Is The Mosaic Law Passed Away ??

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Duckybill

New Member
Feb 12, 2010
3,416
44
0
Well, darned me if I didn't just complement you on another post and here you are going off on me!

No, it ain't a license to sin. But what do you think Paul meant when he said it? I can only gather that he meant, yes it's covered by grace, but why do you want to or why should you? Look at the whole chapter! Heck, look at the whole verse. He is saying, "yea, all things are lawful, and you can do them and they are covered by grace. But some things are just stupid and you are going to suffer from them." He used the term "All things are lawful" a few times. He's acknowledging grace but saying even though you have it, you are an idiot for doing some things. Your life is going to be in chaos if you do them and eventually it will effect your spiritual well being.
I surely must be misunderstanding you. We can murder, rape, steal, lie, blaspheme, etc. and still be Christians?

 

veteran

New Member
Aug 6, 2010
6,509
212
0
Southeast USA
So how do we reconcile that 1 Cor.10:23 verse with what Paul said in Galatians 5?

Gal 5:17-21
17 For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would.
18 But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law.
19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,
20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,
21 Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.
(KJV)

To the Church at Corinth were those things lawful, but to the Galatians those things not lawful?

Our Lord Jesus said He can forgive all manner of sin, except the sin of blasphemy against The Holy Spirit. So how does that reconcile with what He also said about doers of His Father's will entering into His Kingdom? (Matt.7:21-27).

At some point, the believer must make a decision about this, and conclude that believing AND doing are both equally important.

 

FHII

Well-Known Member
Apr 9, 2011
4,833
2,494
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States

I surely must be misunderstanding you. We can murder, rape, steal, lie, blaspheme, etc. and still be Christians?



We can't blaspheme. If you look closely I always said our sins of the flesh aren't held against us. But technically yes. Let me ask you if the patriarchs (who were actually under the law) murdered, stole and lied at times? Paul still said "All things are lawful..." I'm done explaining this verse, now I'd like for you to explain what you think he meant when he said that.
 

FHII

Well-Known Member
Apr 9, 2011
4,833
2,494
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
So how do we reconcile that 1 Cor.10:23 verse with what Paul said in Galatians 5?

Gal 5:17-21
17 For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would.
18 But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law.
19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,
20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,
21 Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.
(KJV)

To the Church at Corinth were those things lawful, but to the Galatians those things not lawful?

Our Lord Jesus said He can forgive all manner of sin, except the sin of blasphemy against The Holy Spirit. So how does that reconcile with what He also said about doers of His Father's will entering into His Kingdom? (Matt.7:21-27).

At some point, the believer must make a decision about this, and conclude that believing AND doing are both equally important.

You keyed in on verse 21 but not on verse 18 and totally left out verse 22, didn't you? I partly agree with you though.... I have quoted over and over that all things are lawful, however I am also a believer that not all things are expedient and we shouldn't be brought under their power. Furthermore, we can't to these things against the brethren.

I find it amazing that when I bring these things up, some want to take it to the extreme. I hope that's not whats in their hearts!
 

Duckybill

New Member
Feb 12, 2010
3,416
44
0
We can't blaspheme. If you look closely I always said our sins of the flesh aren't held against us. But technically yes. Let me ask you if the patriarchs (who were actually under the law) murdered, stole and lied at times? Paul still said "All things are lawful..." I'm done explaining this verse, now I'd like for you to explain what you think he meant when he said that.
Ok, to clarify further, I can go out today and suicide bomb churches filled with Christians and still be a Christian? Yes I know, this is ridiculous.

 

veteran

New Member
Aug 6, 2010
6,509
212
0
Southeast USA
You keyed in on verse 21 but not on verse 18 and totally left out verse 22, didn't you? I partly agree with you though.... I have quoted over and over that all things are lawful, however I am also a believer that not all things are expedient and we shouldn't be brought under their power. Furthermore, we can't to these things against the brethren.

I find it amazing that when I bring these things up, some want to take it to the extreme. I hope that's not whats in their hearts!

I was just simply focusing on the same idea you and Ducky were with 1 Cor.6:12, comparing it with other Scripture by Apostle Paul. My point is that all of what Paul said there must be included, also with other of Paul's Epistles where he speaks of the same things. Galatians 5 is one of them. So is 1 Timothy 1:9-10.

The problem is how some misinterpret the idea of "lawful" there from Paul.

1 Cor 6:9-11
9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.
11 And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.
(KJV)

Paul just said that prior to the 1 Cor.6:12 verse, so that MUST be included with his Message.

He began in 1 Cor.6 of how some of the brethren were going before the law among the unjust against other Christian brethren, instead of their being able to settle their differences among themselves as Christ's body.

