Results 1 - 9 of 9
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | 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 |
||||||
2 | Why ask Why? Why ask Where? | Bible general Archive 2 | kalos | 126211 | ||
Two different ways of being saved? [Theo-Minor: I am reposting a Note that I had posted earlier. Here I disucss the false idea some have that "we are no longer saved by keeping the law." I do not mean that this is what you think. I merely bring it up because whenever the subject of not being under the Law comes up, this is what many are thinking. Again, you have not said any such thing. So this is no criticism of you. It is merely a point I believe is worthy of consideration in the discussion of the Law. Grace to you, kalos] The law was not given as a way to be saved in the first place. So why do people [but not you, Theo] keep arguing that since in the NT era we are not saved by keeping the law, it must then be invalid or abolished? This argument is meaningless. I am not aware that I have ever said we are saved by keeping the law. No one was ever saved by keeping the law. "Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness." (See Rom 4:3; Gal 3:6; James 2:23.) The just shall live by faith Habakkuk 2:4 (KJV) Behold, his soul which is lifted up is not upright in him: but the just shall live by his faith. No man is justified by the law Galatians 3:11 (KJV) But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith. Galations 3:11 (New Living Translation) Consequently, it is clear that no one can ever be right with God by trying to keep the law. For the Scriptures say, "It is through faith that a righteous person has life." Two different ways of being saved? Not according to the Bible. Since the law was never given as a way to be saved, why do people keep arguing that in the NT era we are not saved by keeping the law? No one was ever saved by keeping the law. Not in the OT. Not in the NT. Not today. And not in the future. |
||||||
3 | 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 |
||||||
4 | Why ask Why? Why ask Where? | Bible general Archive 2 | kalos | 126219 | ||
Theo-Minor: I agree with you and am happy to see that we are indeed close to being on the same page. We keep the moral law contained in the Ten Commandments not as a way of BEING saved (redeemed), but because we ARE saved (redeemed). Kenneth Wuest, in his "Word Studies in the Greek New Testament", wrote: The law says, Do this and you will live. Grace says, You live, so do this. (See Luke 10:28 and Lev. 18:5). Grace to you, kalos |
||||||
5 | 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 |
||||||
6 | Why ask Why? Why ask Where? | Bible general Archive 2 | IBLONG2GOD | 126228 | ||
The law says, "Do this and you will be blessed" Deuteronomy 27:1, 28:1-13. We are not saved by keeping the law - that is legalism. Unless our righteousness exceeds that of the Pharisees we will in no way enter heaven..Matthew 5:20. The Pharisees are well known for keeping the "letter" of the law, but not the "spirit" of the law. The letter killeth, but the spirit maketh alive..2 Corinthians 3:6. | ||||||
7 | Why ask Why? Why ask Where? | Bible general Archive 2 | Theo-Minor | 126244 | ||
IBLONG2GOD ... Are you trying to criticize the quote I just quoted? This thread was not about keeping the letter of the law, but an expansion upon keeping the spirit of it. Please read the whole thread beginning with the post by docTrinesograce. The quote I quoted happens to be very good. This discussion was more or less started because kalos was making sure I knew what I was talking about and not just spouting drivel that I don't understand. Do you know what you're saying and why? Do you know what it means to keep the spirit of the law versus keeping the letter of it? Or are you just repeating what you've read without thoroughly comprehending it? (no criticism intended. It's a genuine and sincere question). Theo-Minor |
||||||
8 | Why ask Why? Why ask Where? | Bible general Archive 2 | IBLONG2GOD | 126261 | ||
Theo-Minor, It was not my intention to be critical in the negative sense of the word. I apologize if I offended you. I'm truly sorry. I'm new to this forum and don't know the ins and outs, yet. If I had read the entire thread, I'm sure I would have gathered what this post was about. Please understand that it was done out of ignorance and I will try to be more thorough in reading the entire thread before I respond. My only intention was to correct what I believed to be wrong. I hope you understand. I do have some insight to the spirit of the law, but I'm open and humble enough to know that I don't have absolute knowledge of it. I'm willing to hear what you have to say about it, if you desire to explain your understanding of it. |
||||||
9 | Why ask Why? Why ask Where? | Bible general Archive 2 | Theo-Minor | 126262 | ||
IBLONG2GOD ... I wasn't the least bit offended brother/sister. I think I did the same thing days ago (I've only been on here a few days myself). You just have to be careful to read the full train of thought so you know what's been said, and why it has reached its current point. It's not impossible or uncommon for your (or my) point to have already been made and reasonably disputed by someone else in a sound and competent manner. Correcting what you believe to be wrong is absolutely a good thing. Iron sharpens iron. If we don't correct each other, using the tid-bits of knowledge and understanding God has given each of us in turn, we would never grow. There are things people show me all the time that I either didn't see, or didn't think about. To: do you know what it means to walk by the spirit of the law versus the letter ... I'm asking a sincere question. Do you know the difference? You say, "I do have some insight," but also say, "I don't have absolute knowledge of it." Thus the question reiterated. At the bottom of the screen where you answer to a post, you'll see a highlighted line in a tree of posts. The highlighted post is the one you're looking at/answering to. Follow the line up to the post in this line of posts beginning with DocTrinsograce. Follow them systematically and you'll see the whole discussion. I did three full-page posts on the subject of the spirit of the law, and what it means to say that we are not under the law. Keep sharpening! Theo-Minor |
||||||