Results 201 - 220 of 559
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: Wild Olive Shoot Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
201 | Can a woman divorce man: Ongoing porn? | Matthew | Wild Olive Shoot | 212630 | ||
Dear bandaid, I’ve followed along and read and seen many people on this forum come to your aid, at your request I may add. Please keep in mind you have asked for the assistance on this very public forum, they didn’t come to you. First and foremost, I’ll lift you and your husband and family in prayer. I don’t know the circumstance of your ordeal and will not pretend to. Prayer is all I or anyone can offer that will have any effect, God willing, to help you with your situation. Secondly, your posts seem to lack Christian grace in dealing with those who are trying to assist you. Rather than chastising someone for trying to help you, if you aren’t appreciative of their response, it is probably better to simply not respond than to belittle them. Thirdly, take this for what it is worth, prayer and fasting, according to Scripture can have lasting effects. In the end, it is God’s will that is done. He doesn’t act out of obligation and perform at our request the miracles He has purposed. But He does tell us to pray and unceasingly at that. 1Thessalonians 5:17 pray without ceasing, So please continue to do so. I’m sure others are joining. Keep you and your family safe and if God wills, our prayers concerning your predicament will be answered as He desires. Concerning your query of free will over riding God’s will, God is sovereign, whatever He desires will be done. If God desires to break someone, they will be broken. Romans 8:28 And we know that for those who love God all things work together for good, for those who are called according to his purpose. Ephesians 1:11 In him we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to the purpose of him who works all things according to the counsel of his will, Galatians 1:15,16: 15 But when he who had set me apart before I was born, and who called me by his grace, 16 was pleased to reveal his Son to me, in order that I might preach him among the Gentiles, I did not immediately consult with anyone; Stand in His grace, WOS |
||||||
202 | Can a woman divorce man: Ongoing porn? | Matthew | Wild Olive Shoot | 212635 | ||
Dear bandaid, Is a woman biblically allowed the right to divorce a man under these grounds (porn as adultery) or does she have to separate and wait for her husband to divorce her? Pornography is not adultery. It should be considered sexual immorality in the sense that it leads to thoughts and potentially actions unbecoming of a Christian, but you cannot convict someone for thinking about something now can you. Since divorce is only acceptable for marital unfaithfulness, adultery, the answer to your question from a biblical perspective would be no. Divorce for reasons other than biblically permitted is not acceptable. Matthew 5:32 , Can freewill be overthrown if it is a sin that may be oriented through strongholds? Man’s free will cannot now, never has and never will override God’s sovereignty. Man’s free will is only free in the sense that in Christ, we can choose God, without Him, we will not choose God. God calls whomever God desires to call. As tragic as they may sound, for that means there are some God will not call, it is not in our power to question God. Romans 8:28, Ephesians 1:11, Galatians 1:15,16. Romans 9:19-21: 19 You will say to me then, "Why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?" 20 But who are you, O man, to answer back to God? Will what is molded say to its molder, "Why have you made me like this?" 21 Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use? How do we know if a sin such as pornography addiction is a spiritual stronghold? Is it just a learned behavior that has affected dopamine in the brain, a spiritual stronghold, or both? Arguably, the problem with any sin is where it starts. James 1:12-15:12 Blessed is the man who remains steadfast under trial, for when he has stood the test he will receive the crown of life, which God has promised to those who love him. 13 Let no one say when he is tempted, "I am being tempted by God," for God cannot be tempted with evil, and he himself tempts no one. 14 But each person is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own desire. 15 Then desire when it has conceived gives birth to sin, and sin when it is fully grown brings forth death. Seemingly, your husband’s addiction to pornography is an internal problem that has grown in which the effects, according to your posts, can now be seen externally. The only cure: Romans 6:16-18: 16 Do you not know that if you present yourselves to anyone as obedient slaves, you are slaves of the one whom you obey, either of sin, which leads to death, or of obedience, which leads to righteousness? 17 But thanks be to God, that you who were once slaves of sin have become obedient from the heart to the standard of teaching to which you were committed, 18 and, having been set free from sin, have become slaves of righteousness. 2Corinthians 5:17-19: 17 Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation. The old has passed away; behold, the new has come. 18 All this is from God, who through Christ reconciled us to himself and gave us the ministry of reconciliation; 19 that is, in Christ God was reconciling the world to himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and entrusting to us the message of reconciliation. I didn’t overlook any one of your questions. Stand in His grace, WOS |
