Only Those Who Do the Will of God Will Enter the Kingdom

[GracePeace]

I've been trying to get up the courage to change this overhead bathroom exhaust fan (lots of dust and dirt involved, and I'm somewhat of a germophobe), but lots of stuff has been coming up, getting in the way, and I have to go to dialysis tomorrow, and I am terrified of the shame I will feel tomorrow if I don't get this done today ("deliver me from my reproach, which I dread" lol), so I have to step away for a bit, and be a man about this task. Wish me well.

I got it done, and it wasn't as bad as I had feared it would be--I already did the one in my bathroom (this is another bathroom), so I already knew my way around, plus I knew I needed my face shield with 3M ventilators, and vacuumed to get the loose dust out of the equation.

Kind of uneventful actually. LOL

 

[Fred J]

There is no such thing as a "Pauline sect".
There is just the Doctrine of Paul, given to Paul by Jesus for the NT Church, as found in Paul's Epistles.

Mature consuming 'meat' in the contextual doctrine of the New Testament and Old Testament. (2Timothy3:16&17)

And not remain a toddler still consuming 'milk', hanging on still to the out of context doctrine of Paul and playful.

As to that even Apostle Peter remarked in his letter that the 'unlearned' and 'unstable' tend to 'wrest' Paul's teaching, and even the scriptures.

The same Paul who wrote to the Gentile Ephesus church, told them that, they Gentile together with Jew believers access by one Holy Ghost unto the FATHER.

And 'both' are built upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets, while Jesus Christ Himself being the Chief Corner Stone.

Therefore apparently he'd already made a point, besides his doctrine as one of the Apostle, Jew and Gentile church are also built in the doctrine of the other Apostles.

If we're not in the same 'page', will leave you be as you want to believe, no thank you.

 

[Soyeong]

You already know--Ro 2:6-16,26,27, where the Gentile believers, who neither possess nor know the Law, are deemed "doers of the Law" who "will be justified" on the Day of Judgment and repaid eternal life.

Those verses notably do not say that Gentiles to not know the law.

I could pick through this, correcting the many errors, but let's cut to the chase : if you insist that Christians must know Torah in order to serve God as Christians, you're going to find a huge issue with Romans 2:6-16. It's a "clue", or a "hint", for your own good, showing you your error, to bring you in to a better, more consistent and coherent understanding of what is being taught.y

It would be fantastic if you were able to actually show that I've made errors, but all you have is bluster. I've said nothing contrary to Romans 2:6-16.

Maybe English is not your first language, but I never said that you said that Gentiles couldn't be doers of the Law, nor that you said that Gentiles don't know Torah (I understand very well that that is MY position you disagree with). I don't think we should engage in this discussion if you are going to be constantly misunderstanding me--it is difficult enough to navigate the topic with an English-speaker, let alone someone who is unacquainted with both the Scriptures and the English language he's trying to discuss those Scriptures in.

You said:

"According to you, they couldn't be doers of the Law justified in the Day of Judgment, because they don't know Torah--God knows differently, "

I denied that that is according to me, so you are misunderstanding me by assigning to me a position that I don't hold.

Again, I never said every Jew knew the Law. Remember that. Stop straw manning my position.

I never said that you said that, so I'm not strawmannirg your position.

Again, you're arguing against Paul : in the ancient world, in general, one of the distinctions between Jews and Gentiles was that the Jew possessed and knew the Law and the Gentile neither possessed nor knew the Law. This is echoed, again, in his categorization of humans into the two, "those who sinned under Law" and "those who sinned without Law" (Ro 2).

Jews were in possession of the Torah scrolls and responsible for copying, maintaining, and teaching from them, but that does not mean that the Gentile doesn't know the Torah. There are unbelieving Gentiles who do not know the Torah, but believing ones do know it.

You're trying really hard to argue your case, but you're tripping over all sorts of things in Scripture that you can't see.

Then by all means please point them out.

