Law and Grace - shall we sin, because we are not under the Law?
LAW AND GRACE
This article may be accessed online at the following link: Law and Grace
Romans 6:14-15 KJV 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.
Romans 6:14-15 NET For sin will have no mastery over you, because you are not under law but under grace. (15) What then? Shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? Absolutely not!
Romans 6:14-15 is one of the most discussed, misunderstood, and misrepresented scripture in the Bible. The context of these two verses concerns Paul’s exegesis about Christian members considered lawless. Like many throughout the Church age these people believed themselves separated from the Law and therefore had a license to commit the sins of their choice.
Has the law been put away? Paul states: “sin is lawlessness” and earlier in Romans 3:20 he states, “through the law comes the knowledge of sin”. Therefore, how does Romans 6:14-15 put away the law and free individuals from obeying the law?
Paying the Debt How did the law work in the Old Testament? I will attempt to explain. If a person stole a goat. He was required to repay his debt with two goats. If unable to pay the debt of two goats the thief’s property was to be sold until the cost of two goats was fulfilled. If his property could not match the amount of the debt then he was to be sold as a bondservant for the length of time needed to pay the debt in full.
If the thief could pay his debt then he was released and put under grace. Being under grace did not mean he was no longer under the law and could then steal more goats without punishment. It merely meant that his debt had been paid but the thief was still responsible for obeying the law.
Some sin debts could not be redeemed by repaying double the amount. In these cases the debtor received stripes with a whip and then released under grace as the thief. Some more severe sins such as rape, adultery, or murder could not be redeemed either by repaying double or with stripes. In these instances the debtor was put to death with the actual judgment taking place at the great White Throne Judgment of Jesus Christ. Although not everyone agrees, it is my belief that everyone will be redeemed at the great White Throne Judgment. Some debtors may require many years of bondservant duty. It is my thought (not doctrine) there will be another 1000 years of possible judgment after the Millennium as described in the Revelation.
Returning to the goat thief, he was under the law for the length of time it took to repay the debt. The law of God had dominion over him. The sin of the thief empowered the law to keep him enslaved until the debt had been paid. Again, when the debt was paid the debtor was no longer under the law but under grace.
The goat thief could also be redeemed by a near kinsman (or close relative such as a father, an uncle, or a brother). A stranger or a person of no relation would not qualify to be a redeemer. The near kinsman would be required to post money, livestock, or property equal to double the value of the stolen item(s). When payment was made the thief or debtor was no longer under the jurisdiction of the law but under grace. To my knowledge prior records were not kept or maintained which is an element of grace. There is also no mention of a jail or prison system for debtors or law breakers.
The law has no power to judge a man whose sin has been paid in full.
Stripes and Death Remember that only when the debt has been paid is the sinner under grace and not under the judgment of the law. The Son of God, Jesus Christ, paid the price for all sin. Prior to His crucifixion He was scourged with a whip. The limit of stripes according to the Law was forty. It is not known the number of stripes Jesus received.
An Internet Account of Roman Scourging
Scourging was a brutal punishment, but it was standard practice before a crucifixion. The whip, the flagellum, had several thongs, each one of which had pieces of bone or metal attached. It made a bloody pulp of a man’s body. The person to be whipped was stripped of his clothing, tied to a post or pillar, and beaten until his flesh hung in shreds.
There was no maximum number of strokes: the whipping could go on as long as the soldier administering it wished. Men frequently collapsed and died as the result of a flogging. The Jewish historian Josephus says with some pride that he had whipped rebels in Galilee until their entrails showed.
After the scourging, beating, thorns pushed into His head, beard ripped out, Jesus was led away carrying a heavy post. He was then nailed to a cross which was then set upright. His legs were not broken but He was pierced with a sword. The One who committed no sin, fulfilled all the payment debts for a sinner. Jesus was the ultimate living sacrifice in the manner of a sacrifice for sin as performed in the Tabernacle or Temple. The law has no power to judge a man whose sin has been paid in full.
If the believer commits a sin – that debt has already been paid for by Jesus Christ and therefore we are not under the authority of the law but under the grace of God. Like the goat thief we are still required to obey the Law while under grace. Romans 3:23 states that “all have sinned”, therefore, every person is a debtor in the eyes of the Law, and we are a bondservant (or slave) due to our sin. However, our complete sin debt has been paid by our Redeemer, Jesus Christ.
Jesus could have freed us by putting away His law and legalizing all sin, but instead He upheld the law and paid the complete debt (full price). This eliminated our conviction as a bondservant to the law and allowed us to be a bondservant to Jesus Christ.
Paul reminds believers in Romans 6, that by the law of redemption, they were now free to stop sinning, because they were purchased with a price. They were now to serve their new Master, rather than continue in sin. The law of redemption makes this clear in Lev. 25: 53, saying of the redeemed debtor, “Like a man hired year by year shall he be with him,” that is, the redeemer. The law of redemption does not set the debtor free, but rather it gives him a new master. In other words, because Jesus has redeemed us, we are now to serve Him and have no right to continue in sin that grace may abound. We have only been set free from the dictates (or laws) of Sin, which is here personified as our former master.
Jesus came as our near kinsman with the right of redemption, having come both of the seed of Abraham and as flesh and blood to establish kinship with Adam (Heb. 2: 14). The price of redemption was His life, His blood on the cross, which, admittedly, was worth far more than the entire debt that mankind has ever incurred for sin. Yet He was willing to pay that price to redeem mankind and His creation.
Romans 3:31 states, “Do we then nullify the law through faith? May it never be! On the contrary, we establish the law”. If Romans 3:31 and later 6:14 appear to be contradictory, it is because we do not understand Paul’s writing.
>>>>>Some ideas and concepts have been blessedly borrowed from several papers by Dr. Stephan Jones which are available as Kindle editions on Amazon.com.<<<<<</span>
Anyone can join.
Anyone can contribute.
Anyone can become informed about their world.
"United We Stand" Click Here To Create Your Personal Citizen Journalist Account Today, Be Sure To Invite Your Friends.