||||||
203 | Can a woman divorce man: Ongoing porn? | Matthew | Wild Olive Shoot | 212648 | ||
Dear bandaid, Well there you go. Apparently you’ve had the answer all along, so why the hubbub? Although to claim that viewing pornography equates to adultery is a bit of a stretch, and although I’ll disagree with that thought process, others may not. May as well already convict me of murder then if this is your thought process because to my shame I have hated people in my life time. You see where this leads us, we would be putting a bunch of innocent people in prison should we begin to try and judge them on their thoughts. Did you read the scripture I posted? Pornography is sinful yes, I will not debate that, it falls into the category of sexually immoral but it is not adultery. It will entice your lusts and potentially lead to adultery, but it is not. “This command forbids not only the acts of fornication and adultery, but, (1.) All appetites to them, all lusting after the forbidden object; this is the beginning of the sin, lust conceiving (Jam_1:15); it is a bad step towards the sin; and where the lust is dwelt upon and approved, and the wanton desire is rolled under the tongue as a sweet morsel, it is the commission of sin, as far as the heart can do it; there wants nothing but convenient opportunity for the sin itself. Adultera mens est - The mind is debauched. Ovid. Lust is conscience baffled or biassed: biassed, if it say nothing against the sin; baffled, if it prevail not in what is says. (2.) All approaches toward them; feeding the eye with the sight of the forbidden fruit; not only looking for that end, that I may lust; but looking till I do lust, or looking to gratify the lust, where further satisfaction cannot be obtained.” – Matthew Henry “saving for the cause of fornication; which must not be taken strictly for what is called fornication, but as including adultery, incest, or any unlawful copulation; and is opposed to the sense and practices of the Pharisees, who were on the side of Hillell: who admitted of divorce, upon the most foolish and frivolous pretences whatever; when Shammai and his followers insisted on it, that a man ought only to put away his wife for uncleanness; in which they agreed with Christ. For so it is written (i),” – John Gill You see, this is exactly what Jesus was explaining. We invent so many ways don’t we? We don’t like the command or the truth so we rationalize our way around it. Marital unfaithfulness, adultery, this includes the act of doing. It starts with a thought. That is why you must know that cleanliness has to start on the inside, with our heart. Do yourself a favor, look up the word adultery in a reliable dictionary. Stand in His grace, WOS |
||||||
204 | Can a woman divorce man: Ongoing porn? | Matthew | Wild Olive Shoot | 212662 | ||
Dear bandaid, Sister, when you are ready for the truth and a serious study, you’ll receive a far better reception than by throwing insults around. My post answered every one of your questions with scripture. Many others have answered your many questions with scripture. But it seems all you want to do is address your own personal interpretation, which is an injustice to God’s word to say the least. I’ll continue you in prayer, but must let you know, you’re not fooling anyone, at least not the majority of us. When you ready for the truth and really care to study God’s word for what it truly says, let me know, I’d love to join. Until then, I guess I’ll just stay in my fantasy world. At least I know here, I’m viewing God’s word rightly and in truth. Trust me, in the truth there is much grace. I pray you stop your out of context rationalization of God’s word and step into that grace. No “lol” from me, I’m saddened by what you are trying to do to the Word. :( Most of us hold it in the highest regard knowing who the author is. 2 Timothy 3:16: All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: Stand in His grace, WOS |
||||||
205 | Can a woman divorce man: Ongoing porn? | Matthew | Wild Olive Shoot | 214670 | ||