The Greek word for "lawful" involves the idea of having power over, and power to do. Paul said in 1 Timothy 1 that the law was made for the unrighteous and not for Christ's body. He was rebuking them for not showing that. He was not LITERALLY intending that all things are 'lawful' in the absolute sense for Christ's body, which is clear with what he said in those 1 Cor.6:9-11 verses above, and even in Gal.5 about those who walk by their flesh not inheriting the Kingdom.

This reveals that the law has not passed away, and that we as believers can bring ourselves back into bondage under the law by not walking by The Spirit. Refusing to forgive another's trespasses against us, and instead going to the law among the unjust is like walking by our flesh, and not by The Spirit. At the same time, our Lord Jesus and Paul covered what to do with an unrepentant brother that keeps doing trespass among Christ's body.

So really, Paul was not preaching that all things are literally lawful to us, but that Christ's body has been given power to be ascendent over the law by not doing things which bring the power of the law back over us. That was his message in Galatians 5 also; for doing the works of The Spirit, against such there is no law.


 

aspen

“"The harvest is plentiful but the workers are few
Apr 25, 2012
14,111
4,778
113
52
West Coast
Faith
Christian
Country
United States


I was just simply focusing on the same idea you and Ducky were with 1 Cor.6:12, comparing it with other Scripture by Apostle Paul. My point is that all of what Paul said there must be included, also with other of Paul's Epistles where he speaks of the same things. Galatians 5 is one of them. So is 1 Timothy 1:9-10.

The problem is how some misinterpret the idea of "lawful" there from Paul.

1 Cor 6:9-11
9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.
11 And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.
(KJV)

Paul just said that prior to the 1 Cor.6:12 verse, so that MUST be included with his Message.

He began in 1 Cor.6 of how some of the brethren were going before the law among the unjust against other Christian brethren, instead of their being able to settle their differences among themselves as Christ's body.

The Greek word for "lawful" involves the idea of having power over, and power to do. Paul said in 1 Timothy 1 that the law was made for the unrighteous and not for Christ's body. He was rebuking them for not showing that. He was not LITERALLY intending that all things are 'lawful' in the absolute sense for Christ's body, which is clear with what he said in those 1 Cor.6:9-11 verses above, and even in Gal.5 about those who walk by their flesh not inheriting the Kingdom.

This reveals that the law has not passed away, and that we as believers can bring ourselves back into bondage under the law by not walking by The Spirit. Refusing to forgive another's trespasses against us, and instead going to the law among the unjust is like walking by our flesh, and not by The Spirit. At the same time, our Lord Jesus and Paul covered what to do with an unrepentant brother that keeps doing trespass among Christ's body.

So really, Paul was not preaching that all things are literally lawful to us, but that Christ's body has been given power to be ascendent over the law by not doing things which bring the power of the law back over us. That was his message in Galatians 5 also; for doing the works of The Spirit, against such there is no law.



This is a well researched post....I appreciate learning from it.
 

FHII

Well-Known Member
Apr 9, 2011
4,833
2,494
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States


I was just simply focusing on the same idea you and Ducky were with 1 Cor.6:12, comparing it with other Scripture by Apostle Paul. My point is that all of what Paul said there must be included, also with other of Paul's Epistles where he speaks of the same things. Galatians 5 is one of them. So is 1 Timothy 1:9-10.

The problem is how some misinterpret the idea of "lawful" there from Paul.

1 Cor 6:9-11
9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.
11 And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.
(KJV)

Paul just said that prior to the 1 Cor.6:12 verse, so that MUST be included with his Message.

He began in 1 Cor.6 of how some of the brethren were going before the law among the unjust against other Christian brethren, instead of their being able to settle their differences among themselves as Christ's body.

The Greek word for "lawful" involves the idea of having power over, and power to do. Paul said in 1 Timothy 1 that the law was made for the unrighteous and not for Christ's body. He was rebuking them for not showing that. He was not LITERALLY intending that all things are 'lawful' in the absolute sense for Christ's body, which is clear with what he said in those 1 Cor.6:9-11 verses above, and even in Gal.5 about those who walk by their flesh not inheriting the Kingdom.

This reveals that the law has not passed away, and that we as believers can bring ourselves back into bondage under the law by not walking by The Spirit. Refusing to forgive another's trespasses against us, and instead going to the law among the unjust is like walking by our flesh, and not by The Spirit. At the same time, our Lord Jesus and Paul covered what to do with an unrepentant brother that keeps doing trespass among Christ's body.

So really, Paul was not preaching that all things are literally lawful to us, but that Christ's body has been given power to be ascendent over the law by not doing things which bring the power of the law back over us. That was his message in Galatians 5 also; for doing the works of The Spirit, against such there is no law.



