Results 1 - 20 of 74
|
||||||
Results from: Notes On or After: Thu 12/31/70 Author: Theo-Minor Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Must we observe the law of God? | Bible general Archive 2 | Theo-Minor | 125810 | ||
The letter of the law kills. The spirit brings life. (2 Cor 3:6) The spirit of the law is "love your neighbor as yourself." This is the fulfillment of the law. (Gal 5:14) If you keep this, you will, by default, keep all the others. A person that loves his neighbor as himself will not murder his neighbor, sleep with his neighbor's wife, contrive mischiefs to acquire the possessions of his neighbor, steal from his neighbor, etc. Romans 13:8-10 Owe no man anything, but to love one another: for he that loves another has fulfilled the law. For this, Do not commit adultery, do not murder, do not steal, do not bear false witness, do not covet; and if there is any other commandment, it is summed up in this saying, namely, "You shall love your neighbor as yourself." Love works no ill to his neighbor: therefore love is the the fulfilling of the law. To keep the spirit of the law is to love one another. To keep the letter of the law is to scrutinize the words. I always like to use the illustration of my children. If they are jumping on the bed, and I were to hang a sign that said, "No jumping on the bed," I would walk in five minutes later upon hearing a ruckus and find one of them flying through the air. I stop them and ask, don't the rules say, "No jumping on the bed?" "Yes," they would say, "but we weren't jumping on the bed. We were jumping OFF the bed." This is the poison that is the letter of the law. You can scrutinize the words to find a loophole of self justification, but you can't fool your own heart. The Spirit convicts, and there is no excuse if you know that you should love one another. I don't need to know, "Do not murder." I will love my neighbor as myself and thereby not murder him. There isn't a single commandment we have that is not to the point and purpose of love. Paul tells us that the goal of their instruction is love from a pure heart, clear conscience, and sincere faith. (1 Tim 1:5) Jesus tells us that all the law and the prophets depend upon the two great commands for their existence. (Matt 22:36-40) John says that if a man loves his brother, he walks in the light, and there is no occassion of stumbling in him. (1 John 2:10) If love was the commandment of Jesus (John 13:34-35); and all the law and the prophets depend on loving God and loving each other for their existence (Matt 22:36-40); and if any commandment we have is summed up by love (Rom 13:8-10); and if love is the fulfillment of the law (Gal 5:14); and if we love, we walk in the light and there is no occasion of stumbling in us ... then it is safe to assume that love is the point. It always was, it always will be. We are not under the law. We are under love. If a man thinks to find justification by the law, he gives up his claim to salvation. Galatians 5:4 Christ is become of no effect to you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; you are fallen from grace. If we are saved by grace through faith (Eph 2:8), and you are "fallen" from grace, then you have lost grace. If you do not have the grace, you do not have the salvation that comes by said grace. Theo-Minor |
||||||
2 | What Is The Meaning Of Life? | Bible general Archive 2 | Theo-Minor | 125854 | ||
Amen to that sister! All is vanity, a chasing after the wind. Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man. For God shall bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing, whether it be good, or whether it be evil. (Eccl 12:13-14) Theo-Minor |
||||||
3 | Which one are we not going to keep? | Bible general Archive 2 | Theo-Minor | 125883 | ||
It's #125810 | ||||||
4 | Which one are we not going to keep? | Bible general Archive 2 | Theo-Minor | 125891 | ||
Til heaven and earth pass, not one jot or tittle will pass from the law until all is fulfilled. The sacrifices passed from the law, so we must assume that either heaven and earth passed away, or that phrase is figurative, similar to, "unless hell freezes over." Because something has passed from the law, we must also assume that it has all been fulfilled. In addition, he may not have come to abolish the law, but according to Eph 2:15, that's exactly what he did. "Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace ..." Paul also says that we are no longer under the law. See Galatians. Five out of six chapters directly address the fact that we are not under "law," whether the Old, or new ones created by men that are mere shadows of the Old. The "commands" we have in the NT are directly to the purpose of love. "The goal of our instruction is love from a pure heart, clear conscience, and sincere faith." (1 Tim 1:5) Theo-Minor |
||||||
5 | Which one are we not going to keep? | Bible general Archive 2 | Theo-Minor | 125894 | ||
Following him ... My bible says that we do not sin, will not sin, and are unable to sin. (1 John 3:6-9). My bible also says that if we willfully sin after coming to the full knowledge of the truth, there remains no more sacrifice concering sin. (Heb 10:26) It also says that no man putting his hand to plow and looking back is fit for the kingdom of God. (Luke 9:16) I don't know how you substantiate "We do the same thing when we sin again just as those in the OT did we go to the blood." If you continue to sin after receiving the sacrifice of Jesus' blood, you are just mocking God and nailing Christ back on the cross. (Heb 6:4-6) Theo-Minor |
