Is Calvinism Wrong?

Clete

Truth Smacker
Silver Subscriber
Wait a minute, was that meant as "viable alternative" or "the alternative of death?"

The knowledge of good and evil was not intended to be a secret. Eating of the tree was not the only way by which the knowledge could have been attained. A relationship with God was the other means of understanding right from wrong, good from evil. Adam took the shortcut and learned his lesson the hard way, the result was not just eventual death but the law itself which has a ministry of death.

We today are faced with the same choice, it is the law which kills or the Spirit which brings life. And it's not the spirit of the law, as so many interpret it to mean, it is THE Spirit (capital S)!

Clete
 

glorydaz

Well-known member
Wait a minute, was that meant as "viable alternative" or "the alternative of death?"

Wait a minute. If that isn't an attempt to deceive, what is? You posted Clete's quote and left out your own reply which is what I was responding to. :madmad:

Follow the little blue arrow to see what Rosen did there.

Ritter.....Stop doing that.
[MENTION=2589]Clete[/MENTION]. I was NOT saying you couldn't see the forest for the trees, but that Rosen couldn't see the forest for the trees.
 

Clete

Truth Smacker
Silver Subscriber
But, Paul says this about the Law.
Romans 7:7 What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.​
Yes, the Law is good just as was the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. (Genesis 1:31)

Yes, good points all. Except, we are redeemed from the curse of the Law. The Law condemns, and Christ redeemed us from the condemnation we had rightfully coming to us. Which is why I mentioned the forgiveness in the next verse.
I don't understand how this is responsive to my point. The whole plan of redemption revolves around that Tree and the Law which resulted from it. Paul's whole entire ministry has to do with telling everyone that your relationship with God no longer has ANYTHING to do with the Law. Why interpret that one verse of Paul's to mean that he was talking about soemthing other than the Law when he is making that exact point when he mentions "the handwriting of requirements"?

Don't give up on me, Clete. I really do have a listening ear. :)
I'm not giving up. It's just disheartening to see someone rationalize the Ten Commandments into something a lot more than ten commandments.

The "law" was added because of transgressions. What was the "law" added to if not the Ten?

What was added by Moses were rites, rituals, and sacrifices, because the Jews were in disobedience attempting to skirt the Ten and avoid obeying. So, of course, "Remember the Sabbath" became MORE than what was intended. Now there are all kinds of rules and regulations. Basically, the Law of Moses was punishment added on to the Ten. Which included the sacrifices until the seed should come.

But, I am more than willing to see what I may be missing.....
Moses wrote over 600 laws and they included a whole lot more than rites and rituals and other religious laws. There is a whole legal justice system included in the Mosaic Law. The Law doesn't just say "You shall not murder." It says, "If a man sheds another man's blood, by man his blood shall be shed." The Ten Commandments are just a synopsis and a basis for the rest of the law. Just as a tree has a few branches but many leaves.

Also, and again this is a bit of a rabbit trail but it serves to make the point, God started with a single command which was broken, then there were 10 and those were broken, then hundreds and every one of those were broken, then Israel stacked hundreds and hundreds more on top of those that Moses wrote down and they broke every single one of those as well. The more law, the more lawlessness. Why oh why do people want to hang on to even ten of them?!

Do you think that Jesus, that God is righteous because He follows the Law? Is God subject to the Law? (Please say "No!")

I know that you believe that you are complete in Him and so if He is not righteous because of the Law then where's the motivation to preserve any portion of the law as it pertains to the living of your life? You're not to live your life by the law but by faith. Faith in what? In the rightness of the Ten Commandments? NO! In the biblical fact that you are righteous, healed, clothed, hidden, complete and perfect in Him. The more convinced you become of that truth and the more real that fact becomes in your mind, the more His righteousness will reveal itself in your walk and it will be Him doing it and not your flesh.

Clete
 

Clete

Truth Smacker
Silver Subscriber
Wait a minute. If that isn't an attempt to deceive, what is? You posted Clete's quote and left out your own reply which is what I was responding to. :madmad:

Follow the little blue arrow to see what Rosen did there.

Ritter.....Stop doing that.

[MENTION=2589]Clete[/MENTION]. I was NOT saying you couldn't see the forest for the trees, but that Rosen couldn't see the forest for the trees.

Yeah, I got that.
 

glorydaz

Well-known member
What was nailed to the cross is described as “the handwriting of ordinances"-that was against us, which was contrary to us.” Because “ordinances” sounds like “law,” some, twist the meaning of “nailed it to the cross” into Paul saying the force of the law of God ended at the death of the Lord Jesus Christ.