First off, an apology is in order on one thing. You stated on July 16th at 3:29 AM:

"So how do we reconcile that 1 Cor.10:23 verse with what Paul said in Galatians 5?"


I in turn commented you were leaving out 1 Cor 6:12. You weren't in that you were addressing similar verses. I cannot describe the thought process that lead me to say that, but there was one. In any sense, I retract that statement.... You weren't leaving it out or ignoring it.

But that's about where the apology ends. I absolutely agree with you that all of what Paul said must be included. I detailed all of 1 Cor 6 (or at least most of it) in another thread. Many of the conclusions you came to were similar to mine. However, sticking to that same thing, don't forget verse 11 which says they [we] are washed, sanctified, justified IN THE NAME OF JESUS (not ourselves, or our works of good or evil).

I must also say that yes, Paul did literally mean "all things are lawful unto me." He also said that not all things are expedient, edify and that he would not be brought under their power. IF we break that statement down, it's more than just people have the power or ability (if that's what you are implying) to do them. He literally means its not held against us (why? Because we have been sanctified and justified by Jesus' death... No other reason!) Furthermore, he says "unto me". This implies it isn't lawful for others. Because not all things were lawful to the Jews. Why? They were still under the law. One day I will do a count of how many times Paul said things like, "we are not under the law", "we are covered by grace, not the law" and statements like that. I imagine it would be well above 20.

But yes, Paul was saying that all things were lawful. That means "all things". Since he was talking about certain things in the previous verses... He especially means them. Don't forget, he wasn't scolding them for those things at the time, but for taking brothers before unbelievers, as you yourself have acknowledged.

In the book of 1 Timothy 1 he wasn't rebuking anybody, much less a "them". It was a letter to one individual, and in that chapter there was no rebuke to him or any "them".

I have two more points to cover. First, Galatians 5. There are more verses in this book that state we are free from the law and under grace than any other book with the possible exception of Romans. THIS book is a rebuke, unlike Timothy. It was a rebuke for going back to the Law. If you talk about verses 19-21, fine. But then you are ignoring the rest of the book. Furthermore, the opening line of these verses is: now the works of the flesh are.... Veteran. We are all in the flesh and we all do these things whether it be physically, in thought, or subconsciencely or (that which is truly damning) spiritually. The fact that he says these are the sins of the flesh (and also the fact which many people deny: we all to them to some point) is rebutted in that we are to focus more on the spiritual growth, as he goes on to say. So I don't reconcile anything. The Bible does.

Let me turn that around on you. How do you reconcile Galatians 5 with Paul saying, "The good that I would do, I do not; but the evil that I would not, that I do. Yet it is not I, but sin that dwelleth in me" [somewhat of a paraphrash]. Paul himself was saying he was guilty of the very things you say we can't do!

You also said this:

"Paul was not preaching that all things are literally lawful to us, but that Christ's body has been given power to be ascendent over the law by not doing things which bring the power of the law back over us."

Simply not true. Grace through faith means ALL our sins are covered. Christ can help us quit some sins, but we are still guilty of sin. For every sin you claim Christ help you stop doing (and I believe he can and did) there are many more sins which he didn't help you quit. This theory is outright dangerous in that it leads people to believe that unless they live a sterile life, they aren't saved. They will spend more time trying to "live holy" than they will learning of him.

So grace gives us the power to stop doing things which bring the power of the law back to us? It didn't work for Paul, because he said he still did evil even when he didn't want to. It didn't work for Peter because Paul still had to confront him for not believing grace, and he argued with God concerning the eating of meats. It didn't work for John either because he still couldn't seem to get along with Paul (his brother in Christ, and I'm not laying the blame on John alone). How's it going to work for us if it didn't for the three most prominant Apostles?

I want to say one more thing. I am not defending sin but am defending Grace. Even though I claim what the Bible says in that Paul said all things are lawful, Paul was STILL saying NOT to do them! It was still a rebuke and I fully acknowledge that Paul was against it. I don't think that anybody should sin and I think that everyone should fight it with all their abilities. I am not telling anyone they should sin. I'm not even telling them they can sin without punishment. I agree with John... Flee from it! I wish just one person would recognize that I am NOT encouraging sin in any way, shape or form.







 

Eccl.12:13

New Member
Aug 28, 2010
558
10
0
I want to say one more thing. I am not defending sin but am defending Grace. Even though I claim what the Bible says in that Paul said all things are lawful, Paul was STILL saying NOT to do them! It was still a rebuke and I fully acknowledge that Paul was against it. I don't think that anybody should sin and I think that everyone should fight it with all their abilities. I am not telling anyone they should sin. I'm not even telling them they can sin without punishment. I agree with John... Flee from it! I wish just one person would recognize that I am NOT encouraging sin in any way, shape or form.



