Calling all Law Keepers.

[Helen]

i can't help but note that scenarios like this in Scripture are usually followed by something to the effect of "well done, good and faithful servant."

And maybe it 'became ' a mystery, because she is a legalist...and maybe only likes posts that agree with her own belief system.
Sometimes, if I come on here when I am tired, and enjoy reading a post, but I am just too brain tired ( or lazy) to post...I will then "like" a post just showing appreciation and also so the person knows that I have read it.
We could start a new thread called- " How and why do you use the 'like' button?"

 

[Helen]

so from here, we might examine what the doctrine of OS provides, that the Law of sin and death does not.
What is the fruit of this doctrine?

What doctrine? OS, apples , or the law of sin and death? :)

We complicate things, but isn't that what salvation is all about?
A&E had their eyes opened when they ate...they then could see both good and evil but they lost their pure heavenly vision. They wee now mixture.
We were born mixture, but "in Christ" the flesh life is being diluted as the Spirit life increases.
( He must increase I must decrease )
We have the ability to 'see'...so, I see the fruit on the positive side as being faith in what Jesus gave us through the "law of the spirit of life" which has made us free from the law of sin and death.
The doctrine of OS just provides us with a reason why the flesh man struggles within us against the spirit man.
That's how I see it anyway.
( but I am still smiling over his "Apples" response...)

 

[jimd]

Yes this is true.
Jesus confirmed that the parent's sin is not passed on to the children.
God does not impute to us sins of another -- that would not be just.

However, the EFFECTS of that sin have been felt by all, and also the sin nature IS PASSED DOWN to us.

I agree, the sin/flesh nature is passed down.

The sin nature did not exist before Adam and Eve ate of the forbidden fruit.

Then why did they eat the fruit? Please do not say it was the apple:)

 

[bbyrd009]

We have the ability to 'see'...so, I see the fruit on the positive side as being faith in what Jesus gave us through the "law of the spirit of life" which has made us free from the law of sin and death.
The doctrine of OS just provides us with a reason why the flesh man struggles within us against the spirit man.

yes, unfortunately bringing you back under the law in the process.

Or, you might contrast the doctrine (as it is practiced) with the "law of the spirit of life."

 

[jimd]

Yes this is true.
Jesus confirmed that the parent's sin is not passed on to the children.
God does not impute to us sins of another -- that would not be just.

However, the EFFECTS of that sin have been felt by all, and also the sin nature IS PASSED DOWN to us.

Yes, the sin/flesh nature is passed down but that is not what I understand the doctrine of OS to be. Have I been wrong all this time?

The sin nature did not exist before Adam and Eve ate of the forbidden fruit.

Then why did they eat the fruit? Please don't say it was the apple:)

 

[amadeus]

Jesus didn't abolish ritual, He perfected them.

Or He made it possible and desirable for all of the rituals which were but types and shadows to be replaced with reality! There no further need for daily or weekly or yearly sacrifices. No more death has already begun for the true believer in the sacrifice of the Son of God. Why would anyone need to go through rituals of any kind?

"And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this?" John 11:26

 

[GodsGrace]

I agree, the sin/flesh nature is passed down. Then why did they eat the fruit? Please do not say it was the apple:)

Yeah.
The apple had evil in it.
JK

One time, not long ago, it took me many lessons to teach a 7 yr old girl that the sin was not that they ate an apple. We all clapped when she finally understood.

As to the why?
Whoever answers that gets the prize...

 

[GodsGrace]

Yes, the sin/flesh nature is passed down but that is not what I understand the doctrine of OS to be. Have I been wrong all this time? Then why did they eat the fruit? Please don't say it was the apple:)

The doctrine of OS in Catholicism teaches that the sin was passed to us, thus infant baptism.
Is this what you mean?

 

[GodsGrace]

Yes, the sin/flesh nature is passed down but that is not what I understand the doctrine of OS to be. Have I been wrong all this time? Then why did they eat the fruit? Please don't say it was the apple

You did the quote thingy!
:)

 

[Helen]

Then why did they eat the fruit? Please don't say it was the apple:)

Agree....where anyone came up with an apple I have never understood...maybe from the early paintings.