||||||
6 | Which one are we not going to keep? | Bible general Archive 2 | Theo-Minor | 125897 | ||
The Old Testament is gone. God found fault with the first covenant and replaced it with a better covenant, established upon better promises. This new covenant is in the heart and mind, not on paper, and the Old is decayed and ready to vanish. Galatians 3:30 For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse; for it is written, "Cursed is everyone who does not continue in all things which are written in the book of the law, to do them." Tell me, you that 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 bondmaid, the other by a freewoman. ... Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman will not be heir with the son of the freewoman.(Galatians 4:21-31) Galatians 5:4 Christ is become of no effect to you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; you are fallen from grace. 1 Corinthians 15:56 The sting of death is sin, and the strength of sin is the law. We are not under the Old law. This is scriptural. The Old is gone, the New is in. If the Old has not passed, then we can't have a New, merely an ammendment to the Existing. Theo-Minor |
||||||
7 | Which one are we not going to keep? | Bible general Archive 2 | Theo-Minor | 125916 | ||
No one has yet to truly dispute anything I've said. Throwing out passages that contradict does not answer the plain statements. Paul says we are not under the law. Call it Torah if you please, call it Old Testament. It all amounts to the same thing. As someone pointed out, the law identifies sin. If we are under the law, sin is revived and we die. If we are under grace, walking in the spirit of the New Covenant, we will live. You choose as you please, but if you are still subject to the law, you make void the "New" Covenant, and condemn yourselves to judgment. The law we are now subject to is brotherly love. Knit pick over Matthew if you please, but Paul's statements quantify the ramifications of the death and resurrection of Christ. Jesus made his statement while the Old Covenant was still in force. He said that nothing would pass from the law until all was fulfilled. Something has passed from the law. The sacrifices are gone. Laws concerning fasting are gone. Laws concerning traditions are gone. Some of you have mildew in your houses. By the standard of the law, you should burn them down. You can't keep the laws that are convenient and disregard the rest. If you fail in one part, you are a transgressor of the law. If you have mildew in your house, and you refuse to burn it down, then you are being directly disobedient to God, and "habitually" "practicing" sin. Since you are doing this willingly, there is no more sacrifice for you concerning sin. This thing is but one small example amongst many. If you are guilty of even this one small matter, you are a murderer because of the law, and are thereby condemned because no murderer has eternal life abiding in him. If this is what you want, have at it. I challenge any of you to produce a scripture that says we are still under the law following the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, which event brought in the New and cast out the Old. The Old is good for reference. It is good for instruction to teach the loveless how to love. But we are no longer under a schoolmaster. I am under a New Covenant, established upon better promises, because God found fault with the first one. His laws are now written on my heart and mind. Defy that as you please, but it is plain scripture and coming out of the mouth of God himself. As for sin ... I am a workman approved of God, and I am not ashamed. Sin is not MY master. If sin is yours, I pity you. I am not the one with an interpretation issue. Your rendition of 1 John 1 is paradoxial. If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. Therefore, confess your sins to God, and he is faithful and just to forgive us and cleanse us from all unrighteousness. So, because we all have sin, let us pray together and confess. NOW, do we have sin anymore? If you say no, you're a liar and the truth is not in you. If you say yes, then God is a liar, for he was not faithful to do as he said. Jesus came to take away the sins of the world. If we still have sin, then HE FAILED! But for the sake of arguement, let's go ahead and confess again. Maybe THIS TIME he'll forgive and cleanse us. The more reasonable interpretation of 1 John 1 is that it applies to a person that needs to be cleansed, not someone that has already received their cleansing. And now that we are cleansed, we should go and sin no more. Because we have been born of God, we are not able to sin anymore. "Habitually" is an implication derived from a word study that showed 1 John 3:6 was written in a present perfect tense. i.e. "sinning" "Those abiding in God are not sinning." But the syntax of present perfect is that it is happening RIGHT NOW. If you are committing a sin RIGHT NOW, then you are sinNIG. At each moment, we are not committing a sin, and thus not sinning. This