This Doctrine does NOT line up with the Word of God!
- Thread starter Eccl12v13
- Start date
- Status
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2007
- Messages
- 12,493
Romans 7
[7] What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.
So is Paul saying here that God’s laws are bad? No he is not. As a matter of fact it is by God’s laws he knows what sin is. He knows to obey and keep God’s law of NOT to covet. So could ‘Do not covet’ have been one of God’s laws that were nailed to the cross? Are we no longer required to try to keep this law? Of course not. Let’s read more;
[8] But sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence. For without the law sin was dead.
But sin, reasoned by the law, stirred up all sorts of feelings and desires. Again, had I not known that the law said what was sin, sin did not exist. It was dead to me.
[9] For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died.
I did what I wanted without the knowledge of the law, I was alive. But when I found the law, it let me know what sin is; and sin revived. I could no longer do what I wanted, that old man and old lifestyle died.
[10] And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death.
And the law that gives life eternal, caused death to that sinful man and lifestyle.
[11] For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me.
But sin, reasoned by the law, fooled me, and it (sin) would have me die, spiritually.
[12] Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.
So I now know that God’s law is HOLY, JUST AND GOOD!
How can Paul mean that the very thing that can save him if he obeys (And the commandment, which was ordained to life…) has been done away with and nailed to the cross? Then he goes to tell others we are not bound to it? In verse 10 above he tells us what the law does; it, “…was ordained to life…“Does not make sense NOT to obey them!
[13] Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful.
Was that which was ordained to life, the law that is holy and just and good, cause me to die spiritually? God forbid. But sin, now that it is known as sin, IT causes me to die spiritually, by that which is good; (“…the commandment, which was ordained to life…” and “…the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.”), and now because of the knowledge of God’s laws sin is exceeding sinful.
Paul ask the question…”Are the laws that give life, the thing that will cause me to die spiritually?” To which he answers, “No!”. He then tells us now that he knows sin, by the knowledge of God’s laws, is THAT which will cause him to die spiritually. And now that he knows God’s laws, sin is even MORE sinful to him.
Romans 7:15 For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I.
Do you know what he is saying here? Let's break it down.
For that which I do (The things I do), I allow not (I don't want to do them): for what I would (the things I want to do), that I do not (I don't do them); but what I hate (the things I don't want to do), that I do (are the things I do).
The above scripture is NOT easy reading! Even for those learned it can be a challenge. Can you imagine babes in the word trying to understand Paul‘s writings? Let’s continue;
[16] If then I do that which I would not, (If I do those things I know I should not do), I consent unto the law that it is good. (I agree with the law that it is good).
Paul is letting us know that just knowing that he should not do those things that he does not want to do, lets him know that God’s laws are the right thing to do and they are good.
[17] Now it is no more I that do it,(But it’s not me that do those things, nor do I even what to do them), but sin that dwelleth in me. (But it is the pressure of sin. It is the temptation of sin.)
Paul tells us he does not want to do that which is wrong…but it is sin and the temptation of sin that makes him give in.
[18] For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: (I know my flesh is weak), for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not. (I have the will, but I cannot find the way to do good).
[19] For the good that I would I do not: (I want to do good but I don’t do it): but the evil which I would not, that I do. (But the bad things I don’t want to do are the things I do.)
Paul is telling us that he wants to do that which is good, but it seems to be those things that are bad is what he does.
[20] Now if I do that I would not, (Again, if I do those things I don’t want to do.) it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.(It is not me, but the sin within me, it is the temptation within.)
Now let’s read what it is that keeps Paul in check and causes him to beat himself up, sort to speak.
[21] I find a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me.(I now have a law, that when I want to do good, right away the law of sin is present.)
Paul tells us that whenever he tries to keep God’s laws, the laws of sin is right there tempting him to do that which is evil. Paul is telling us that this is the struggle that happens with. Let’s confirm…
[22] For I delight in the law of God after the inward man:
Paul tell us he delights in God’s law, which is in his mind…when he is thinking about it. And which laws is it that is in Paul’s inward man? Let’s read it…
Heb.10
[16] This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws into their hearts, and in their minds will I write them;
The laws that God said would be in the new covenant are those that Paul delights in. And these are the same laws that were in the old covenant; do not steal, do not murder, do not lie, do not covet. These are the laws that come to mind whenever Paul tries to do that which is good. But is there another law that comes to Paul’s mind when he delights in the laws of God? Let’s read….
[23] But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members.
