had me very concerned.

Actually I think NoHype believes only the ceremonial law was nailed to the cross.
This partly stems from the faulty KJV translation of (Colossians 2:14).

On the subject of the law written on our hearts, this refers to the law of Christ.
Not the spirit of the ten commandments might I say, I have never heard of the
spirit of the ten commandments?

 

[NoHype]

Hello NoHype.

This is a very complex thread and I have not bypassed your quotation from Timothy.
Just need to attend to more pressing matters at this stage of the conversation.

You picked up on the fact that we are using different translations of the Koine
Greek for (Colossians 2:14). I had quoted from (Colossians 2:14) and you realized
that the NASB translation was different to the KJV translation. Here is what you stated NoHype.


There are a number of very different translations of (Colossians 2:14) and we will examine the
reason why there are different translations in time.

Colossians 2:14 (KJV)
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;

Colossians 2:14 (NASB)
having canceled out the certificate of debt consisting of decrees against us, which was hostile
to us; and He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross.

There is a phrase used in the Greek text that is translated differently in these two translations
shown above. The KJV uses the translation 'handwriting of ordinances'. Whereas the NASB uses the
phrase 'certificate of debt consisting of decrees'. This troubled me, NoHype, we should have a clear and straight
forward translation, there should not be numerous different translations.

The way that the KJV has translated the Greek does create the idea that Jesus died only for
the requirements of the 'ordinances' (i.e., ceremonial law or minor laws). Meaning that
Christ did not die for the demands of the ten commandments that were against us. Which
you claimed NoHype.
Then we have the NASB translation that gives the impression that Christ died for all
the decrees (laws) against us. In other words NoHype, the NASB is saying that Christ died
for the ten commandments too.

So which translation of the verse (Colossinas 2:14) is a reliable and accurate translation?

This is the million dollar question NoHype!

We will examine the KJV (very literal) translation of the Koine Greek text, NoHype.

Here is the phrase 'handwriting of ordinances' (KJV), notice that the KJV uses the word 'ordinances'.

Below is the KJV translation of the Koine Greek 'dogmasin' into the English 'ordinances'.

KJV, 'ordinances', dogmasin, G1378, Strongs: doctrine, decree, ordinance.

So instead of using 'ordinances' the KJV could have used 'doctrines' or 'decrees'.
There is no hard and fast rule that enables us to choose between these three
possibilities.

Which word would you choose NoHype, and why?

Also NoHype, how would you translate the phrase 'handwriting of ordinances'
and why?

Both Col.2:14 and Eph.2:15 have the Greek word 'dogma' as "ordinances". Per Dr. James Strong, he defined 'dogma' to mean law, either ceremonial or ecclesiastical. It's translated as "decrees" in Acts 16:4 referring to what the Apostles and elders at Jerusalem had ordained the Gentiles to keep.

Word play isn't really going to define this issue of how "ordinances" (dogma) was meant by Apostle Paul. Obviously Paul and the other Apostles imparted dogma to the Churches also, which specifically is what Paul's warnings in 1 Timothy 1 and Galatians 5 was about. So why steer around that?

It's easy to know that Paul meant the law involving ceremonial and ritual worship commanded by the Old Covenant is what our Lord Jesus nailed to His cross.

How easy?

It's easy because the history of the Christian Church with those given as overseers, even one like King James, upheld many of the laws that originate from the Old Testament, and likewise much of that is still upheld in the Christian nations today. Every Christian nation of history has had the law, because once again who did Paul say the law was for? For the unrighteous and ungodly, etc. (1 Timothy 1).

Every nation of history, including non-Christian nations, have had law. The question is who's laws would the Christian rather be under, because law will never go away, never be done away with in the real sense of this world (nor the world to come either). Even God's final Judgment will be according to His law, and it means either reward for those who stay in Him, or spiritual death for those who remain against Him. Yes, assignment of the death penalty for false worship is per His law, which is why all those who choose to follow Satan will perish with him.

So are you going to tell me that the leaders in Christ's Church since the 1st century didn't understand what those "ordinances" (dogma) was about? Yeah, they understood Paul meant the Old Covenant ceremonial and ritual ordinances in the law, especially the blood ordinances. Because the early Church established laws directly from The Bible within the structure of the Christian nations.

