What is this thing called "sin"?

[heretoeternity]

One should be wary of what one says, the only consequecne of breaking the law is death, there is no grace for those under the law. What he loves is all these "christians" fighting and bickering of what they understand, because he knows they will not take things to God. he wins so many batttles without lifting a finger all because of mans pride and arrogance. hes being laughing at mans foolishness sice Adam and Eve and will do so untill he gets thrown tino prison.

Gal_5:4 Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.
Gal_2:21 I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain.

Seems sometimes that Jesus wasted His time, doin all He did, and having so few who really desire to know the truth.

As Apostle Paul says "should we sin more so grace abounds? God forbid." and "do we make void the law through faith? God forbid. We establish the law"....in other words..once we are save by grace, we should repent, and follow the law..if we do not want to be obedient to God, the we were never saved period...better check the spirit you aree following if you think you have salvation, and chose to ignore God's commandments...Romans, and 1, 2,3 John...

 

[mjrhealth]

One question HTE , what saves you, you keeping the law or grace by His sacrifice ??

 

[heretoeternity]

One question HTE , what saves you, you keeping the law or grace by His sacrifice ??

You should know better...but of course God's grace saves us, and if we are truly saved,then we should want to please God, by following His Holy law, the Ten commandments...that proves we have been saved..He said in Hebrews
I will write my commandments on their hearts and minds and I will be their God, and they will be my people"...so if you do not have His commandments written on your hearts and minds, well whose people are you??

 

[Barrd]

Just showed you what Paul said sin is in the NT, so if you don't believe Paul we don't have much to discuss.

Why is it always Paul with you?
What about what John said about sin?

1Jn 3:4 Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.

As for what Paul said, it seems to me that sin sabotages our faith, and that is a problem.

But this chapter on whether or not to eat meat makes me uncomfortable. Does it concern you at all that, in 1 Cor 8, Paul says that it is just fine to eat things offered to idols, as long as your conscience doesn't bother you?

1Co 8:4 As concerning therefore the eating of those things that are offered in sacrifice unto idols, we know that an idol is nothing in the world, and that there is none other God but one.

Does this represent a break with the Jerusalem council?

Act 15:29 That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well.

And didn't Jesus condemn this in Rev 2:14?

Rev 2:14 But I have a few things against thee, because thou hast there them that hold the doctrine of Balaam, who taught Balac to cast a stumblingblock before the children of Israel, to eat things sacrificed unto idols, and to commit fornication.

Whatever was Paul thinking?

Using human reasoning won't cut it Barrd. A crazy/schizophrenic person does NOT have faith. You always use strawmen to try and prove your POV.

I'm not completely sure that is true.
About whether a crazy person not being able to have faith that is...I'm not going to address your remark about strawmen.

AGAIN, they weren't saved, and didn't have true faith.

I'm not brave enough to say who is and who is not saved. Suppose it is a kid who sees his abusive parent also abusing his younger siblings, and who truly believes that God has called him to save them all from him by killing him? Such things have happened. I'm not sure I want to question that child's faith.

You're right, they don't always agree, but they've done the work and I'm showing you the work. If you haven't done the work and don't understand it then how can you have an INFORMED opinion?

I appreciate you showing me the work. I truly do.
I'm sure Mr. Lenski was a great man in his time. But in this case, I just don't think he got it quite right.

What do you think "the work" is, then? I've read and studied my Bible...isn't that where it all begins and ends? You've heard me say a number of times that I ain't no scholar...I am a hack writer from Alabama....with Celtic roots, yet.
And I'll bet a nickel you've never once followed the link at the end of my signature and read any of the stuff I've posted in my blog...
Point being...how would you know how INFORMED I am if you've never read me?
Granted, what I do is quite different from what guys like Lenski did. But I do not believe that I could do it without God...

The chapter is about freedom in faith. Paul uses an example that was present. Spiritual laws are applicable in ALL scenarios, not just the one they are used in. Paul is writing about the weak and strong, the mature and immature. He starts out by saying..."Accept the one who's faith is weak..."

I'm afraid I don't see it that way, Stan. Freedom in faith does not give me the right to worship other Gods, make idols to worship or even to eat meat sacrificed to an idol, blaspheme the name of God....it does not give me the right to disrespect the parents who raised me, it does not give me the right to commit adultery, or to lie, or to steal, or to murder...and it does not give me the right to drool over someone else's stuff. (Once again, I skipped over the fourth commandment, not because I believe it no longer applies, but because I do not want this thread to become yet another Sabbath debate.
Freedom in faith gives me freedom from those ties that once held me in sin.
I was a prisoner, locked in a cage of my own making...each bar a desire...a temptation to sin.
The Son has set me free from all that.
And if the Son has set me free, then am I free indeed!