I belive the “fruit” that Eve wanted and was enticed by , and what she took of , was knowledge ...Satan told her that she would be like God knowing good and evil.
She believed that God was with holding back something she wanted.
She sold this lie to Adam...and the story continues....

 

[jimd]

I find it very interesting that @ByGrace gave you a like for your above quote since she believes the law has been abolished.

She is a total mystery to me.
Giving likes to persons that do not agree with her.

Did you notice I gave her a like also?

 

[jimd]

You did the quote thingy!
:)

Yes, thanks to you!

 

[GodsGrace]

Did you notice I gave her a like also?

We're only advised of the Like we each get...
So, no, you don't notice all of them.

 

[jimd]

Agree....where anyone came up with an apple I have never understood...maybe from the early paintings.

I belive the “fruit” that Eve wanted and was enticed by , and what she took of , was knowledge ...Satan told her that she would be like God knowing good and evil.
She believed that God was with holding back something she wanted.
She sold this lie to Adam...and the story continues....

Yes it was knowledge but knowledge of what? What gives us knowledge of good an evil? If the tree of life was a metaphor for Christ as some believe (I don't know if you do), What would the tree of good and evil be a metaphor for?

 

[jimd]

We're only advised of the Like we each get...
So, no, you don't notice all of them.

OK, I get it, I am just a little slow:)

 

[epostle1]

Or He made it possible and desirable for all of the rituals which were but types and shadows to be replaced with reality! There no further need for daily or weekly or yearly sacrifices. No more death has already begun for the true believer in the sacrifice of the Son of God. Why would anyone need to go through rituals of any kind?

"And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this?" John 11:26

I had the Eucharist in mind. The Church is an extension of the Incarnation united by the Eucharist, they are inseparable.

 

[amadeus]

I had the Eucharist in mind. The Church is an extension of the Incarnation united by the Eucharist, they are inseparable.

Please don't get upset as I am only trying to be honest with you. For me what you call the Eucharist would be just another ritual. The real eating of His flesh and drinking of His blood doesn't occur through the physical consumption of wafer and wine. I have no doubt that a sincere believer gets something from God through communion rituals, be they Protestant or Catholic, but I believe that those are also only types and shadows of that which is real. I am simply responding to your post. You may call me a blasphemer, but I will leave this at this unless you really want more detail of what I believe...

 

[Copperhead]

My original question to you was why Jesus spoke in parables.

I was listening to a discussion where a Jewish believer was expounding on various parables. He asserted the idea of "seeing they will not see" and "hearing they will not hear" by speaking in parables was actually an example of grace exhibited by Yeshua. That more revelation requires more accountability. That by many not understanding the parables, they would not be held as accountable.

Along the lines of "to whom much has been given, much will be required".

Not sure that it is the real reason for Yeshua speaking in parables, but it is a reasoned idea that could have some validity.

 

[epostle1]

Please don't get upset as I am only trying to be honest with you. For me what you call the Eucharist would be just another ritual. The real eating of His flesh and drinking of His blood doesn't occur through the physical consumption of wafer and wine. I have no doubt that a sincere believer gets something from God through communion rituals, be they Protestant or Catholic, but I believe that those are also only types and shadows of that which is real. I am simply responding to your post. You may call me a blasphemer, but I will leave this at this unless you really want more detail of what I believe...

I know you partake of bread an wine and it' nothing more than a memorial. The Eucharist is one and the same sacrifice as the Crucifixion, as indicated by the Fourth Cup. Baptism is a ritual. Wen you sit down to eat or prepare for bed you are performing mundane rituals. They are normal to human experience.

The teaching on the Eucharist has not changed in 2000 years; the evidence is there for anyone who wishes to see it.

 

[GodsGrace]

OK, I get it, I am just a little slow:)

LOL
You sure don't seem slow to me!!