Nor did Paul....which is why he taught that God's laws should be kept;

Rom.7
[7] What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.

1 Cor.5
[9] I wrote unto you in an epistle not to company with fornicators:
[10] Yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with the covetous, or extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs go out of the world.
[11] But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat.

1 Cor.6
[9] Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
[10] Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.
[11] And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.
[18] Flee fornication. Every sin that a man doeth is without the body; but he that commiteth fornication sinneth against his own body.

1 Cor.15
[34] Awake to righteousness, and sin not; for some have not the knowledge of God: I speak this to your shame.

Eph.4
[25] Wherefore putting away lying, speak every man truth with his neighbour: for we are members one of another.
[26] Be ye angry, and sin not: let not the sun go down upon your wrath:
[27] Neither give place to the devil.
[28] Let him that stole steal no more: but rather let him labour, working with his hands the thing which is good, that he may have to give to him that needeth.

Eph.5
[3] But fornication, and all uncleanness, or covetousness, let it not be once named among you, as becometh saints;
[4] Neither filthiness, nor foolish talking, nor jesting, which are not convenient: but rather giving of thanks.
[5] For this ye know, that no whoremonger, nor unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, hath any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God.
[6] Let no man deceive you with vain words: for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience.
[7] Be not ye therefore partakers with them.

Eph.6
[1] Children, obey your parents in the Lord: for this is right.
[2] Honour thy father and mother; (which is the first commandment with promise;)
[3] That it may be well with thee, and thou mayest live long on the earth.

Col.3
[5] Mortify therefore your members which are upon the earth; fornication, uncleanness, inordinate affection, evil concupiscence, and covetousness, which is idolatry:
[6] For which things' sake the wrath of God cometh on the children of disobedience:
[7] In the which ye also walked some time, when ye lived in them.
[8] But now ye also put off all these; anger, wrath, malice, blasphemy, filthy communication out of your mouth.
[9] Lie not one to another, seeing that ye have put off the old man with his deeds;






.


 

veteran

New Member
Aug 6, 2010
6,509
212
0
Southeast USA
First off, an apology is in order on one thing. You stated on July 16th at 3:29 AM:

"So how do we reconcile that 1 Cor.10:23 verse with what Paul said in Galatians 5?"

I in turn commented you were leaving out 1 Cor 6:12. You weren't in that you were addressing similar verses. I cannot describe the thought process that lead me to say that, but there was one. In any sense, I retract that statement.... You weren't leaving it out or ignoring it.

But that's about where the apology ends. I absolutely agree with you that all of what Paul said must be included. I detailed all of 1 Cor 6 (or at least most of it) in another thread. Many of the conclusions you came to were similar to mine. However, sticking to that same thing, don't forget verse 11 which says they [we] are washed, sanctified, justified IN THE NAME OF JESUS (not ourselves, or our works of good or evil).

I must also say that yes, Paul did literally mean "all things are lawful unto me." He also said that not all things are expedient, edify and that he would not be brought under their power. IF we break that statement down, it's more than just people have the power or ability (if that's what you are implying) to do them. He literally means its not held against us (why? Because we have been sanctified and justified by Jesus' death... No other reason!) Furthermore, he says "unto me". This implies it isn't lawful for others. Because not all things were lawful to the Jews. Why? They were still under the law. One day I will do a count of how many times Paul said things like, "we are not under the law", "we are covered by grace, not the law" and statements like that. I imagine it would be well above 20.

When you do that account of Paul, you'll find a condition to be met to not be under the law. He said it is only IF we walk by The Spirit, and not our flesh (Gal.5).

Gal 5:18
18 But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law.
(KJV)

That's different than what you're trying to say. You're trying to say that a believer cannot ever fall from Christ's Grace once they have accepted Him as their Saviour. The Bible does not teach that idea; instead your idea comes from men's doctrines. Paul taught the same things that our Lord Jesus did.

Rom 6:1-6
1 What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound?
2 God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?
3 Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into His death?
4 Therefore we are buried with Him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.
5 For if we have been planted together in the likeness of His death, we shall be also in the likeness of His resurrection:
6 Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with Him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.
(KJV)

Is Paul preaching that we should no longer count ourselves as sinning, even to the point of disregarding when we still sin? or that we should no longer serve sin by still doing sins? It's the latter. To 'serve sin' means to still follow the lusts of the flesh. Paul declares we should not live any longer in sin after having believed on Christ Jesus and baptized in His death. Is he saying it's now impossible for us to have sin any longer? Nope.