Amen.

 

[H. Richard]

Okay then, good luck with that..satan loves it!

Satan loves those that try to be justified by the works of the law when they know they can't keep the law. Jesus' work on the cross has justified all those that believe and trust in what He did.

 

[H. Richard]

Why is it always Paul with you?
What about what John said about sin?

1Jn 3:4 Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.

As for what Paul said, it seems to me that sin sabotages our faith, and that is a problem.

But this chapter on whether or not to eat meat makes me uncomfortable. Does it concern you at all that, in 1 Cor 8, Paul says that it is just fine to eat things offered to idols, as long as your conscience doesn't bother you?

1Co 8:4 As concerning therefore the eating of those things that are offered in sacrifice unto idols, we know that an idol is nothing in the world, and that there is none other God but one.

Does this represent a break with the Jerusalem council?

Act 15:29 That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well.

And didn't Jesus condemn this in Rev 2:14?

Rev 2:14 But I have a few things against thee, because thou hast there them that hold the doctrine of Balaam, who taught Balac to cast a stumblingblock before the children of Israel, to eat things sacrificed unto idols, and to commit fornication.

Whatever was Paul thinking?

I'm not completely sure that is true.
About whether a crazy person not being able to have faith that is...I'm not going to address your remark about strawmen.

I'm not brave enough to say who is and who is not saved. Suppose it is a kid who sees his abusive parent also abusing his younger siblings, and who truly believes that God has called him to save them all from him by killing him? Such things have happened. I'm not sure I want to question that child's faith.

I appreciate you showing me the work. I truly do.
I'm sure Mr. Lenski was a great man in his time. But in this case, I just don't think he got it quite right.

What do you think "the work" is, then? I've read and studied my Bible...isn't that where it all begins and ends? You've heard me say a number of times that I ain't no scholar...I am a hack writer from Alabama....with Celtic roots, yet.
And I'll bet a nickel you've never once followed the link at the end of my signature and read any of the stuff I've posted in my blog...
Point being...how would you know how INFORMED I am if you've never read me?
Granted, what I do is quite different from what guys like Lenski did. But I do not believe that I could do it without God...


I'm afraid I don't see it that way, Stan. Freedom in faith does not give me the right to worship other Gods, make idols to worship or even to eat meat sacrificed to an idol, blaspheme the name of God....it does not give me the right to disrespect the parents who raised me, it does not give me the right to commit adultery, or to lie, or to steal, or to murder...and it does not give me the right to drool over someone else's stuff. (Once again, I skipped over the fourth commandment, not because I believe it no longer applies, but because I do not want this thread to become yet another Sabbath debate.
Freedom in faith gives me freedom from those ties that once held me in sin.
I was a prisoner, locked in a cage of my own making...each bar a desire...a temptation to sin.
The Son has set me free from all that.
And if the Son has set me free, then am I free indeed!

Amen.

Most religious churches """"blend""" what Jesus and the 12 taught """"UNDER THE LAW OF MOSES" "" and to the Jews who were under the law in with grace

The Jews were set aside because they refused their Messiah and King. It is a FACT that Jesus sent Paul out into the world with a "HIDDED IN GOD"" gospel of grace. It is a totally different gospel. Until a person understands this they will never understand the N.T.

 

[Barrd]

Most religious churches """"blend""" what Jesus and the 12 taught """"UNDER THE LAW OF MOSES" "" and to the Jews who were under the law in with grace

The Jews were set aside because they refused their Messiah and King. It is a FACT that Jesus sent Paul out into the world with a "HIDDED IN GOD"" gospel of grace. It is a totally different gospel. Until a person understands this they will never understand the N.T.

So, you realize that what you think Paul taught was different from what Jesus and the 12 taught. You seriously do believe that Jesus sent Paul out with a totally different gospel.
Interesting...

 

[Barrd]

Satan loves those that try to be justified by the works of the law when they know they can't keep the law. Jesus' work on the cross has justified all those that believe and trust in what He did.

Why is it that you lawless types always seem to think that obedience is the same thing as trying to be justified by the works of the law? No one has said any such thing. We are certainly NOT justified by our works, and we know that.

We also know that faith without works is dead.

Oh, wait...I forgot. You have already cut James out of your Bible...

http://www.christianityboard.com/topic/22294-a-study-on-the-book-of-james/#entry269876

 

[StanJ]

Why is it always Paul with you?
What about what John said about sin?
1Jn 3:4 Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.
Because Paul wrote the majority of the NT. John was talking about those under the OC Law, NOT the NC of Grace. IF you read v5, he states; "IN HIM THERE IS NO SIN" You seem again, not to be able to discern between OCC Law and NC Grace?