Even in the early American colonies, the Christian Church founded the first universities, and educated those who held offices of authority in government, etc., and also future laymen involved in serving in the Churches. Schools of law weren't out somewhere in the woods ya know. This is why images of Moses and the Ten Commandments hang in the Supreme Court building in Washington, D.C., and in many U.S. courtrooms.

Are you getting the picture yet? Who would be silly enough to claim that law structure throughout the history of the Christian nations as being nailed to Christ's cross? The early Church must not have known! Wow! What error they made! No, the early Christian Church didn't make an error with establishing God's laws among His people in the Christian nations.

And I really don't think those who claim all of God's laws are now nailed to Christ's cross are impressing anybody that reads such ignorance. Who would even want to imply such a lie? A Communist that hates the Christian nations would. Any enemy of Christ's Church which includes an enemy of the foundation of the Christian nations, since Christians established those nations, would like for us to think there is no more law, and that one can just do whatever they want and not suffer the consequences of God's laws.

And yes, God's laws in the Old Testament even include judgments if one's cow gets outside the fence and causes damage to another's property, which laws are still... in effect today in the U.S. God's laws about cleansing are still in effect today; in the middle ages doctors washed their hands in the same bowl of water between patients and didn't yet understand that transferred diseases. They eventually figured out to wash their hands under running water, which is one of God's laws the priests were to administer. Thus many of God's laws given in the Old Testament has to do with science, i.e., what some call natural law.

So when you guys decide to come down out of your cloud and face the reality of many of God's laws in His Word maybe then you will begin to understand what all God's law is about. When you read about something concerning ceremonial or religious 'dogma', that is what the Old Covenant was actually about.

This is why Apostle Paul was quoting from God's laws in the 1 Timothy 1:8-11 and in Galatians 5:19-21. And that's why some of you guys here keep skipping over those two New Testament Scriptures written by Apostle Paul.

 

[james1523]

Hello James.

I am glad to see that you agree, though you had me very concerned.

Actually I think NoHype believes only the ceremonial law was nailed to the cross.
This partly stems from the faulty KJV translation of (Colossians 2:14).

On the subject of the law written on our hearts, this refers to the law of Christ.
Not the spirit of the ten commandments might I say, I have never heard of the
spirit of the ten commandments?

Spirit means intent. The spirit of the 10 commandments is the moral law. The moral law , or spirit of the law, was never nailed to the cross (as proved by Romans 3:31) , only the ceremonial law.

Eph 2:15 by abolishing in His flesh the enmity, which is the Law of commandments contained in ordinances, so that in Himself He might make the two into one new man, thus establishing peace,

Ordinances are the rituals, or ways of living and worship, that created the division between the Gentiles and the Jews. The ordinances include circumcision, rules about diet, and Sabbath keeping.

 

[RJ]

Hello James.

I am glad to see that you agree, though you had me very concerned.

Actually I think NoHype believes only the ceremonial law was nailed to the cross.
This partly stems from the faulty KJV translation of (Colossians 2:14).

On the subject of the law written on our hearts, this refers to the law of Christ.
Not the spirit of the ten commandments might I say, I have never heard of the
spirit of the ten commandments?

For me, everyone is missing the truth about all this law stuff.

• All of God laws, including the 10 commandments are holy and righteous and always will be; they were never at fault, man was. Man was at fault because he was weak. If he could not abide by the law perfectly 24/7, if he failed just one point of the law, he was credited with failing all of the law; therefore the law was incapable of saving man.
• In fact, St. Paul aid that , under the New Covenant, one word replaces all of the 10 commandments and that word is love.
• Look at 1 Corinthians 13:4-7..Paul explains by listing types of love that he refers to, God's love, perfect love, Agape love. The point here is that we can no more perform this love 24/7 any better than we could abide in the 10 commandments perfectly, which would be a requirement for salvation.
• Thanks be to God for Jesus Christ, in him there is no condemnation when we fail the commandments, including love.
• In the meantime, all of the law is written on our hearts, including love and is worthy of a standard to love by.

 

[DHC]

For me, everyone is missing the truth about all this law stuff.

