Under Grace or Under Law?...Round 3

[His Blood Spoke My Name]

HP: What? Are you advocating sinless perfection? Don't you listen to the comments on this board? No one can keep the commandments. It is utter arrogance to even consider such a thing. All men are liars. God just has some favorites that He does not enforce the mandates of the law upon. We are forgiven although we can do everything others do and that are condemned for it, even adultery, murder and the such like................NOT!(meaning this is NOT what I really believe)

We can keep the law if we truly are submitted to Christ.

James 4:7 Submit yourselves therefore to God. Resist the devil, and he will flee from you.

1 John 5:3 For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous.

The Word says that His commandments are not grievous. To the one who will truly serve Him, they are not.

 

[His Blood Spoke My Name]

while I agree with alot that you say, I dont ALWAYS agree with this point. SOMETIMES when someone falls into sin they are just exhibiting what was in their hearts all along.

But I think you are forgetting the fact that Jesus said

Mt:26:41: Watch and pray, that ye enter not into temptation: the spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak.

Obviously we can see from that verse that the Disciples COULD very easily fall into temptation if they werent "watching and praying"... just as Peter did.

THAT didnt mean all the Disciples were some sort of "bad trees just waiting to have their evil revealed in time of temptation". RIGHT?

Claudia

We must also remember that Jesus told Peter:

Luke 22:31-32 And the Lord said, Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat: But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and when thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren.

What did He mean about 'when thou are converted'? Were the disciples saved before the cross? or after it?
We do know that Judas was one of the Apostles, yet the son of Perdition. Were the others also in an unsaved state before the shedding of blood?

 

[Claudia_T]

Well, the subject is "Under Grace or Under Law?...Round 3", I do believe. And secondly I believe James actually says "fulfill the royal law", to be specific, but I agree. Why get upset and quibble about the words of Scripture? Undoubtedly if James had only known as much then as we now do, he would have worded it bette...

Ed

Paul words it just like this:

Romans 13:
8: Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law.
9: For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
10: Love worketh no ill to his neighbour: therefore love is the fulfilling of the law.


and theres no reason to tell us to keep the Law if we cant do it:


Mt:5:19: Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.


Rom:6:2: God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?


Rom:6:15: What then? shall we sin, because we are not under the law, but under grace? God forbid.


Claudia

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

HBSMN: The Word says that His commandments are not grievous. To the one who will truly serve Him, they are not.

HP: I totally agree. I was just using your post to provoke some of the others to think about and utilize sound words such as you have posted here.

 

[Claudia_T]

We must also remember that Jesus told Peter:


What did He mean about 'when thou are converted'? Were the disciples saved before the cross? or after it?
We do know that Judas was one of the Apostles, yet the son of Perdition. Were the others also in an unsaved state before the shedding of blood?

okay, I can see the point maybe about Peter not being converted, and Im not sure if that means he wasnt "saved" but I dont think the fact that Jesus hadnt gone to the cross yet has a thing to do with any of that.

The sacrificing of the sheep was to show faith in the dying on the cross that was to come so to reason that perhaps if Peter wasnt converted this means nobody else was either... that is just wrong, in my opinion.

Plus "converted" in this passage could mean that he just didnt realize who Jesus really was.

Not completely.


sorry I gotta change that, I just read through and Jesus said that to Peter right when He said he was going to betray him...

Claudia

 

[Claudia_T]

Acts:3:19: Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord

well that does seem to say if you arent "converted" you arent "saved"

 

[Claudia_T]

...that provoking Heavenly Pilgrim... I tell ya!

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Claudia: ...that provoking Heavenly Pilgrim... I tell ya!

HP: Heb 10:24 And let us consider one another to provoke unto love and to good works:

 

[Brother Bob]

Well, at least here is a place where we can agree, but I will go a bit further. If you "keep the two", you will keep each and every precept of the 600 or so found in the Mosaic law. BTW, if you don't keep each and every one of the 600, you did not keep these two. (Can anyone say go to Jerusalem twice a year to sacrifice in the non-existent temple??)
I don't keep these two, per se, (and don't particularly worry about this since Jesus kept them for me, and as one in Him, I did as well) since I am not and never was "under the law", in the first place.

Ed

When Jesus spoke of the Commandments He always spoke of the Ten and even spoke them. Never did He say anything about the above 600 pots and pans laws, to us.

 

[Brother Bob]

I challenge anyone to find where Scripture ever says that regarding any one of the 'Big Ten' individuals I cited. Not one of these individuals is ever said to have repented in any way, in Scriture, let alone to "repent of their sins",


I fully agree that repentence is required for a person to be saved. In fact, I have argued that consistently.

so what is your problem?

Quote:
Then on the other hand you got your guys who act like just anybody is going to be in Heaven, ...
Have I ever said this, in any way? I don't think so.

You amen it!!!

