Major misconception: What is legalism and what's not legalism.

WheresEnoch · Apr 10, 2015

Elin said:

Well here's the thing about that... Nobody could ever comply perfectly all of the time, yet those who lived before Christ also received grace, as long as they loved God and His instructions and placed Him first in their lives. Those who had a heart of love and obedience towards God have always been under grace, none of them were saved or considered righteous because of complete and total perfect obedience, but their faith in action which was shown by their obedience none the less.

WheresEnoch · Apr 10, 2015

Elin said:

The instructions Christ gave in the OT are basically the same as the ones He taught while He was alive and gives in the NT. They can all be summed up in this: Love God with all your heart, soul and mind & love your neighbor as yourself.

Elin · Apr 10, 2015

WheresEnoch said:

Those of faith before Christ were declared righteous through faith (Ge 15:6).

Those of faith from Moses to Christ were nevertheless under the law and, therefore, they were condemned by the law (Gal 3:10), and their sin only covered until the death of Christ, when it was then remitted (Ro 3:25) through forgiveness, which is salvation (Lk 1:77).

In the new covenant we are not under the law, but under grace and, therefore, there is now no condemnation for us (Ro 8:1) when we do not obey perfectly.

Elin · Apr 10, 2015

WheresEnoch said:

Yep. . .so if we focus on the two commandments, we've got all the others covered and don't need to follow a "to do" list to please God.

Keeping in mind that all of this is in and by the Holy Spirit indwelling us who keeps us on track.

WheresEnoch · Apr 10, 2015

Elin said:

Isn't this how we are declared righteous as well?

We are also to be obedient to the laws of God. Those who are truly in Christ will be, those are not in Christ will not be obedient. Just because someone calls themselves a Christian does not mean they love and follow Christ as He himself has said. Those who love Him obey His commandments.

We can't steal, we can't kill, we can't curse the deaf and blind, we are to give to those in need, we are to not worship other Gods or take part in paganism, we are not to put people to shame, to carry tales, to cherish hatred in our hearts, to wrong anyone in speech, to afflict an orphan or widow, to stand by idly when a human life is in danger, to not add or subtract from the commandments, we are not to blaspheme or profane the name of God, we are not to bear a grudge, we are not to wrong people in business deals or withhold wages from our employees, we are not to practice sexual immorality as defined in the OT, we are not to loan to our brothers and sisters on interest, we are not to demand repayment of anothers debt, not to kidnap, rob, defraud, covet, indulge in evil thoughts and sights, we are not to use dishonest scales, to not eat things which God does not want us to eat..........

We are to honor our mother and father, show love and respect to strangers, respect elderly and on and on and on...

Compare the lists. Do you really believe that we are not under any laws from God? All Christ did was teach the laws of God, He hardly talked about forgiveness in comparison. He talked about turning from sin and repenting. If the law was done away with than we do not even need Christ because there is no more sin. I am suggesting that you do not understand what Paul was saying in Romans

prove-all · Apr 10, 2015

Elin said:

Notice which day Paul and Barnabas used for preaching to Gentiles:

(1) Acts 13:14-15, 42-44: “But when they departed from Perga, they came to Antioch in Pisidia, and went into the synagogue on the sabbath day, and sat down. And after the reading of the law and the prophets the rulers of the synagogue sent unto them, saying, Ye men and brethren, if ye have any word of exhortation for the people, say on.”

Then Paul stood up, and spoke, preaching Christ to them.

“And when the Jews were gone out of the synagogue,

[the Gentiles] besought that these words might be preached to them [the next sabbath].”

Now since Paul was preaching “the grace of God” (verse 43), here was his opportunity
to straighten out these Gentiles, and explain that the Sabbath was done away.

Why should he wait a whole week, in order to preach to the Gentiles on the next Sabbath?
If the day had now been changed to Sunday, why did not Paul tell them they would not have
to wait a week, but the very next day, Sunday, was the proper day for this service?

But notice what Paul did.

“And the next sabbath day came almost the whole city together to hear the word of God.”