When Paul says "because I speak to those who know the Law", it means, in his mind, he knows that it is his "brothers", fellow recipients of "the oracles of God" (Ro 3), who, unlike those who are not his "brothers" (unlike "Gentiles"), "know the Law".
Why?
The Gentiles don't have the Law.
How are they "doers of the Law" then?
God writes it on the heart and mind in the New Covenant of Grace.

Paul referred to the recipients of the letter to the Romans as brothers (Romans 1:13), so you are unjustified in thinking that Paul was only referring to Jews in Romans 7:1. A Gentile can know the Torah because they have been taught to be a doer of it by those who have it or because God has put it in their minds and written it on their hearts.

Oops, God writes the Law on hearts and minds, so they can be doers of it--as evinced in, for instance, Romans 2.
Under the Old Covenant, Pentecost was when the "fiery Law", the Torah, was given (according to tradition); in the New Covenant, however, Pentecost is when the Holy Spirit was given. I don't think this is merely a "coincidence". The Law told people what to do before, but, now, the Spirit tells people what to do--"serve not in oldness of the Letter but in newness of the Spirit".

God puts the Torah in our minds and writes in on our hearts so that we can know it and be doers of it. I agree that that is not a coincidence. The Spirit leading us to obey the Torah still involves following what the Torah instructs.

Nope, God's Law is cast as opposite Sin's Law. Sin is anthropomorphized as a ruler opposite God. God has a Law, and Sin has a Law. The Law we are not under is the Law of Moses, and, and Paul says, the result is that Sin will not master us (make us its slave) BECAUSE we are not under the Law of Moses, BECAUSE sin utilizes the good and holy Law to work sin in us (Ro 7), just as 1 Co 15 says "The strength of sin is the Law".
This is also why Ro 8:3 says "what the Law could not do, in that it was weakened through the flesh" : the Law turns you to your flesh, and, there, you find "nothing good" wherewith you might fulfill the good requirement of the good Law. When you turn to Grace, however, God is perfectly good, and full of goodness, which is why the righteous requirement of the Law is fulfilled in you those who serve in newness of the Spirit of Grace.

In Romans 7-8:2, Paul said that the Law of God is good, that he wanted to do good, that he delighted in obeying it, and that he served it with his mind in contrast with the law of sin, which was working within his members to cause him not to do the good that he wanted to do, which was waging war against the law of his mind, which he served with his flesh, which held him captive, and which the Law of the Spirit has freed us from. The Law of God leads us to do what is holy, righteous, and good (Romans 7:12) while the law of sin leads us in the opposite direction by stirring up sinful passions in order to bear fruit unto death (Romans 7:5). So verses that refer something that would be absurd for Paul to delight in should not be interpreted as referring to the Law of God while verses that refer to a law that is sinful, that causes sin to increase, or that hinders us from obeying the Law of God should be interpreted as referring to the law of sin, such as with Romans 5:20, 6:14, 7:5, Galatians 2:19, 5::16-18, or 1 Corinthians 15:56.

For example, it would be absurd to interpret Romans 5:20 as referring to the Law of God as if Paul delighted in causing sin to increase, or to interpret Romans 6:15 as if Paul delighted in sin having dominion over him, or Romans 7;5 as if Paul delighted in stirring up sinful passions in order to bear fruit unto death, but rather all of those verses as describing the role of the law of sin. In Romans 8:2-7, Christ freed us from sin so that we could be free to meet the righteous requirement of the Law of God and Paul contrasted those who walk in the Spirit with those who have minds set on the flesh who are enemies of God who refuse to submit to the Law of God. The Law of Moses is the Law of God.

When did I ever say you were permitted to "indulge in the flesh" (Col 2:23)?

I didn't claim that you did.

Yeah, Paul's point is that it isn't the way to be righteous.

We can't earn our righteousness even as the result of having perfect obedience to the Torah (Romans 4:1-5) because it was never given as a way of doing that, through that does not mean that we are not obligated to refrain from doing what God has revealed to be sin through the Torah.

Oops, you're transgressing Romans 6:14 "you are not under Law".