The writ of charges...
In using the words “handwriting of requirements … contrary to us … nailed it to the cross,” Paul was describing the record of our sins, the indictment that required the penalty of death.

No, the indictments against believers, the charges against believers, the legal indebtedness against believers – was what was dropped, and nailed to the cross at the Lord Jesus Christ's death, rather than the law itself, which is consistently characterized in Scripture as eternal, and good...To wit:


Spoiler
Romans 7 KJV

12 Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.

13 Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful.

14 For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.

15 For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I.

16 If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is good.

“handwriting,”=a memorandum of debt, "a writing by hand" used in public and private contracts.


The wages of our sins—our debt—is death (Romans 6:23 KJV). The Lord Jesus Christ was willing to pay that debt by dying in our place, thus blotting out the record of our debt and pardoning our sins.

Survey the "death warrant" against us, because of our sin/sins is the sign that Pilate had nailed to the cross upon which the Lord Jesus Christ was crucified. John 19:19-22 KJV-It was customary to publish a writ of charges against the condemned, and the board above the Lord Jesus Christ's head was inscribed with the charges for which the Jewish authorities demanded His death. Thus, it was a Roman custom, to write the name of the condemned person and his crime on a plaque to be placed above his head at the execution. Survey Mark 15:26 KJV-"superscription of his accusation."

26 And the superscription of his accusation was written over, The King Of The Jews.




The charges removed-the meaning, then, of Colossians 2:13-14 KJV, based upon the immediate and the broader context is: You gentile believers had a death sentence against you due to your sin/sins-here are the charges............... But through the dbr, everything that one time could have been held against you has been removed.

The law against believers? No, it wasn’t God’s law that was against believers; it was the sins that they committed, as defined by that same holy, good law!. "the handwriting of ordinances that was against us,"= anything written by hand, but can more specifically apply to a legal document, bond or note of debt, was against us!!!!

Paul is relaying that the LORD God has "wiped out," removed, "nailed to the cross," through the body of Christ , representing mankind's guilt, the instrument for the remembrance of sin. The legal basis of this instrument was the "binding statutes," Col. 2:14 KJV, but what the LORD God destroyed on the cross was not the legal ground, the law, for our entanglement into sin, but the written record of our sins. By destroying the record of sins, the LORD God removed the possibility of a charge ever being made again against those who have been forgiven-a dead man is not under jurisdiction to the law.

" Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us,"


The above-a handwritten acknowledgement or note of debt, something like an I.O.U. When the debt was paid in full, the handwriting was invalidated by piercing it with something sharp like a nail.

This "handwriting" was also used in the case of the crucifixion or punishment of a criminal. All the charges of which the person had been found guilty, were written on a piece of parchment, and nailed to the cross on which the person convicted of those crimes would be crucified. Everyone could then see why he was hanging there and what he had done to deserve such a cruel punishment.This written indictment/charge/accusation are seen in John 19:19-20: accusations that were hung on the cross, on which the Lord Jesus Christ hung:

19 And Pilate wrote a title, and put it on the cross. And the writing was Jesus Of Nazareth The King Of The Jews.

20 This title then read many of the Jews: for the place where Jesus was crucified was nigh to the city: and it was written in Hebrew, and Greek, and Latin.

The "accusing witness," so to speak, against the sinner, the record book of his sins, the certificate of debt, or book of debt, was removed/nailed. The Lord Jesus Christ has "erased" it, removed it out of the court, out of the witness chair of the accuser. Not only is this record of our sins removed, but it is also "nailed to the cross" in the sense that the Lord Jesus Christ took our sins upon himself, and paid the penalty for them...Survey 2 Cor. 5:21 KJV.


When we talk about "nailing it to his cross", that is not the law itself, but the curse of the law, or the penalties for disobeying the Law. It was the penalty of the broken law which He rendered inoperative, not the law itself.

In that time period when a man was charged with a crime the charges against him were written down on papyrus. If he was found not guilty the papyrus was then washed down with water, removing or blotting out those charges against him, to confirm his acquittal. This abolished the written charges against the man. This is the what is referred to in "blotting out of ordinances against us" that were nailed to the Stake, not the Law itself.

The law is still God's standard of righteousness and all the requirements for the broken law remain unchanged, apart from Him.



Again-the penalty which a lawbreaker had to pay--it does not signify the laws that are to be obeyed--only the penalty.


