Antinomianism

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

If God commands man to be obedient, but man is not under law but under grace, does it not follow that one can violate any law with impunity? Would this not apply to civil law as well? If the reason we are to abide by civil law is that God’s law tells us that we should, and we are not under law but under grace, can we not disobey civil law with impunity as well?

 

[billwald]

Thus Christians are as bad as anyone else when behind the wheel of a car.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

BillWald: Thus Christians are as bad as anyone else when behind the wheel of a car.

HP: Not the Christians I have came to know, love and appreciate.

 

[BobRyan]

If God commands man to be obedient, but man is not under law but under grace, does it not follow that one can violate any law with impunity? Would this not apply to civil law as well? If the reason we are to abide by civil law is that God’s law tells us that we should, and we are not under law but under grace, can we not disobey civil law with impunity as well?

In Romans 4 Paul states "where there is no law there is NO SIN'

so - sinning with impunity is exactly where people are going with that.

Many use Col 2 to argue that INSTEAD of Christ Paying for our SINS our DEBT our "CERTIFICAT OF DEBT nailing it to the cross" NASB -- Christ took the LAW of God -- the WORD of God that DEFINES sin and "NAILED IT" to the cross.

How sad.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Some today attempt to claim that God's Word -- God's Commandments have been abolished (but in a nice way) --

Notice how the Apostle John does not go for such Bible-breaking methods…

I Jn 5:2-3 2 By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God, and keep his commandments.
3 For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous.

Rev 12:17 17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.

Rev 14:12 12 Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.

Rev 22:14 14[b] Blessed are they that do his commandments,[/b] that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.

I Jn 2:3-4 3 And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments.
4 He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.

 

[Claudia_T]

Some today attempt to claim that God's Word -- God's Commandments have been abolished (but in a nice way) --

Notice how the Apostle John does not go for such Bible-breaking methods…

I Jn 5:2-3 2 By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God, and keep his commandments.
3 For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous.

Rev 12:17 17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.

Rev 14:12 12 Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.

Rev 22:14 14[b] Blessed are they that do his commandments,[/b] that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.

I Jn 2:3-4 3 And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments.
4 He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.

I have always been amazed at how people will just ignore Bible statements such as these, as if they were not there and then just say "well we are under grace". It would seem obvious to me they are somehow misunderstanding what grace does.

Claudia

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Claudia: I have always been amazed at how people will just ignore Bible statements such as these, as if they were not there and then just say "well we are under grace". It would seem obvious to me they are somehow misunderstanding what grace does.

HP: Grace never negates the necessity of obedience. Neither are the penalties for disobedience negated by grace apart from the conditions being met that God demands of us.

 

[CarpentersApprentice]

If God commands man to be obedient, but man is not under law but under grace, does it not follow that one can violate any law with impunity? Would this not apply to civil law as well?...

According to *Torbet, this is exactly the trap that the hyper-Calvinist Particular Baptists fell into in the early 1700's. (There's nothing new under the sun.)

*Ref. Robert G. Torbet, A History of the Baptists (3rd ed.) page 63.

 

[thjplgvp]

If God commands man to be obedient, but man is not under law but under grace, does it not follow that one can violate any law with impunity? Would this not apply to civil law as well?...


As quick answer to your question, I would invite you to look at 2 Corinthians 3:6 Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.

Between the two extremes of law and freedom from law lie moral discretion or the ability to control ones self and to discern right from wrong, when a man walks in the spirit he shall not fulfill the lusts of the flesh. More licentiousness, extreme personal freedom, must be balanced for the sake of society by greater law. The person who walks in the spirit is frustrated by both extremes. He repulsed by carnal believers (some unsaved) who insist on an antinomian view of society and her laws while at the same time he fears the loss of his own personal freedoms to those laws being enacted to preserve society as a whole.

There is no human answer our only hope is found in the preaching of the gospel of Jesus Christ through the power of the Holy Spirit which is found in much fasting and prayer.

thjplgvp

 

[Brother Bob]

Rom 8:4 That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

If the righteousness of the Law is fulfilled in us then we would also be free from the following scripture. Or simple put, we would not be guilty of breaking God’s Commandments.

1 Cor 6
9 Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals,
10 nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God.
11 Such were some of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God.

The scriptures teach that the above cannot go to Heaven but I am amazed at the ones who say just the opposite and put God's word to a lie. We don't tolerate such at our church and according to the above scriptures God does not permit it also. They quoted to me that our righteousness is as filthy rags to God as if that is saying its alright to be guilty of the sins of 1 Cor.6:

Seems intelligent men would know by reading the scriptures or just by the Spirit of God that teaches man right from wrong that if it is "sin" before being saved, how much greater "sin" it would be after being saved if they were able to commit such acts, instead of saying that the blood of Christ, instead of giving us eternal life, it made it possible so we could "sin". I am shocked and completely disappointed in some on this board.