No, I made the case that that verse is referring to us not being under the law of sin, not the Law of God.

We never were "under" the Law of Sin--when Paul says "you are not under Law but under Grace", that corresponds with "serve not in oldness of the letter but in newness of the spirit [of grace]".
I would provide more proofs, but I suspect you, like all other so-called "Torah observant" Christians, are not open to evidence. We'll see, based on your response, if I am right.

IF we were never under the law of sin, then we would have no need for Jesus to have freed us from it. In Psalms 119:29, he wanted to be gracious to him by teaching him to obey the Torah, which is why those who are under grace are not permitted to do what it reveals to be sin. If you could provide any "proofs", then that would be fantastic.

Sorry, from what I've seen, and as I've proven, you have only scant knowledge of Scripture.

All you've offered so far is a bunch of bluster that does not counter what I've said.

 

[soberxp]

Agreed 100% Behold.

But you seem to be forgetting about obedience.
If we do good works, we are obeying God.

If I remember correctly, YOU are the one that stated that it is not necessary to obey God.
Or that good works are not necessary - or something to that effect.

THIS is where you begin to depart Christian teachings.

Not everyone has saved from God is the good workers.
Jesus told the parable of the sower.
The read and learning = 30
The faith = 60
The faith and work = 100

God is our teacher. I don't think a good teacher will treat his students differently, just like in Chinese education. Teachers are attracted to good students. I don't think our God is such a teacher.

Then it depends on what you willing to do,
If you willing keep on the level of faith,that is your willing,
If you keep on the level of faith and work,that is still your willing.


1 Corinthians 3:15
If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.

But the difference is whether you're closer to God.

 

[GracePeace]

Those verses notably do not say that Gentiles to not know the law.

Those verses qualify the Gentiles as those who "sin without law", and who "do not have the Law", but, later, Romans 7:1, we see that they don't know the Law either, which one naturally concludes, it follows logically based on what Romans 2 teaches about the distinctions between Jews and Gentiles that Paul has in mind in Romans 2.

"According to you, they couldn't be doers of the Law justified in the Day of Judgment, because they don't know Torah--God knows differently, "

I denied that that is according to me, so you are misunderstanding me by assigning to me a position that I don't hold.

I'm saying that GIVEN that the text says they don't HAVE the Torah, and, later, they do not KNOW Torah, according to your position, which is that "we cannot be doers of the Law unless we know the Torah--it is upon us, as Christians, to know and serve by Torah", what Paul is saying is an impossibility. Aren't you the one saying we are guilty of sin if we do not know and follow Torah?

I never said that you said that, so I'm not strawmannirg your position.

Then there's no reason for you to raise it (as if you were answering something I'd said). LOL

Jews were in possession of the Torah scrolls and responsible for copying, maintaining, and teaching from them, but that does not mean that the Gentile doesn't know the Torah. There are unbelieving Gentiles who do not know the Torah, but believing ones do know it.

Technically, it's true that a Gentile can obtain the knowledge in the Torah (it's not as if they are "supernaturally" incapable of holding the knowledge of the Law in their minds), but that's not what Paul is addressing. He's addressing what is in the minds of the Jewish believers in the Roman Church, who are looking down their noses at their believing Gentile brothers, LITERALLY BECAUSE they don't walk the same way as they do (eg, "the one who observes a day observes it unto the Lord, the one who does not observe a day to the Lord he does not observe it" Ro 14), because they're not circumcised, not Jewish, don't have the Law. Paul says, "Not so fast!"

Then by all means please point them out.

I've been doing just that--eg, he puts Gentiles in the category of those who sinned "without Law", but Jews in the category of those who sinned "under Law", upending your argument against Paul's casting of Gentiles as not knowing Law.

Paul referred to the recipients of the letter to the Romans as brothers (Romans 1:13), so you are unjustified in thinking that Paul was only referring to Jews in Romans 7:1. A Gentile can know the Torah because they have been taught to be a doer of it by those who have it or because God has put it in their minds and written it on their hearts.