As for what Paul said, it seems to me that sin sabotages our faith, and that is a problem.
But this chapter on whether or not to eat meat makes me uncomfortable. Does it concern you at all that, in 1 Cor 8, Paul says that it is just fine to eat things offered to idols, as long as your conscience doesn't bother you?

Actually he says a lot more...he says if your freedom causes another to stumble then DON'T exercise your freedom in front of that person. Nothing the Bible says causes me concern Barrd. Long ago I committed my faith to it and it has NEVER let me down. I'm not really sure what YOU are afraid of but following Paul's teachings should NOT be one of them. Let's stop with all the strawmen shall we. Constantly deflection to other passages to divert attention away from what one passage does teach, doesn't really work with me as you should know by now. The issue is NOT 1 Cor 8:4, it is your lack of accepting Rom 14:23.

Whatever was Paul thinking?[/quote]

He wasn't, he was being inspired of God and anybody can see that the power struggle in the NT was between the Judeo Christians who wanted to control all believers, and Paul who was called to lead and be the Apostle to the Gentiles.

I'm not completely sure that is true.
About whether a crazy person not being able to have faith that is...I'm not going to address your remark about strawmen.
I'm not brave enough to say who is and who is not saved. Suppose it is a kid who sees his abusive parent also abusing his younger siblings, and who truly believes that God has called him to save them all from him by killing him? Such things have happened. I'm not sure I want to question that child's faith.[/quote]

Well that would be your problem then, and nothing I can really help you with as you refuse to be properly instructed. You can ignore the truth and refuse to accept it Barrd, but it doesn't go away. The Bible tells us by their fruits we can know them. John made it plain, as did Paul, but your doubt here is rather contradictory, as you do have enough pride to not accept things clearly true. The bottom line is you have a POV that you will not allow to be changed regardless of the evidence to the contrary.

I appreciate you showing me the work. I truly do.
I'm sure Mr. Lenski was a great man in his time. But in this case, I just don't think he got it quite right.
What do you think "the work" is, then? I've read and studied my Bible...isn't that where it all begins and ends? You've heard me say a number of times that I ain't no scholar...I am a hack writer from Alabama....with Celtic roots, yet.
And I'll bet a nickel you've never once followed the link at the end of my signature and read any of the stuff I've posted in my blog...
Point being...how would you know how INFORMED I am if you've never read me?
Granted, what I do is quite different from what guys like Lenski did. But I do not believe that I could do it without God...[/quote]

Again, your "set in your way" POV will not allow you to see the truth of proper Biblical exegesis. I'm beginning to wonder why I even try with you?
Why would I read you blog when we disagree with so much on this forum? I know because I read your responses here and they clearly indicate such. It doesn't really matter who you discuss with, once your mind is made up you refuse to accept evidence of ANY sort, and you deflect from it all the time.
This is funny, because you just said you believe people can murder with God. You do seem to be double minded a lot.

I'm afraid I don't see it that way, Stan. Freedom in faith does not give me the right to worship other Gods, make idols to worship or even to eat meat sacrificed to an idol, blaspheme the name of God....it does not give me the right to disrespect the parents who raised me, it does not give me the right to commit adultery, or to lie, or to steal, or to murder...and it does not give me the right to drool over someone else's stuff. (Once again, I skipped over the fourth commandment, not because I believe it no longer applies, but because I do not want this thread to become yet another Sabbath debate.
Freedom in faith gives me freedom from those ties that once held me in sin.
I was a prisoner, locked in a cage of my own making...each bar a desire...a temptation to sin.
The Son has set me free from all that.
And if the Son has set me free, then am I free indeed!
[/quote]

More strawmen Barrd. Are you living your walk or your parents walk?
Freedom, is freedom period, but as you don't see that in the NT, you continue to try and relate to that freedom through legal OT/OC ways. That is NOT what Jesus brought. Did you get saved because the Bible told you to or because God's spirit drew you to Jesus and you accepted what He actually was?
Sadly, you don't sound FREE at all....only bound by rules and OT laws.
[/QUOTE]

 

[Barrd]

Why is it always Paul with you?
What about what John said about sin?
1Jn 3:4 Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.
Because Paul wrote the majority of the NT. John was talking about those under the OC Law, NOT the NC of Grace. IF you read v5, he states; "IN HIM THERE IS NO SIN" You seem again, not to be able to discern between OCC Law and NC Grace?

Paul wrote the majority of the NT...but He did not write all of it.
I should think that the most important character in the NT would be Jesus Christ.
It is Jesus Who has the Words of Life...
Still, I am convinced in my own heart that Paul knows what grace is because, of sinners, he was the chief. And Jesus not only forgave him, but chose him to be the "Apostle to the Gentiles".
I just do not believe that the Gospel of Grace is a gospel of lawlessness.