Please Help Support BeforeitsNews by trying our Natural Health Products below!
Order by Phone at 888-809-8385 or online at https://mitocopper.com M - F 9am to 5pm EST
Order by Phone at 866-388-7003 or online at https://www.herbanomic.com M - F 9am to 5pm EST
Order by Phone at 866-388-7003 or online at https://www.herbanomics.com M - F 9am to 5pm EST
Humic & Fulvic Trace Minerals Complex - Nature's most important supplement! Vivid Dreams again!
HNEX HydroNano EXtracellular Water - Improve immune system health and reduce inflammation.
Ultimate Clinical Potency Curcumin - Natural pain relief, reduce inflammation and so much more.
MitoCopper - Bioavailable Copper destroys pathogens and gives you more energy. (See Blood Video)
Oxy Powder - Natural Colon Cleanser! Cleans out toxic buildup with oxygen!
Nascent Iodine - Promotes detoxification, mental focus and thyroid health.
Smart Meter Cover - Reduces Smart Meter radiation by 96%! (See Video).
| Online: | |
| Visits: | 1,603,888,823 |
| Stories: | 8,151,670 |
Whistler Blowers, Insiders
That’s about as concisely as it can be put, Ephraim.
And I doubt any of the antinomians will be swayed by it. But I’ll save this post to direct any of those antinomians to in the future whenever I next end up re-tangled in the argument with them.
Well done, brother.
Thank you.
Test
Forgive the test…..I am having some severe cloud cover and rain. I’ll answer back when sat is more reliable.
In other words, because Jesus has redeemed us, we are now to serve Him and have no right to continue in sin that grace may abound. We have only been set free from the dictates (or laws) of Sin, which is here personified as our former master.
That’s quite an opinion….I didn’t realize Sin had laws.
Laws have sin (Jesus) so sin (Jesus) has laws (insert pet master race).
Sin is lawlessness. The New Testament holds our New Commands or Laws, starting with
John 14:15If ye love me, keep my commandments.
16And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever; 17Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.
18I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you. 19Yet a little while, and the world seeth me no more; but ye see me: because I live, ye shall live also. 20At that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you. 21He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him. 22Judas saith unto him, not Iscariot, Lord, how is it that thou wilt manifest thyself unto us, and not unto the world? 23Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him. 24He that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings: and the word which ye hear is not mine, but the Father’s which sent me.
25These things have I spoken unto you, being yet present with you. 26But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.
crowpie
I will step into this conversation briefly;
I know you believe the Commandments are gone and Christ gave us new ones. I have seen your long list.
Have you spent any time in Jeremiah 31? This is what Paul quoted in Hebrew 8 concerning the New Covenant.
Jeremiah 31 is showing that with the New covenant God will cause the Law to be written in our inward parts and hearts ——– but did you know the word in verse 33 for Law is –Torah??
Jeremiah and Paul are tell us that God is now putting in our natures — HIS TORAH.
and I am sure you realize the Torah is the 5 Books that Moses wrote which include the 10 Commandments the Sabbath and the Holy Days and all the Statutes and Judgement you do not like.
If the LAW was nailed to the stake and Christ created new ones — then how can it and why would it then be written in the hearts and inward parts of Christians?
31 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:
32 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day [that] I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD:
33 But this [shall be] the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put——– my law—— in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.
34 And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.
Truthseeker,
You and I have realized where we differ. You will not change The Word by your insistence that there is not A Father, A Son and a Holy Ghost (see the verses above). All are One, and One are All.
If the Father gave the Law in the Old Testament and then said in Jeremiah that He would make a New Covenent…then Jesus is the same who said those words. If Jesus said, “If you love me follow MY (did you get that? He said MY not the old law or your Jewish Torah) commandments,” then God said it.
You will not change my mind on this subject……and you can’t change the scriptures that prove them ……no matter how hard you try. Sorry.
crowpie
I do understand , there are a few billion that believe as do you,
I am of the .001 % that rejects the way of this world.
I have proven to myself over these last few years that unless the Father call no man can come to Christ.
PS it was Christ that wrote the Law with His finger not the Father,
Christ states no man has seen the Father and Moses spoke face to face.
Then you have just proven my point……
“Then you have just proven my point……”
CrowPie,
If you agree that Messiah was the Lawgiver atop Mount Sinai, and you acknowledge that Messiah said:
“If you love Me follow MY commandments…”
…then how has Truthseeker proven your point by saying what he’s said?
crowpie
You follow some catholic dogmas such as the trinity and I reject all things catholic.
Catholics embrace “Unknowable mystery” such as the trinity which defies the logic of God.
I seek logical and facts which are rarely found in the 4000 flavors of confusion called christianity.
I am told to prove all things and the only way I can prove anything is by God given logic.
That is why I am in the .001%
Truthseeker
You and your statist tin foil suit both.
crowpie
Really???
statist tinfoil suit? –Says the person that follows the gentile roman catholic “invented” dogma!
Sunday, easter, the trinity, going to heaven, immortal soul all came from the “gentiles” that began the church at gentile Rome long after the Apostles had died– that is after they hung Christ on a stake and destroyed the temple, murdered Jews and burned Jerusalem.
And I am “wacky” for NOT followings gentiles???? I follow no man!! or women!
Crowpie I found this in the book posted here on BIN called: “the House of Israel returns.”
Abraham, the father of the Faithful and others followed the Torah LONG before it was included in the Covenant. Do you really think what existed from the beginning has been cast aside?? not logical– and again catholic are not logical but love mystery.