is the truth of the matter. This particular scripture would never have been scrutinized if it said, "Those abiding in God are not eating carrots." It defied man's tradition, contradicted fleshly teachings, and thus needed to be adjusted to suit itching ears. To me, it says what it says. If you choose to attribute words like "habitually" to it, that is your option, but no such word exists in the original text. If you are truly abiding in God, you are not sinning (from one moment to the next). If you are, you do not have God. Further, the context suggests precisely what John seems to be saying. Jesus came to take away sins, and in him is no sin. How can we have sin and abide in him when in him is no sin? I've been on both sides of the fence folks. I was an advocate of the law and inherent sin. I have seen the truth of the matter. If you can't see what I see, then we'll have to agree to disagree. I'm not going to continue typing the same thing over and over again just to have it ignored, criticized, and scrutinized because someone disagrees (but is unable to discredit, only contradict). Theo-Minor |
||||||
8 | Which one are we not going to keep? | Bible general Archive 2 | Theo-Minor | 125917 | ||
I agree. | ||||||
9 | Where are these words coming from? | Bible general Archive 2 | Theo-Minor | 126019 | ||
Hey Ray, You had asked me similar questions, and now Stultis ... I took the time to do some looking, as I didn't want to give you a hasty answer. In both the cases here in this letter, and also in the questions you asked me, the words are the same words. If you have an interlinear, take a look at them. The same greek words are being used. Light/light Love/love. God is "love" is God is "agape" Capitalization of Deity is, in my opinion, a knit-picky topic. The autograph manuscripts were written completely in upper case letters. None of the apostles made a distinction. Capitalize what you please, and don't capitalize what you don't please. God is light, and so are we. We have become partakers of the divine nature. God is Love. It is in Love that we dwell, and it is Love that dwells in us. We walk in the Spirit according to the Spirit that gives us power. Does that help any? Get an interlinear Greek/English and a few good Greek lexicons. I believe you'll find a lot of these answers yourself with the right resources. All my love, Theo-Minor |
||||||
10 | Where does the Bible SAY that? | Bible general Archive 2 | Theo-Minor | 126038 | ||
Amen, brother! Cast out the bondwoman and her child, for the child of the bondwoman will not be heir with the child of the freewoman. Theo-Minor |
||||||
11 | Why ask Why? Why ask Where? | Bible general Archive 2 | Theo-Minor | 126147 | ||
Romans 10:4 For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes. The law is gone for our righteousness' sake. Why are we doing this train of thought again when the previous thread on the same subject was restricted? None of the arguments have changed. Things have still passed from the old law, invalidating the Matthew passage (til heaven and earth pass away ... one jot or tittle will not pass ... til all be fulfilled) as an arguement. As pointed out in the previous thread on this general subject, things have passed from the law, indicating that all has been fulfilled. In addition, Paul says more times than I care to record that we are not under the law. Again, why is this topic still being debated? We are not under the written law. God's law is now written on our hearts and minds. These are the terms of the new covenant. Written ordinances are contrary to us. The Law causes sin to revive and kill us spiritually. The letter of the law is not the point. No one was able to satisfactorily debate this point last time. Unless some new arguements have come up, it will not be satisfactory this time either. Theo-minor |
||||||
12 | A possible translation error? (Lk 2:2) | Bible general Archive 2 | Theo-Minor | 126177 | ||
Leslie ... It was a comprehensive answer for a comprehensive question. I DO appreciate your efforts. I have already apologized for my previously poor behavior, so accept it or not, and let's leave it at that. So, are you suggesting that it can only be translated as "first," or that it is usually translated that way? (Genuine question; no sarcasm intended). Can it be "before," indicating or denoting a "foremost" position or rendering of time? I recognize that it may often be used a certain way, but we have English words that are often used a certain way, but have alternate meanings under some circumstances. A rendering of "before" would certainly solve a big problem with the chronology of the birth according to the listed facts. Theo-Minor |
||||||
13 | Why ask Why? Why ask Where? | Bible general Archive 2 | Theo-Minor | 126183 | ||