As for what Paul said, it seems to me that sin sabotages our faith, and that is a problem.
But this chapter on whether or not to eat meat makes me uncomfortable. Does it concern you at all that, in 1 Cor 8, Paul says that it is just fine to eat things offered to idols, as long as your conscience doesn't bother you?

Actually he says a lot more...he says if your freedom causes another to stumble then DON'T exercise your freedom in front of that person. Nothing the Bible says causes me concern Barrd. Long ago I committed my faith to it and it has NEVER let me down. I'm not really sure what YOU are afraid of but following Paul's teachings should NOT be one of them. Let's stop with all the strawmen shall we. Constantly deflection to other passages to divert attention away from what one passage does teach, doesn't really work with me as you should know by now. The issue is NOT 1 Cor 8:4, it is your lack of accepting Rom 14:23.
[/QUOTE]Whoa, who said that I do not accept Romans 14:23? I just think it has a broader interpretation than you seem to be giving it.

Whatever was Paul thinking?

He wasn't, he was being inspired of God and anybody can see that the power struggle in the NT was between the Judeo Christians who wanted to control all believers, and Paul who was called to lead and be the Apostle to the Gentiles.
[/QUOTE]So, you are relegating James to "the Judeo Christians who wanted to control all believers"?
Whoa, wait. Was Jesus a "Judeo Christian who wanted to control all believers" too?

I'm not completely sure that is true.
About whether a crazy person not being able to have faith that is...I'm not going to address your remark about strawmen.
I'm not brave enough to say who is and who is not saved. Suppose it is a kid who sees his abusive parent also abusing his younger siblings, and who truly believes that God has called him to save them all from him by killing him? Such things have happened. I'm not sure I want to question that child's faith.

Well that would be your problem then, and nothing I can really help you with as you refuse to be properly instructed. You can ignore the truth and refuse to accept it Barrd, but it doesn't go away. The Bible tells us by their fruits we can know them. John made it plain, as did Paul, but your doubt here is rather contradictory, as you do have enough pride to not accept things clearly true. The bottom line is you have a POV that you will not allow to be changed regardless of the evidence to the contrary.

[/QUOTE]You know, Stan, I could say the very same thing about you.
You do not have a teachable spirit....

I appreciate you showing me the work. I truly do.
I'm sure Mr. Lenski was a great man in his time. But in this case, I just don't think he got it quite right.
What do you think "the work" is, then? I've read and studied my Bible...isn't that where it all begins and ends? You've heard me say a number of times that I ain't no scholar...I am a hack writer from Alabama....with Celtic roots, yet.
And I'll bet a nickel you've never once followed the link at the end of my signature and read any of the stuff I've posted in my blog...
Point being...how would you know how INFORMED I am if you've never read me?
Granted, what I do is quite different from what guys like Lenski did. But I do not believe that I could do it without God...

Again, your "set in your way" POV will not allow you to see the truth of proper Biblical exegesis. I'm beginning to wonder why I even try with you?
Why would I read you blog when we disagree with so much on this forum? I know because I read your responses here and they clearly indicate such. It doesn't really matter who you discuss with, once your mind is made up you refuse to accept evidence of ANY sort, and you deflect from it all the time.
This is funny, because you just said you believe people can murder with God. You do seem to be double minded a lot.
[/QUOTE]You made my point for me.
Listen to yourself for just a minute. "You are set in your way"...and you, Stan, are not? "I'm beginning to wonder why I even try with you?" You see yourself as a teacher with me as your student? How did that happen? I never enrolled in any classes under you. I thought we were discussing these things as two equal adults.
Yes, we disagree on a few things. We also agree on some things. Sometimes what you see as "evidence" is not what I see as "evidence"...sometimes it is.
And, fyi, what I write is fiction, Stan. Fiction, and poetry, and song lyrics. I am not a scholar, I don't do books on why I'm right and why everyone else ought to think like me.
For anyone who might be interested, here is a short piece of mine. (It's all under copyright, folks.)

Offering​

God Who was made flesh for me​

And nailed upon a lonely tree​

What gift can I bring that would suffice​

To repay such great sacrifice?​

All that I am I lay at Your throne​

Make me, Lord, Your very own​

​

That's the kind of stuff I do, Stan. As I have said...you do not know me.

