Under Grace or Under Law?...Round 3

[Claudia_T]

Claudia,



AAAAARRRRRRRRGGGGGGGG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

WHEN HAVE I EVER SAID "SIN DOESNT MATTER" ???????

This is absolutly amazing. Just incredible...

(But I'm not gonna give up)

Mike

I wont give up on you either, Mike, now tell me then... why does sin matter?

 

[Claudia_T]

Here is yet another thought. If it all has been paid for, and God remembers them of us no more, then how is God going to appreciate any change that we might make? All He see is Christ, remember?

P.S. I am beginning to feel invisable.

yeah I know how you feel, and if you're a woman and they are all men here it makes you feel like you are at a men's club and you start to pout LOL!

Thats how I felt the other day

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Mike: WHEN HAVE I EVER SAID "SIN DOESNT MATTER" ???????

HP: Everytime one says that we are not under the law or that there is no penalty awaiting me when I break the law. Law without penalty might be good advice or council, but is no law at all. No law? It is impossible for it to matter.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

duplicate post. Sorry!

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

double post, Sorry!

 

[Diggin in da Word]

yeah I know how you feel, and if you're a woman and they are all men here it makes you feel like you are at a men's club and you start to pout LOL!

Thats how I felt the other day

It is ok for you to be here, Claudia.

Luke 10:40 But Martha was cumbered about much serving, and came to him, and said, Lord, dost thou not care that my sister hath left me to serve alone? bid her therefore that she help me.

Now... where is my coffee?

 

[EdSutton]

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.

Are you suggesting that matthew is not written to or for us? Just wonderin'.

Actually, I believe he said something to the effect that one jot or one tittle should in no wise pass from the law till all be fulfilled. And in the next verse spoke of someone breaking one of these least commandments, as well.

Since "the law" by definition means one law, or the whole codex, which one was he talking about, since you apparently do not believe he was speaking of the whole ball of wax? Adultery, maybe? Lying? Keeping the Sabbath? Coveting? Dishonor of father and mother? Or one of the other five? Which one is it?

James says something to the same effect, and in fact cites one law that is not a part of the Ten commandments as the example, and in fact speaks of the whole law. My problem is those who prefer to "pick and choose" which ones apply, rather than see that the entire codex was done away in Christ, who personally kept it all perfectly and nailed it to the cross, thereby "taking it out of the way", and the relevant parts - i.e. the necessary principles (as opposed to the Mosaic precepts), are restated for us in the language of grace, or as the NT puts it, "My commandments", "the perfect law of Liberty", or "the law of the spirit of life in Christ Jesus", and is contrasted with the Mosaic law, here spoken of as "the law of sin and death". We do not "keep the law"; rather we are to "fulfill the law", as both Paul and James state. All the above are in the language of 'pure grace'. I have never in any way suggested that we are not to be led by the Spirit via the law of Liberty. I only am not willing to put myself under the curse of the 600 odd precepts of the Mosaic law- "the law of commandments contained in ordinances" and live with Hagar and Ishmael in the wilderness and starve with hunger, when I can be under the "perfect law of liberty" and live in the tents with Sarah and Isaac, and "pig out" and have all the blessings. Why do so many prefer the former? I know "Ah 'on't get it!"

Ed

 

[EdSutton]

Claudia,



AAAAARRRRRRRRGGGGGGGG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Mike

Thanks for the observation, Charlie Brown! :laugh:

Ed

 

[Claudia_T]

**Singing** "Where has all the Coffee gone?"

(sung to the tune of "Where have all the flowers gone?")

 

[Claudia_T]

Are you suggesting that matthew is not written to or for us? Just wonderin'.

Actually, I believe he said something to the effect that one jot or one tittle should in no wise pass from the law till all be fulfilled. And in the next verse spoke of someone breaking one of these least commandments, as well.

Since "the law" by definition means one law, or the whole codex, which one was he talking about, since you apparently do not believe he was speaking of the whole ball of wax? Adultery, maybe? Lying? Keeping the Sabbath? Coveting? Dishonor of father and mother? Or one of the other five? Which one is it?

James says something to the same effect, and in fact cites one law that is not a part of the Ten commandments as the example, and in fact speaks of the whole law. My problem is those who prefer to "pick and choose" which ones apply, rather than see that the entire codex was done away in Christ, who personally kept it all perfectly and nailed it to the cross, thereby "taking it out of the way", and the relevant parts - i.e. the necessary principles (as opposed to the Mosaic precepts), are restated for us in the language of grace, or as the NT puts it, "My commandments", "the perfect law of Liberty", or "the law of the spirit of life in Christ Jesus", and is contrasted with the Mosaic law, here spoken of as "the law of sin and death". We do not "keep the law"; rather we are to "fulfill the law", as both Paul and James state. All the above are in the language of 'pure grace'. I have never in any way suggested that we are not to be led by the Spirit via the law of Liberty. I only am not willing to put myself under the curse of the 600 odd precepts of the Mosaic law- "the law of commandments contained in ordinances" and live with Hagar and Ishmael in the wilderness and starve with hunger, when I can be under the "perfect law of liberty" and live in the tents with Sarah and Isaac, and "pig out" and have all the blessings. Why do so many prefer the former? I know "Ah 'on't get it!"