Paul tells us that the moment he delights in the laws of God…there enters ‘ANOTHER’ law that he struggles with. And this law wars against the law of God that he delights in. And what is this law that wars with the laws of God? They are the laws of sin that tell Paul TO Sin, TO Murder, TO Lie, TO Steal and TO Covet! And it is this law of sin that wars with the laws of God that brings him to the captivity of sin within his body.
[25] I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.
So which law is it that Paul is trying to keep? The laws of God!
And WHAT did Paul tell us these laws would do? “…And the commandment, which was ordained to life…” Paul tells us that God’s laws were ordained to LIFE!
Paul tells us that God’s laws are, “Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.”
And with all of what we have just read above, you have Paul TELLING OTHERS to keep God’s laws!
As I have said before…..Paul speaks of TWO sets of laws in his writings: There is the one set of laws that we just read about above. The above set of laws are those that Paul keeps, tells others to keep and he calls them, holy, just, good and are ordained to life.
Then there is the other set of laws that Paul speaks of that God never liked, that could not make the comers there unto perfect, thus were against us, that required deeds and works, and was only to be around until, “…the seed should come…”! It is THIS set of laws we are no longer under!
At NO point does God EVER tell us that just because we cannot keep His laws perfectly, we are NOT supposed to try to keep them at all.
.
RJ
Active
- Joined
- Jun 1, 2009
- Messages
- 4,080
At NO point does God EVER tell us that just because we cannot keep His laws perfectly, we are NOT supposed to try to keep them at all.
You keep bringing this up over and over again and I repeat:
I have never said that they are not worthy goals and that we shouldn't try but you continue to miss the main point.
Trying to keep them has nothing to do with our forgiveness and salvation and, if you think they do,
My friend, I say this with all due respect and love:
If you believe that, you are cursed under the law and live a legalistic life but, at last, we can atleast agree to disagree! I kindly give you the last word.
God Bless
Last edited:
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2007
- Messages
- 12,493
I actually can relate to Paul here!
I like how you broke this down. Thumbs up!
Humm....have to pray on how you broke this one down.
As long as you're separating this as a condition of salvation, which from what I can tell you are, I agree with you.
Dear Eccl12v13.
I was reading your post concerning Romans 7.
You arrived at verse 22 then you switched to Hebrews.
It would be advisable to read some verses in the next
chapter of Romans. Why? Because Romans 8 explains
the paradox of Romans 7.
Romans 8:1-4 (NKJV)
1 There is therefore now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus,
who do not walk according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit.
2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has made me free from
the law of sin and death.
3 For what the law could not do in that it was weak through the flesh,
God did by sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, on account of sin:
He condemned sin in the flesh,
4 that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us
who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.
Read verse 4 carefully. What the law requires is taken care of by Jesus Christ.
We like Paul are unable to follow the law, we can try but we fail.
We are creatures infected with sin, we look upon the law and
cannot meet its holy requirements, this is Romans 7.
I was reading your post concerning Romans 7.
You arrived at verse 22 then you switched to Hebrews.
It would be advisable to read some verses in the next
chapter of Romans. Why? Because Romans 8 explains
the paradox of Romans 7.
Romans 8:1-4 (NKJV)
1 There is therefore now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus,
who do not walk according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit.
2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has made me free from
the law of sin and death.
3 For what the law could not do in that it was weak through the flesh,
God did by sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, on account of sin:
He condemned sin in the flesh,
4 that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us
who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.
Read verse 4 carefully. What the law requires is taken care of by Jesus Christ.
We like Paul are unable to follow the law, we can try but we fail.
We are creatures infected with sin, we look upon the law and
cannot meet its holy requirements, this is Romans 7.
Last edited:
But Paul NEVER stopped trying to keep God's laws. Paul tells us;
"I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin."
And then he goes on to tell others they must also keep God's laws.
This Paul of yours sure was confused!
.
Again.
Do you understand these two verses Eccl12v13?
3 For what the law could not do in that it was weak through the flesh,
God did by sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, on account of sin: He condemned sin in the flesh,
4 that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us
who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.
Do you understand these two verses Eccl12v13?
3 For what the law could not do in that it was weak through the flesh,
God did by sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, on account of sin: He condemned sin in the flesh,
4 that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us
who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.
And there in lies the rub...you do not know which law it is that Paul speaks of;
Which law was weak because of flesh? Paul is NOT talking about all 613 laws, for if he were why would he tell us to KEEP God's laws?
Paul is speaking about (1) set of laws that was weak because the set of laws it self was FLESH!
I know this is totally over your head.
What was the one set of laws that God never liked?
What was the one set of laws that could not make the comers there unto perfect?