Kind of weird that I am responding to my own post… But I feel I need to address my errant thinking so forgive me for dredging up old posts and I pray that the person to whom this was originally addressed has somehow found peace with the situation. I have had a change of thought or heart concerning this matter. Viewing pornography and the effects it can have on one whose spouse does it is indeed dreadful. Is it grounds for divorce? Maybe so because of what it actually is and how Scripture speaks of it, but reconciliation is what should be desired first and foremost above contemplating separation. The cure to this dreadful sickness or addiction or attraction, however we may refer to it, remains the same and that is found in our Lord and being faithful to Him. With that said, regarding the Scripture from Matthew that was referenced throughout this thread, I think my error was in separating the physical from the thought for fear of adding to the Word something that wasn’t there. When in fact, I have come to believe that one is just as detrimental as the other and therefore can be viewed from the same perspective. I hope I was able to explain my view on this and apologize to any I may have offended in the previous posts. Always learning and so thankful to be doing so. Stand in His grace, WOS 2Corinthians 5:17-19: 17 Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation. The old has passed away; behold, the new has come. 18 All this is from God, who through Christ reconciled us to himself and gave us the ministry of reconciliation; 19 that is, in Christ God was reconciling the world to himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and entrusting to us the message of reconciliation. |
||||||
206 | names of 3 wise men | Matt 2:1 | Wild Olive Shoot | 164614 | ||
Do you see what you did here? You claim that is how the Bible gets corrupted, by people putting in what isn’t there and then you do the very thing by insinuating that the wise men “may have come from Iraq”. We don’t know how many wise men and we know not from where they came. WOS |
||||||
207 | names of 3 wise men | Matt 2:1 | Wild Olive Shoot | 164640 | ||
Well just as you say they may have come from Iraq, someone else can easily assume there may have been three. If you choose to correct someone on the forum, please make sure you at least follow your own advice. WOS |
||||||
208 | What was the point of the temptation ? | Matt 4:1 | Wild Olive Shoot | 193115 | ||
Dear Jesusman, By claiming "Could Jesus sin?". Could he? I say "Yes".", you are stating God can or could sin. Do you really believe that? An all knowing God knows what it is to be tempted and can empathize with us even though He Himself never has and will never sin. But He knows. If He doesn't than He is not all knowing. I hope this link helps: http://www.gotquestions.org/could-Jesus-have-sinned.html Stand in His grace, WOS |
||||||
209 | What was the point of the temptation ? | Matt 4:1 | Wild Olive Shoot | 193134 | ||
Just a few points Jesusman, in responding to both of your posts. First off, when your car is all knowing, then it will understand what temptation is without the capability of giving in. That is partly the point in the article, the omniscience of God. He knows. Can God die you ask? Look at John 10:18. He had the power to take it again, and from whom? Now, if Jesus is the eternal begotten Son, why do you think He is different today? He willingly emptied Himself, but never ceased to be divine. He has the same nature today as ever otherwise He is not a sufficient Mediator. And if you still hold to this position, please see Hebrews 13:8 and then tell me again that Christ has changed. Hebrews 13:8 Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever. God exalted Jesus which was in a way, I suppose, a reward for His humility as Matthew Henry writes concerning His exaltation: “Because he humbled himself, God exalted him; and he highly exalted him, huperupsose, raised him to an exceeding height. He exalted his whole person, the human nature as well as the divine; for he is spoken of as being in the form of God as well as in the fashion of man. As it respects the divine nature, it could only be the recognizing of his rights, or the display and appearance of the glory he had with the Father before the world was (Joh_17:5), not any new acquisition of glory; and so the Father himself is said to be exalted. But the proper exaltation was of his human nature, which alone seems to be capable of it, though in conjunction with the divine.” Jesus was tempted my friend, but there was never a chance He could have sinned. But that doesn’t make it any less of a temptation. A few simple yes or no questions for you: Was and is Jesus God? Has he ever stopped being God? Can God sin? For me it is as easy as understanding the omniscience of God. To say that we must experience something or at least have the capabilities of experiencing something in order to understand it may be true of us, because we don’t know all and are limited in our understanding. But surely you don’t believe that applies to God? For if it does, He’s not all-knowing now is He? Stand in His grace, WOS |
||||||
210 | What was the point of the temptation ? | Matt 4:1 | Wild Olive Shoot | 193139 | ||