• All of God laws, including the 10 commandments are holy and righteous and always will be; they were never at fault, man was. Man was at fault because he was weak. If he could not abide by the law perfectly 24/7, if he failed just one point of the law, he was credited with failing all of the law; therefore the law was incapable of saving man.
• In fact, St. Paul aid that , under the New Covenant, one word replaces all of the 10 commandments and that word is love.
• Look at 1 Corinthians 13:4-7..Paul explains by listing types of love that he refers to, God's love, perfect love, Agape love. The point here is that we can no more perform this love 24/7 any better than we could abide in the 10 commandments perfectly, which would be a requirement for salvation.
• Thanks be to God for Jesus Christ, in him there is no condemnation when we fail the commandments, including love.
• In the meantime, all of the law is written on our hearts, including love and is worthy of a standard to love by.

Hello RJ.

Nice to see you on a thread not related to OSAS.

This thread may not seem very important to you but it is very important to the more traditional and
older church denominations. These older churches separate the ten commandments from the rest
of the law. They see the ten commandments as divine, eternal, moral law and these commandments
must be obeyed. They are 'under' the law in the same way as the Israelites.

For me, everyone
is missing the truth about all this law stuff.

I think you need to understand that in the USA many
Christian folk are raised under the Mt Sinai law RJ. For these folk the ten commandments are paramount
and could never be repealed by God. You were not raised in the USA so you see the ten commandments
simply as the law and so do I.

There is no greater controversy on Talk Jesus than the ten commandments RJ. Make no mistake, there is a
clear line of demarcation in Talk Jesus and the line is the law.

All of God laws, including the
10 commandments are holy and righteous and always will be; they were never at fault, man was.

There is no dispute that the ten commandments are holy. These holy 'divine decrees' have one purpose
and only one purpose RJ. The law demonstrates that we are not holy and that we fall way short of the mark.
That is why God gave the law to the Israelites to demonstrate to us why God has issues with humanity. The
law brings the knowledge of sin, but the law does not offer the cure for sin itself.

In fact, St. Paul aid that,
under the New Covenant, one word replaces all of the 10 commandments and that word is love.

RJ these
folk are taught that love is obeying the ten commandments. Love is defined by the ten commandments in their eyes.
They are conditioned from a young age into the legalist thought pattern. They disregard what you wrote, it is just
nonsense.

 

[RJ]

Hello RJ.

Nice to see you on a thread not related to OSAS.

This thread may not seem very important to you but it is very important to the more traditional and
older church denominations. These older churches separate the ten commandments from the rest
of the law. They see the ten commandments as divine, eternal, moral law and these commandments
must be obeyed. They are 'under' the law in the same way as the Israelites. I think you need to understand that in the USA many
Christian folk are raised under the Mt Sinai law RJ. For these folk the ten commandments are paramount
and could never be repealed by God. You were not raised in the USA so you see the ten commandments
simply as the law and so do I.

There is no greater controversy on Talk Jesus than the ten commandments RJ. Make no mistake, there is a
clear line of demarcation in Talk Jesus and the line is the law.
There is no dispute that the ten commandments are holy. These holy 'divine decrees' have one purpose
and only one purpose RJ. The law demonstrates that we are not holy and that we fall way short of the mark.
That is why God gave the law to the Israelites to demonstrate to us why God has issues with humanity. The
law brings the knowledge of sin, but the law does not offer the cure for sin itself.RJ these
folk are taught that love is obeying the ten commandments. Love is defined by the ten commandments in their eyes.
They are conditioned from a young age into the legalist thought pattern. They disregard what you wrote, it is just
nonsense.

Ah, yes OSAS, it is tied into everything, lol!
It's not fare to paint me as dis-interested just because I have a different view with the common thread.
I find it unusual that you refer to "Christians" that adhere to legalism for there salvation and not salvation by grace only. One would certainly understand orthodox Jews doing this but Christians?
I don't think God has and I have never said that he repealed the 10 commandments. He didn't repeal any of the law but fulfilled it in Jesus Christ.
I see a real contradiction here:

• If they strictly must obey the 10 commandments, how are they Christians living in and under grace?
• We both know that it is impossible for them to abide in all the 10 commandments, 24/7, with out missing one point, ever.
• Frankly I an sorry that they would think it nonesense but,If they do not accept their faith through grace alone, they are not Christians.