1. Seventh Day Sabbath set apart: Gen 2:2-‐3; Torah Instruction—Ex 20-‐10-‐11
2. Adam/Eve and the shedding of blood for covering/atonement (Kapahar): Gen 3:21; Torah Instruction—Lev 17:11
3. Cain Abel and the sacrifice of blood: Gen 4:4; Torah Instruction—Lev 17:11
4. The unauthorized genetic mixing of kinds, and the world is subsequently destroyed because of it, Genesis 6; Torah Instruction—Lev 19:19
5. Noah’s sacrifices—clean animals versus unclean animals: Genesis 7 & 8:20; Torah Instruction—Lev 11:1-‐47 & Dt 14:1-‐20
6. Abraham leaves idolatry: Gen 12:1-‐4 (Terah the idol maker—Wikipedia); Torah Instruction—Ex 20:4, Lev 26:1, Dt 5:8
7. Sarah’s right to keep Gentile servants. Gentile servant is considered Lawful property: Gen 16:1-6; Torah Instruction—Lev 25:44-‐46
8. Abraham right to sleep with servant as property (shifkaw): Gen 16:1-‐6; Torah Instruction—Lev 25:44-‐46
9. Sarah’s right to own the children of a servant: Gen 16:1-‐6; Torah Instruction—Lev 25:45-‐46
10. Abraham and circumcision: Gen 17:9-‐14; Torah Instruction—Lev 12:2-‐3
11. Abraham’s tithe to priesthood: Gen 14:18-‐20; Torah Instruction—Lev 27:32-‐34 & Num18:26-‐30 & Dt 12:17-‐19
12. Abraham’s special setting apart and partaking of wine & bread (Kiddush) with priesthood: Gen 14:18; Torah Instruction—Lev 23:9-‐14
13. Esau gives up birthright (firstborn status): Gen 25:31-‐33; Torah Instruction—Deut 21:17
14. Later, Esau does not receive firstborn blessing: Gen 27:38-‐41; Torah Instruction—Deut 21:17
15. Jacob and the 10% tithe to G-‐d: Gen 28:22; Torah Instruction—Lev 27:32-‐34 & Num 18:26-‐30 & Deut 12:17-‐19
16. Originally Jacob left his parents with a dowry for a bride of one of Laban’s daughters (Rebekah’s Brother) Gen 28:1-‐3. This dowry is stolen and Jacob is left completely empty-‐handed. Jacob works exactly 7 years for each bride as a “debt” servant: Gen 29:18-‐20; Torah Instruction—Deut 15:1-‐3 and 12-‐15
17. Rachel is not to be touched as she is unclean, or anything touching her is considered unclean, during her menstruation: Gen 31:34-‐35; Torah Instruction—Lev 15:19
18. Jacob cares for his animals welfare: Gen 33:17; Torah Instruction—Deut 22:1-‐4
19. Dinah and the Torah Law of intercourse before marriage, justified the man (no guilt) if he married the defiled female—this is why Jacob was so distraught with his sons who killed the men of Shechem who were trying to make the original defilement right by the Laws of Torah: Gen 34:1-‐31; Torah Instruction—Deut 22:28-‐29
20. Reuben’s defiling of his father’s bed with Bilah: Gen 35:22 & Gen 49:3-‐4; Torah Instruction—Lev 18:8
21. Jacob’s use of the Torah Law of firstborn is first deemed to Reuben to the heir of his unloved wife taken into consideration, but then disqualified due to misbehavior to the same Laws of Torah (sleeping with his father’s concubine): Gen 35:22 and Gen 49:3-‐4; Torah Instruction— Deut 21:15-‐17
22. Subsequently, the potential right of firstborn is now given to Simeon, and then Levi; but their actions were cursed and they were disqualified. This too satisfies the inheritance Torah Law to the unloved woman, Gen 49:5-‐7; Torah Instruction—Deut 21:15-‐17
23. Jacob uses the Torah Laws of the disqualification of the three sons of Leah to now act as 3 witnesses against Leah’s line Gen 49:5-‐7. Jacob has the Torah right to now skip over to Rachael’s line and start from that firstborn: Gen 48; Torah Instruction—Num 35:30 and Deut 17:6
24. Because of Leah’s 3 sons becoming disqualified by specific actions against the Laws of the Torah, the leadership and double portion now can legally go to Joseph, Rachael’s firstborn, as Jacob has proved his willingness to follow the “Laws of the Unloved Woman”: Gen 48:8-‐22; Torah Instruction—Dt 21:15-‐17
25. Simeon and Levi disqualified as next in line according to the Laws of Torah for cruelty to an animal, and for disallowing the Torah right of Shechem to make it right by Dinah, Gen 49:5-‐7; Torah Instructions— Gen 1:26; Lev 22:28; Deut 22:6 and Deut 28:29-‐30
26. There are two parts to the right of the first-‐born: The Leadership and the Blessing portion. Joseph receives the firstborn “Blessing” and was later to receive the Leadership of the Tribes when he was older. This is what the special robe was all about which he received from his father Jacob—it was the sign that Jacob had made a decision, and that Joseph was to receive “firstborn” birthright status and eventual Leadership over all the other brothers. This is why the brothers were so upset when they saw Joseph with the special robe—it meant that Joseph was to rule them.
The brothers rebel against this notion and sell Joseph into slavery. When Joseph is then thought dead, there became in Jacob’s mind a vacuum of Leadership. Instead of the firstborn status going to the next-‐in-‐line Benjamin, Rachael’s next son, he opts to go back to Leah’s line. Why—especially with so many disappointments already from Leah’s line? Judah is next-‐in-‐birth-‐line by Leah after the 3 previous candidates are disqualified for bad behavior (Reuben, Simeon, Levi), so Judah receives the “ruling scepter” of the family in lieu of his coming firstborn Leadership by default. In short, by Judah selling Joseph into slavery it secured his position as next in line. It may be that Jacob thought G-‐d killed Joseph because he had skipped over Leah’s line and went to Rachael’s line. Naturally, because Jacob loved Rachael so very much, he would have then given the birthright to Benjamin—but he does not. Again, why? Because of his fear that he may have broken the Torah Law of the “Unloved Woman”, Jacob feels he might have sinned by skipping over Leah’s line; so now he feels he has passed over the Torah-‐legal “birthright” procedure. At this point, Jacob wants to make sure he gets it right, so he goes back and applies the Laws of the Torah of the Unloved Woman; thus, Jacob goes back to Leah’s line and gives the ruling scepter of the family to Judah, his fourth in-‐line son through Leah who was still a viable candidate. Had Jacob known what Judah had literally done to Joseph this would never had happened. We see first-‐hand this “ruling sceptre” that Judah had received as it was temporarily given to Tamar. But, because Joseph was not technically and legally dead, as Jacob found out later, this led to a Torah-‐legal paradox of sorts. This is why you see Jacob in Genesis 49, when Jacob is about to die, give Judah “ruling” status—because he had already done so and it could not be retracted; and it is also why he then reiterates Joseph’s special “blessing” status, because he had already done so, and it could not be retracted. Gen 49:8-‐12 and Gen 49:22-‐26; Torah Instructions—Deut 21:15-‐17 27.