I couldn’t explain it any better than Matthew Henry, which it was from his commentary on those very scriptures I pulled the quote in my last post. It is speaking of the duality of His nature, being both divine and man. But in His condescension, He never lost His divinity. He willingly humbled Himself. Henry further wrote: “As it respects the divine nature, it could only be the recognizing of his rights, or the display and appearance of the glory he had with the Father before the world was (Joh_17:5), not any new acquisition of glory; and so the Father himself is said to be exalted. But the proper exaltation was of his human nature, which alone seems to be capable of it, though in conjunction with the divine.” – Matthew Henry Don’t look at verses 6 and 7 individually, take them in context with the rest. We already know He is divine by nature. But His human nature was exalted as well. If Christ was both divine and human, and He was exalted having both natures, do you believe He relinquished one of those after exaltation? You made the claim He is different. How do you believe He is different? Maybe in answering that question, I’ll better understand your position. And you dodged the very simple questions I presented in my last post. Since I’m making an effort to answer all of yours, it would be greatly appreciated if you did the same in return. Again, what it comes down to, in relevance to the original post, if Christ could sin, He is not God. In His divinity, sin was not a possibility and He never relinquished His divinity even while humbling Himself as a man. Stand in His grace, WOS |
||||||
211 | What was the point of the temptation ? | Matt 4:1 | Wild Olive Shoot | 193140 | ||
Yes Jesus was God incarnate, and as God, He knew. As a man, He did not. I think maybe we need to start another thread concerning the natures of Christ, because that seems to be what you are questioning, or am I wrong? Stand in His grace, WOS |
||||||
212 | What was the point of the temptation ? | Matt 4:1 | Wild Olive Shoot | 193144 | ||
What if the purpose of the tempting was to in fact prove that He was the Son of God and truly incapable of giving in? “No attempt to set forth the doctrine of His wondrous and peerless person would be complete, without considering this blessed perfection. Sad indeed is it to behold the widespread ignorance thereon today, and sadder still to hear and read this precious truth denied. The last Adam differed from the first Adam in His impeccability. Christ was not only able to overcome temptation, but He was unable to be overcome by it. Necessarily so, for He was "the Almighty" (Rev. 1:8). True, Christ was man, but He was the God-man, and as such, absolute Master and Lord of all things. Being Master of all things—as His dominion over the winds and waves, diseases and death, clearly demonstrated—it was impossible that anything should master Him.” – A. W. Pink “Because He was not susceptible to any change, it was impossible for the incarnate Son of God to sin. Herein we behold again His uniqueness. Sinless angels fell, sinless Adam fell: they were but creatures, and creaturehood and mutability are, really, correlative terms. But was not the manhood of Christ created? Yes, but it was never placed on probation, it never had a separate existence. From the very first moment of its conception in the virgin's womb, the humanity of Christ was taken into union with His Deity; and therefore could not sin.” – A. W. Pink http://home.att.net/sovereigngrace/impeccability.html Note:(Insert a tilde directly before the s in sovereigngrace) Very interesting article if you follow the link. “It is irreverent speculation to discuss what the human nature of Christ might have done if it had been alone.” A. W. Pink I would think that is an appropriate response since it was never. Stand in His grace, WOS |
||||||
213 | What was the point of the temptation ? | Matt 4:1 | Wild Olive Shoot | 193156 | ||
Christ was tempted in every way that we are. The devil approached and presented Christ with the same enticements he presents to us today. The difference as I see it, Jesus had not the internal agency to concede, we on the other hand do. What was then presented to Christ in the wilderness by satan, in His ministry, by the religious councils and many others, is the very same things that are presented to us to this very day. You and I can and do give into these at times. Christ, being divine in nature, had not the internal capabilities of succumbing to these. Like as we are, means just that, the temptation was there, the outward influence presented to Him, But never the thought of giving in, the internal condition to allow it. Jams 1:13, 14: 13 Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man: 14 But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. “For God cannot be tempted with evil - Margin, “evils.” The sense is the same. The object seems to be to show that, in regard to the whole matter of temptation, it does not pertain to God. Nothing can be presented to his mind as an inducement to do wrong, and as little can he present anything to the mind of man to induce him to sin. Temptation is a subject which does not pertain to him. He stands aloof from it altogether. In regard to the particular statement here, that “God cannot be tempted with evil,” or to do evil, there can be no doubt of its truth, and it furnishes the highest security for the welfare of the universe. There is nothing in him that has a tendency to wrong; there can be nothing presented from without to induce him to do wrong: (1) There is no evil passion to be gratified, as there is in men; (2) There is no want of power, so that an allurement could be presented to seek what he has not; (3) There is no want of wealth, for he has infinite resources, and all that there is or can be is his Psa_50:10-11; (4) There is no want of happiness, that he should seek happiness in sources which are not now in his possession. Nothing, therefore, could be presented to the divine mind as an inducement to do evil.” – Albert Barnes Stand in Hs grace, WOS By the way, you are still leaving my questions unanswered. |
