ECT Obey the Gospel

[Jacob]

are they commands, commandments or suggestions ?

you seem to be redefining the words command & commandments
would you give me your definition of commandment ?

Not necessarily redefining them. Just that when you see a command or commandment it should be observed in or according to the Spirit or not at all. Else, obey the commands or commandments even if you do not know if the Spirit of God dwells in you, but not contrary to God and His Spirit. My fear is that some would say don't obey or observe the commands or commandments at all. Seeing a commandment is such as seeing a commandment in the Bible. Or the Torah. Or the TaNaKh.

 

[way 2 go]

Not necessarily redefining them. Just that when you see a command or commandment it should be observed in or according to the Spirit or not at all. Else, obey the commands or commandments even if you do not know if the Spirit of God dwells in you, but not contrary to God and His Spirit. My fear is that some would say don't obey or observe the commands or commandments at all. Seeing a commandment is such as seeing a commandment in the Bible. Or the Torah. Or the TaNaKh.

so not a command it is a "should"

you have a belief contradiction since you said no to Rom 7:2-4
& are still under the law. link

Rom 3:19 Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.
Rom 3:20 Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.

Rom 7:2 For the married woman was bound by law to the living husband. But if the husband is dead, she is set free from the law of her husband. Rom 7:3 So then if, while her husband lives, she is married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress. But if the husband dies, she is free from the law, so that she is no adulteress by becoming another man's wife. Rom 7:4 Likewise, my brothers, you also have died to the law through the body of Christ, so that you may belong to another, to him who has been raised from the dead, in order that we may bear fruit for God.

 

[Danoh]

Exodus 35:1 And Moses gathered all the congregation of the children of Israel together, and said unto them, These are the words which the LORD hath commanded, that ye should do them.

Acts 17:11, 12.

 

[Danoh]

Not necessarily redefining them. Just that when you see a command or commandment it should be observed in or according to the Spirit or not at all. Else, obey the commands or commandments even if you do not know if the Spirit of God dwells in you, but not contrary to God and His Spirit. My fear is that some would say don't obey or observe the commands or commandments at all. Seeing a commandment is such as seeing a commandment in the Bible. Or the Torah. Or the TaNaKh.

What do you do with the fact of Romans 6:14, then?

The guy is right, Jacob, Romans 7:4.

 

[Danoh]

Tell us, then, how our DBR gospel is fraudulent. Tell us from Paul what we should be preaching in addition to the DBR but are not.

That's just you, twisting my words in usual your incompetence.

For someone who recently described the Corinthians as "stupid" you're not very bright yourself, are you?

For you have yet to notice I began ignoring your posts just after you slandered me a third time.

Your obvious fraud, and...its' resulting incompetence ever remains...amusing.

:chuckle:

Rom. 5:6-8.

 

[way 2 go]

Exodus 35:1 And Moses gathered all the congregation of the children of Israel together, and said unto them, These are the words which the LORD hath commanded, that ye should do them.

Acts 17:11, 12.

Jacob is using "should" as a suggestion

Jacob needs to realize the truth of Romans 7:2-4

 

[Danoh]

Ah yes, the true Danoh alway makes his appearance in the end. :rotfl:

If you say so, hypocrite.

To quote, RD, back to ignoring replying to you, you go.

Unless, of course, a post of yours wonderfully stands out as sound, as they sometimes do.

:rotfl:

Rom. 5:6-8.

 

[Danoh]

Jacob is using "should" as a suggestion

Jacob needs to realize the truth of Romans 7:2-4

The word has many meanings, each depending on the particular narrative in which it is found being used.

So, yeah, on the Romans 7:2-4.

 

[musterion]

He can't. He just enjoys bloviating and playing the big shot. He has new folks in the audience.

Unless I've missed it he's still not answering such a simple yet profoundly important question.

I mean, if I seriously believed people were preaching an incomplete (which must = false) gospel, I would know it's my duty to at least try to tell them what they're missing. Whether they believed it or not, I'd have no control over that. But at least I'd have done my part.