Rom 6:11-19
11 Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord.
12 Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, that ye should obey it in the lusts thereof.
13 Neither yield ye your members as instruments of unrighteousness unto sin: but yield yourselves unto God, as those that are alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness unto God.

Are we still able to fall to yielding our members as instruments of unrighteousness unto sin? Yes, otherwise Paul would not have warned us to be careful and try not do that. Use your common sense, when he warns us to not do something, it means we still have the ability and choice to do that thing.

We are not free from this body of sin just yet, for that will only happen at the redemption when Christ returns. Paul even goes so far to show us 'how' to think in relation to Christ's Grace. We are to consider ourselves already as alive from the dead, as instruments of righteousness unto God. That means being careful to not walk in sin, and even act like the redemption of our bodies has already come, even though it literally hasn't yet.

14 For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace.
15 What then? shall we sin, because we are not under the law, but under grace? God forbid.

Paul preached grace, and then how still being in a body of sin relates to it. Shall we still sin? A big no he says, with "God forbid". He's not saying we will not sin anymore, he telling us to try to not sin anymore. Big difference.

16 Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?

To drive that point homeward, Paul shows how we become servants of the things we yield to and obey. He gives 2 conditions with that: 1) "whether of sin unto death", or 2) "of obedience unto righteousness". It means we still have the ability to choose either one.

17 But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you.
18 Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness.
19 I speak after the manner of men because of the infirmity of your flesh: for as ye have yielded your members servants to uncleanness and to iniquity unto iniquity; even so now yield your members servants to righteousness unto holiness.
(KJV)

What was the change there that happened with their coming to Christ Jesus? Before they knew of Christ, they were the servants of sin, their hearts not knowing the difference. But when they came to Christ, their hearts were to change, and Paul commands "even so now yield your members servants to righteousness unto holiness". Paul is commanding them to obey and yield, which always requires action and choice. That's what coming to Christ Jesus and believing on Him should do for the believer, give them a heart towards obedience to Him and His commandments, not in continuance of walking in the flesh like they were doing before. That's a lot different than treating Paul's preaching there like after coming to Christ there's no need for obedience and yielding to Christ by trying to stay away from sin.

Rom 6:20-23
20 For when ye were the servants of sin, ye were free from righteousness.
21 What fruit had ye then in those things whereof ye are now ashamed? for the end of those things is death.
22 But now being made free from sin, and become servants to God, ye have your fruit unto holiness, and the end everlasting life.
23 For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.
(KJV)

This is why Paul said this...

Rom 3:25
25 Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in His blood, to declare His righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;
(KJV)

The Greek word for "past" is 'proginomai', meaning 'have previously transpired'. That does not mean our future sins are counted as righteousness. They are counted as wages of sin unto death, unless we repent to Christ to stay in His grace. That's what walking by The Spirit is about. We are to walk in Christ, which means to try and stay away from sin, but if we do sin, repenting and asking forgiveness, and trying not to do it again. It's a continual process until the redemption of our body at His coming.



But yes, Paul was saying that all things were lawful. That means "all things". Since he was talking about certain things in the previous verses... He especially means them. Don't forget, he wasn't scolding them for those things at the time, but for taking brothers before unbelievers, as you yourself have acknowledged.

Paul did not mean that all things were lawful in the literal absolute sense. It's in the sense that we still have the choice and ability to do sins, but not as a license to sin. It's about our condition with our walk with Christ. If we go out and sin on purpose, knowing it's a sin, and then expect Christ to automatically forgive us because of being covered by His grace no matter what, I guarantee, we will suffer His chastisement for doing it. Do it enough and He will cut us off until we pick our walk back up with Him. He is longsuffering to forgive us when we repent and return to Him, but not while we are rebellious against Him in following unrighteousness by choice.

Christ's warning about the five foolish virgins, and those who will say, "Lord, lord" on the day of His return, and He shuts them out of His Kingdom, is exactly about believers that think they can do whatever and still fall under His grace automatically without later repentance in returning to Him. Christ said He will tell those to get away from Him, them that work iniquity (Matt.7; Matt.25). Like Paul said, walk by The Spirit and you won't be under the law.


In the book of 1 Timothy 1 he wasn't rebuking anybody, much less a "them". It was a letter to one individual, and in that chapter there was no rebuke to him or any "them".

1 Tim 1:5-11
5 Now the end of the commandment is charity out of a pure heart, and of a good conscience, and of faith unfeigned:
6 From which some having swerved have turned aside unto vain jangling;
7 Desiring to be teachers of the law; understanding neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm.
8 But we know that the law is good, if a man use it lawfully;
9 Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,
10 For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;

11 According to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, which was committed to my trust.
(KJV)

Are there Christian brethren that put themselves under those things? Yes, if and when they do them. And they place themselves back under the law WHEN they do those sins there. Paul even covers sins like perjury. Get caught doing that in court and you can be put in jail. Did Paul literally mean it was OK if he did any of those things, when he said all things are lawful to him? No, of course not.