I'm afraid I don't see it that way, Stan. Freedom in faith does not give me the right to worship other Gods, make idols to worship or even to eat meat sacrificed to an idol, blaspheme the name of God....it does not give me the right to disrespect the parents who raised me, it does not give me the right to commit adultery, or to lie, or to steal, or to murder...and it does not give me the right to drool over someone else's stuff. (Once again, I skipped over the fourth commandment, not because I believe it no longer applies, but because I do not want this thread to become yet another Sabbath debate.
Freedom in faith gives me freedom from those ties that once held me in sin.
I was a prisoner, locked in a cage of my own making...each bar a desire...a temptation to sin.
The Son has set me free from all that.
And if the Son has set me free, then am I free indeed!

More strawmen Barrd. Are you living your walk or your parents walk?
Freedom, is freedom period, but as you don't see that in the NT, you continue to try and relate to that freedom through legal OT/OC ways. That is NOT what Jesus brought. Did you get saved because the Bible told you to or because God's spirit drew you to Jesus and you accepted what He actually was?
Sadly, you don't sound FREE at all....only bound by rules and OT laws.
[/QUOTE]Do you think that because I understand obedience that I do not also understand grace?
My parents walk? Did I not tell you that my parents were a bit sketchy in their Christianity? Especially my Mom. Oh, we were members of a church...at least, I think we were. And we did go...generally on Easter Sunday. When my Mom died, I looked all over her house for her Bible...she did not have one. But she did have some JW literature.
Didn't I tell you about the time I sneaked out of the house to go see "The Greatest Story Ever Told"...it was winter, and deadly cold outside. I did a lot of sneaking out. My Mom never knew that I was a member of the choir. Heck, I was 50 years old before she knew I could sing... No, Stan...I am definitely not living my parents walk.
Did I get saved because the Bible told me to or because Jesus drew me? What kind of a question is that? How did you learn of Jesus in the first place? Wasn't it from the Bible?
I can honestly say that I read the Bible because Jesus drew me. Jesus had fascinated me from the very first. I can't remember a time when I was not fascinated...one might almost say obsessed...by Him.
As to whether I am free or not, I will let my poetry speak for me once more:

Free Indeed​

I have been a prisoner​

I have been hemmed in​

Tied by cords of wickedness​

Bound by ropes of sin​

Fettered by these ruthless chains​

Helpless in my need​

Until the Son came to set me free​

And now I am free, indeed!​

And now, you know

 

[StanJ]

Sorry Barrd but the above is far to screwed up in format for me to use, so I'll just say I really can't make heads or tails of your latest missive but it does appear you are stuck on your opinion without any real exegesis from scripture, so UI see no reason to continue to lay things out for you that you are not willing to accept.
I indeed am NOT your teacher, but I am also not your peer when it comes to God's word. Do with that what you want and receive what you want from God's word, but I'm not going to continually repeat myself.

 

[Barrd]

Sorry Barrd but the above is far to screwed up in format for me to use, so I'll just say I really can't make heads or tails of your latest missive but it does appear you are stuck on your opinion without any real exegesis from scripture, so UI see no reason to continue to lay things out for you that you are not willing to accept.
I indeed am NOT your teacher, but I am also not your peer when it comes to God's word. Do with that what you want and receive what you want from God's word, but I'm not going to continually repeat myself.

Stan, I like you. Like I said before, you remind me of my Grandfather.
He got into a debate once with my uncle, who went to the library and produced several reference books to prove his point.
My grandfather swept them from the table, and declared "They shouldna let fools write books!" And that was the end of the argument.

Now, what that old man knew, he knew well, that is true. The problem was that what he didn't know, he also knew better than anyone else.
He fought tooth and nail against indoor plumbing...but once he had experienced an indoor bathroom, he was hooked. Before long, that old farmhouse had three of them.
And he kept his money, first in a mattress, and then in a built in wall safe. Having lived through the depression, he didn't trust banks.
You might say he was set in his ways...

I'm sorry, Stan, but I do not see you as an authority at all...I'm afraid I do see you as my peer. I think you are very intelligent, and well-read, and very capable of determining scripture...what you call exegesis...but I do not see you as any more intelligent than I am myself. More educated? Perhaps in some ways. But not in any significant way. Although I have a deep respect for you, and I have actually learned from you, you are not my superior in any way.
And you have told me before that you are not my friend, which made me very sad.

Call me arrogant if you will, but that is truly my opinion.

 

[StanJ]

Stan, I like you. Like I said before, you remind me of my Grandfather.
He got into a debate once with my uncle, who went to the library and produced several reference books to prove his point.
My grandfather swept them from the table, and declared "They shouldna let fools write books!" And that was the end of the argument.

I agree with your grand father, but to be clear, I am the one showing you THE reference book and you are the one sweeping it off the table.