Here Paul waited a whole week, passing up a Sunday, in order
to preach to the Gentiles on the Sabbath day.

Gentiles Met on Sabbath

2) Acts 15:1-2, 14-21: Study this whole passage carefully.
Certain men had come down from Judaea to Antioch, teaching that the Gentile converts

there must be circumcised and keep the law of Moses to be saved.

Quite a dissension arose between them and Paul and Barnabas.
So it was decided Paul and Barnabas should go to Jerusalem to
the apostles and elders about the question.

At the conference at Jerusalem, James gave the decision.
“Wherefore my sentence is,” he pronounced (verses 19-20), “

that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols,
and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood.”

He did not say they should not keep the Ten Commandments. The Ten
Commandments were not in question—but only the ritual law of circumcision,
which was an altogether different law. He merely mentioned four prohibitions,
and otherwise they did not need to observe the law of Moses.

But why WRITE this sentence to them? Note it!

“For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him,
being read in the synagogues every sabbath day” (verse 21).

The law of Moses—the first five books of the Bible—was being taught in
the synagogues every Sabbath day. The apostles were writing only these decrees,
because Gentile converts were going to church on the Sabbath day.

They had heard God’s law read and expounded every Sabbath in the synagogues
and did not need further instructions. It shows that the Gentile converts
had started keeping the Sabbath day, and went to church on that day!

And the apostles’ letter did not reprove them for this Sabbath-keeping.
This is very significant, since Gentiles had never kept the Sabbath.

Therefore it is something these Gentiles had started doing after they were
converted under the teaching of Paul and Barnabas!

prove-all · Apr 10, 2015

Elin said:

also a Sabbath in Philippi

3) Acts 16:12-15: Here we find Paul and Silas at Philippi. And “we were in that city abiding certain days. And on the sabbath we went out of the city by a river side, where prayer was wont to be made, and we sat down, and spake unto the women which resorted thither. And a certain woman named Lydia, a seller of purple, of the city of Thyatira, which worshipped God, heard us: whose heart the Lord opened?.… And?…?she was baptized?.…”

Here again Paul and his companions waited until the Sabbath, and then went to a place of worship, and preached, and this woman, probably a Gentile, was converted. The passage indicates it was the custom to meet there on the Sabbath, and that it was custom for Paul and his companions to go to a place of prayer and worship when the Sabbath day came.

Paul Worked Weekdays, and Kept the SABBATH

4) Acts 18:1-11: “After these things Paul departed from Athens, and came to Corinth; And found a certain Jew named Aquila?…?with his wife Priscilla?…?and came unto them. And because he was of the same craft, he abode with them, and wrought: for by their occupation they were tentmakers. And he reasoned in the synagogue every sabbath, and persuaded the Jews and the Greeks.”

If we could find one text in the New Testament giving as strong authority for Sunday observance as this one does for Sabbath-keeping, we should certainly have Bible authority for it! Here Paul worked weekdays, but went to church and taught Gentiles as well as Jews every Sabbath.

Now the commandment says: “Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work,” just as much as it says “Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.” There is just as much command to work six days as there is to rest the seventh. And so if the day had been changed, Paul would have had to work Sabbaths, in order to go to church and preach every Sunday. But here he worked weekdays and went to church and preached every Sabbath—not just on one particular occasion—it says every Sabbath.

He preached Christ and the gospel of the Kingdom. And when the Jews became offended and blasphemed, he turned away from the Jews altogether, and from then on preached to Gentiles only (verse 6), and he continued there a year and six months (verse 11)—working weekdays—preaching to Gentiles ONLY—every Sabbath!

To these Gentile-born at Corinth, Paul commanded: “Be ye followers of me,
even as I also am of Christ” (1?Corinthians 11:1).

And Paul “as his manner was, went in unto them, and three sabbath days reasoned
with them out of the scriptures” (Acts 17:2).

It was his manner, his custom, as we have seen by ample evidence showing
a total over 80 different Sabbaths Paul is shown specifically to have kept.

Did he follow Jesus in this? Why, certainly! Jesus, “as his custom was
went into the synagogue on the sabbath day?…” (Luke 4:16).