Judah initially follows through with the Torah-‐legal Law of the “Rights of the Dead Brother”. Then, after losing two sons (because of sin), Judah fore-‐goes this same Law and denies his daughter-‐in-‐law Tamar her right to marry the next brother in-‐line so to give a name-‐sake heir to the dead brother(s). She subsequently uses creative intrigue to capture this Torah right by sleeping with Judah and becoming pregnant. Judah eventually “gets it”, and states that she is “legally” more righteous than he, even though she used deception to capture this Torah-‐legal right to children from Judah’s genetic line. Gen 38:6-‐30; Torah Instructions—Deut 25:5-‐6 28.
When the twin sons of Tamar are born, there becomes a big question of who is technically the firstborn. Zarah technically “opens the womb” first and a scarlet thread is tied around his wrist;
Pharez then pushes by Zarah and comes all the way out of the womb first. According to the Torah, the one who opens the womb is considered firstborn status, Gen 38:27-‐30; Torah Instructions—Ex 13:2; Deut 21:15-‐17
29. Joseph considers sleeping with another man’s wife a sin against G-‐d Gen 39:7-‐10; Torah Instructions—Ex 20:14; Lev 20:10; Deut 5:18
Truthseeker
Crowpie I found this in the book posted here on BIN called: “the House of Israel returns.”
——
All of this is covered by the Noahide laws. That is not really the ‘Torah’. The later Torah (that you want) generally excludes gentiles (you).
======
Sunday, easter, the trinity, going to heaven, immortal soul all came from the “gentiles” that began the church at gentile Rome long after the Apostles had died– that is after they hung Christ on a stake and destroyed the temple, murdered Jews and burned Jerusalem.
——————–
Oh so now you have decided that it was the gentiles who killed Christ and not the law? Why not a meteorite? Or runaway donkey-cart?
======
And I am “wacky” for NOT followings gentiles???? I follow no man!! or women!
——
You mean you recognize ‘gentiles’ but not ‘Israel’. A post Jewish statist after Pix and Pharisees own heart. Scatter scatter scatter.
===
Obviously your nonsense about the church in Babylon and ‘gentiles killing the jew’ is just your IN THE WORLDNESS social conformism.
—
Stake? Now you’re a Jehovahs Witness?
crowpie
I won’t bother you any longer,,
I found a conversation that explains my view on this subject in great depth with the corresponding verses. I do not have permission (I have asked but have not heard back as yet) to show it here. I will post the link and you can look for yourself. It will save a great deal of time and what Mayhem refers too as ‘dancing.’
I will await your response.
http://www.iswasandwillbe.com/christandtorah.php
It has been said that Jesus did not break the law but only the extra additions and distortions added by the scribes and Pharisees.
Example: Matthew 12:1-2 KJV At that time Jesus went on the sabbath day through the corn; and his disciples were an hungred, and began to pluck the ears of corn, and to eat. (2) But when the Pharisees saw it, they said unto him, Behold, thy disciples do that which is not lawful to do upon the sabbath day.
Gleaning was not against the law as given by Moses and was not given as a Sabbath no-no. Gleaning on the Sabbath as unlawfull was apparently added by some scribe at some point in time either during or after the Babylonian captivity.
I will read the link more carefully tomorrow and perhaps add more information.
Exodus 20:10 – But the seventh day [is] the sabbath of the LORD thy God: [in it] thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that [is] within thy gates:
Now you may not have spent much time in a field, but I have. It does not matter what name you give it…Gleaning, gathering, picking, cutting…..or what crop it is…..wheat, cotton, tomatoes, corn, squash, green beans…..it’s ALL work.
They were eating a snack, not harvesting corn.
Excuses…..
Is it permitted to reach one’s hand into the refrigerator on the Sabbath Day, in order to withdraw a snack?
Of course it is.
It is legal to eat on the Sabbath, but food preparation, i.e. cooking with fire, boiling or baking, is forbidden.
Weren’t the disciples feeding themselves from the stalks, hand to mouth? Indeed they were. There is no difference between what the disciples did and reaching into a refrigerator or a cupboard on the Sabbath Day.
The rabbis insist that not even a light switch may be activated. That is an erroneous interpretation of the Word, which teaches that the Sabbath is not a burden but should be a rest and a pleasure.
Work is forbidden. But the rabbis extend this to mean things like tying shoelaces. The rabbis today would make the same objection the Pharisees made in the Gospel account. And they would be just as wrong as the Pharisees were to do so. Neither the Pharisees nor the rabbis have accurately comprehended the nature of the Law or the spirit of the Law.
You should have not stopped reading here is the part you missed including the authors credit- Mike Vinson
“You keep saying, “Jesus cannot and did not oppose the Torah,” but you don’t address the fact that Christ said that He and His disciples had done just that. It is Christ Himself, who tells us that He and His disciples did that “which was not lawful for him to eat, neither for them which were with him, but only for the priests.” You don’t address the fact that Christ admits that he and His disciples, as “the priests in the temple, profane the sabbath, and are blameless.” I am not guilty of saying that Christ did “that which is not lawful.” Those are the words of Christ concerning the actions of Himself and His disciples. I am not accusing Christ of “profaning the sabbath.” It is He who says that He and those who were with Him, like “the priests in the temple, profane the sabbath, and are blameless.” Here is the scripture:
Matthew 12:1 At that time Jesus went on the sabbath day through the corn; and his disciples were an hungred, and began to pluck the ears of corn, and to eat.