I'm sorry, Stan, but I do not see you as an authority at all...I'm afraid I do see you as my peer. I think you are very intelligent, and well-read, and very capable of determining scripture...what you call exegesis...but I do not see you as any more intelligent than I am myself. More educated? Perhaps in some ways. But not in any significant way. Although I have a deep respect for you, and I have actually learned from you, you are not my superior in any way.
And you have told me before that you are not my friend, which made me very sad.
Call me arrogant if you will, but that is truly my opinion.

I'm actually not claiming to be, but you wouldn't accept my words even if I was. You made up your mind and only the Holy Spirit can teach you.
BTW, I never claimed to be MORE intelligent than you, but being as your perspective is skewed, you take instruction as a personal attack on yourself instead of a chance to learn. Guess you don't learn much from your pastor either? I don't find you arrogant Barrd, just defensive and a tad insecure.

 

[Barrd]

I agree with your grand father, but to be clear, I am the one showing you THE reference book and you are the one sweeping it off the table.

LOL!
You want to run that by me again? No, never mind. It's one of those "you had to have been there" things.

Did you know that I almost always go and GOOGLE any references you, or Oz, or WW send to me?
I have an amazing respect for Oz...one of the few that I do see as more advanced than I am and someone I will take instruction from.
The rest of you...you, WW, Justaname, etc. not so much. Seriously, there are some really wacky ideas among you guys.
Then we have a few wanna-bees...I won't mention names...I don't think I need to...who need serious help. They think they have it all together, poor kids...and they aren't even close. Seriously, we ought to be praying for those people.

But you know what? When it comes right down to it, the honest truth is, we are all wanna-bees. It's sad, really...this arguing about who is smarter than who...when in the long run, all our intellect is nothing when we compare it to the omniscience of God...

I'm actually not claiming to be, but you wouldn't accept my words even if I was. You made up your mind and only the Holy Spirit can teach you.
BTW, I never claimed to be MORE intelligent than you, but being as your perspective is skewed, you take instruction as a personal attack on yourself instead of a chance to learn. Guess you don't learn much from your pastor either? I don't find you arrogant Barrd, just defensive and a tad insecure.

You were the one who said that you are not my peer. I'm pretty sure you weren't trying to tell me that I am the better of we two. I say that you are my peer. You are also the one who said that you are not my friend...you don't like me calling you "brother", or any other terms of endearment. And I have respected your wishes in that regard. You have been relegated to the realm of "nodding acquaintances".
Sorry...

Now let me ask you...since you recognize that you are not MORE intelligent than me, where do you get off thinking that I ought to take instruction from you? Not that I have not learned from you, I have. But I don't see you as the ultimate receptacle of all wisdom, sorry.

And when it comes to this idea that so many seem to have that it must be law OR grace, I'm sorry, but I cannot agree. It makes absolutely no sense...if there is no law, there is no need of grace. You don't need to be forgiven for breaking a law that doesn't exist, that's just silly.

I suppose I have gotten defensive a time or two in these threads. "You always do that, Barrd." "You are skipping verses, Barrd." "Nobody is interested in what you have to say, Barrd." Basically, "you are out on a limb all by yourself, Barrd." As if that were anything new.

One thing I am not, however, is insecure. I like myself just fine, thank you, and I am quite happy with my life. I hold my own around here, and I don't feel as if I've a durned thing to be ashamed of. I just don't feel as if I've got to exaggerate my own self-importance in these threads. Perhaps you are mistaking Christian humility for insecurity? Maybe...

 

[justaname]

Barrd,

Obviously sin existed before the Law as sin and death entered the world through Adam. God punished because of sin man with the flood of Noah. Therefore sin exists outside the Law or without it's prior establishing with humanity.

Have you ever done a word study of sin?
What is the definition of sin both in Hebrew and Greek? How do both NT and OT authors use the word within their contexts?

A definition of sin can be viewed as rebellion or disobedience to God. This is the one culmination of all the variances of sin. This is the first sin committed in the garden by Adam, and is the root of every other sin committed afterward. It encompasses everything from pride to murder.

For all that is in the world-the desires of the flesh and the desires of the eyes and pride of life-is not from the Father but is from the world. - 1 John 2:16

Sin is anything done not in faith. More than relationally to other humans sin is against God first including all sin that is against another human being. Being created in His image any time we reflect something contrary to the good nature of God we are sinning against Him.

How can we be in rebellion if we do not first have Law? Because Adam was given a command by God that he directly and knowingly disobeyed.

16 And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, "You may surely eat of every tree of the garden,
17 but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die." - Genesis 2:16-17

The death experienced by Adam was both spiritually and physically, although his physical death was not immediate. This then enabled sin to manifest itself in other diverse ways that conflicts with God's nature and the image man was made in.