 

[DHC]

Spirit means intent. The spirit of the 10 commandments is the moral law. The moral law , or spirit of the law, was never nailed to the cross (as proved by Romans 3:31) , only the ceremonial law.

Eph 2:15 by abolishing in His flesh the enmity, which is the Law of commandments contained in ordinances, so that in Himself He might make the two into one new man, thus establishing peace,

Ordinances are the rituals, or ways of living and worship, that created the division between the Gentiles and the Jews. The ordinances include circumcision, rules about diet, and Sabbath keeping.

Hello James.

Thanks for the reply.

Spirit means intent. The spirit of the 10 commandments
is the moral law. The moral law , or spirit of the law, was never nailed to the cross
(as proved by Romans 3:31) , only the ceremonial law.

You may not be fully aware of what you wrote James. You used the phrase 'moral law',
which is not a Biblical phrase or even a Biblical concept. To call the ten commandments
'moral' is a theological concept and you have been taught this approach.

If you do a word search of the New Testament using say the KJV translation you will
not find a result for 'moral'. Nor will a search in the New Testament provide a result
for 'immoral'.

I use the NASB and this translation uses a term such as 'immorality' in some letters.
But if you check the Koine Greek the NASB translation is faulty, which causes me grief.
The Greek word is 'pornea' which means sexual transgression or fornication. At least
the KJV translated that word correctly as fornication. Many modern translations were
asleep at the wheel regarding the word 'immorality'.

We are products of our society James and we have all been conditioned into certain
ideologies. One of the most blatant ideologies is the view that the ten commandments
are divine, moral law. Alas James, all the translators themselves have been infected
with this moral ideology. It is littered through the modern translations and has corrupted
these translations.

Is the KJV a better translation because it preceded this 'moral' corrupt influence.
No the KJV wrongly translates certain passages such as (Colossians 2:14). Because the
translators of the KJV lived in an era with no understanding of first century culture.

Paul was pointing out that the decrees had been nailed to the cross. Which to first
century folk in Asia minor meant the termination of the debt to God. Because when
a debt was cancelled in Asia minor the creditor, in public nailed the note of debt to
a post. This announced to all and sundry the debt was cancelled. Meaning the whole
divine legal requirement had been canceled. Hence we should use the word 'decree'
and not the word 'ordinance' in the translations.

You quoted from (Romans 3:31) and I will print this quotation below.

Romans 3:31
Do we then nullify the Law through faith? May it never be! On the contrary, we establish the Law.

Notice the word used above James is 'law' and in the Greek that word is 'nomos'.
Paul has not used the word 'entole' which means commandment. There is a correct
understanding of this quotation and there is an incorrect understanding.

Romans 3
19 Now we know that whatever the Law says, it speaks to those who are UNDER the Law (JEWS),
so that every mouth may be closed and all the world may become accountable to God;
20 because by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified in His sight; for through the
Law comes the knowledge of sin.

'The law speaks to those under the law' and the scripture is very strict as to who these
folk were James. Those UNDER the law were the Israelites and not the Gentiles.

The knowledge of sin is what the law delivers James! Whether you stold a chocolate bar
from the local store or kidnapped someone, you have broken the 'law'. Both are laws
and bring the knowledge of sin. One law is no more special than any other law.

We establish that the law exposes what sin is and why mankind is in very serious
trouble. 'for through the Law comes the knowledge of sin'. We handle the law
properly James and we never impose this law on the Gentiles. That is what
the letter to the Galatians is concerned with.

Romans 3
28 For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law.
29 Or is God the God of Jews only? Is He not the God of Gentiles also? Yes,
of Gentiles also,
30 since indeed God who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised
through faith is one.

There are no works of the law available anymore. No one can use any one or more
laws to find favor with God. The old covenant itself which included the whole law
is redundant and this unfortunately includes the ten commandments. Jesus instituted
a New Covenant and this covenant is by Grace and not by legal obedience. Law can
only be used to notify a person of sin and not for the purpose of righteousness.