Matthew 12:2 But when the Pharisees saw it, they said unto him, Behold, thy disciples do that which is not lawful to do upon the sabbath day.
Matthew 12:3 But he said unto them, Have ye not read what David did, when he was an hungred, and they that were with him;
Matthew 12:4 How he entered into the house of God, and did eat the shewbread, which was not lawful for him to eat, neither for them which were with him, but only for the priests?
Matthew 12:5 Or have ye not read in the law, how that on the sabbath days the priests in the temple profane the sabbath, and are blameless?
Matthew 12:6 But I say unto you, That in this place is one greater than the temple.
Matthew 12:7 But if ye had known what this meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice, ye would not have condemned the guiltless. [And why is He guiltless?]
Matthew 12:8 For the Son of man is Lord even of the sabbath day.
And yet you ask:
How could he say that he came from the Father, if he declared the Words of the Father to be “outdated” or to be in opposition to his “new,” “better” way? He would surely be a false Messiah.
Not if Torah was only intended to rule “until the Seed should come” (Galatians 3:19). Not if “But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster” (Galatians 3:25). Under these conditions, Christ would have been a ‘false Messiah,’ ONLY if there had been no “reformation.”
Hebrews 9:10 Which [Torah] stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them [only] until the time of reformation.
The “new” is new. If it weren’t “new,” then Christ would not have called it “new.” “The NEW agrees not with the old” (Luke 5:36), and it is “better” or it would not replace the old.
Hebrews 8:13 In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.
John 13:34 A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another.
1 John 2:8 Again, a new commandment I write unto you, which thing is true in him and in you: because the darkness is past, and the true light now shineth.”
I didn’t stop, CrowPie, and have read the entire document at least twice. It’s a long winded attempt to build a case and i’m suggesting you’ll make no friends cutting-n-pasting the entire document piece by piece.
Lets cut straight to the chase and address the critical points upon which Mr Vinson rests his case. In reply to the Matthew 5:17 objection, to the law being abolished, it is argued that the subsequent verse provides the answer wherein Jesus satisfied the condition…
“Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.” Matt 5:17,18
… but that doesn’t sound right no matter how it’s put. Not to mention the condition is “heaven and earth” passing not the crucifixion. I’d prefer the translation had it “has happened” rather than “be fulfilled” but the passage can be understood either way. Till all be fulfilled contextually pertains to the law and the prophets, dunnit, and while Jesus certainly fulfilled many prophecies there are still others that are yet to happen. Therefore, condition unmet, not one jot or tittle has yet passed and Mike Vinson is wrong.
But that website isn’t a total waste, CrowPie, and you might read the treatise on Trinitarianism because, according to my scant knowledge, Mr Vinson debunks that nonsense very thoroughly.
Your quite funny, Mayhem.
As you will see, if you had taken the time to read my comment just before where I had posted the link….you would see that I had no intention of ever posting any of the conversation to begin with, until it became obvious that entire verses (Matt 12:1-8) were totally over looked or out right ignored by members of this conversation. I see you are still ignoring them.
And since you say,” i’m suggesting you’ll make no friends cutting-n-pasting the entire document piece by piece,” That only tells me that the information therein would lead to some serious questioning of your argument.
Btw…..I do believe that is the most rambling, babbling, nonsensical excuse for a comment I have ever seen you attempt to make.
I have indeed read your comments, CrowPie, and while you might say that you didn’t want to cut-n-paste the opinion of some man you went ahead and did just that which speaks more of your hypocrisy than it does anything else.
Regardless; we have been through all these arguments and what you have failed to provide is any Scripture showing the Law has been abolished that doesn’t have the author contradicting himself.
Why don’t you shut your yap and study in subservient silence as you are commanded to do? See 1Cor 14:34,35 and 1Tim 2:11,12.
So you Do actually believe some of the verses in the New Testament.
Funny how it’s the four little ones that allow you to belittle and keep women under foot, but you totally ignore the great many that tell you the “old law is obsolete”, and to “judge not.”
Talk about hypocrisy and cherry picking. Your “down wit tat like fo flat tires.”
Whatever makes you think i don’t believe the gospels and revelations, CrowPie?
Speaking of Revelations; what laws of God do you think Angel 3 was referring to in Rev 14:12?
“Whatever makes you think i don’t believe the gospels and revelations, CrowPie?”
Simply put…..I see very little in your actions or arguments, past or present, that reflect a belief in the New Testament. Period.
I see a litigator, nothing more.
/entertainment/2015/11/so-hilarious-youll-wanna-share-with-everybody-2576066.html
Now, back to the subject and getting back to Christ and His disciples plucking the corn on the sabbath, why, if Christ were a practicing Jew, as you and all Christendom affirm, why didn’t He take this opportunity to explain that He was actually keeping Torah, instead of admitting to doing that “which was not lawful for Him?” Why does He not show respect for Torah instead of claiming, “in this place is one greater than the temple?” Why does He not take this opportunity to explain for us, and for all people of all time, that He is in reality, keeping Torah while failing to ‘prepare for the sabbath?’ Why does He instead admit to “profaning the sabbath?” Why not expound upon the proper understanding of “Thou shalt do NO work therein,” instead of simply telling us, “The Son Of Man is Lord even of the sabbath day?” It is as if He were deliberately trying to make a point, “the piece that was taken out of the new agreeth not with the old.”
No. Jesus was the true Messiah, and his teachings (if we understand them properly) reflect this.
Amen! He went out of His way to prove that he had come to reform a “carnal commandment.”
Hebrews 7:16 Who is made, not after the law of a carnal commandment [Torah], but after the power of an endless life.
What proved Christ’s Messiahship is the fact that He fulfilled all the prophecies about Himself.