None have given an answer to 1 Cor. 6:.

You know how the righteousness of the Law is fulfilled in us is that we don't do those things anymore because of the blood of Christ. Why, his blood did set us free from those things because we are a new creature, kept by the power of God. They are in our hearts and minds, but if it says thou shalt not commit adultery and you are not an adultereous because you are kept by the blood of Christ or in other words set free from committing adultery then it wouldn't have no bearing on you. He said, MY GRACE is sufficient to keep thee. That does not mean if you do them His Grace is sufficient to keep thee. There is another scripture that goes with it, and for you "temptation, I will make a way for your escape". It is so simple and there is a reason for men trying to change it and that is they either want to justify their own sins or someone's sin close to them.

From reading posts on here, I think that many grew up under such teachings and its hard to believe that they were taught wrong, but their own concious will teach them better if they will listen to it.

They talk about not being under the "curse of the Law". If you are guilty of those things then it is a sure sign that you are indeed under the curse of the Law, which is sin and death.

If you are a True Christian then you are not under the curse of the Law, for you do not do those things and therefore are "free from death".

She is the bride and to think how some degrade her is sad.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

BB: Seems intelligent men would know by reading the scriptures or just by the Spirit of God that teaches man right from wrong that if it is "sin" before being saved, how much greater "sin" it would be after being saved if they were able to commit such acts, instead of saying that the blood of Christ, instead of giving us eternal life, it made it possible so we could "sin".

HP: Amen Brother Bob. A lot of what I hear sounds more like wishful thinking or the purchase of fire insurance that biblical salvation.

 

[BobRyan]

If God commands man to be obedient, but man is not under law but under grace, does it not follow that one can violate any law with impunity? Would this not apply to civil law as well?

The heresy first introduced into the church in the first century is that "not under law" meant "you are supposed to engage in rebellion against God's Word" or it was taken to mean "God's Word no longer includes imperatives as given in scripture".

How in the world could man-made tradition lead to such a wild conclusion?

"The heart is deceitful" according to scripture - mankind is prone to self-deception. We must CHOOSE faith and obedience EVEN when rebellion seems like a good idea.

That is why 1Cor 6:8-12 contains the phrase "BE NOT DECEIVED".

In Christ,

Bob

 

[Brother Bob]

.........................

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

In Romans 4 Paul states "where there is no law there is NO SIN'

so - sinning with impunity is exactly where people are going with that.

Many use Col 2 to argue that INSTEAD of Christ Paying for our SINS our DEBT our "CERTIFICAT OF DEBT nailing it to the cross" NASB -- Christ took the LAW of God -- the WORD of God that DEFINES sin and "NAILED IT" to the cross.

How sad.

in Christ,

Bob

GE:
Surprise! I have always thought what happened to the two tables? Thanks for the information, Bob!

 

[grahame]

It never ceases to amaze me how folk are so blind to this precious doctrine of justification by faith alone. They all seem to suppose that if a person believes this doctrine that they will automatically sin with impunity. Yet the history of the Church shows that it is the people who believe this doctrine have lived holy lives. Now what is it that enables these people to do so? is it by the keeping of the law? Or is it rather belief in the victory of Christ over sin on the cross and the application of the power of the precious blood of Christ.
C. H. Spurgeon. Was he a raging sinner? One of the world's greatest preachers and one who also believed in justification by faith alone. Surely he alone is a witness to the fact that this doctrine works in practice. My dear friends please let go of your puny efforts to be justified before God by keeping the law.

 

[BobRyan]

It never ceases to amaze me how folk are so blind to this precious doctrine of justification by faith alone. They all seem to suppose that if a person believes this doctrine that they will automatically sin with impunity.

That is a generalization that does not work. See the thread on "James 2 or Bible Butchery" and try your hand at a sound interpretation of James 2 that remains consistent with the Romans 3 and Eph 2 principle of "Saved by grace through faith - not of works".

Many good self-sacrificing Christians among Catholics, Presbyterians, Methodists, Lutherans throughout history as you have pointed out. That still does not give us a way to circumvent the Acts 17:11 instruction to test their teaching against scripture and "see IF those things they taught are so".

In Christ,

Bob

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Grahame: C. H. Spurgeon. Was he a raging sinner? One of the world's greatest preachers and one who also believed in justification by faith alone. Surely he alone is a witness to the fact that this doctrine works in practice. My dear friends please let go of your puny efforts to be justified before God by keeping the law.