Ah, OK, but that's not Paul's argument--he's warning the Jewish believers to stop boasting and trusting in their mere possession of the Law (without doing it--hypocrisy), their circumcision, their being Jewish, contrary to their Gentile believing brothers who don't know Law, aren't circumcised, and aren't Jewish.

God puts the Torah in our minds and writes in on our hearts so that we can know it and be doers of it.

OK That's my whole argument. Thank you. LOL

I agree that that is not a coincidence.

OK

The Spirit leading us to obey the Torah still involves following what the Torah instructs.

OK we know that's not a valid interpretation, because Christ nullifies Torah laws (eg, about vows, He says it is "of the evil one", thus prohibits it (Mt 5); of the divorce prescribed in the Torah, He says it is now ended (Mt 19))

In Romans 7-8:2, Paul said that the Law of God is good, that he wanted to do good, that he delighted in obeying it, and that he served it with his mind in contrast with the law of sin, which was working within his members to cause him not to do the good that he wanted to do, which was waging war against the law of his mind, which he served with his flesh, which held him captive, and which the Law of the Spirit has freed us from. The Law of God leads us to do what is holy, righteous, and good (Romans 7:12) while the law of sin leads us in the opposite direction by stirring up sinful passions in order to bear fruit unto death (Romans 7:5). So verses that refer something that would be absurd for Paul to delight in should not be interpreted as referring to the Law of God while verses that refer to a law that is sinful, that causes sin to increase, or that hinders us from obeying the Law of God should be interpreted as referring to the law of sin, such as with Romans 5:20, 6:14, 7:5, Galatians 2:19, 5::16-18, or 1 Corinthians 15:56.

For example, it would be absurd to interpret Romans 5:20 as referring to the Law of God as if Paul delighted in causing sin to increase, or to interpret Romans 6:15 as if Paul delighted in sin having dominion over him, or Romans 7;5 as if Paul delighted in stirring up sinful passions in order to bear fruit unto death, but rather all of those verses as describing the role of the law of sin. In Romans 8:2-7, Christ freed us from sin so that we could be free to meet the righteous requirement of the Law of God and Paul contrasted those who walk in the Spirit with those who have minds set on the flesh who are enemies of God who refuse to submit to the Law of God. The Law of Moses is the Law of God.

The Law is "weakened through the flesh" (Ro 8:3), but those who walk after the Spirit fulfill the righteous requirement of the Law (Ro 8:4)--thus we are "not under Law but under Grace".

Paul says he is not under the Law but he becomes as one under the Law for the sake of those under Law, the Jews, when he is ministering to them, if that will lead them to salvation. He does not live like a Jew. His death through faith in Christ freed him from his Covenantal/legal obligation to serve God by the Law (Ro 7:1-6).

I didn't claim that you did.

When you say "We are not permitted to sin" as an answer to me, that makes it sound like I had said that we could.

We can't earn our righteousness even as the result of having perfect obedience to the Torah (Romans 4:1-5) because it was never given as a way of doing that

The Torah was not given for righteous people, but for the unrighteous (1 Ti 1:9).

through that does not mean that we are not obligated to refrain from doing what God has revealed to be sin through the Torah.

Already addressed this before in two ways :
1. Jesus nullified some Torah laws.
2. Paul permits some to observe days and others to not observe those very same laws (on your view, this would not be possible, since Torah says "there shall be one Law for the native born and for the sojourner"--clearly, then, the "one Law" is "each man must be fully convinced in his own mind" (Ro 14:5)).

No, I made the case that that verse is referring to us not being under the law of sin, not the Law of God.

Yes, and it doesn't hold up to scrutiny--do you think that "serve not in the oldness of the letter but in the newness of the Spirit" is just a coincidence, or don't you see that he means "not under Law but under Grace"? Which "Law" were they obligated to serve God in accordance with as long as they lived, but, through dying with Christ, were they set free from (Ro 7:1-6)?