 

[DHC]

Ah, yes OSAS, it is tied into everything, lol!
It's not fare to paint me as dis-interested just because I have a different view with the common thread.
I find it unusual that you refer to "Christians" that adhere to legalism for there salvation and not salvation by grace only. One would certainly understand orthodox Jews doing this but Christians?
I don't think God has and I have never said that he repealed the 10 commandments. He didn't repeal any of the law but fulfilled it in Jesus Christ.
I see a real contradiction here:

• If they strictly must obey the 10 commandments, how are they Christians living in and under grace?
• We both know that it is impossible for them to abide in all the 10 commandments, 24/7, with out missing one point, ever.
• Frankly I an sorry that they would think it nonesense but,If they do not accept their faith through grace alone, they are not Christians.

Hello RJ.

It is not so much that you are not interested but you sure do favor the threads
involving OSAS. Here is what you wrote RJ.

Ah, yes OSAS, it is tied into everything, lol!

You have an understanding of OSAS that views OSAS as a primary doctrine.
I do not hold to this theological premise RJ. I see God as loving above everything
else RJ. Love is way beyond the all powerful and knowing God of the old testament.
You mentioned AGAPE love and you were correct RJ and I commend you for that.

It's not fare to paint me as dis-interested just because I have a different view with the common thread.
I find it unusual that you refer to "Christians" that adhere to legalism for there salvation and not salvation by grace only.

Diplomacy is very important and God has been teaching me the value of diplomacy.
I will not call a spade a spade, this does not break down any barriers at all. To
point to someone's deficiency is not being diplomatic and certainly not loving.

An out stretched hand of friendship to all and sundry is what we are called to do.
We are ambassadors of Christ and we teach reconciliation, we do not hunt for
heretics. But we do straighten the usage of the scripture where possible.

One would certainly understand orthodox Jews doing this but Christians?

Affirmative RJ, for a Gentile to even consider going under the law is absurd.
Scripture gives no instruction for the Gentiles regarding Mt Sinai law.
The only way that a Gentile can access the law is if they are taught that the
ten commandments are special, moral, divine laws. People are taught that all
scripture is inspired by God, hence they read all the scripture as applying
to them. Big mistake as far as I am concerned.

Frankly I an sorry that they would think it nonsense but, If they do not accept
their faith through grace alone, they are not Christians.

Most do accept their faith through Grace but qualify that with the divine law.
Which is what they are taught to do RJ. Whether they are acceptable to God
with the mixing of law and Grace I really do not know. Seems very risky to me,
and possibly a fatal condition.

 

[james1523]

You may not be fully aware of what you wrote James. You used the phrase 'moral law',
which is not a Biblical phrase or even a Biblical concept. To call the ten commandments
'moral' is a theological concept and you have been taught this approach.

If you do a word search of the New Testament using say the KJV translation you will
not find a result for 'moral'. Nor will a search in the New Testament provide a result
for 'immoral'.

I use the NASB and this translation uses a term such as 'immorality' in some letters.
But if you check the Koine Greek the NASB translation is faulty, which causes me grief.
The Greek word is 'pornea' which means sexual transgression or fornication. At least
the KJV translated that word correctly as fornication. Many modern translations were
asleep at the wheel regarding the word 'immorality'.

We are products of our society James and we have all been conditioned into certain
ideologies. One of the most blatant ideologies is the view that the ten commandments
are divine, moral law. Alas James, all the translators themselves have been infected
with this moral ideology. It is littered through the modern translations and has corrupted
these translations.

Is the KJV a better translation because it preceded this 'moral' corrupt influence.
No the KJV wrongly translates certain passages such as (Colossians 2:14). Because the
translators of the KJV lived in an era with no understanding of first century culture.

Paul was pointing out that the decrees had been nailed to the cross. Which to first
century folk in Asia minor meant the termination of the debt to God. Because when
a debt was cancelled in Asia minor the creditor, in public nailed the note of debt to
a post. This announced to all and sundry the debt was cancelled. Meaning the whole
divine legal requirement had been canceled. Hence we should use the word 'decree'
and not the word 'ordinance' in the translations.

You quoted from (Romans 3:31) and I will print this quotation below.