Hey Doc ... What I see focuses on the other half of the scriptures you're citing. What you have to say is right on the money, but only half correct according to what I see. For example: "If there were no law, there would be no sin (Romans 7:7). Now, day by day, when I do fail, His mercies are renewed morning by morning (2 Cor 4:16). I am reminded each time I fall down that I still need a Savior!" When Paul talks about the law identifying sin, it is precisely his point that we are not under the law anymore. If we are not under the law, sin cannot be identified, and thus we live. If we put ourselves back under the law, sin is revived and we die. Thus: Romans 10:4 For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes. This is one scripture of many, and I will apologize and excuse myself from making reference citations. It's 2:30 am, and I'm typing in the dark. All in all, what I see is that we had the law, and we all needed the law in order to die. Now that we are dead, we are alive again in the resurrection through baptism (water or spiritual is a conversation for another day). But it is not we that live, but Christ that lives in us. Having become dead to the law, we are now free to be saved by the grace of Christ. Having become one flesh with him through marriage, it is not really we that stand before God on the Day of Judgment, but Christ that stands in our stead, because he and we are one person. Hence "we are the body of Christ." This is why it is his righteousness we stand on, and not that of the law. If there had been a law that could have made us righteous, then righteousness would have come by the law. But there was no such law, so our righteousness comes by Christ, by grace through faith. If we try to justify ourselves according to the law, which equates to little more than the deeds of the flesh, then we trade salvation for damnation. Christ is become of no effect to you, whosoever of you are justified by the law. You are fallen from grace. Since our salvation is by grace, to be fallen from grace is a clear indication of a loss of salvation, because we trade the justification of our marriage and oneness with Christ for our own sense of justification under the law, and therein do we perish. The law we are now subject to is brotherly love. All the law and prophets are dependant upon love for their existence; the goal of the Apostles' instruction was love from a pure heart, clear conscience, and sincere faith; there is no commandment we have that is not summed up by love; love fulfills the law; if we love one another, we walk in the light, and there is no occasion of stumbling in us. In other words, love is the point. Love is the law, and the law means to love. The OT law was designed for a single purpose: To teach the loveless how to love. When Jesus died, the written law that was contrary to us (for the written law identifies and revives sin within us) was nailed to the cross with him, giving us freedom. Freedom to sin? Absolutely not. As you say, we should keep the moral laws. But by what standard? Not by the letter. You'll fail time and again. You keep the moral law (The law of Christ) by the spirit of the law which is love. Love one another as he loved us, and in so doing, you will not stumble. There is plenty that I can say, but these posts are of limited space. What I'm getting at is that the letter of the law is not the point. Love, which is the spirit of the law (or the force that sets it in motion), is what we need to be following. Every command we have must be summed up by love. If it is not, then it is not a real commandment, because such a commandment not founded in love is contrary to scripture. I'll gladly talk about this as much as you like if you're open-minded and willing to take this to conclusion. I don't want to discuss it anymore, however, if the topic is going to be restricted, banned, or anything else, and I don't want to argue with a wall (not to suggest that you are that way). I'll concede to reasonable points, and I'll expect the same from you if we discuss it. Thanks for your reply. Theo-Minor |
||||||
14 | A possible translation error? (Lk 2:2) | Bible general Archive 2 | Theo-Minor | 126193 | ||
YES ... this is precisely what I'm talking about. The census would have been the census BEFORE Judas the Galilean, which is the one I mentioned. Cyrenius' census is the one that "started the trouble" with Judas, and I think Matthias is the name of the co-conspirator. This one was in the 8 ADish area. The census when Jesus was born was in the 8-3 BC area; the lustrum performed by Augustus during the reign of Herod the Great. I'm sure I can find that commentary, but you'd be doing me a favor if you just quote what it is you are wanting me to look at (within the bounds of reasonable size for this forum). Theo-Minor |
||||||
15 | Why ask Why? Why ask Where? | Bible general Archive 2 | Theo-Minor | 126206 | ||
Hey kalos ... What I see is that the law (written) is a stumbling block. The law (Torah or otherwise) creates a list of dos and don'ts that most (all actually, except Jesus) people can't live up to. There are two specific purposes I see for the existence of a written law. 1) Instruction. It is to teach the loveless how to love. Thus Jesus' concluding statement to the Sermon on the Mount: "Therefore (i.e. to sum it all up), do to others as you would have them do to you (i.e. love your neighbor as yourself), for this is the law and the prophets." He later says that all the law the prophets are dependent upon the two great commandments (love God, love your neighbor) for their existence. (Master, what is the greatest commandment ...) He concludes his ministry by giving us a final commandment; one that is new. Love one another as he loved us. By this will all men know that we are his disciples. Paul says that the goal of their