The Law was given so we can recognize sin therefore sin is transgression of the Law. Yet sin is not limited to the Law that was written on stone tablets for now God's Laws are written on our flesh and given in our minds. The Royal Law is love. Anything done outside seeking the highest good for God first must be considered sin. We as new creatures in Christ are to live towards God and not towards the world. No longer are we to be self seeking, living for ourselves, rather living for the Father seeking to serve Him in every moment and every thought; always and in all things. This is walking in the Spirit. Every fiber of our being is to be in servatuide towards God; slaves to righteousness. This includes all thought, all words, and all action. Anything less is sin.

Aren't you glad we have Christ?

 

[Barrd]

Barrd,

Obviously sin existed before the Law as sin and death entered the world through Adam. God punished because of sin man with the flood of Noah. Therefore sin exists outside the Law or without it's prior establishing with humanity.

Have you ever done a word study of sin?
What is the definition of sin both in Hebrew and Greek? How do both NT and OT authors use the word within their contexts?

A definition of sin can be viewed as rebellion or disobedience to God. This is the one culmination of all the variances of sin. This is the first sin committed in the garden by Adam, and is the root of every other sin committed afterward. It encompasses everything from pride to murder.

For all that is in the world-the desires of the flesh and the desires of the eyes and pride of life-is not from the Father but is from the world. - 1 John 2:16

Sin is anything done not in faith. More than relationally to other humans sin is against God first including all sin that is against another human being. Being created in His image any time we reflect something contrary to the good nature of God we are sinning against Him.

How can we be in rebellion if we do not first have Law? Because Adam was given a command by God that he directly and knowingly disobeyed.

16 And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, "You may surely eat of every tree of the garden,
17 but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die." - Genesis 2:16-17

The death experienced by Adam was both spiritually and physically, although his physical death was not immediate. This then enabled sin to manifest itself in other diverse ways that conflicts with God's nature and the image man was made in.

The Law was given so we can recognize sin therefore sin is transgression of the Law. Yet sin is not limited to the Law that was written on stone tablets for now God's Laws are written on our flesh and given in our minds. The Royal Law is love. Anything done outside seeking the highest good for God first must be considered sin. We as new creatures in Christ are to live towards God and not towards the world. No longer are we to be self seeking, living for ourselves, rather living for the Father seeking to serve Him in every moment and every thought; always and in all things. This is walking in the Spirit. Every fiber of our being is to be in servatuide towards God; slaves to righteousness. This includes all thought, all words, and all action. Anything less is sin.

Aren't you glad we have Christ?

Very prettily put, Justaname.
A very good answer. Thank you.

Yes, I am very glad we have Christ.

 

[StanJ]

LOL!
You want to run that by me again? No, never mind. It's one of those "you had to have been there" things.

That's what I did, only in reverse. I know, it suck when people use your own logic in you.

Did you know that I almost always go and GOOGLE any references you, or Oz, or WW send to me?
I have an amazing respect for Oz...one of the few that I do see as more advanced than I am and someone I will take instruction from.
The rest of you...you, WW, Justaname, etc. not so much. Seriously, there are some really wacky ideas among you guys.
Then we have a few wanna-bees...I won't mention names...I don't think I need to...who need serious help. They think they have it all together, poor kids...and they aren't even close. Seriously, we ought to be praying for those people.

Most of the things I know are indeed supported by many on the net, which is why I use them. In this framework, nobody really takes my word for it, so I quote accomplished scholars. I think Oz is a great guy, and we ARE friends. Have known him for a few years now and we met online on another forum. I rarely disagree with him, but he is not my peer and neither are you. We do not exist in the same social or church settings, we do not have the same understanding of the Bible, so we cannot be peers. I won't bother gossiping about others even though I know they do it towards me. I quite frankly don't care. As far as wacky ideas, when you can refute them, you can call them wacky. Mean while belittling them only shows one thing IMO.

But you know what? When it comes right down to it, the honest truth is, we are all wanna-bees. It's sad, really...this arguing about who is smarter than who...when in the long run, all our intellect is nothing when we compare it to the omniscience of God...

Barrd I never claimed to be smarter than you, just more knowledgeable about the Bible, just as Oz is more knowledgeable than I am about it. This response only reflects your personal insecurities which you really should have a handle on if you're going to debate online.