Romans 3:31
Do we then nullify the Law through faith? May it never be! On the contrary, we establish the Law.

Notice the word used above James is 'law' and in the Greek that word is 'nomos'.
Paul has not used the word 'entole' which means commandment. There is a correct
understanding of this quotation and there is an incorrect understanding.

Romans 3
19 Now we know that whatever the Law says, it speaks to those who are UNDER the Law (JEWS),
so that every mouth may be closed and all the world may become accountable to God;
20 because by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified in His sight; for through the
Law comes the knowledge of sin.

'The law speaks to those under the law' and the scripture is very strict as to who these
folk were James. Those UNDER the law were the Israelites and not the Gentiles.

The knowledge of sin is what the law delivers James! Whether you stold a chocolate bar
from the local store or kidnapped someone, you have broken the 'law'. Both are laws
and bring the knowledge of sin. One law is no more special than any other law.

We establish that the law exposes what sin is and why mankind is in very serious
trouble. 'for through the Law comes the knowledge of sin'. We handle the law
properly James and we never impose this law on the Gentiles. That is what
the letter to the Galatians is concerned with.

Romans 3
28 For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law.
29 Or is God the God of Jews only? Is He not the God of Gentiles also? Yes,
of Gentiles also,
30 since indeed God who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised
through faith is one.

There are no works of the law available anymore. No one can use any one or more
laws to find favor with God. The old covenant itself which included the whole law
is redundant and this unfortunately includes the ten commandments. Jesus instituted
a New Covenant and this covenant is by Grace and not by legal obedience. Law can
only be used to notify a person of sin and not for the purpose of righteousness.

DHC, your views are known as Antinomianism - the belief that salvation by faith alone is enough, and that Christians do not need to keep the "moral law". However this is not consistent with reformed theology, which says "We are justified by faith alone but not by a faith that is alone". Luther wrote that "a living, creative, active and powerful thing, this faith. Faith cannot help doing good works constantly. It doesn’t stop to ask if good works ought to be done, but before anyone asks, it already has done them and continues to do them without ceasing. Anyone who does not do good works in this manner is an unbeliever...Thus, it is just as impossible to separate faith and works as it is to separate heat and light from fire!"

I consider the concept of "moral law" to be the same as the concept of Trinity. There is no word Trinity in the Bible, but it is there. I understand where you are coming from, however I do not call the 10 commandments moral because I have been taught that, I call the 10 commandments moral because that is what they are. A law which says not to steal, is a moral law. A law which says to don't murder someone else, is a moral law. They are laws which set forth a standard of morality for society to follow, and have been the basis of Western society since the time of the Roman Empire. That is why we don't eat each other as cannibals (tribal society), or have sex with our parents and siblings (ancient pagan society).

When you say Gentiles are not under God's law, you are meaning gentiles who have not joined God's people, are not under the Law of Moses. That is correct. But this does not mean they were not under God's law, or lawless, because although they had no written law, they possessed a sense of right versus wrong, known as the conscience, and they were under patriarchal law. The head of the household was the family priest (like Abraham and Job). And God communicated directly with the head of the household via dreams or visions and via special messengers from God such as Melchizedek. We can consider that both the Law of Moses (and 10 commandments), and the patriarchal law, are governed by the one and same Law of God, which is the picture of God Himself, who "is love". God's law governing the gentiles is revealed in Romans 1:18 to Romans 3.

Both Jew and Gentile had the problem of sin, both Jew and Gentile were under God's law (Law of Moses, and patriarchal law), both needed Christ. God gave more attention to the Jews (was stricter and harsher and gave more detailed laws) than the Gentiles, because they were His chosen people, a shadow of what was to come. But this does not mean that the Gentiles were lawless or unaccountable to God. Gentiles were not under the law of Moses, but if a Gentile wanted to be part of God's people, they had to come under God's law (of Moses). There is no entrance to any kingdom (of God) unless we obey its law. But now for the Christian, as Romans 6:14 says, we (Jew and Gentile, in Christ) are not under the law (of Moses, including the 10 commandments, or the patriarchal law, concerning the conscience), but under grace.