It was Jesus’ custom. Paul followed Him, and commanded the Gentile converts
to follow him, even as he followed Christ.

hope that made sense

Elin · Apr 10, 2015

WheresEnoch said:

The law we are not under is the Mosaic law, it is not the Decalogue.

The Decalogue we are under is fulfilled in two commandments (Mt 22:37-40; Ro 13: 8, 9, 10).

"Under the law" means to break one is to break them all because the Mosiac law is a unit,
which condemns for any infraction.

"Not under the law" means not under the condemnation of the Mosaic law for imperfect obedience, and also not guilty of breaking them all when you break one.

Elin · Apr 10, 2015

prove-all said:

1Co 9:19-20.

WheresEnoch · Apr 10, 2015

Elin said:

How were people before Christ saved then? It was not by perfect sinlessness, but through faith which is belief + action + confidence in God. All I am saying is that is how we are saved as well, and all of us are saved by what Christ has done.
If we are solely trying to be saved by perfect obedience, thereby setting Christ aside, then yes, if we break one we break them all and are guilty. All who have loved God are saved by grace not by being perfect.

I know I have mentioned this before, but it is worth mentioning again. Peter warns us about Paul being easily misunderstood. People have been misunderstanding Paul for thousands of years at this point and spreading the lawless doctrines until today. Now these false doctrines are very much ingrained in mainstream unChristianity. What is the specific error that people make when reading and trying to understand Paul? - lawlessness

[h=2]Merriam-Webster Full Definition of LAWLESS[/h]1
: not regulated by or based on law

2
a : not restrained or controlled by law : unruly
b : illegal

2 Peter 3
15 And count the patience of our Lord as salvation, just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, 16 as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures. 17 You therefore, beloved, knowing this beforehand, take care that you are not carried away with the error of lawless people and lose your own stability.

prove-all · Apr 10, 2015

Elin said:

but he was preaching to gentials on the sabbath,

the gentials where meeting in the synagogue,

even when no jews would listen,

and preached to new gential converts,

Paul only preached on sabbath, worked 6 other days.

again why preach to and have gentials gather only on the sabbath?

when no jew was even there

MarcR · Apr 10, 2015

prove-all said:

also a Sabbath in Philippi

3) Acts 16:12-15: Here we find Paul and Silas at Philippi. And “we were in that city abiding certain days. And on the sabbath we went out of the city by a river side, where prayer was wont to be made, and we sat down, and spake unto the women which resorted thither. And a certain woman named Lydia, a seller of purple, of the city of Thyatira, which worshipped God, heard us: whose heart the Lord opened?.… And?…?she was baptized?.…”

Here again Paul and his companions waited until the Sabbath, and then went to a place of worship, and preached, and this woman, probably a Gentile, was converted. The passage indicates it was the custom to meet there on the Sabbath, and that it was custom for Paul and his companions to go to a place of prayer and worship when the Sabbath day came.

Paul Worked Weekdays, and Kept the SABBATH

4) Acts 18:1-11: “After these things Paul departed from Athens, and came to Corinth; And found a certain Jew named Aquila?…?with his wife Priscilla?…?and came unto them. And because he was of the same craft, he abode with them, and wrought: for by their occupation they were tentmakers. And he reasoned in the synagogue every sabbath, and persuaded the Jews and the Greeks.”

If we could find one text in the New Testament giving as strong authority for Sunday observance as this one does for Sabbath-keeping, we should certainly have Bible authority for it! Here Paul worked weekdays, but went to church and taught Gentiles as well as Jews every Sabbath.

Now the commandment says: “Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work,” just as much as it says “Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.” There is just as much command to work six days as there is to rest the seventh. And so if the day had been changed, Paul would have had to work Sabbaths, in order to go to church and preach every Sunday. But here he worked weekdays and went to church and preached every Sabbath—not just on one particular occasion—it says every Sabbath.

He preached Christ and the gospel of the Kingdom. And when the Jews became offended and blasphemed, he turned away from the Jews altogether, and from then on preached to Gentiles only (verse 6), and he continued there a year and six months (verse 11)—working weekdays—preaching to Gentiles ONLY—every Sabbath!