The certificate of debt was wiped away and nailed to the cross.



Moreover, pardoning someone for committing a capital crime, doesn’t do away with the law that was broken. If anything, it shows that the law carries force, for without the pardon, the criminal would die!

In the same way, the law of God carries force since breaking it (committing sin) requires the death penalty. The law is that powerful, that important. It is holy. People aren’t saved from that which was against them (the death penalty) by doing away with the law. What saves people from death is the death of the Lord Jesus Christ in the place of those who trust 1 Cor. 15:1-4 KJV.

In fact, the wording Paul employed Colossians 2:13-14 KJV showed that the law of God continues to carry great force. By saying the penalty demanded under the law of God was nailed to the instrument that killed the Lord Jesus Christ, Paul was showing that the law of God was still in force, still requiring death for sin.

By contrast, if the law had been brought to an abrupt end by the death of the Lord Jesus Christ, from that point on, nothing would be “against the law”-duh! Nothing could be called “sin.” Of course, we know that is not true. Sin exists, which means the law that calls it “sin” also exists!

The Lord Jesus Christ nailed to the cross what was contrary to him...

Ephesians 2:15 KJV "the law of commandments contained in ordinances;"
Colossians 2:14 KJV "the handwriting of ordinances"
Hebrews 7:16 KJV "the law of a carnal commandment"
Hebrews 9:10 KJV "carnal ordinances;"

What the Lord Jesus Christ abolished was carnal/fleshly commandments and ordinances, and hand written ordinances=that is the context..= the decrees of exclusion established by men, which were rooted in enmity between Jew & Gentile,such as “touch not, taste not, handle not”(survey Colossians 2:21 KJV), man-made social class/caste system set in place by Oral Torah, and Jewish leaders, attempting to keep a social and religious difference between Jews and Gentiles. Ordinances/decrees were laws that were man-made. Paul was referring to man-made orders, in this verse through the term “ordinance”. These “ordinances” were, yes, indeed hostile/”hate”/”enmity”, as they restrained anyone other than “Jews” worshiping God. These ordinances made a clear separation between Jew and Gentile, by elevating one above the other, to an “elite status,” to the extent where gentiles were looked down upon, scorned, and disassociated, by Jews everywhere………..

Shuck this deleting "the handwriting of ordinances" of Colossians 2:14 KJV, replacing it with "law/ordinances," thus perverting, corrupting the scriptures, making it look like Paul says that Christ blotted out, made void, the law/ordinances, making it look like Paul is saying that the law/ordinances are contrary/against us, not for our benefit, instead of Paul saying that the sin debt/IOU was blotted out, as that is what is contrary to us, against us, as Paul asserts that the law is perfect, good, holy, just, spiritual, not void, in Romans 11, and the problem is with man, and the sin debt/IOU for breaking a good, holy, spiritual law, not the law itself.


Again...When we talk about "nailing it to his cross", that is not the law itself, but the curse of the law, or the penalties for disobeying the law. It was the penalty of the broken law which He rendered inoperative, not the law itself.

In that time period when a man was charged with a crime the charges against him were written down on papyrus. If he was found not guilty the papyrus was then washed down with water, removing or blotting out those charges against him, to confirm his acquittal. This abolished the written charges against the man. This is the what is referred to in "blotting out of ordinances against us" that were nailed to the cross, not the law itself.

The law is still God's standard of righteousness and all the requirements for the broken law remain unchanged, apart from Him. B


"nailed to the cross" is the penalty which a lawbreaker had to pay--the certificate of debt was wiped away and nailed to the cross.


To the naysayers:Tell us how believers can be charged with the sin of rape, murder, stealing,..... if the law was abolished. Go ahead.

And notice I said "charged," not convicted, to anticipate any convoluted answer.

If there is no law against rape, murder................... how can a believer, be charged with the sin/crime?


How can an unbeliever be charged with murder, rape.................if there is no law, defining it is an offense, sin?


And there are literally thousands of preachers, that, in error, assert that the LORD God did away with His "holy law and then abolishes it," citing Colossians 2:14 KJV. Colossians 2:14 KJV does not say that the LORD God did away/abolished the law-it says that "the handwriting of ordinances" was blotted out-this is not a reference to the law, that was blotted out.

If the law was blotted out/did away, everyone would be saved:

1 John 3:4 KJV Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.


So, one of the definitions of sin is " the transgression of the law."

With me?