Ed

you know what? that just didnt make any sense to me

 

[Diggin in da Word]

still scratching my head on that'n too.

 

[D28guy]

Diggin,

"Mike,

You have advocated that one who is a Christian has past, present and future sins covered through the atonement made by Jesus' blood."

Yes

"You also advocated the church disciplining one in the church for abominable sins."

Yes

"If the sins have been covered you discipline."

Yes

If Christ is going to allow that one in heaven anyway (in which case the person would be blameless for he would have seen Christ), why discipline one for a sin that will not be remembered against one?

Because God has INSTRUCTED us to. Our complete security as believers does not mean there will be no consequences for sin. There are. If who steal, you might go to jail. If you murder, you will go to jail. If you commit adultery, it might wreck your marriage and cause you to lose your wife. On and on.

God tells us in Hebrews that if you are a born again person sinning you will recieve His discipline and chastisement. You will NEVER lose His love or your eternal place in heaven. But discipline and chastisement is one of God gifts for us, and sometimes this is done through the body of believers we are a part of.

The man would lose his position as a bible teacher. The same if he is a Deacon. Counseling sessions. Accountability groups, etc etc.

None of that in the least bit contradicts what DHK, myself, and others have been sharing concerning our complete freedom from the Law, our being dead to the Law, and our being no longer under the Law with its condemnation abd curse.

Hope this helps,

Mike

 

[EdSutton]

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:

Caludia, I don't mean to pick on you but that is twice in two posts you have substituted "keep" for what Scripture says is "fulfill". I made a joking reference to it before, but I am wondering if some of you think it is ok to reword Scripture? Ya' know kinda' like I referenced "repent", and have seen several posters add "from your sins" to the word? For any and all, doesn't Revelation say something about "adding to the words", and if so, would this not be an example? This is not interpretation, but even though I think usually done innocently, is still manipulation, IMO.

Ed

 

[D28guy]

Heavenly Pilgrim,

I said...

WHEN HAVE I EVER SAID "SIN DOESNT MATTER" ???????

And you say...

"HP: Everytime one says that we are not under the law or that there is no penalty awaiting me when I break the law."

You havent been listening closely.

"Law without penalty might be good advice or council, but is no law at all. No law? It is impossible for it to matter."

The believer will not go "scott free" for sin. But it has no effect on their eternal security, since we will not be judged by the Law. We have been completly freed from it, and its curse.

Mike

 

[Claudia_T]

Caludia, I don't mean to pick on you but that is twice in two posts you have substituted "keep" for what Scripture says is "fulfill". I made a joking reference to it before, but I am wondering if some of you think it is ok to reword Scripture? Ya' know kinda' like I referenced "repent", and have seen several posters add "from your sins" to the word? For any and all, doesn't Revelation say something about "adding to the words", and if so, would this not be an example? This is not interpretation, but even though I think usually done innocently, is still manipulation, IMO.

Ed

well these say keep

Rv:12:17: 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.

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

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

ED: when I can be under the "perfect law of liberty"

HP: I am just curious under the law of liberty which one of the ten commandments you can be at antipodes with, if any?

 

[Claudia_T]

Caludia, I don't mean to pick on you but that is twice in two posts you have substituted "keep" for what Scripture says is "fulfill". I made a joking reference to it before, but I am wondering if some of you think it is ok to reword Scripture? Ya' know kinda' like I referenced "repent", and have seen several posters add "from your sins" to the word? For any and all, doesn't Revelation say something about "adding to the words", and if so, would this not be an example? This is not interpretation, but even though I think usually done innocently, is still manipulation, IMO.

Ed

and this one says doers:

Rom:2:13: (For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.

 

[D28guy]

Claudia,

"
**Singing** "Where has all the Coffee gone?"

(sung to the tune of "Where have all the flowers gone?")"

Hey, are you a converted hippie like me? :tongue3: :tongue3: :tongue3:


Peace,

Mike

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Is not the perfect law of liberty found only as we are in compliance, first by having all sins of the past atoned for by faith, and are presently living in a state of obedience?

 

[Claudia_T]

Claudia,



Hey, are you a converted hippie like me? :tongue3: :tongue3: :tongue3:


Peace,

Mike

actually yeah I am