IF we were never under the law of sin, then we would have no need for Jesus to have freed us from it. In Psalms 119:29, he wanted to be gracious to him by teaching him to obey the Torah, which is why those who are under grace are not permitted to do what it reveals to be sin. If you could provide any "proofs", then that would be fantastic.

When Paul says "under" (Ro 6:14), he refers to the accepted way of serving God. Paul hadn't even gotten to Romans 7, describing the law which anthropomorphized Sin decreed, so he wouldn't be treating that subject in Ro 6:14.

All you've offered so far is a bunch of bluster that does not counter what I've said.

As I said, you're no different than the other "Torah observant" Christians.

 

[soberxp]

Those verses qualify the Gentiles as those who "sin without law", and who "do not have the Law", but, later, Romans 7:1, we see that they don't know the Law either, which one naturally concludes, it follows logically based on what Romans 2 teaches about the distinctions between Jews and Gentiles that Paul has in mind in Romans 2.

The verses does not mean that they know the law about God or Bible, but they know the Love, they do anything good out of love, You must have heard of such people, they are few.

The law that we learn is love of God, and God is love.

 

[GracePeace]

The verses does not mean that they know the law about God or Bible, but they know the Love, they do anything good out of love, You must have heard of such people, they are few.

The law that we learn is love of God, and God is love.

As I said before, and apologized for it, there is a language barrier--you're not even addressing the substance of the argument.

 

[soberxp]

As I said before, and apologized for it, there is a language barrier--you're not even addressing the substance of the argument.

I will try my best to make English better.

 

[soberxp]

As I said before, and apologized for it, there is a language barrier--you're not even addressing the substance of the argument.

The "who do not have the law " does not mean that they "sin without law ", but they know the Love, they do anything good out of love, You must have heard of such people, they are few.

The law that we learn is love of God, and God is love.

 

[GracePeace]

The Spirit leading us to obey the Torah still involves following what the Torah instructs.
...
We can't earn our righteousness even as the result of having perfect obedience to the Torah (Romans 4:1-5) because it was never given as a way of doing that, through that does not mean that we are not obligated to refrain from doing what God has revealed to be sin through the Torah.

No, I made the case that that verse is referring to us not being under the law of sin, not the Law of God.

When Paul says "under Law" in Romans 2, describing Jews, is that "under Law" meaning "under Sin's Law", or "under Torah"? Obviously, he means "under Torah"--so, also, in Romans 6:14. It is BECAUSE they are not under Law that Sin will not master them, because...

Romans 7:5For while we were in the flesh, the sinful passions, which were aroused by the Law, were at work in the members of our body to bear fruit for death.
...
7What shall we say then? Is the Law sin? May it never be! On the contrary, I would not have come to know sin except through the Law; for I would not have known about coveting if the Law had not said, “YOU SHALL NOT COVET.” 8But sin, taking opportunity through the commandment, produced in me coveting of every kind; for apart from the Law sin is dead. 9I was once alive apart from the Law; but when the commandment came, sin became alive and I died; 10and this commandment, which was to result in life, proved to result in death for me; 11for sin, taking an opportunity through the commandment, deceived me and through it killed me.

1 Corinthians 15:56The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the Law....

When Paul uses (the very same words) "under Law" in 1 Co 9, describing Jews, does he mean "under Sin's Law"? No, of course not. Jews would not accept him if he lived "under Sin's Law" in their presence, but he takes on their manner of living, "under Torah", in order for them to accept him, and, hopefully, his Gospel.

 

[GracePeace]

I will try my best to make English better.

As I said before, I am not better than you. I do not speak your language better than you speak mine. LOL

Have you tried Duolingo.com ?

 

[soberxp]

As I said before, I am not better than you. I do not speak your language better than you speak mine. LOL

so are you learning Chinese? I just don't think you're likely to learn Chinese.

Have you tried Duolingo.com ?

This website is good.
Thanks.

 

[GracePeace]

so are you learning Chinese? I just don't think you're likely to learn Chinese.

This website is good.
Thanks.