Now let me ask you...since you recognize that you are not MORE intelligent than me, where do you get off thinking that I ought to take instruction from you? Not that I have not learned from you, I have. But I don't see you as the ultimate receptacle of all wisdom, sorry.
And when it comes to this idea that so many seem to have that it must be law OR grace, I'm sorry, but I cannot agree. It makes absolutely no sense...if there is no law, there is no need of grace. You don't need to be forgiven for breaking a law that doesn't exist, that's just silly.
I suppose I have gotten defensive a time or two in these threads. "You always do that, Barrd." "You are skipping verses, Barrd." "Nobody is interested in what you have to say, Barrd." Basically, "you are out on a limb all by yourself, Barrd." As if that were anything new.
One thing I am not, however, is insecure. I like myself just fine, thank you, and I am quite happy with my life. I hold my own around here, and I don't feel as if I've a durned thing to be ashamed of. I just don't feel as if I've got to exaggerate my own self-importance in these threads. Perhaps you are mistaking Christian humility for insecurity? Maybe...

I'm pretty sure you know the answer to all these queries, regardless of how sarcastically you've framed them. A good sign is the type of exaggeration and embellishment you use to defend your POV. I've seen it in many people over many years, including myself, and all I can respond to you is that one can only lead a horse to water, but one cannot make it drink.
All you've basically done here is created a thread and decided to not engage in real discussion, despite your protestations to the contrary

 

[Barrd]

That's what I did, only in reverse. I know, it suck when people use your own logic in you.

We were talking about my grandfather, not some deep theological issue, Stan. Obviously, you couldn't possibly know anything at all about the man, and now you want to talk about logic? I know you think you have to know just everything, but this is a tad over the top, even for you.

Most of the things I know are indeed supported by many on the net, which is why I use them. In this framework, nobody really takes my word for it, so I quote accomplished scholars. I think Oz is a great guy, and we ARE friends. Have known him for a few years now and we met online on another forum. I rarely disagree with him, but he is not my peer and neither are you. We do not exist in the same social or church settings, we do not have the same understanding of the Bible, so we cannot be peers. I won't bother gossiping about others even though I know they do it towards me. I quite frankly don't care. As far as wacky ideas, when you can refute them, you can call them wacky. Mean while belittling them only shows one thing IMO.

Honestly, nobody is "gossiping" about anyone. That veiled barb failed to hit it's target. And you should be ashamed of yourself for even trying that one, Stan. I'm surprised at you.
As for finding support on the net...given that one could find support for just about any idea you could possibly imagine on the internet, that really isn't as impressive as you seem to think. Every denomination has it's accomplished scholars. For that matter, every religion has them. I'd bet we could pull up support for Wicca, for Neo Paganism, for Satanism...you name it, someone has written a paper on it.

Barrd I never claimed to be smarter than you, just more knowledgeable about the Bible, just as Oz is more knowledgeable than I am about it. This response only reflects your personal insecurities which you really should have a handle on if you're going to debate online.

I do not believe that you are "more knowledgeable" than I am. Your insistence that you are only reflects your own personal insecurities.

I'm pretty sure you know the answer to all these queries, regardless of how sarcastically you've framed them. A good sign is the type of exaggeration and embellishment you use to defend your POV. I've seen it in many people over many years, including myself, and all I can respond to you is that one can only lead a horse to water, but one cannot make it drink.

There were no "queries" there. And you need to stop making these little digs. This isn't a "Miss Congeniality" contest, Stan.
You are right about one thing, however. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink.

All you've basically done here is created a thread and decided to not engage in real discussion, despite your protestations to the contrary

Another baseless accusation. Obviously you think "real discussion" means accepting your pov. Not so. "Real discussion" means that each one of us ought to have the opportunity to present his or her own pov.

 

[justaname]

Very prettily put, Justaname.
A very good answer. Thank you.

Yes, I am very glad we have Christ.

I am glad too!

To speak a bit about Jesus; He always did what was pleasing to the Father. This is the example we are to strive towards. Sin is any measure of failure in this respect, be it things we do or things we don't do.

Thank God for the Advocate we have in Christ! In Him we already have the victory over sin, while we continue now to strive against it. We are not lawless yet we are not under the Law. Through His grace we are able to do what is pleasing in His sight, yet if we "miss the mark" (sin) Christ's propitiation has satisfied His wrath.

 

[Barrd]

I am glad too!

To speak a bit about Jesus; He always did what was pleasing to the Father. This is the example we are to strive towards. Sin is any measure of failure in this respect, be it things we do or things we don't do.

Thank God for the Advocate we have in Christ! In Him we already have the victory over sin, while we continue now to strive against it. We are not lawless yet we are not under the Law. Through His grace we are able to do what is pleasing in His sight, yet if we "miss the mark" (sin) Christ's propitiation has satisfied His wrath.

I think we find ourselves in agreement, Justaname.
Hoodathunk?

Let me ask you...it is my contention that the Ten Commandments are still valid. They cannot be "done away" because they are basic, fundamental laws...necessary to human society.
What say you?