instruction is love from a pure heart, clear conscience, and sincere faith (or conviction). Paul says that any commandment we have, whether do not kill, do not steal, do not commit adultery ... "or if there be any other commandment," it is summed up by this: namely, love your neighbor as yourself. Love does no ill to your neighbor, so love is the fulfilling of the law. John says that if we love our brother, we walk in the light, and there is no occasion of stumbling in us. To put it all together: Love your neighbor as yourself is what the law and the prophets mean; all the law and the prophets depend upon love for their existence; love fulfills the law; the Apostles' instruction was with the goal of love in mind; if we love, there is no reason for us to stumble. Thus, if we love, which fulfills the OT Law, adheres to the commandment of Christ, meets the full expectations of the Apostles' teachings, and prevents us from stumbling since we walk in the light, we do well, having fulfilled the Royal Law by the scripture "love your neighbor as yourself." Now, as we know, all scripture is profitable for correction, doctrine, reproof, etc. This goes back to the first aspect of this item. It is profitable for teaching the loveless how to love. Those that understand real love will not kill someone else, steal from them, sleep with their wife, or even do something so small as to call them names (Rakka ... thou fool). This is simply not the attitude of love. 2) We need the law to die. Jesus had to die in order to fulfill the law. If you recall Elisha when he was being killed, he cursed everyone. When Jesus was being killed, he forgave them; love to the utmost extreme. He fed the hungry, clothed the naked, healed the sick, comforted the hurting, gave to the poor ... He was meek, mild, humble ... willing to teach, eager to do good, did not seek his own gain, was without pride ... All of these things are qualities of love. It really had nothing to do with the written law. He did it that way because love was the point. Because of the written law, he had to suffer all things in order to live up to the fullest standard of the law, which was love. The law is death. If there had been a law that could have made righteous, then righteousness would have come by the law. Because righteousness did NOT come by the law, it must be concluded that no such law existed that could have made us righteous. We have to trust in the righteousness of Jesus Christ. Our own righteousness is dirt, and nothing we can do will ever measure up, because all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. Because of all this ... because the law is death to us, we had to die, just like Christ had to die. In baptism, we go down in imitation of his death, and we come up in the newness of life. As the written law was nailed to the cross with Christ, so too as we nail our old man to the cross, the old man that was subject to the law died. Now, raised up in the newness of life, we are dead to the law, and hence, dead to sin. The law identifies sin. Therefore, as quoted in a previous post, Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to all those that believe. If we put ourselves back under the law, sin is suddenly reidentified, revived within us, and we die spiritually. Without a written law, there is no identification of sin. Where there is no law, there is no transgression. Theo-Minor Continued .... |
||||||
16 | Why ask Why? Why ask Where? | Bible general Archive 2 | Theo-Minor | 126207 | ||
Continued .... To say that we are no longer under the law is to say that we are no longer subject to the dos and don'ts, except where brotherly love dictates the behavior befitting a disciple of Christ. Laws that have nothing to do with brotherly love are manmade. In the words of Paul, "If you are dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are you subject to ordinances, (Touch not; taste not; handle not; Which all are to perish with the using;) after the commandments and doctrines of men?" Adhering to the teachings of Christ, and of the Apostles, our commandments must be summed up by brotherly love. If they are not, they are not commandments of God. Such pointless commandments and doctrines are nothing more than stumbling blocks, and I'll give you an example taken directly from Bible study at my house last night: Ben, who was an absolute "Law is valid; must keep the commandments" advocate, is slowly but surely coming around, because none of his arguments can stand up under sound doctrine. He has finally come to a point where he has conceded that love is the law, the law means to love. There is no passage that says we still have to sin. He has acknowledged that it is possible to live without sinning under a doctrine of love. He has acknowledged that any law we have must be summed up by love, and hence, that we must have no other commandment but to love one another, for this is not only the commandment of Christ, but also the fulfillment of the law. Then after all that acknowledgment and recognition of plain scripture that, try as he would, he could not refute, he says, "I still disagree, sort of. There are other commandments we have to keep, like taking the Lord's Supper." Now, if I am following the doctrine of Christ, knowing, trusting, hoping, and believing that if I am