||||||
214 | How does it relate to everyday life? | Matt 5:7 | Wild Olive Shoot | 188116 | ||
Wonderfully stated Mark. Stand in His grace, WOS |
||||||
215 | The Law of Moses has been abrogated | Matt 5:17 | Wild Olive Shoot | 172531 | ||
Here is a good bit of info for you koscheiman. Please take a look at the following: http://www.ccel.org/h/henry/mhc2/MHC40005.HTM You'll have to scroll about half way down the page to see the commentary on the verses you have mentioned. WOS |
||||||
216 | The Law of Moses has been abrogated | Matt 5:17 | Wild Olive Shoot | 173163 | ||
So then tell me what these "new laws" are. You state that there is a change of the law, that now there is the law of Christ... Tell me what you believe these to be. And also let me know which "OT" laws you find acceptable to disregard and not adhere to. Do you worship idols? Is it okay to murder? Is aldultery now acceptable? And so on. WOS |
||||||
217 | The Law of Moses has been abrogated | Matt 5:17 | Wild Olive Shoot | 173169 | ||
Along with what Doc posted in ID# 173168: “The notion that no law is binding on the Christian is a classic form of antinomianism. This type of thinking sets grace against law, as if the two were antithetical. It has some dire theological consequences. It is crucial to understand that in terms of moral standards, grace does not permit what the law prohibits. "Grace" never signifies the lowering of God's moral demands. The word grace in scripture signifies a lot of things, but licentiousness is not one of them. In fact, those who turn the grace of God into promiscuity are expressly condemned as false teachers (Jude 4).– John MacArthur: WOS |
||||||
218 | Can you break the OT Law? | Matt 5:17 | Wild Olive Shoot | 173171 | ||
Jude 1:4 For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ. “Turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness - Abusing the doctrines of grace so as to give indulgence to corrupt and carnal propensities. That is, probably, they gave this form to their teaching, as Antinomians have often done, that by the gospel they were released from the obligations of the law, and might give indulgence to their sinful passions in order that grace might abound. Antinomianism began early in the world, and has always had a wide prevalence. The liability of the doctrines of grace to be thus abused was foreseen by Paul, and against such abuse he earnestly sought to guard the Christians of his time, Rom_6:1, following.” – Albert Barnes Romans 6:1 What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? 1John 2:3 And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments. “if we keep his commandments; not the commandments of men, for the keeping of them arises from ignorance of God, and is a proof of it; nor the commandments of the ceremonial law, which are abolished, particularly circumcision, which is opposed to the keeping of the commandments of God, 1Co_7:19; but either those of the moral law, and which are more particularly the commandments of God the Father; the observance of which, though it cannot be with perfection, yet being in faith, and from love to God, and with a view to his glory, is an evidence of the true knowledge of him and of his will: or else those commandments, which are more especially the commandments of Christ Jesus; such as the ordinances of baptism and the Lord's supper, which are peculiar to the Gospel dispensation; and which being kept as they were delivered by Christ, and in his name and strength, and to his glory, without depending on them for life and salvation, is an argument and proof of the right knowledge of him; and particularly his new commandment of loving one another may be chiefly designed, that being what the apostle has greatly in view throughout this epistle…” – John Gill If nine of the Ten Commandments are repeated in the New Testament, then please explain how “technically” they are not applicable to Christians? WOS |
||||||
219 | Can you break the OT Law? | Matt 5:17 | Wild Olive Shoot | 173191 | ||
“The moral law, in its purity and perfection, was written on the heart of Adam in his first creation; was sadly obliterated by his sin and fall; upon several accounts, and to answer various purposes, a system of laws was written on tables of stone for the use of the Israelites; and in regeneration the law is reinscribed on the hearts of God's people; and even among the Gentiles, and in their hearts, there are some remains of the old law and light of nature, which as by their outward conduct appears, so by the inward motions of their minds,” – John Gill Romans 2:11-16: 11 For there is no respect of persons with God. 12 For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law; 13 (For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified. 14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves: 15 Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;) 16 In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel. So then to the Gentiles who had not the Law of the Jews, what Law was written upon their hearts? What laws are written upon the hearts of the regenerated? Christ fulfilled the Law. We are no longer enslaved by it, to be condemned by it because we can’t live to the letter of it. His own words tell us He did not come to abolish it, so why is it so many now feel the Law, the moral Law of God, is void? WOS |