Now:

Romans 4:15 KJV because the law worketh wrath: for where no law is, there is no transgression.


Romans 5:13 KJV (for until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.

Thus, since sin is the transgression of the law, and, if it is true that there is no more "God's holy law," then, where there is no law, there is no transgression, whereby anyone can be accused, and sin cannot be imputed, if there is no law. Secular wise, for eg., if there is no law against speeding/going over a certain speed, no one can be charged with speeding/breaking a law-there is no law against speeding-no transgression.


Shuck this "the law was abolished/did away" assertion, and certainly not employ Colossians 2:14 KJV, in making this "argument," as "the handwriting of ordinances" is not a reference to "God's holy law."


Survey....

"Not imputing their trespasses unto them"

Paul must have been drunk, stoned, for no one can commit a "trespass," if there is no law against it.

And Paul did not write, "The just shall live by faith," to assert that the law was done away.

Through the law, is the knowledge of sin, and still functions, to bring the lost to Christ-today, as it did in Egypt, as it always has:

Romans 3:20 KJV 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.

Galatians 3 KJV
24 Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. 25 But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.

Read it-"that"


Again...

Romans 3:20 KJV 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.

Galatians 3 KJV
24 Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. 25 But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.

If the law no longer exists, then the law no longer leads others to Christ, as the school master, since it no longer exists, and that others cannot know what sin is, since the law no longer exists.


The Ten Commandments, part of the law of Moses, which many, in error, say is abolished, are for the specific purpose of defining sin. This law, which defines sin, is described by Paul as being as "holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good"(Romans 7:12 KJV).


I'm only putting spoiler tags on this because of the length.

I wanted to add this, which mirrors the text in Colossians. And that points to the "sin offerings". This is why I say the Ten are separate from the Law of Moses. The Ten were the Commandments of the Lord, and the Law of Moses was the remedy for the Jewish people.

Colossians 2:14-16
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; 15 And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it. 16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:


Ezekiel 45:17
17 And it shall be the prince's part to give burnt offerings, and meat offerings, and drink offerings, in the feasts, and in the new moons, and in the sabbaths, in all solemnities of the house of Israel: he shall prepare the sin offering, and the meat offering, and the burnt offering, and the peace offerings, to make reconciliation for the house of Israel.
 

glorydaz

Well-known member
I didn't say it was a shortcut to God.


I'll put this up for Rosen. Rosen has made a habit of not reading what is written.

Quote Originally Posted by Clete View Post
The ultimate alternative was God Himself. The Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil was a shortcut, an alternative to God, just as is the Law today.

So, when men could convince themselves they were being obedient to the Law, they wouldn't have to be in touch with God at all. That, of course, is man's problem. Not a problem with the Law, itself. Right?
 

glorydaz

Well-known member
Yes, the Law is good just as was the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. (Genesis 1:31)


I don't understand how this is responsive to my point. The whole plan of redemption revolves around that Tree and the Law which resulted from it. Paul's whole entire ministry has to do with telling everyone that your relationship with God no longer has ANYTHING to do with the Law. Why interpret that one verse of Paul's to mean that he was talking about soemthing other than the Law when he is making that exact point when he mentions "the handwriting of requirements"?

VERY TRUE. I'm just trying to consider the whole text, and it's meaning.

That handwriting of requirements like touch not, taste not, bring a lamb for an offering..."after the commandments and DOCTRINES OF MEN?


Col. 2:14 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;

16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:


20 Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances,

21 (Touch not; taste not; handle not;

22 Which all are to perish with the using;) after the commandments and doctrines of men?



I'm not giving up. It's just disheartening to see someone rationalize the Ten Commandments into something a lot more than ten commandments.

Please don't be disheartened. This is what members of the body are supposed to do...like the Breans. :)


Moses wrote over 600 laws and they included a whole lot more than rites and rituals and other religious laws. There is a whole legal justice system included in the Mosaic Law. The Law doesn't just say "You shall not murder." It says, "If a man sheds another man's blood, by man his blood shall be shed." The Ten Commandments are just a synopsis and a basis for the rest of the law. Just as a tree has a few branches but many leaves.

Also, and again this is a bit of a rabbit trail but it serves to make the point, God started with a single command which was broken, then there were 10 and those were broken, then hundreds and every one of those were broken, then Israel stacked hundreds and hundreds more on top of those that Moses wrote down and they broke every single one of those as well. The more law, the more lawlessness. Why oh why do people want to hang on to even ten of them?!