What was the one set of laws that was changed?
What was the one set of laws that was only to be around unti the seed should come?
What was the one set of laws that was nailed to His cross?
Was thou shall not kill, murder, steal and lie nailed to His cross?
Did not Paul tell us that we must keep God's laws?
How can ALL of God's laws be done away with when Paul tells us to keep them?
.
And what happened to your CLAIM that you said I made, which were really just questions?
.
Does not Paul tell us we are to keep God's laws?
Why tell us to keep them if we are not under them?
What sense does that make to tell people to keep laws they are no longer under?
.
Your reply.
I asked you Eccl12v13 how you understand the following verses?
3 For what the law could not do in that it was weak through the flesh,
God did by sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, on account of sin: He condemned sin in the flesh,
4 that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us
who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.
Romans 8 (NKJV)
Lets look at your reply to see just how you read these verses.
"And there in lies the rub...you do not know which law it is that Paul speaks of;
Which law was weak because of flesh? Paul is NOT talking about all 613 laws, for if he were why would he tell us to KEEP God's laws?
Paul is speaking about (1) set of laws that was weak because the set of laws it self was FLESH!"
1) You stated that I do not know which law Paul refers to.
2) You also stated that Paul was not referring to all Mosaic law.
3) Paul was speaking about one set of laws.
Can you see the theology that you introduced in your reply?
I am stunned at just how you derived your interpretation
of these two verses.
You accused me of not knowing which law. These verses
do not specify any category of law, but you do.
Then you took it upon yourself to separate the laws
according to your theology.
A correct rendering of those two verses without theology
is as follows.
The law cannot be obeyed by the flesh, this has been rectified by Jesus Christ. We now meet the requirements of the law through
Jesus Christ this is a spiritual condition.
I asked you Eccl12v13 how you understand the following verses?
3 For what the law could not do in that it was weak through the flesh,
God did by sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, on account of sin: He condemned sin in the flesh,
4 that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us
who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.
Romans 8 (NKJV)
Lets look at your reply to see just how you read these verses.
"And there in lies the rub...you do not know which law it is that Paul speaks of;
Which law was weak because of flesh? Paul is NOT talking about all 613 laws, for if he were why would he tell us to KEEP God's laws?
Paul is speaking about (1) set of laws that was weak because the set of laws it self was FLESH!"
1) You stated that I do not know which law Paul refers to.
2) You also stated that Paul was not referring to all Mosaic law.
3) Paul was speaking about one set of laws.
Can you see the theology that you introduced in your reply?
I am stunned at just how you derived your interpretation
of these two verses.
You accused me of not knowing which law. These verses
do not specify any category of law, but you do.
Then you took it upon yourself to separate the laws
according to your theology.
A correct rendering of those two verses without theology
is as follows.
The law cannot be obeyed by the flesh, this has been rectified by Jesus Christ. We now meet the requirements of the law through
Jesus Christ this is a spiritual condition.
RJ
Active
- Joined
- Jun 1, 2009
- Messages
- 4,080
Dear Eccl12v13,
I have watched these threads with great interest and there seems to be this circle that you stay in; no one can disagree with your tenacity and conviction.
Several of us have tried in vane to get you see the New Covenant's standpoint concerning the Old Covenant Law in relationship to us in our current walk with Jesus Christ. I want you to understand that our disagreement is not directed so much towards you but also the benefit of others that read these discussions as well; giving them veiw other than your own.
I look back and wonder if you really believe in all you say about Paul and the law or, are you just trying to save face and continue your argument; I know how hard it is when everyone has an opposite view.
Then I take your name Eccl 12vs13 and ask, why this name? Then I read Ecclesiastes 12:13 and there in , I think I get an answer:
Ecclesiastes 12:13
<SUP id=en-NIV1984-17537 class=versenum>13</SUP> Now all has been heard;
here is the conclusion of the matter:
Fear God and keep his commandments,
for this is the whole duty of man.
This is indeed the word of God and yes, a very worthy goal.
Here is the point that we are trying to make:
Eccl 12:13 was givien under the law and under the restrictions given by God and given to the Jewish people.
This was still under God's, at that time, current agreement with man.
As you well know, at this time, God's people were under a "Sacrificial System" and a "Legalistic System" that was completed every year with the "Day of Atonement". Again, as you well know, this system had to be repeated year after year for thousands of years and required the blood of Bulls and Goats to be accomplished.
Of course, all the hundreds of laws ( not just the 10 commandments) given by God are, perfect, holy and righteous but, the problem was God saw that we were not so, the laws were and still are good and we are not.
