Search results

Interesting translation ... Romans 3:31 The Voice 31 So are we trying to use faith to abolish the law? Absolutely not! In fact, we now are free to uphold the law as God intended.

Please re-write this without pronouns. I don't understand what the 'it's' refer to. Thanks!

Here is where kcnalp is a troll; completely ignoring the valid part of your sentence ... be harmless like doves.

I know. It's just that I do not think your response were as insightful as mine. :)

Hmmm. How does this align with Jeremiah 31:33?

I think it is more that we should not violate the law as a general rule. The exception is when the letter violates the Spirit, such as lying to protect innocent lives.

Didn't you mean that Grace is established by faith?

Sin. Serve. Not the same. If we keep to the subject of sin, what does living under Grace mean with respect to acceptable actions as they pertain to the 10 Commandments? My Bible Study leader is fond of saying it is all about God's glory. Lying is generally bad but if it advances God's glory it...

What of Gentiles?

By what means did the thief on the cross enter into the kingdom?

Like I said, a human invention untied to Scripture. See 1 Corinthians 11:3.

Great points! Regarding point 1; too many Christians do not reflect Grace. Certainly, they do not reflect humility and love. One of the best ways to show this is how the violate the law. The law was needed when we were immature. IMO, Jesus' command to love, though a higher command, is also...

You do like to troll. The point of the OP is in line with Jesus saying he has not come to abolish the law. As one church put it, Jesus commands us to fulfill the law IN A SPIRIT OF LOVE. It’s not that it is OK to now murder, it is that you have accepted through faith divinity within you and...

Disagree. In January a new grandchild was born. This added to my total. It did not replace all previous grandchildren.

Even if I agree, iron sharpens iron. A good friend is very philosophical and analytical. We don’t disagree but I do challenge him to be concise. To boil down the axiom to its fewest essentials. Your OP is helping me do that.

Possibly, but you whole OP points to the notion that we could have a burden, work we ought to do, action to avoid and action to initiate. That seems to generate hostility on this site for some reason.

And hence, why he is on my ignore list. I appreciate and respect reasoned differences. I don’t appreciate or respect being unreasonable or disagreeable. “Your doctrine does not line up with mine, 100%? Burn in hell heretic.” No love of God in that sentiment. LOL.

The hostility on this site by OSAS crowd to any kind of effort, action or work being a burden Christians must bear is amazing! Jesus said his yoke was light, not that he had no yoke.

I enjoy analysis - philosophical discussion and debate. I can take an opposing point of view JUST for the sake of discussion. Heaven forbid I go through life and might change my mind about anything! It’s so odd that some people take ideas as a personal affront. Threads like this is why I am on...

The only point of contention is the necessity of water. Sometimes when I call my wife, I use a phone. Using a phone is not necessary. The thief on the cross did not need water. I think we should differentiate between tradition and Scriptural requirement.