What you're preaching is the Once Saved, Always Saved doctrine if you don't admit later repentance of sins is needed to stay in our walk with Christ Jesus. The OSAS doctrine of men is against the idea of Christ's grace that only HE is in control of. This is why His judgment is going to come down hard upon a lot of Churches that have fallen away from Him. And the pattern of that is in Rev.2 & 3, with FIVE out of SEVEN.


I have two more points to cover. First, Galatians 5. There are more verses in this book that state we are free from the law and under grace than any other book with the possible exception of Romans. THIS book is a rebuke, unlike Timothy. It was a rebuke for going back to the Law. If you talk about verses 19-21, fine. But then you are ignoring the rest of the book. Furthermore, the opening line of these verses is: now the works of the flesh are.... Veteran. We are all in the flesh and we all do these things whether it be physically, in thought, or subconsciencely or (that which is truly damning) spiritually. The fact that he says these are the sins of the flesh (and also the fact which many people deny: we all to them to some point) is rebutted in that we are to focus more on the spiritual growth, as he goes on to say. So I don't reconcile anything. The Bible does.

Nothing in Galatians 5 disagrees with what Paul taught in Romans that those in Christ are to not follow sin after having believed on Him and been baptized in Him. I'm not ignoring any of Paul's preaching.

Gal 5:16-21
16 This I say then, Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil the lust of the flesh.
17 For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would.
18 But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law.
19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,
20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,
21 Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.
(KJV)

That's the same things Paul said in 1 Cor.6:9-11, wasn't it?


Rom 8:9-13
9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of His.
10 And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness.
11 But if the Spirit of Him That raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, He That raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by His Spirit That dwelleth in you.
12 Therefore, brethren, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live after the flesh.
13 For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: but if ye through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live.
(KJV)

To "mortify" the deeds of the body by The Spirit means to kill those fleshy deeds, end them, stop, quite doing it. But what preaching of grace only does, is to not be concerned if we still have those deeds after coming to Christ, and to wrongly think He has already automatically forgiven all sins we haven't even committed yet, even without later need of repentance (things Richard Burger has been preaching).


Let me turn that around on you. How do you reconcile Galatians 5 with Paul saying, "The good that I would do, I do not; but the evil that I would not, that I do. Yet it is not I, but sin that dwelleth in me" [somewhat of a paraphrash]. Paul himself was saying he was guilty of the very things you say we can't do!

It's easy! It's called REPENTANCE TO CHRIST JESUS, for sins we commit AFTER having believed on Him! True repentance also means making a change to try and not keep doing the sin. THAT is how Christ's grace is applied. It's under the condition that we stay in the walk with Him by The Holy Spirit.

What Paul was covering in Rom.7 was how it is impossible to be in this flesh and not have sin. For we all have been concluded under sin so that Christ's Salvation would be only for those who believe. Catch yourself doing a sin tomorrow, and you need to repent to Christ about it, asking forgiveness, and try not to do it again. All those in Christ have trouble with their flesh, with some only stopping a sin gradually over time with continual praying and asking Christ's forgiveness and help. And it works. Christ will help cleanse us from it (1 John 1).

But going out to do sin, or even stop looking for sin in our lives to check ourselves, refusing to repent of it, nor asking His forgiveness, nor His help to stop it, simply because of holding to men's tradition that we are saved regardless, now that will get us in trouble fast, and we can lose His grace because doing that is to not walk with Him by The Spirit, but to walk by our flesh instead, which is death. That is not mortifying the deeds of the body.



You also said this:

"Paul was not preaching that all things are literally lawful to us, but that Christ's body has been given power to be ascendent over the law by not doing things which bring the power of the law back over us."

Simply not true. Grace through faith means ALL our sins are covered. Christ can help us quit some sins, but we are still guilty of sin. For every sin you claim Christ help you stop doing (and I believe he can and did) there are many more sins which he didn't help you quit. This theory is outright dangerous in that it leads people to believe that unless they live a sterile life, they aren't saved. They will spend more time trying to "live holy" than they will learning of him.

That power involves choice, even though we will still have slip ups at times. And those slip-ups certainly don't mean sins like the ones Paul warned us about that will keep us out of Christ's Kingdom if we continue to do. You need to read Romans 3:25 again about just which sins are remitted by our first belief on Christ and baptism; only sins that were past from that point. We still need to repent to Christ of later sins we may commit.