No, I have been studying Japanese, and have been learning Japanese Kanji, though.

Enjoy the website! I am sure you will do very well in your English studies!

 

[soberxp]

No, I have been studying Japanese, and have been learning Japanese Kanji, though,

The usage of Japanese Kanji is more like the old Chinese habit, because Japan learned and used Chinese in the past, probably from the Tang Dynasty.

I have never studied Japanese, but when I play Japanese games, I understand the content through simple Japanese Kanji.

Kanji It's the Chinese pronunciation of the words "Chinese characters", maybe more ancient pronunciation.

It's actually the dialect of here, where the city I live in. Kanji.

Enjoy the website! I am sure you will do very well in your English studies!

:)

 

[GracePeace]

@Soyeong

Paul says he is not under the Law but he becomes as one under the Law for the sake of those under Law, the Jews, when he is ministering to them, if that will lead them to salvation. He does not live like a Jew. His death through faith in Christ freed him from his Covenantal/legal obligation to serve God by the Law (Ro 7:1-6).

This understanding of Romans 7:1-6 mirrors the traditional doctrine of the Pharisees (Paul had been a Pharisee) from ancient times that stands to this day :

Niddah 61b
Our Rabbis taught: A garment in which kil'ayim4 was lost5 may not be sold to an idolater,6 nor may one make of it a packsaddle for an ass, but it may be made into7 a shroud for a corpse. R. Joseph observed: This8 implies that the commandments will be abolished in the Hereafter.9 Said Abaye (or as some say R. Dimi) to him: But did not R. Manni10 in the name of R. Jannai state, 'This8 was learnt only in regard to the time of the lamentations11 but for burial12 this is forbidden'?13 — The other replied: But was it not stated in connection with it, 'R. Johanan ruled: Even for burial'? And thereby R. Johanan followed his previously expressed view, for R. Johanan stated: 'What is the purport of the Scriptural text, Free14 among the dead?15 As soon as a man dies he is free from the commandments'.

 

[Brakelite]

Every orthodox Christian on this forum will affirm the words of Paul, "neither circumcision nor uncircumcision counts for anything, but keeping God's commands;" the point where they will differ is the MEANS whereby that occurs : if God's plan for serving Him in the ew Covenant was "oldness of the letter [of the Law]", and not "newness of the Spirit [of Grace]", how were the Gentile believers deemed "doers of the Torah" (and, based on that righteousness, headed for justification on the Day of Judgment) while neither possessing nor knowing Torah (Ro 2:6-16, 26 27, 7:1)?

The promise of the gospel is that not only is the righteousness of Christ imputed to us, but imparted also. By beholding Christ, by being connected to the Vine, we are changed into the image of Christ. So we are to no longer look to the law and say, oh dear, I need to do better and then go away and strive harder and work harder at being good aged loving and obedient. No. If we look to the law and discover our deficiency, then we are to immediately kneel before the cross, confess our weaknesses, and trust in the holy Spirit to work in is to do and to will God's good pleasure. The holy Spirit abiding in us does what we are incapable of doing. Changing the heart. Filling us with the power and the love of Christ, prompting us to accomplish His will toward Him, and toward our neighbours. It isn't in us to naturally obey God's commandments. Such righteousness is a gift. And it comes by faith. And faith comes through hearing the word of God.
Hence we are "doers of the law" through the power and the righteousness of Christ.

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

Unfeigned Bible

Unfeigned Bible

www.unfeignedbible.app

“Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law. ”
Romans 3:31 KJV

Unfeigned Bible

Unfeigned Bible

www.unfeignedbible.app

“3 For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh: 4 That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. ”
Romans 8:3-4 KJV

Unfeigned Bible

Unfeigned Bible

www.unfeignedbible.app

 

[GracePeace]

The promise of the gospel is that not only is the righteousness of Christ imputed to us, but imparted also.

I'm not really acquainted with the "imputed" concept; I feel safer affirming Jesus' Name is "God Is Our Righteousness" (Jer 23:6), and this is because we are in Him and He is in us, and God is in Him, thus God is in us, and God is our righteousness as we abide in Him.