Not the least of these prophecies is the one which predicted that He was to be ‘like Moses.’ Moses was a great reformer. Before Moses any Israelite could erect an altar anywhere and offer an offering to God. After Moses this became a sin.
Deuteronomy 12:13 Take heed to thyself that thou offer not thy burnt offerings in every place that thou seest:
Deuteronomy 12:14 But in the place which the LORD shall choose in one of thy tribes, there thou shalt offer thy burnt offerings, and there thou shalt do all that I command thee.
Before Moses there was no weekly sabbath, no Passover, nor any other holy day. There was no tabernacle, no priesthood, and no structured, sacrificial system, as outlined in Leviticus. There was certainly no tithing system before Moses.
Romans 5:13 (For until the law [Moses] sin [against the unchanging, yet unrevealed "law of the Spirit"] was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.
Romans 5:14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses [the period when "there is no law."], even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam’s transgression [a 'transgression is an 'imputable,' sin], who is the figure of him [Christ] that was to come.
Adam prefigured Christ inasmuch as his actions would affect “all” without their consent. Our fabled ‘free will’ was not a factor in our being created “in Adam.” Neither will it have any part in our salvation from death. Once again, the first is always the ‘shadow.’ Yes, even though it was God Himself who made the “first Adam …in His image,” the ‘first Adam’ was only a type of “the true” ‘image of God.’ So it is with Torah. Torah is only a shadow and a type! Again, yes indeed! The first Adam, “in the image of God,” is in Christ “outdated!”
Hebrews 10:1 For the law [Torah] having a shadow of good things to come [Christ and the new covenant], and not the very image of the things…”
1 Corinthians 15:21 For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead.
1 Corinthians 15:22 For as in [the first 'outdated'] Adam all die, even so in Christ [the second Adam] shall all be made alive.
And again:
Romans 9:16 So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.
The entire volume of scripture declares that God “worketh all things After The Counsel of His Own Will.” (Ephesians 1:11). For more on this subject read the paper by this name on the web page.
Now just as Christ is prefigured by that which has the exact opposite effect, so the “law of the Spirit of life” is prefigured by that which has the exact opposite effect. Torah is called “the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones” (2 Corinthians 3:7).
1 Corinthians 15:45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.
1 Corinthians 15:46 Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual.
1 Corinthians 15:47 The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven.
I hope that helps to explain what I believe the scriptures tell us with thanks to Mike Vinson.
Many things are left unexplained within the context they are presented. It has been my experience, apparently not yours crowpie, that most things are explained somewhere within scripture. However, it requires a level of faith and trust. Things that bother you (nothing personal) not only don’t bother me but I generally don’t dwell on them. I don’t treat the New Testament as a legal document searching for a loophole. I consider the things it says as true and the things I don’t understand I don’t compile a contradictory explanation.
I am not attempting to be insulting because I think you are a relatively intelligent person but it seems that you are attempting to understand the Gospel on an intellectual level without true faith which requires the indwelling of the Holy Spirit.
To me, if the scripture says that Jesus was without sin, then in my opinion He is without sin. If it says that Jesus fulfills all prophecy then He does just that.
I would hesitate to say that Jesus was a practicing Jew. To my knowledge he never offered an an animal sacrifice but of course He did not need to do so. On the other hand He could have been a practicing Jew but not the Edomite-Pharasee type of practicing Jew. The word “Jew” became necessary during the Babylonian captivity because the nationality of the nation of Judah ceased to be a reality since it was completely destroyed and was no longer a nation.
You said, “instead of admitting to doing that “which was not lawful for Him?” Those words came out of the mouth of a Pharasee not Jesus to my knowledge. I don’t recall Jesus saying, “I broke the law”.
So long as you continue to repeat yourself, CrowPie, i’ll not bother to engage. Also you are ignoring my questions while continuing to pose your own and that will not do.
If you think the commandments belittle women and keep them under foot (1Cor 14:34,35 and 1Tim 2:11,12) then you might as well have doing as you will for the whole of your law.
For a certainly i’m sexist, as in knight-in-shining-armour-princesses-on-pedestals kind of way, and maybe a little bigoted, to boot, but i hadn’t imagined it was so obvious.
Perhaps you could quote where i have overstepped the mark just to be sure that it’s not simply something that’s only in your head?
Ephraim,
“Many things are left unexplained within the context they are presented.”
I’d be happy to post the entire body of work, however it’s quite comprehensive. Seek and ye shall find.
“I don’t treat the New Testament as a legal document searching for a loophole.”
ummmm…..apparently you do if you ignore the verses that plainly state that the old law is D.E.A.D.
” it seems that you are attempting to understand the Gospel on an intellectual level without true faith which requires the indwelling of the Holy Spirit.”
…..And I find that you rely wholly on intelligence and have no faith at all….or you would believe Entire body of The Word….even those that state the Old Law is Obsolete.
“To me, if the scripture says that Jesus was without sin, then in my opinion He is without sin. If it says that Jesus fulfills all prophecy then He does just that. ”
On this we fully agree.
I don’t recall Jesus saying, “I broke the law”.
The verse is as follows:
Matthew 12:2 But when the Pharisees saw it, they said unto him, Behold, thy disciples do that which is not lawful to do upon the sabbath day.
Matthew 12:3 But he said unto them, Have ye not read what David did, when he was an hungred, and they that were with him;
Matthew 12:4 How he entered into the house of God, and did eat the shewbread, which was not lawful for him to eat, neither for them which were with him, but only for the priests?
Matthew 12:5 Or have ye not read in the law, how that on the sabbath days the priests in the temple profane the sabbath, and are blameless?
Matthew 12:6 But I say unto you, That in this place is one greater than the temple.
Matthew 12:7 But if ye had known what this meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice, ye would not have condemned the guiltless. [And why is He guiltless?]
Matthew 12:8 For the Son of man is Lord even of the sabbath day.