To these Gentile-born at Corinth, Paul commanded: “Be ye followers of me,
even as I also am of Christ” (1?Corinthians 11:1).

And Paul “as his manner was, went in unto them, and three sabbath days reasoned
with them out of the scriptures” (Acts 17:2).

It was his manner, his custom, as we have seen by ample evidence showing
a total over 80 different Sabbaths Paul is shown specifically to have kept.

Did he follow Jesus in this? Why, certainly! Jesus, “as his custom was
went into the synagogue on the sabbath day?…” (Luke 4:16).

It was Jesus’ custom. Paul followed Him, and commanded the Gentile converts
to follow him, even as he followed Christ.

hope that made sense

Ac 20:7
7 And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them, ready to depart on the morrow; and continued his speech until midnight.
KJV

prove-all · Apr 10, 2015

MarcR said:

What “Break Bread” Means

But does this text not say, as many claim today, that the disciples always
held communion every first day of the week? Not at all!

In the first place, it says nothing about anything being done every first day of the week.
It relates the events of this one particular first day of the week, only.

It is not speaking of any customs, but of the events occurring as Paul and his companions
concluded their seven-day visit in passing by this town.

Jesus had introduced the “Lord’s Supper” as part of the Passover, at the beginning of
the annual “days of unleavened bread.” No longer need they kill lambs or eat the roasted
body of Passover lambs, after Christ, our Passover, had been once slain for us.

Yet the Passover was ordained forever (Exodus 12:24).

At His last Passover supper, Jesus substituted the wine as the emblem of His blood,
instead of the blood of the slain lamb. He substituted the unleavened bread for
the roast body of the lamb as the symbol of His body, broken for us.

The disciples continued to observe the Passover annually, now in the form of
“the Lord’s Supper” using only the bread and wine, as a memorial (1?Corinthians 11:24)
of Christ’s death (1?Corinthians 11:26), showing His death till He comes again.

They continued to observe the Days of Unleavened Bread (Acts 20:6).

This year they had observed the Days of Unleavened Bread and the “Communion” service
at Philippi, after which they came to Troas in five days, where they remained seven days.

After the Sabbath day had ended, at sunset, “upon the first day of the week…
the disciples came together to break bread.”

People have assumed this expression to mean the taking of “Communion.”

But notice! Paul preached, and continued preaching until midnight. They had no opportunity
to stop and “break bread” until then. When Paul “therefore was come up again”—after restoring
the one who had fallen down from the third balcony“and had broken bread, and eaten” Acts 20:11

Note it! “roken bread, and eaten.” This breaking bread was not Communion
—it was simply eating a meal. This expression was commonly used of old to designate a meal.
It still is used in that sense in parts of even the United States.

Notice Luke 22:16, where Jesus was introducing the Lord’s Supper, taking it with His disciples.
He said, “I will not any more eat thereof, until it be fulfilled in the kingdom of God.”

Yet, the day after His resurrection, after walking with the two disciples to Emmaus,
“…?as he sat at meat with them, he took bread, and blessed it, and brake, and gave to them” (Luke 24:30).

Here Jesus “brake bread,” but it was not the Lord’s Supper,
which He said He would not take again. It was a meal—“he sat at meat.”

Notice Acts 2:46. The disciples, “continuing daily with one accord in the temple,
and breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat with gladness?.…”
Here again, “breaking bread” means eating a meal. Not on the first day of the week, but daily.

Again, when Paul was shipwrecked on the voyage to Rome, the sailors had been fasting out
of fright. But “Paul besought them all to take meat, saying, This day is the fourteenth day
that ye have tarried and continued fasting, having taken nothing.

Wherefore I pray you to take some meat: for this is for your health?.… And when he had thus spoken,
he took bread, and gave thanks to God in presence of them all: and when he had broken it,
he began to eat” (Acts 27:33-35).

Here Paul broke bread to give to unconverted sailors who were hungry.