Because they still have a purpose. A very important purpose that has never changed. That is to show men their guilt and lead them to Christ. As long as we have unbelievers in this world, we will need God's Law.

Do you think that Jesus, that God is righteous because He follows the Law? Is God subject to the Law? (Please say "No!")

No, of course not. If righteousness came by the law then Christ died in vain. Galatians 2:21

The law does NOT justify, make righteous, or give life. It never did. It was never meant to.

But, it does have a purpose still.
 

glorydaz

Well-known member
We today are faced with the same choice, it is the law which kills or the Spirit which brings life. And it's not the spirit of the law, as so many interpret it to mean, it is THE Spirit (capital S)!

Clete

I love what Paul says about that...concerning the law kills.

Romans 7:10-11 And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death. 11 For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me.

The law is just going along holy and good, and sin "takes occasion" by the commandment and deceives man. Satan uses God's very good law to entice men to evil. The forbidden fruit will always tempt the natural man of the flesh.

Thou shalt not eat....but it looks so tasty.
Those shalt not eat....but it's so beautiful
Thou shalt not eat....but it would make me wise.
 

JudgeRightly

裁判官が正しく判断する
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Gold Subscriber
What does the Bible say about faith alone?
Spoiler

James 2:17
17 Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.​

Context is key:

James, a bondservant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, To the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad: Greetings. - James 1:1 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=James1:1&version=NKJV

If you think that one cannot be saved without works, based on James 2:17, I'd like to ask you:

Which tribe of Israel are you from that was scattered abroad (aka the diaspora or dispersion)?
 

TestedandTried

New member
While I am not a Calvinist, it is true that we are predestined...

Romans 8:29-30:
29 For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers and sisters. 30 And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified.

Ephesians 1:4-5:
For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight. In love 5 he predestined us for adoption to sonship through Jesus Christ, in accordance with his pleasure and will—
 

Clete

Truth Smacker
Silver Subscriber
I'll put this up for Rosen. Rosen has made a habit of not reading what is written.
He seems to jump to conclusions.

So, when men could convince themselves they were being obedient to the Law, they wouldn't have to be in touch with God at all. That, of course, is man's problem. Not a problem with the Law, itself. Right?
Absolutely
 

Clete

Truth Smacker
Silver Subscriber
VERY TRUE. I'm just trying to consider the whole text, and it's meaning.

That handwriting of requirements like touch not, taste not, bring a lamb for an offering..."after the commandments and DOCTRINES OF MEN?


Col. 2:14 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;

16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:


20 Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances,

21 (Touch not; taste not; handle not;

22 Which all are to perish with the using;) after the commandments and doctrines of men?

What do the Sabbaths have to do with "the commandments of men"? And I'm pretty sure the Ten Commandments are not only written down ordinances but that one of them is about the Sabbath - right?

Please don't be disheartened. This is what members of the body are supposed to do...like the Breans. :)
I promise not to be disheartened if you promise not to rationalize. Deal?

Because they still have a purpose. A very important purpose that has never changed. That is to show men their guilt and lead them to Christ. As long as we have unbelievers in this world, we will need God's Law.
The whole law does that! If the Ten Commandments do this, the whole law does it times 10! Why stop with the Ten Commandments?

Further, this is only true when the law is applied to the unbeliever to convict him of his guilt and to bring him to Christ. The Law is his tutor to teach him of his sin and rebellion against God. Paul says it better than I ever could...

Galatians 3:19 What purpose then does the law serve? It was added because of transgressions, till the Seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was appointed through angels by the hand of a mediator. 20 Now a mediator does not mediate for one only, but God is one.

21 Is the law then against the promises of God? Certainly not! For if there had been a law given which could have given life, truly righteousness would have been by the law. 22 But the Scripture has confined all under sin, that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe. 23 But before faith came, we were kept under guard by the law, kept for the faith which would afterward be revealed. 24 Therefore the law was our tutor to bring us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith. 25 But after faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor.​

Is it your belief that Paul was refering only to the Ten Commandmets in this passage as well?

No, of course not. If righteousness came by the law then Christ died in vain. Galatians 2:21

The law does NOT justify, make righteous, or give life. It never did. It was never meant to.

But, it does have a purpose still.
I agree it has a purpose, I just don't seperate the Ten Commandments from the rest of the Law thinking that the Ten still apply to those who are in Christ. The point of the question was to point out that our righteousness does not come from the law, including the Ten Commandments, it comes from Christ who was also not righteous because of the Law. Our righteousness, therefore, has nothing whatseover to do with the law - period. A point I know you agree with and which I think should stop any attempt on your part to follow any part of the law, including the Ten Commandments.