I don't keep these two, per se, (and don't particularly worry about this since Jesus kept them for me, and as one in Him, I did as well) since I am not and never was "under the law", in the first place.

Ed

You were under it before Christ set you free when you believed and put them in your heart and mind that the righteous of the Law would be fulfilled in you and the only way the righteous of the Law can be fulfilled is to Keep them.

HBSMN; I agree with your posts also.

 

[Brother Bob]

BBob;
Should an action be taken against a person caught in adultery who is a member of the Church?
DHK, D28, Ed, Steaver and anyone else who would care to answer. Should the church take any action against them who commit such acts, fornicators, covetous, idolaters, railers, drunkards, and extortioners. All these people are examples of Christians living in sin.

Should the church take any action against such?
__________________

Ed answered, still waiting on the others.

 

[D28guy]

Brother Bob,

"
Should an action be taken against a person caught in adultery who is a member of the Church?
DHK, D28, Ed, Steaver and anyone else who would care to answer. Should the church take any action against them who commit such acts, fornicators, covetous, idolaters, railers, drunkards, and extortioners. All these people are examples of Christians living in sin.

Should the church take any action against such?"

It is completly appropriate for a fellowship to step in with the appropriate discipline. I dont think any of us would argue with that.

Grace and peace,

Mike

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

D28Guy: It is completly appropriate for a fellowship to step in with the appropriate discipline. I dont think any of us would argue with that.

HP: On what authority do they do that? Are Churches bound to the law? Is not the church made of of nothing apart from individuals that are not under law but grace?

For mere man to suggest that something might need to be done about sin that has already been forgiven by the blood of Christ even before it was committed........is that not trampling on the blood of Christ, acting as if though it is of no effect...........at least according to some on this list.

 

[D28guy]

Heavenly Pilgrim,

"HP: On what authority do they do that?"

The scriptures. God has written to us concerning that. The church has been instructed to employ appropriate discipline. That has nothing to do with the topic of this thread.

"Are Churches bound to the law?

No

"Is not the church made of of nothing apart from individuals that are not under law but grace?"

Yes.

God bless,

Mike

 

[Claudia_T]

Quote:
D28Guy: It is completly appropriate for a fellowship to step in with the appropriate discipline. I dont think any of us would argue with that.

HP: On what authority do they do that? Are Churches bound to the law? Is not the church made of of nothing apart from individuals that are not under law but grace?

Heavenly Pilgrim,
The scriptures. God has written to us concerning that. The church has been instructed to employ appropriate discipline. That has nothing to do with the topic of this thread.
Mike

I think it has plenty to do with the topic of this thread. WHY would the church discipline someone for breaking the ten commandments if we are no longer Under the Law?

 

[Brother Bob]

If the sin is under the blood according as you all have said and that means all sin and been made white as snow and cast into

a lake never to be remember against him anymore by the one he sinned against. According to your words and theory.

Then what gives you the right to do anything to this man according to your theory has already had his sin covered by Jesus's

blood. What gives you the right to judge another man's servant if he is already "forgiven".

What are you condemning him for?

 

[D28guy]

HP,

I forgot this...

"For mere man to suggest that something might need to be done about sin that has already been forgiven by the blood of Christ even before it was committed........is that not trampling on the blood of Christ, acting as if though it is of no effect...........at least according to some on this list."

No. What we have been talking about on this thread is the believers standing before God, and eternal security. In that regard we have been completly freed from the bondage of, and condemnation of, the Law.

The reason is because we are to walk "in the newness of the Spirit" and not "the oldness of the letter", because "The letter kills, but the Spirit gives life".

Mike

 

[Brother Bob]

That still does not answer what this man has done to deserve punishment from the church if all he did is covered by the blood of Christ.

You boxed yourself in a hole my friend.

 

[D28guy]

Claudia,

" think it has plenty to do with the topic of this thread. WHY would the church discipline someone for breaking the ten commandments if we are no longer Under the Law?"

A christian fellowship has no buisiness expecting its people to not "break the 10 commandments" or help the sinning one with discipline for "breaking the 10 commandments". We are not under Law, but under grace.

Under grace however wrong is still wrong, and proper is still proper. Adultery is still wrong. The one who has fallen into that problem is living inconsistantly with who they are in Christ. They are one of Gods Spirit born Saints who is living like a lost person. And for the brothers and sisters who love him to step in and help him with discipline is the right thing to do because God has instructed us to do it.

Grace and peace,

Mike

 

[His Blood Spoke My Name]

Why Brother Bob! I am surprised at you!

Didn't you know, my Brother that the Church has every right to place themselves above Christ and condemn one who sins? one whose sins have been cast into the sea? one whose sins and iniquities are remembered anymore by Christ?

The Church has that authority because it says so. Surely you have read it in your Bible.

(DISCLAIMER: I do not hold to, nor do I endorse the beliefs of any church that would dare condemn anyone whose sins are truly blotted out.)