Did you see the use of the words, “have ye not read in the law, how that on the sabbath days the priests in the temple profane the sabbath, and are blameless?”
Your first statement in regard to this incident was that they were having a ‘snack,’….and not working.
Okaaaaay. First question. When was the last time YOU SNACKED on uncooked corn kernels?
He wasn’t snacking…He wasn’t even HUNGRY. Uncooked corn kernels are all but unchewable (you can…but after afew it’s gonna brek teeth and kill your gut.)
Corn must have a Fire and be COOKED.
He was BAITING the Pharisees to say something so that He could teach this very lesson. That if He wanted to and those believers with him…..He could Harvest on the Sabbath, build a fire or whatever He work he wanted…..because the old Law waxeth old.
Christ Jesus was sent to be our Savior, Redeemer and our EXAMPLE in all things……even in behaviors in respect to the old Law and Holy days.
Christ Jesus was making the point that He was and is greater than the old Law and than the temple. The, in Fact, is the temple in which Christians should reside, hence the often used phrase…”In Christ.”
John 1:17 For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ
Yet you say Israel was already ‘redeemed’ and given ‘grace.’
You see, there is only type and shadow in the old covenant.
Hebrews 10:1 For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect.
That is why we have statements like this all through the new covenant:
Col 1:6 Which is come unto you, as it is in all the world; and bringeth forth fruit, as it doth also in you, since the day ye heard of it, and knew the grace of God in truth:
As opposed, yes opposed to the ‘typical,’ ‘grace,’ of:
Exodus 33:16 “For wherein shall it be known here that I and thy people have found grace in thy sight?”
The typical ‘grace’ Israel received while in the typical wilderness is just as typical as the typical “bread from heaven they received while in the typical wilderness :
John 6:31 Our fathers did eat manna in the desert; as it is written, He gave them bread from heaven to eat.
John 6:32 Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Moses gave you not that bread from heaven; but my Father giveth you the true bread from heaven.
Yes, Israel was ‘redeemed’ and brought out of Egypt. Here is what the scripture says about that:
Exodus 33:16 For wherein shall it be known here that I and thy people have found grace in thy sight? is it not in that thou goest with us? so shall we be separated, I and thy people, from all the people that are upon the face of the earth.
God ‘going with us,’ and ‘Christ in you,’ are two quite distinct experiences.
What is your point about ‘grace,’ and ‘redemption,’ in the old covenant? Is this supposed to add something to, “For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ” (John 1:17)? Israel’s redemption and grace in God’s sight was not the reality of redemption.
It is not my intentions to be contentious with you, Ephraim. I only wish to share my belief with you.
Mayhem,
You tend to try and keep all but your friends under your boot, so in that respect, maybe my remark was unfair.
“So long as you continue to repeat yourself, CrowPie, i’ll not bother to engage.”
Good. Then I’ll be sure to repeat myself as often as possible.
“Corn must have a Fire and be COOKED.”
My Bible might not be any good after all because it says nothing about the corn being cooked let alone why it must be cooked. As it happens, CrowPie, corn is juicy and so so sweet straight off the stalk but that might well be different in your parts.
Mayhem,
“Rev 14:12 Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.
Which one of those Ten Commandments are NOT Honored/covered or expected to be followed in Full by the 51 Commandments the Christ Jesus gave in the New Testament?
“As it happens, CrowPie, corn is juicy and so so sweet straight off the stalk but that might well be different in your parts.”
You must have some of that New GMO corn.
The only corn I have ever seen on a stalk was HARD as stone and DRY as DIRT. So dry in fact that it could be immediately could be ground into corn meal.
But hey….I only grew up in the country. Where did you grow up again?
Mayhem,
Thanks for letting me know your actually reading what I post. I was beginning to wonder if I was wasting my efforts.
(I know that corn is sweet and juicy. It is allowed to dry for milling)
The point is the same however, Jesus still baited the Pharisees.
Don’t be a grumptail over this, now.
For a time i was fostered on a 300 cow dairy farm, in between institutions, that cropped it’s own supplements and i got quite partial to knocking back a bit of corn right off the cob. But yeah it was always harvested when it was fully matured, hard as rocks, dry as a bone and completely inedible.
But where does it say, in the Bible, that the corn was fully matured? Whether it was early season, mid season or late season were we told or do you presume? GMO corn
um, yeah, about that 
i’m pretty sure we’re riddled with it 
You spoke of the 50 odd commandments, of Jesus, and how they summarized the Ten. So, to begin with, lets look at, arguably, Jesus’ foremost command…
In John 15:9-17 (KJV) Jesus says, among other things – “If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father’s commandments, and abide in his love.” and “for all things that I have heard of my Father I have made known unto you”.
I put it to you, CrowPie, that Jesus didn’t summarize the law rather He repeated it because we weren’t doing it right and gleaning on the Sabbath was one of the things we had misunderstood and/or misapplied. Jesus did not break the law instead He demonstrated it’s correct application.
I have made my point. That is all I wished to do.
Write a full rebuttal if it makes you feel better, but be sure you consider the entire body of work line by line, and not argue the points piece meal.
Then a reader with eyes to see and ears to hear will know the truth when they see it.
Do you mean like how you didn’t even attempt any sort of rebuttal to my Matthew 5:17-18 objection?
Why must i be held to a higher standard, CrowPie, than that which you abide?
Or, do you mean, like how you simply ignore the questions you don’t like or can’t answer…
“where does it say, in the Bible, that the corn was fully matured? Whether it was early season, mid season or late season were we told or do you presume?”
… hmm?
You know I have a sense of humor Mayhem, don’t try and make mountains out of mole hills.
” Why must i be held to a higher standard, CrowPie, than that which you abide?”
You are free to quit this thread any time you like. Your standard is your own.
I, however , am telling you that I made my point. I am happy with that result. I don’t feel the need to stand around and defend it.
In truth…I don’t LIKE arguing scripture. If you will recall my entry on the BIN boards…I often stated that we are ‘Not to be contentious.”