God came up with another " Sacrificial System" , that required blood but, it was a system that was more perfect for us, wasn't based on accomplishing many sets of requirements (laws) and was done one time for all and not year after year.
This new system was, of course, the New Covenant and where Jesus did it all for us with his shedding of blood, death, burial and resurrection. His death provides forgiveness of all of our sins and his resurrection gives us eternal life for those who recieve him.
The Law, all of them, could not provide the level of forgiveness that Jesus gives us because his level of forgiveness was one time and for ever. The law could never provide eternal life because there was no way to get the law into the hearts and minds of men and do it perfectly; only one person was capable of this and tht was Jesus. The New Covenant changed all of this, God and his laws are in us.
We are not under the law anymore, we follow the Holy Spirit who is inside our being. The law was NOT nailed to the cross. Most of the law remains with us because Jesus said that he did not come to abolish the law but to fulfill it. The Law's purpose is to reveal sin and that will not go away according to Jesus until the New Earth and New Heaven and we are all in heaven and there is no need for the law.
But make no mistake, though the most of the old law is still with us, it is not part of the New Covenant of love and grace. Following any part of the old law has nothing to do with your forgiveness, salvation or relationship with Jesus Christ.
Here is just a couple of examples of what part of the old law is obviously not with us:
- Numbers 15:32-36
<SUP id=en-NIV1984-4186 class=versenum>32</SUP> While the Israelites were in the desert, a man was found gathering wood on the Sabbath day. <SUP id=en-NIV1984-4187 class=versenum>33</SUP> Those who found him gathering wood brought him to Moses and Aaron and the whole assembly, <SUP id=en-NIV1984-4188 class=versenum>34</SUP> and they kept him in custody, because it was not clear what should be done to him. <SUP id=en-NIV1984-4189 class=versenum>35</SUP> Then the LORD said to Moses, “The man must die. The whole assembly must stone him outside the camp.” <SUP id=en-NIV1984-4190 class=versenum>36</SUP> So the assembly took him outside the camp and stoned him to death, as the LORD commanded Moses.
- The old sacrifiacial system of the blood of bulls and goats and the day of atonement.
Last edited:
Let me ask you....what was the law that was changed in the following verse?
Heb.7
[12] For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law.
Now if Paul is ALWAYS speaking of ALL of God's 613 laws did he mean that ALL 613 laws were changed?
Because if not, then that means Paul, at sometimes, was NOT always speaking about ALL 613 of God's laws.
So....did Paul mean that ALL of God's laws were changed....or just ONE?
.
RJ
Active
- Joined
- Jun 1, 2009
- Messages
- 4,080
That is what most of us have been trying to say to you Ecc12v13!
If you, being as knowledgeable of the scriptures as you say, then you understand the change in Priesthood.
You understand that the change in Priesthood, is that of Jesus Christ.
Then, you also would know that at the exact same moment that He became our last and final Priest, he also ushered in the New Covenant which replaced all of the previous Old Covenant laws with regard to our forgiveness and salvation!
And this is what you are not getting....
Did the punishment for Do not kill change?
Did the punishment for Do not Lie change?
Did the punishment for Do not Steal change?
Did ANY of the consequences go away for breaking God's laws in the New Covenant? No!
So we still have the same laws in the New Covenant!
We still have the same consequences for breaking those laws!
And we still must do the samething for salvation.....
Heb.5
[8] Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered;
[9] And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him.
OBEY GOD!
So what changed in the New Covenant?
What was it about the Priesthood that was changed? There was ONLY one part that was changed...NOT the entire Priesthood!
.
RJ
Active
- Joined
- Jun 1, 2009
- Messages
- 4,080
You finally have stopped beating around the bush and have stated in what you beleive. St. Paul talks about the curse of the Law and my friend you are simply stuck in legalism.
I pray that God removes your from this curse and this bondage to the Law that you are under. You simply do not understand or you just don't care about God's New Covenant with us, the covenant of love and Grace!
I am officially through with further threads with you my friend.
May God Bless You
Last edited:
If I am wrong then please tell me.
Did the punishment for Do not kill change?
Did the punishment for Do not Lie change?
Did the punishment for Do not Steal change?
Did ANY of the consequences go away for breaking God's laws in the New Covenant?
Are any of the above wrong?
Will not Jesus return to punish those that have transgressed the laws of God?
Or how about this...
What was it about the Priesthood that was changed? There was ONLY one part that was changed...NOT the entire Priesthood! Do you not know?
ALL of the requirements remained the same.....ALL but ONE! Do you know what it was?
.
.
- Status