 

[Rosenritter]

so not a command it is a "should"

"Should" is the language that is used with a command. "Would" is the optional word that depends on the will of the doer.

Such as, "Thou shalt not..." ("should" is in the same class as "shall").

 

[Rosenritter]

The word has many meanings, each depending on the particular narrative in which it is found being used.

So, yeah, on the Romans 7:2-4.

I know this seems like geeky grammar but this seems relevant here (and it helps elsewhere.)

I will ... directly states the future because of your will.
I shall ... a prediction of what you will do but it is subject to someone else's will.

You will ... a prediction, what actually happens is up to the other person's will.
You shall ... a command for other people based on the your will.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shall_and_will

examples:

If God said "You will not worship any graven image" it would have been a prediction, and a wrong one at that.
When God said "You shall not worship any graven image" it is a commandment, and one that was quickly broken.

If you say "I will dance" you're going to dance assuming that you are not restrained by another power.
If you say "I shall dance" it is because someone else is making you dance.

So. if you say you should do such and such, it is because you are obeying someone else's will. If you say you will do such and such, you are saying it is because you decided to do so.

Happy grammaring.

 

[way 2 go]

"Should" is the language that is used with a command. "Would" is the optional word that depends on the will of the doer.

Such as, "Thou shalt not..." ("should" is in the same class as "shall").

:argue:

Obedience is not a one-time thing. If children are obedient to their parents, it is not sufficient to be obedient at one point in space-time. Obedience to the gospel is to believe in our Lord and Christ, and the continuing action of that belief is faith. This faith is manifested in repentance, and obedience to his commandments, which are chiefly summed in one word, love. This belief, faith, obedience, and repentance are the works of our faith, the evidence that our love is true. Against this there is no law.

Galatians 5:22-26 KJV
(22) But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith,
(23) Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law.
(24) And they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts.
(25) If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit.
(26) Let us not be desirous of vain glory, provoking one another, envying one another.

oh rosenritter there is that word "spirit" again which you just do not understand
this will be fruitless discussion for you. :dead:

interesting that it says fruit of the spirit
not fruit of your flesh trying to obey his commandments

:think:

Gal 5:16 But I say, walk by the Spirit, and you will not gratify the desires of the flesh.

Gal 5:18 But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law.

 

[Danoh]

I am reminded of hearing some people argue that we do not need to obey and especially not the gospel of Jesus Christ. Someone even said that "Trust and obey, for there's no other way, to be happy in Jesus, but to trust and obey" is a terrible song.

Obedience is not a one-time thing. If children are obedient to their parents, it is not sufficient to be obedient at one point in space-time. Obedience to the gospel is to believe in our Lord and Christ, and the continuing action of that belief is faith. This faith is manifested in repentance, and obedience to his commandments, which are chiefly summed in one word, love. This belief, faith, obedience, and repentance are the works of our faith, the evidence that our love is true. Against this there is no law.

Galatians 5:22-26 KJV
(22) But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith,
(23) Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law.
(24) And they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts.
(25) If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit.
(26) Let us not be desirous of vain glory, provoking one another, envying one another.

Under Grace, the "should" is in the sense of a debt or an attitude, of gratitude, that keeping one's nose in Scripture learning more and more about the love of Christ, is meant to.automatically result in, in the Believer.

2 Corinthians 5:14 For the love of Christ constraineth us; because we thus judge, that if one died for all, then were all dead: 5:15 And that he died for all, that they which live should not henceforth live unto themselves, but unto him which died for them, and rose again.

Sort as in "mom is not well, I should keep the noise down..."

Romans 5:6-8.

 

[john w]

Along with Steko (and RD to a much lesser degree), I've always considered you one of the most well -informed MADs on here, even though I might disagree with various of you on one thing, or another, and vice-versa, I'm sure.

Still, I'm really surprised some of you, of all people, haven't been able to see what it is I have been pointing out.

I mean, these other aspects are present in 1 Cor. 15.

Not obvious, right away, but present there, nevertheless.

More obvious, elsewhere in Paul's writings.