Since when is the need to repent to Christ of sins we may commit after our first belief and baptism a dangerous thing? Since when is repentance a dangerous thing? What's dangerous is refusal to repent afterwards.
What was that which Paul said in Rom.6:19, "even so now yield your members servants to righteousness unto holiness"? Was he teaching for us to remain unholy, just so grace would abound more? No.


So grace gives us the power to stop doing things which bring the power of the law back to us? It didn't work for Paul, because he said he still did evil even when he didn't want to. It didn't work for Peter because Paul still had to confront him for not believing grace, and he argued with God concerning the eating of meats. It didn't work for John either because he still couldn't seem to get along with Paul (his brother in Christ, and I'm not laying the blame on John alone). How's it going to work for us if it didn't for the three most prominant Apostles?

Yes, it sure DID work for Paul, and for all those in the Churches that listened to him. Or did Paul go back to the "religion of the Jews' again? No, he did not. But did it prevent the strife between him and Barnabas because of Mark? No, but that could have been for other purposes that weren't written down. Do you really think the early disciples didn't carefully watch their walk with Christ, and repented through prayer when they messed up?


I want to say one more thing. I am not defending sin but am defending Grace. Even though I claim what the Bible says in that Paul said all things are lawful, Paul was STILL saying NOT to do them! It was still a rebuke and I fully acknowledge that Paul was against it. I don't think that anybody should sin and I think that everyone should fight it with all their abilities. I am not telling anyone they should sin. I'm not even telling them they can sin without punishment. I agree with John... Flee from it! I wish just one person would recognize that I am NOT encouraging sin in any way, shape or form.

I'm defending Christ's grace also. But His grace does not mean going off on our own without Him, for that is instead to think of ourselves as little gods, that we can no longer do any wrong. That's the working OSAS creates. And I see it everyday with believers on that doctrine walking after their flesh like they have no conscience for Christ Jesus. Christ's grace is an active thing, not a one-time thing. If that were not so, Apostle Paul would not have given those warnings to not do those things that will keep a believer out of Christ's Kingdom.

And nor should we cut off our Lord Jesus' teaching in The Gospel Books, for His commandments were not just meant for Jews, but for us Gentiles too. Per Christ, even slothfulness in doing His work can cause a believer to be cast to the "outer darkness". That's what the parable of the talents was about. The word 'disciple' comes from our English word 'discipline'. If we truly want to become disciples of Christ Jesus, then it does require the application of discipline.


 

lawrance

New Member
Mar 30, 2011
738
19
0
How about that mass murderer in Norway. they are saying that he is one of those christian fundamentalist ?

The dude i know that says he is a christian fundamentalist was ranting and raving to me that he could kill anyone he wanted to regardless of who or even how many.
And he was pushing the "once saved always saved" filthy devilish doctrine as proof of it. he says you just say some words in front of him and that's it it's a done deal you are saved.
He comes up and tells me that he has just saved an other person and in that he can put another person to the list of his accomplishments, so he runs around trying to finding people to do this to, all day.

And some of the rubbish he has come up with, i could go on and on with.

This type of nut case people pushing all this fundamentalism and their left behind rubbish will give and is giving Christianity a bad name.

If i happen to mention anything that could be related to Christianity at all on other forums that are not to do about christianity. it's amassing to get attacked straight away as being one of this lot of radicals.
And i find to my surprise that most of the people on these forums only know of this type of rat bag religion and they think it's what all Christians believe.
So i think that the majority of young people in this country have a absolute deep hatred for Christians and it's a hatred way beyond anything i could of possibly imagined ever in this country.

I think it's our school system pushing their politically correct gods and they run around like nazis pushing it down on people and when i point out how sickening and pathetic their PC gods are they are then livid.

I should start a topic about the dangers of this fundementialist rubbish.
 

tomwebster

New Member
Dec 11, 2006
2,041
107
0
76
How about that mass murderer in Norway. they are saying that he is one of those christian fundamentalist ?

...
This type of nut case people pushing all this fundamentalism and their left behind rubbish will give and is giving Christianity a bad name.

...
I should start a topic about the dangers of this fundementialist rubbish.



What is your definition of "fundamentalism?" I think we need to be careful to not throw the baby out with the bath water.

 

veteran

New Member
Aug 6, 2010
6,509
212
0
Southeast USA
Right, because the word 'fundamental' applies to first-hand, a beginning basis. The OSAS doctrines are not Biblical fundamentalism. Satan's host have hijacked that word fundamentalist and use it as propaganda against true Christian doctrine from The Bible in general.

I remember reading an article about a group in Africa that accepted Christ Jesus, and in their Communion service they used real blood! They drank real blood to represent Christ's blood!! Makes me wonder if their pagan witch doctor had something to do with that to mock Christ. That kind of thing has nothing to do with Christianity and New Testament Biblical doctrine, yet if that group isn't corrected, how will it represent Christianity to others that haven't believed on Christ Jesus ?