obedient in love that I will be approved of God, and there is now this commandment laid before me ... Say I went to church this last Sunday, but didn't take the Lord's Supper. It wasn't sin to me then. But if I believe now in this "command" and put myself "under the law" according to the traditions and doctrines of men, then this new law has just identified sin in a sense that love could never identify, and this is contrary to the commandment of Christ. Now, suppose, knowing now that I have to take the Lord's Supper, that I already had plans to do something this Sunday. I'm now faced with the option of being obedient to God by going to church and taking the Lord's Supper, or going about my plans. Let's say I chose to go about my plans. I have now willfully sinned, and according to Hebrews, if we willfully sin after coming to the full knowledge of the truth, there is no more sacrifice concerning sin. So what am I to do? I have just insulted the spirit of grace through which I am saved ... and this because someone placed a stumbling block before me; that being a commandment of men, and not a commandment of God (which would be summed up by brotherly love to begin with). So because he gave me the law, put me under its grasp, sin was recognized, sin revived, I was put back into a fleshly mind, I sinned, and I died, because the wages of sin is death. Do not be fooled, God is not mocked. Whatever a man sows, that also will he reap. All in all, I'm not saying we should run around being scumbags. There is a great amount of freedom in the doctrine of love (thus the reason both Peter and Paul have to give the warning not to "use our freedom as an occasion for fleshly vices"), but the doctrine of love adheres absolutely to the Old and New covenants in their most thorough applications. You don't need to know, "Do not murder." You will love your neighbor as yourself and not kill him. By the standard of "do to other as you would have them do to you ..." Tell me how you would feel if someone vaunted themselves above you. It creates envy, strife, jealousy, anger, etc. So because you don't want someone else to feel that way if you are under a doctrine of love, you don't exalt yourself over someone else. It's all really simple, and it's not a hard doctrine to follow. Point of fact, it's easy to live without sin by this standard, and with this is mind, consider two separate statements: For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light. We know we know God if we keep his commandments, and they are not burdensome. Modern doctrines teach perpetual sin and human imperfection, but the Bible teaches that the old man is dead, we are free from the laws that bring about death, we are perfected in Christ, and that sin is no longer our master. Questions or comments? Theo-Minor |
||||||
17 | Why ask Why? Why ask Where? | Bible general Archive 2 | Theo-Minor | 126209 | ||
By the by, I didn't cite the scriptures I quoted because there were too many, and it would have taken me half the day. I'll be happy to provide them if you need them, but I recognize from our brief history of posts that you are more than reasonably well read and will recognize the passages where quoted (and likely where to find them). Theo-Minor |
||||||
18 | Why ask Why? Why ask Where? | Bible general Archive 2 | Theo-Minor | 126210 | ||
Hey ... that's all we can really ask for eh? It's a never ending process of learning, and I look forward to someone teaching me something new every day. I'm hoping you'll have some good (hopefully positive) input into what I've said. And by all means, poke holes in it if holes can be poked (just be nice *laugh*). I'm far more interested in the truth than in my pride. Theo-Minor |
||||||
19 | Why ask Why? Why ask Where? | Bible general Archive 2 | Theo-Minor | 126212 | ||
kalos, Right. You have to keep the law, as you say, just in the spiritual sense. But being "not under the law" does not mean do whatever you want to do. That would be open license to sin, and that's precisely the point it seems you are addressing. I agree with you. To say we are no longer under the law is not to say that we need not keep the law. Being under grace instead of under the law, walking by the spirit instead of by the letter, is a matter of method and perception. Keeping it by the letter means paying attention to every little commandment, tradition, ritual, etc., and you will inevitably fail. Keeping it by the spirit is easy, because knowing that love is the foundation of all the commandments, traditions, rituals, etc., we are able, by the spirit within us (thus the laws written on our hearts and minds), to walk according to righteousness in all the fullness of the law as originally intended. In knowing the right; in being a slave to righteousness, we can reject evil before it becomes the stumbling block the written law surely becomes. And it is all done through unfeigned love of the brethren ... for this is the word that, by the gospel, was preached to us. I think we're close to being on the same page. :oP Theo-Minor |
||||||
20 | Why ask Why? Why ask Where? | Bible general Archive 2 | Theo-Minor | 126221 | ||
"The law says, Do this and you will live. Grace says, You live, so do this." That statement rules. Theo-Minor |
||||||
Result pages: [ 1 2 3 4 ] Next > Last [4] >> |