Musti, I can see not getting it. The guy has never demonstrated having gotten much on his own past what ever he learned from others.

And the fool is too blinded by his animosity towards me and its resulting agenda.

How many posts is it going to have to take on my part for the lights to finally come on.

"So there."



Rom. 5:6-8.

You are way too sensitive/high spirited, D, and "over analyze"-keep it simple, and, being in sales(persuasion) for most of my secular "life," know your target audience, the "babes," on milk, and stay with"the simplicity that is in Christ"(2 Corinthians 11:3 KJV). Preach 1 Cor. 15:1-4 KJV-that is what the "carnal" Corinthians needed.....

1 Corinthians 2:2 KJV For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified.


And flattery will get you everywhere!

 

[glorydaz]

If you say so, hypocrite.

To quote, RD, back to ignoring replying to you, you go.

Unless, of course, a post of yours wonderfully stands out as sound, as they sometimes do.

:rotfl:

Rom. 5:6-8.

I'm just speaking the truth, Danoh.

You start out careful, and then you get too high minded for all us little folk.

However, you ignoring me could just be a blessing in disguise. :banana:

 

[Right Divider]

You are way too sensitive/high spirited, D, and "over analyze"-keep it simple, and, being in sales(persuasion) for most of my secular "life," know your target audience, the "babes," on milk, and stay with"the simplicity that is in Christ"(2 Corinthians 11:3 KJV). Preach 1 Cor. 15:1-4 KJV-that is what the "carnal" Corinthians needed.....

1 Corinthians 2:2 KJV For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified.

And flattery will get you everywhere!

That Danoh is one inconsistent guy. I one post he says that "Along with Steko (and RD to a much lesser degree), I've always considered you one of the most well -informed MADs on here" and then in another post he says that I'm 'a spoon-fed "MAD"'

He's :dizzy:

 

[john w]

That Danoh is one inconsistent guy. I one post he says that "Along with Steko (and RD to a much lesser degree), I've always considered you one of the most well -informed MADs on here" and then in another post he says that I'm 'a spoon-fed "MAD"'

He's :dizzy:

Yes, RD-he's a mite culiar, double-mined, often.

 

[glorydaz]

Unless I've missed it he's still not answering such a simple yet profoundly important question.

I mean, if I seriously believed people were preaching an incomplete (which must = false) gospel, I would know it's my duty to at least try to tell them what they're missing. Whether they believed it or not, I'd have no control over that. But at least I'd have done my part.

But Danoh does tell everyone what they are "missing"....to the point of overburdening them with details that would make any babe's eyes cross.

What does a person need to know in order to be saved? Preaching the cross includes explaining what a cross is a person doesn't know what a cross is, for instance. When we preach His death, we are saying he died for our sins etc. We don't need to preach about the long term consequences of sin or what was predestined from the beginning.

 

[Jacob]

so not a command it is a "should"

you have a belief contradiction since you said no to Rom 7:2-4
& are still under the law. link

Rom 3:19 Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.
Rom 3:20 Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.

Rom 7:2 For the married woman was bound by law to the living husband. But if the husband is dead, she is set free from the law of her husband. Rom 7:3 So then if, while her husband lives, she is married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress. But if the husband dies, she is free from the law, so that she is no adulteress by becoming another man's wife. Rom 7:4 Likewise, my brothers, you also have died to the law through the body of Christ, so that you may belong to another, to him who has been raised from the dead, in order that we may bear fruit for God.

I said no to a question, not to scripture. I am not under the law. I am under grace. That is the situation as I am a Christian. I am also a convert to Judaism, so though I observe the Law, Torah, and am a New Covenant believer, it is not for salvation or justification or anything like that.

 

[glorydaz]

I said no to a question, not to scripture. I am not under the law. I am under grace. That is the situation as I am a Christian. I am also a convert to Judaism, so though I observe the Law, Torah, and am a New Covenant believer, it is not for salvation or justification or anything like that.

There are real Jews in Israel that are Messianic Jews. Is that what you're trying to be?