Romans 7 and 8 show us four laws which apply to the Christian. God's law, the law of sin, the law of good, and the law of life. God's law is the laws of God, the outward standards by which He holds us to account. They are reflective of His Person. The main two are the two greatest commandments of love. The other laws (adultery, murder) etc, are all based on love, on God. The other 3 laws are laws which are internal to us. The law of sin is the law in our members, our body, the law of good is the law in our mind, and the law of life is the law in our spirit. Each of the 3 parts of our being are under a law, and they fight one another. When the mind wants to do good, the sin in our body rises up and prevents us. This is the struggle that every person faces - Jew or Gentile - they want to do good (either to keep Moses's law, or keep the sense of good in the conscience), but they cannot, because of sin. This is when both Jew and Gentile need the law of life - the Spirit of God rises up from within and defeats the sin in our flesh. This enables us to do the good that we know we should do. This gives us the power to keep God's laws.

So what is "God's law", how does our conscience know what is good and what is wrong? The answer is that when Adam and Eve ate the tree of knowledge, they gained the knowledge of what is good. God created this tree, knowing that Adam and Eve would eat it, and would receive within them the knowledge of good. We may praise God that He already had a 'backup plan', just in case Eve did eat the tree of knowledge. He could have just let human beings be overtaken by evil, but He gave us a conscience. Eating the tree produced the conscience. If a person lived by this conscience, they were declared righteous by God. In other words, if they lived according to the right side of knowledge, they were righteous. If they lived according to the evil side of knowledge, they were evil. Satan continuously tries to pull people to the side of evil, whereas the person themselves wants to stay on the side of good. [Some people, even atheists, have a strong will, and are very good at staying on the good side of the tree of knowledge and rejecting evil]. However God comes in and presents the Tree of Life (Christ) to us. The tree of knowledge itself does not have any life in it, it only produces a conscience which condemns us, and brings death. So we also need life which is imparted to us by the Spirit of God. If we live by Christ satan cannot touch us because the tree of life has no evil in it. But if we live by our conscience alone, satan can touch us because when we touch the side of good, we also touch the side of evil, and satan takes this opportunity to defeat us. Most Christians don't know this because they only see Genesis as a story book that tells us that the world was created in 7 days and is 6000 years old. However I believe Paul, when He writes Romans 7 and 8 (particularly Romans 8:20), has in mind a picture of Genesis 1-8.

 

[Barny]

Most do accept their faith through Grace but qualify that with the divine law.
Which is what they are taught to do RJ. Whether they are acceptable to God
with the mixing of law and Grace I really do not know. Seems very risky to me,
and possibly a fatal condition.

Yes mixing grace with works of the law is spiritually fatal and such persons must repent of such error doctrine.
Rev 3:15
“I know your works, that you are neither cold nor hot. I could wish you were cold or hot. So then, because you are lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will vomit you out of My mouth"

Grace cannot be mixed with works of the law.
Rom 11:6
And if by grace, then it is no longer of works; otherwise grace is no longer grace. But if it is of works, it is no longer grace; otherwise work is no longer work.

 

[Barny]

DHC, your views are known as Antinomianism - the belief that salvation by faith alone is enough, and that Christians do not need to keep the "moral law"..

what does it mean to "keep" the law, as you say above?

note James 2:10-11
For whoever shall keep the whole law, and yet stumble in ONE point, he is guilty of ALL. For He who said, “Do not commit adultery,” also said, “Do not murder.” Now if you do not commit adultery, but you do murder, you have become a transgressor of the law.

Just ONE offence makes you guilty of ALL the law (which includes the 10 commandments).
Perfect obedience is what is required under law. And yet we see the legalists who mix grace with works of these law cannot attain this perfect obedience themselves. Legalists do not "keep" the so called "moral" law, and yet warn others to keep it or else.

- the Spirit of God rises up from within and defeats the sin in our flesh. This enables us to do the good that we know we should do. This gives us the power to keep God's laws..

As legalists fail to "keep" the law what do you claim is their position? Are they righteous and saved?

Legalists often propose that "habitual" sin is the determining factor whether someone is "keeping" the law. Unfortunately the legalists never know of a definition of "habitual" from scripture. This would clearly suggest its a error doctrine from man that is not supported in scripture.