I don’t mind discussing scripture….but that is hard to do here. Feathers are far flung rather quickly and I wont point fingers because I am just as guilty now as everyone else.
I’m tired of contention…..it is a negative emotion and I need all the positivity I can muster.
Fair enough, CrowPie, and if you get the chance…
http://www.iswasandwillbe.com/trinity.php
… you’ll see that you and Mike Vinson don’t always agree. What’s that called, again, when you pick and choose only the bits that agree with you?
When did I ever endorse his entire site? Show me where I did that. All I did was post a link to a specific “conversation” on a current topic.
And no…..I don’t always agree with everyone on every biblical subject…..but that is the way it often goes…..if we exclude everyone that we have disagreements with, then we cut ourselves off to a great deal of good in the Lords work. His Grace is sufficient.
BTW….when did you get the idea that I believed in a catholic trinity concept outside of board gossip?
I have many times said, The Father, The Son and the Holy Ghost….which is scriptural. They are the God Head.
I don’t ever recall using the words ‘trinity.’
Now, I will admit…..I don’t understand what the chatholics believe in this regard….means little to me. But board gossip is what you are promoting here….simply because I was kind to Ctrent33.
I got the idea from the horses mouth…
“You will not change The Word by your insistence that there is not A Father, A Son and a Holy Ghost (see the verses above). All are One, and One are All.”
… that’s where.
Allow me to correct myself,…..although I am sure I have said this and even provided the scripture that said the Holy Ghost is the Comforter that Christ said He would send us.
Spirit, CrowPie, not “Ghost” and in particular the Holy Spirit.
Spirit – G4151 – pneuma – spirit, wind, breath.
Ghost – G5326 – phantasma – apparition, spirit, ghost, phantom.
The “Holy Ghost” is a construct of the church that reveres dead people. Which church? It’s big and its top dog wears a fish hat.
The doctrine of Trinity is un-biblical for there is the Father and the Son and they are One. Can i explain that? Heck i don’t even understand it but that is what Scripture says. There is no “three” and, in fact, the word “trinity” appears nowhere in the Bible.
Holy Ghost, is used 90 times in the King James…and since the words Ghost and Spirit are often used to mean the same thing….Your own definition lists the words interchangeably……you can climb down off that high horse. Ghost is biblical. So stop trying to find something to nit pick.
I corrected myself on the Holy Ghost being God…did I not. So I get in too big a hurry to make my point…..you have made mistakes here on the boards too……and what then was my reply? I believe it was…”no biggie…it happens.”
I have Never used the words “trinity” on these boards…as I have already pointed out…..So with that being said, “Are you still trying to push gossip or are you still trying to belittle?
I can only lead you to the water, CrowPie, but if you refuse to do the word study there’s nothing i can do about that. Ghosts are dead people whereas the Holy Spirit is the nature of God and not a being. It is, in my opinion, a part of what the Father breathed into the handful of dust.
I did see you correct yourself, CrowPie, but still wasn’t certain you fully understood the point. I’m still not certain that you do but i trust you’ll consider my arguments, in due course, and that is enough.
Who said what? I didn’t say that you’d used the word “trinity” just as i never said that you endorsed Mr Vinson’s entire site.
Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Father
You don’t seem to understand Mayhem, I don’t “need” nor do I desire your input on the matter. I have my own full understanding of the matter. You may have needed to be drug to the water and have just in past years begun your studies in depth….but I took these in depth studies in college level courses in my late teens and early twenties.
Do me the honor of taking your zeal to a newbies ears and only after you have a full understanding of the English language. Because you tend to like to twist vocabulary words too. And Reminder: Holy Ghost is indeed in the New Testament 90 times.
But I guess that is just another part of the New Testament that you want to tear down rather than accept…….
Acceptance is one of the things you’ll have to accomplish in order to follow Christs commands.
I’m beginning to think you landed somewhere on the autism spectrum since you seem to lack the ability to take a hint, or even a direct statement at face value. You don’t even seem to notice or care when others are green in the face of your self appointed, misplaced, misguided, juvenile attempts at herding others into your thinking.
I have tried very hard to be nice Mayhem, but in case you haven’t noticed…..it is still perfectly “legal” for everyone here to disagree on religious matters.
Or have you decided ISIS has it right and those who don’t agree with Mayhem should be “dealt” with?
If you Do agree that it is still legal….and that there is still such a thing as courtesy…..then I will say it ONE MORE TIME and see if you notice…….
I made my point. That is all I wished to do. If you wish to refute the body of work then do so if it makes you feel better.
Otherwise, Are you still talking? Cause I’ve quit listening.
“You don’t seem to understand Mayhem, I don’t “need” nor do I desire your input on the matter.”
Just as well, as far as i’m concerned, that this is not about you and me then.
I know the term “Holy Ghosts” is in the KJV, CrowPie, and it turns my gut every time i see it. The word that is being translated (G4151 – pneuma – spirit, wind, breath.) does not allow for “Ghost” even though you’re comfortable with it.
I’m autistic, misplaced, misguided, juvenile and want the heads of everyone who disagrees with me! Is that really what you’re saying? Who’s got their panties in a wad again?
“If you wish to refute the body of work then do so if it makes you feel better.”
That’s about the most horrid thing you’ve ever hurled at me and is that what you call trying very hard to be polite?
mayhem
There are some, actually, many that do not care for facts nor logic.
Their minds are made up and nothing can change them.
It makes no difference what scripture clearly states — minds are set in concrete.
If it were otherwise – all – would believe Christ and His WORD and all would be on the same page.
I have tried repeatedly with many using logic and plain scripture — it makes no different – none.
I gave up with crow and others, nothing can penetrate their thick skulls. They in effect say ” I do not care what the truth is — this is what I chose to believe and that is that.”
Not to mention, Truthseeker, that they’ve invariably studied theology at the college level.
I find that extremely arrogant but if their claim helps them sleep at night who am i to say?
Don’t worry about me and my girl true love often starts with a bit of ponytail pulling. She likes me just fine is what she told me.