The truth is, nowhere in the Bible is the expression “breaking of bread,” or “to break bread,”
used to signify observance of “the Lord’s Supper.” In all these texts it means, simply, eating a meal.

So, when we read in Acts 20:7, 11, “the disciples came together to break bread,”
and how Paul had “broken bread, and eaten,” we know by Scripture interpretation
it referred only to eating food as a meal, not to a Communion service.

WheresEnoch · Apr 10, 2015

Elin said:

1 Co 9:19-21
19 For though I am free from all, I have made myself a servant to all, that I might win more of them. 20 To the Jews I became as a Jew, in order to win Jews. To those under the law I became as one under the law (though not being myself under the law) that I might win those under the law. 21 To those outside the law I became as one outside the law (not being outside the law of God but under the law of Christ) that I might win those outside the law.

I think this is saying:

To those who were trying to be justified by the law (the earthly sacrifices and priesthood which are a copies of the heavenly ones), he became as one who was under the law (though he himself is not under the law, apart from Christ, for justification). To those who did not know the law, he became as one of them when he preached the gospel to them (tailoring the message to the audience, though he was not outside the law of God, but under the law of Christ).

So to properly understand this passage we will have to know what he means when he says the law, the law of God and the law of Christ

WheresEnoch · Apr 10, 2015

prove-all said:

This may or may not be relevant, but another thing I notice from Acts 20 is that Paul was in a hurry in his travels to reach Jerusalem by Pentecost. Which may explain why he sat and talked with them for the specified "long while" all the way until daybreak (something I do not think was his regular practice), and then departed right after

Acts 20
11 And when Paul had gone up and had broken bread and eaten, he conversed with them a long while, until daybreak, and so departed. 12 And they took the youth away alive, and were not a little comforted.

13 But going ahead to the ship, we set sail for Assos, intending to take Paul aboard there, for so he had arranged, intending himself to go by land. 14 And when he met us at Assos, we took him on board and went to Mitylene. 15 And sailing from there we came the following day opposite Chios; the next day we touched at Samos; and the day after that we went to Miletus. 16 For Paul had decided to sail past Ephesus, so that he might not have to spend time in Asia, for he was hastening to be at Jerusalem, if possible, on the day of Pentecost.

1 Thessalonians 5
5 For you are all children of light, children of the day. We are not of the night or of the darkness. 6 So then let us not sleep, as others do, but let us keep awake and be sober. 7 For those who sleep, sleep at night, and those who get drunk, are drunk at night. 8 But since we belong to the day, let us be sober,

WheresEnoch · Apr 10, 2015

Elin said:

Here is something interesting that appears right before this passage. Paul uses the laws of Moses, "a nonhuman authority/on the authority of God", to say that those who do the lord's work have a right to receive material support from followers of Christ.

1 Corinthians 9
4 Do we not have the right to eat and drink? 5 Do we not have the right to take along a believing wife,[a] as do the other apostles and the brothers of the Lord and Cephas? 6 Or is it only Barnabas and I who have no right to refrain from working for a living? 7 Who serves as a soldier at his own expense? Who plants a vineyard without eating any of its fruit? Or who tends a flock without getting some of the milk?

8 Do I say these things on human authority? Does not the Law say the same? 9 For it is written in the Law of Moses, “You shall not muzzle an ox when it treads out the grain.” Is it for oxen that God is concerned? 10 Does he not certainly speak for our sake? It was written for our sake, because the plowman should plow in hope and the thresher thresh in hope of sharing in the crop. 11 If we have sown spiritual things among you, is it too much if we reap material things from you? 12 If others share this rightful claim on you, do not we even more?

WheresEnoch · Apr 11, 2015

prove-all said:

Here is what I have so far learned, if any have info to share please do. In the days of ancient Israel, Passover was observed to remember their deliverance from their bondage in Egypt as well as deliverance from the judgement of God. It was also a shadow of things to come: Christ being our Passover lamb.

Now we observe the feast to remember Israel's deliverance from Egypt and our own deliverance from bondage to sin. But I believe it is also a shadow of things to come for us: Our deliverance from the judgements of God which come upon the entire world.