HP: First, for those of like feather to classify one of their own flock one of the 'world’s greatest preachers' is a bit self serving wouldn’t you think? There are far more popular preachers today, that I would by no means call ‘raging sinners’ yet I do believe they are deceived as to many great truths. They might even be successful in reaching men and women for Christ, and may preach as they do in honest ignorance of some truth, and even seemingly see great results from their efforts in overall numbers, but if those are honestly converted it often is in spite of the natural tendencies of the messages they preach, not because of it. God’s Word will simply not return unto Him void. That is a wonderful truth.

Much of the success in Calvinistic pulpits, of men like Spurgeon, is due to the fact that many of their messages contain great truth. The problem is that they are inconsistent. Of a truth, Calvinism is a maelstrom of confusion.

There is a sense we are NOT justified by works of the law, and there is a sense that we ARE justified by intents we indeed are the author of. It depends on what one means by the law, and what sense it is spoken of, whether 'that for the sake of' or 'not without which.' If you cannot understand the difference, I can only trust that in due time you will come to see it. If not, we press on.

Have you read the prison illustration I have posted before? Just in case you have not, I will post it again.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

A man goes to prison for life, being justly condemned and sentenced by a judge for a specific crime. Can such an individual ‘merit’ a pardon by the performance of good works while in prison? Can such a criminal perform good works to such a degree that the governor is forced to grant this man a pardon based merely on the ‘merit’ of the performance of such good works? Absolutely not. Just the same can the governor, if he so pleases, pardon such a criminal? Of course he can. Still, there is something the criminal MUST do, there is an attitude that MUST be reflected by the criminal to receive a pardon IF the governor is indeed fair and just, and attitudes are tied inseparably to intents of the heart, this very initial intent being none other than a ‘work’ in one sense of the word. The governor MUST witness from the criminal a repentant attitude and a change of heart towards his former criminal behavior if the governor is even to consider such a pardon for the criminal.

What kind of governor would pardon a criminal from prison who had not exhibited true remorse for his crimes? Would not the governor have to be satisfied in his or her mind that IF they pardoned such a criminal that they would not return to commit the same crime or one of like heinous behavior upon society again and that such a criminal possessed and exhibited a true change of heart and attitude towards their former behavior? There are indeed certain conditions that the criminal must meet, works that such a one must of necessity do in order to have the opportunity for a pardon if such an opportunity is offered. These works on the part of the prisoner are in no way meritorious in nature, and in no way force the governor to grant such a one a pardon on their account. Just the same, there are definite conditions or works one must do in order for the governor to consider the pardon. These works are thought of in the sense of ‘not without which,’ not ‘that for the sake of.’ It can properly be stated that one is not pardoned due to any works (in one sense of the word ‘works’ in the sense of ‘that for the sake of’) of the prisoner, but just the same it can be said ‘without works’ (in another sense of the word, that being in the sense of ‘not without which’) one will never see the opportunity to receive a pardon.

Can you see how that works can be thought of as necessary for a pardon, or in the sense of “not without which,” yet at the same time no amount of works can be thought of as “that for the sake of” or forcing the governor to pardon the criminal on the account of works performed by the criminal?

 

[BobRyan]

In Romans 3 we are told that God IS JUST AND the JustiFIER of those who have faith in Him.

That means that the Gospel solution is NOT UNJUSTLY merciful NOR is Justice unmercifully just.

(Hence the DESTRUCTION of both body and soul in fiery hell Matt 10:28 instead of torturing your precious daughter for all eternity if she did not make it to heaven -- but that is another topic).

So back to JUSTICE.

Justice demands that the Crime be treated to comparable equivalent measure punishment AND that the Criminal be REMOVED from society so that the crime spree ENDS then and there.

For example -- if someone kills your child Justice does not say "so we may kill their child and then let them continue on in society". Simply having a severe punishment in response WHILE letting them continue their crime spree IS NOT justice being served.

So in the example above - The Governor offers pardon by PAYING the debt OWED HIMSELF - the Criminal ADMITS to his crimes repents and accepts the full pardon. HE SEES the suffering the Governor is going through ON HIS behalf and he determines to STOP living a life of crime.

But in the Gospel - the OLD Man is being killed day by day "Romans 8 puting to death the deed of the flesh".

And there is a NEW law-abiding citizen CREATED "the NEW CREATION of 2Cor 5" with "THE LAw of God WRITTEN on the heart".

Risk free Rebellion against the Law is NOT the purpose of the pardon.

God must be BOTH JUST and the JustiFIER of those that have faith in Him.

Many have simply imagined that the gospel is nothing more than "risk free rebellion" as they declare God's Law to be dead.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Hevenly Pilgrim, you talk too heavenly language for me to come by, sorry; must be I'm not the broghtest.