||||||
220 | The Law of Moses has been abrogated | Matt 5:17 | Wild Olive Shoot | 173192 | ||
Romans 3:31 Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law. Romans 7:6 But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter. Romans 7:22 For I delight in the law of God after the inward man: 1Timothy 1:8 But we know that the law is good, if a man use it lawfully; “but of the moral law, which must needs be good, since the author of it is God, who is only good; and nothing but good can come from him: the law, strictly moral, is a copy of his nature, transcribed out of himself, as well as with his own hands; and is a declaration of his will, and is stamped with his authority, and therefore must be good: the matter of it is good, it contains good, yea, great and excellent things; the matter of it is honestly and morally good, as to love mercy, do justice, and walk humbly with God: and it is pleasantly good to a regenerate man, who loves it, and delights in it after the inner man, and serves it with his spirit; though the carnal mind cannot be subject to it, but rejects it, and rebels against it: and it is also profitably good; for though obedience to it is not profitable to God, yet it is to men; and though eternal life is not obtained hereby, nor any reward given for keeping it, yet in keeping it there is a reward; and that peace is enjoyed, which the transgressors of it are strangers to: it is good in the uses of it, both to sinners and to saints. To sinners it is useful for the knowledge of sin, to convince of it, and bring them to a sense of it, and concern for it, which is effectually done, when the Spirit of God sets in with it, or brings this commandment home to the heart; and if it has not this use, it is sometimes a means of restraining men from sin, which is the use of civil laws among men; and if it has not this, it is of use however to accuse men rightly of sin, and to pronounce justly guilty before God for it, to curse them as they deserve it, and to sentence to condemnation and death: and to believers it is of use, though they are not under it as in the hands of Moses, and as a covenant of works, and are freed from its curse and condemnation, and under no obligation to seek for life and righteousness by it; to them it is of use, to point out to them what is the will of God, and what should be done, and not done; and it is a rule of walk and conversation to them, as in the hands of Christ; and is as a glass to them to behold their own deformity, the impurity of their nature, the plague of their own hearts, and the imperfection of their obedience; by which they see the insufficiency of their own righteousness, how far they are from perfection, and what carnal creatures they are, when compared with this law: and as this serves to put them out of conceit with themselves, so it tends to make Christ and his righteousness more lovely and valuable in their esteem; who has wrought out a righteousness as broad and as long as the law is, and by which it is magnified and made honourable, and has delivered them from its curse and condemnation. And this law is good as it is holy, in its author, nature, and use; and as it is just, requiring just things, and doing that which is just, by acquitting those who are interested in Christ's righteousness, and in condemning those that have no righteousness; and as it is a spiritual and perfect law, which reaches the spirit and soul of man, and is concerned with inward thoughts and motions, as well as outward actions; and especially the end of it, the fulfilling end of it is good, which is Jesus Christ, who was made under it, came to fulfil it, and has answered all the demands of it: so that it must be good, and which cannot be denied, if a man use it lawfully; for if it is used in order to obtain life, righteousness, and salvation by the works of it, or by obedience to it, it is used unlawfully: for the law does not give life, nor can righteousness come by it; nor are, or can men be saved by the works of it; to use the law for such purposes, is to abuse it, as the false teachers did, and make that which is good in itself, and in its proper use, to do what is evil; namely, to obscure and frustrate the grace of God, and make null and void the sufferings and death of Christ. A lawful use of the law is to obey it, as in the hands of Christ, the King of saints, and lawgiver in his church, from a principle of love to him, in the exercise of faith on him, without any mercenary selfish views, without trusting to, or depending on, what is done in obedience to it, but with a view to the glory of God, to testify our subjection to Christ, and our gratitude to him for favours received from him.” – John Gill |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 ] Next > Last [28] >> |