How would you say this corresponds to God "imputing 'His' righteousness" to us? I, rather, say God, Himself, is our righteousness in Christ.

By beholding Christ, by being connected to the Vine, we are changed into the image of Christ. So we are to no longer look to the law and say, oh dear, I need to do better and then go away and strive harder and work harder at being good aged loving and obedient. No. If we look to the law and discover our deficiency, then we are to immediately kneel before the cross, confess our weaknesses, and trust in the holy Spirit to work in is to do and to will God's good pleasure. The holy Spirit abiding in us does what we are incapable of doing. Changing the heart. Filling us with the power and the love of Christ, prompting us to accomplish His will toward Him, and toward our neighbours. It isn't in us to naturally obey God's commandments. Such righteousness is a gift. And it comes by faith. And faith comes through hearing the word of God.
Hence we are "doers of the law" through the power and the righteousness of Christ.

Or, not even only looking to the Law, and seeing our failures, but even our own thoughts that may accuse us (Ro 2), right?

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

Unfeigned Bible

Unfeigned Bible

www.unfeignedbible.app

“Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law. ”
Romans 3:31 KJV

Unfeigned Bible

Unfeigned Bible

www.unfeignedbible.app

“3 For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh: 4 That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. ”
Romans 8:3-4 KJV

Unfeigned Bible

Unfeigned Bible

www.unfeignedbible.app

Yep, I think we are agreed on these.

 

[Jack]

God's Word, the Bible, is His will. Many Bible rejecters here will not enter His Kingdom.

 

[LoveYeshua]

It's insulting--insulting that it seems like I am being told to believe something that is inconceivable.
"You had better obey Me, or I'll send you to hell, but you're not allowed to fear going to hell while you're obeying, you can only love. Don't acknowledge that I said I'd send you to hell, just love."

Yeah, salvation is a gift, like the Jews' salvation from Egypt, but their behavior AFTER having been saved was apparently STRONGER than the gift, thus more important than the gift, thus rendering the gift ineffective or incomplete or irrelevant.

I've had a couple of experiences like that. It's very confusing.

God is not saying, “Better obey Me.” He gives us a choice that is set before us. You seem to think this choice is somehow unfair or harmful, but is it really to hard to obey God and keep His commandments? Why would He give us the Ten Commandments if they could not be kept? Is loving God and loving your neighbor truly impossible? The One who created all things desires what is best for us. Do you not know this? Love God first, and do not cling to this world—it is not wort holding onto at this time. And about the Law, I am speaking here of the Commandments. Today we have full access to Scripture and no excuse to remain ignorant of them. When Paul speaks of the Law, he is referring to the rest of the law of Moses and never the Commandments, and this is a very important distinction to understand.

there I added a few gramatical errors in the text so you wont think again chat GPT writes for me.

 

[GodsGrace]

I named myself GracePeace because it is a wish that I have for my life.

You certainly have God's grace.
Now you just need His peace!
Only your understanding of God's love for you can give you that peace.

I've heard of scrupulosity before--I was infant baptized Catholic, and my grandmother grew up in a convent in Ecuador, so I have some acquaintance with Catholicism--but I just wish that if I really were wrong in my assessment, and that I am wrong to be motivated to serve out of fear, there was an argument that I could follow to that end, just as I followed words to arrive at my current conclusions.

How about John 3:16?
FOR GOD SO LOVE THE WORLD
THAT HE GAVE HIS ONLY BEGOTTEN SON

God loves the world so much,
that He gave His only begotten Son....
Just like Abraham was willing to give Isaac.

So if God loves you...
why would He also want you to fear Him?

I think that perhaps you just have a deep respect for God...
and this is good.

You could also find peace by just accepting your method of serving Him and to stop trying
to understand His love for you.
Maybe that will come in time.

In the meantime...I find myself agreeing with you in that God does demand our obedience.
Those that believe our behavior AFTER salvation does not matter are very wrong.