I feel sorry for my Christian brethren that still are not aware of the many attacks by Satan's host upon fundamental Bible Christianity today. One particular attack by Communism is to try and revert the Churches to following 'Social Religion' instead of Revealed Religion from The Bible (per Cleon Skousen's 1958 work The Naked Communist).

Trying to turn Christianity into Social religion means simply to get away from what The Bible teaches, and supplant The Bible with whatever social traditions each people's have. With that group in Africa using real blood for holy communion with Christ, that act would fall under the idea of Social Religion. Same with the OSAS doctrines of men which allow one to continue to do evil while thinking they are automatically saved regardless.

 

tomwebster

New Member
Dec 11, 2006
2,041
107
0
76
Right, because the word 'fundamental' applies to first-hand, a beginning basis. The OSAS doctrines are not Biblical fundamentalism. Satan's host have hijacked that word fundamentalist and use it as propaganda against true Christian doctrine from The Bible in general.

...
Trying to turn Christianity into Social religion means simply to get away from what The Bible teaches, and supplant The Bible with whatever social traditions each people's have. With that group in Africa using real blood for holy communion with Christ, that act would fall under the idea of Social Religion. Same with the OSAS doctrines of men which allow one to continue to do evil while thinking they are automatically saved regardless.




veteran, You need to add several more things to your list of false doctrine. The "Jesus is not God" junk being taught by some "Christians" on this forum, as well as the "universal reconciliation" junk taught here.

 

veteran

New Member
Aug 6, 2010
6,509
212
0
Southeast USA


veteran, You need to add several more things to your list of false doctrine. The "Jesus is not God" junk being taught by some "Christians" on this forum, as well as the "universal reconciliation" junk taught here.




I have also spoken against those things on this forum. It's getting to where today a Bible believing Christian has to counter a huge list of false doctrines because of the many 'hirelings' and 'wolves in sheep's clothing' among Christ's Church. If we keep to preaching God's Word as written, then those who really care about Christ Jesus will start to see the contradictions they are taught too, and maybe, just maybe, they will start studying His Word more for themselves.
 

lawrance

New Member
Mar 30, 2011
738
19
0


What is your definition of "fundamentalism?" I think we need to be careful to not throw the baby out with the bath water.



Sure we could talk about the fundamentals of Christianity and that's fine
.
But i see this type of so called fundamentalistas something that does knot know or recognize the true Jesus at all but plays games with the word of the Bible
You may say they have another jesus ?
They are not all united but there are from what i can see, looks like dangerous factions with in.
There are people who it looks like to me as very cunning manipulating people who look for people to dominate, they are very well uni educated. i have come across 3 of them now and they have tried to play their cards with me and i have caught them out and every one of them just jumped straight up red faced and stormed off with others looking on wondering why.. i have seen them when walking by some where and i don't think they could see me at all. and people say that i look like Hercule Poirot.
 

tomwebster

New Member
Dec 11, 2006
2,041
107
0
76
Sure we could talk about the fundamentals of Christianity and that's fine


But i see this type of so called fundamentalistas something that does knot know or recognize the true Jesus at all but plays games with the word of the Bible.
You may say they have another jesus ?
They are not all united but there are from what i can see, looks like dangerous factions with in.
There are people who it looks like to me as very cunning manipulating people who look for people to dominate, they are very well uni educated. i have come across 3 of them now and they have tried to play their cards with me and i have caught them out and every one of them just jumped straight up red faced and stormed off with others looking on wondering why.. i have seen them when walking by some where and i don't think they could see me at all. and people say that i look like Hercule Poirot.



If the first sentence describes a fundamentalist the rest of your statement cannot unless the word "christianity" has been redefined.

 

Foreigner

New Member
Apr 14, 2010
2,583
123
0
How about that mass murderer in Norway. they are saying that he is one of those christian fundamentalist ?

-- The gentleman in question identified himself as a "Darwinist" today in court.
Darwinism definitely does not reconcile with Fundamentalism, regardless of how people want to pervert the description.
 

veteran

New Member
Aug 6, 2010
6,509
212
0
Southeast USA
-- The gentleman in question identified himself as a "Darwinist" today in court.
Darwinism definitely does not reconcile with Fundamentalism, regardless of how people want to pervert the description.

That settles it then, a Darwinist trying to pretend to be a Christian fundalmentalist in order to smear Christianity.
 

Foreigner

New Member
Apr 14, 2010
2,583
123
0
lol

I think it's rather a big jump to assume that just because someone has an irrational fear of Islam, they are automatically a Fundamentalist Christian.

Call me old fashioned...