Also I see many elements of it that appear to tie it to the marriage supper of the lamb which will occur in the future.
I don't think I will go too much into those in this post, however Christ Himself tells us that He will partake of the Lord's Supper on Passover again in the future:

Luke 22
"For I tell you, I will not eat it again until it finds fulfillment in the kingdom of God.”

Yes, God has certainly ended the sacrifice of the lamb on Passover by removing the temple in Jerusalem where the sacrifices must have taken place. And by giving us the true Passover lamb. It is cool how God does things, He established so many of His regulations on the temple. Causing the observance of His regulations to only be able to be observed in the physical land of Israel, then when the time came for all nations and peoples to be welcomed in, He did not need to backpeddle and say He changed His laws, He just destroyed the temple.

Also, there is evidence to suggest that Lot's deliverance from God's judgement on Sodom was on Passover:

Genesis 19
“My lords, please turn aside to your servant's house and spend the night and wash your feet. Then you may rise up early and go on your way.” They said, “No; we will spend the night in the town square.” 3 But he pressed them strongly; so they turned aside to him and entered his house. And he made them a feast and baked unleavened bread, and they ate.

And Abraham being willing to comply with sacrificing Isaac and having God supply the offering, also foreshadows Christ.

So I do not think that Passover was simply a shadow of things which have already occurred and should not be observed today.

I don't see any reason why we shouldn't observe it but make sure that we are partaking worthily, having truly been delivered from bondage to sin, purify our hearts of sin. I think we should desire to observe it and unleavened bread by removing leavened products as God said to the Hebrews and it is quite symbolic when you are scrounging through costly food items and throwing them away, a part of you says "ah man, do I have to get rid of this?" lol just like some of our fleshly thoughts and attitudes. Until you decide that yes, it is something you want to do not because we are forced but because we love God more than our own life and our sin.

1 Corinthians 11
23 For I received from the Lord what I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night when he was betrayed took bread, 24 and when he had given thanks, he broke it, and said, “This is my body which is for[e] you. Do this in remembrance of me.”[f] 25 In the same way also he took the cup, after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.” 26 For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until he comes.

27 Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty concerning the body and blood of the Lord. 28 Let a person examine himself, then, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup. 29 For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment on himself. 30 That is why many of you are weak and ill, and some have died. 31 But if we judged ourselves truly, we would not be judged. 32 But when we are judged by the Lord, we are disciplined so that we may not be condemned along with the world.

33 So then, my brothers,[j] when you come together to eat, wait for[k] one another— 34 if anyone is hungry, let him eat at home—so that when you come together it will not be for judgment. About the other things I will give directions when I come.

Elin · Apr 11, 2015

WheresEnoch said:

All are saved only by grace through true faith, not by any works (Eph 2:8-9).
Good works are the result of salvation, not the means to it.

There is a false counterfeit faith (1Jn 2:10), which has no root (Lk 8:13) and does not obey (Mt 7:21-23), and does not save because it is not true faith, which by grace alone saves.

Elin · Apr 11, 2015

prove-all said:

You make no sense. . .

What are "gentials"?

What does Paul himself state in 1Co 9:19-20?

Setting the Scriptures against themselves betrays your lack of understanding of them.

See Ac 20:7.

Jeff_56 · Apr 11, 2015

realize too, just now, that yahweh works through pharoah, etc, even through the unsaved --- and since yahweh does the works,
they are good works, but yet those through or by whom yahweh worked were not/(are not?) / saved. !!!

yahweh causes all things, good and bad, to work together for the good of those who love him, who are called
according
to his purpose.

so he can work as he wills, through kings and princes and men and women and nations and countries and religions even that are not faithful to him --- he directs everything as he pleases.

Major misconception: What is legalism and what's not legalism.

WheresEnoch

Guest

WheresEnoch

Guest

Banned

Banned

WheresEnoch

Guest

Senior Member

Senior Member

Banned

Banned

WheresEnoch

Guest

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

WheresEnoch

Guest

WheresEnoch

Guest

WheresEnoch

Guest

WheresEnoch

Guest

Banned

Banned

Banned