Resting in Him,
Clete
 

glorydaz

Well-known member
What do the Sabbaths have to do with "the commandments of men"? And I'm pretty sure the Ten Commandments are not only written down ordinances but that one of them is about the Sabbath - right?

The Sabbath of the Lord, as given in the Ten, is simply a day of rest in commemoration of the creation, and was made for man's benefit. The other Sabbaths were commandments of men...included in the Mosaic Law.


I promise not to be disheartened if you promise not to rationalize. Deal?

Deal. I don't mean to rationalize anything, though. I'm just trying to explain as best I can.


The whole law does that! If the Ten Commandments do this, the whole law does it times 10! Why stop with the Ten Commandments?

Yes, that's true, but the Mosaic Law was given to the Jews. More was expected of them because they were God's chosen people.

Further, this is only true when the law is applied to the unbeliever to convict him of his guilt and to bring him to Christ. The Law is his tutor to teach him of his sin and rebellion against God. Paul says it better than I ever could...

Galatians 3:19 What purpose then does the law serve? It was added because of transgressions, till the Seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was appointed through angels by the hand of a mediator. 20 Now a mediator does not mediate for one only, but God is one.

21 Is the law then against the promises of God? Certainly not! For if there had been a law given which could have given life, truly righteousness would have been by the law. 22 But the Scripture has confined all under sin, that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe. 23 But before faith came, we were kept under guard by the law, kept for the faith which would afterward be revealed. 24 Therefore the law was our tutor to bring us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith. 25 But after faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor.​

Is it your belief that Paul was refering only to the Ten Commandmets in this passage as well?

I think Paul is speaking of both. The Ten for the whole world, and the Mosaic Law for the Jews.


I agree it has a purpose, I just don't seperate the Ten Commandments from the rest of the Law thinking that the Ten still apply to those who are in Christ. The point of the question was to point out that our righteousness does not come from the law, including the Ten Commandments, it comes from Christ who was also not righteous because of the Law. Our righteousness, therefore, has nothing whatseover to do with the law - period. A point I know you agree with and which I think should stop any attempt on your part to follow any part of the law, including the Ten Commandments.

Resting in Him,
Clete

Just as I suspected. You are saying the same thing I have been saying. The Law has been fulfilled in the believer. My argument has always been that the TEN have not been nailed to the cross. They exist to this very day for all men for the purpose they were given. They exist in our conscience even now as believers. It is simply right and wrong. How can right and wrong be nailed to the cross.

Absolutely true that our righteous has nothing whatsoever to do with the Law....no man's does.
That isn't why the Law was given in the first place.
 

john w

New member
Hall of Fame
While I am not a Calvinist, it is true that we are predestined...

Romans 8:29-30:
29 For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers and sisters. 30 And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified.

Ephesians 1:4-5:
For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight. In love 5 he predestined us for adoption to sonship through Jesus Christ, in accordance with his pleasure and will—
Yes, but not to salvation.
 

Rosenritter

New member
Everyone knows it. Especially those of us who have been around for years. And I'm quite sure everyone is getting more than tired of your outrageous condescending attitute. Why should anyone make any effort at all to discuss anything with a teenage 'know it all'. You must be really young.

My suggestion would be to grow up, and stop bossing the grown ups around. And you may consider that a friendly piece of advice. :cool:

I just admitted that I didn't know about the blue arrow trick until recently. So when someone says they do not know the original question within two hops it sounds like they just didn't know the trick yet. It's called being helpful.

Ah... but you were being funny and poking fun at yourself there when you were playing the grown-up, weren't you? :)
 

Rosenritter

New member
Wait a minute. If that isn't an attempt to deceive, what is? You posted Clete's quote and left out your own reply which is what I was responding to. :madmad:

Follow the little blue arrow to see what Rosen did there.

Ritter.....Stop doing that.

@Clete. I was NOT saying you couldn't see the forest for the trees, but that Rosen couldn't see the forest for the trees.

Glory, sometimes one person starts to reply and the first person starts editing their post. Maybe that happened? But I think with that I read something very different than what he meant, posted, realized that likely wasn't what he meant at all, and was trying to undo the post very quickly. I was being very quick with the delete keys.

I don't know what that would be "deceptive" about, but I was trying to prevent a misunderstanding.
 
Top