Do We Have To Keep The Law?
- Thread starter Budman
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
L
i have been told that in the ancient Hebrew marriage ceremony ((not quite what is followed today)), there are several steps: from choosing the bride, paying a price for her, and betrothing her, then a period of time before the groom comes to snatch her away, the wedding feast, then the consummation. in the time between the betrothal and the groom coming for her, it is the father of the groom who sets the date & alone gives approval for the time. i have been told it was customary when the groom was asked about the time of the marriage to refer all questions to his father - because 'he alone knows the day and hour' - even to use exactly this phraseology.
if this is all so, Jesus is making a direct reference to marriage that would have been unmistakable to anyone in His immediate audience - one that doesn't necessarily imply ignorance, but follows a ceremonial custom full of meaning, and directly correlates to the parable of the 10 maidens waiting for the groom to come at a time unknown to them, to snatch away the bride.
in Revelation 19:12 it is said He has a name written that 'no one knows but He Himself'
does Omniscient God not know this name? does Christ know something that YHVH is ignorant of?
or are the Father and the Son one
if this is all so, Jesus is making a direct reference to marriage that would have been unmistakable to anyone in His immediate audience - one that doesn't necessarily imply ignorance, but follows a ceremonial custom full of meaning, and directly correlates to the parable of the 10 maidens waiting for the groom to come at a time unknown to them, to snatch away the bride.
in Revelation 19:12 it is said He has a name written that 'no one knows but He Himself'
does Omniscient God not know this name? does Christ know something that YHVH is ignorant of?
or are the Father and the Son one
E
I will state the truth as i see it,
you THINK you teach what jesus said, you can say you do until your blue in theface, it does not make it a fact.
In fact, i can say to you, I teach what jesus taught, and use the same logic you do, but what good would it do? We both do not teach what jesus taught, so we have a strawman, or an illogical argument which can go both ways, and does not help in th discussion, it becomes a he said she said, which will get no where.
you want to teach what you think he said do it, knowing people who disagree with you will give their view, then you and him can discuss it, or others can see and discuss. You getting mad and ignoring people rmcalling them names because they disagree, just makes things worse. Can you show humility? Or is that too hard?
the curse falls on whoever is under the Law and fails to keep it. that's what mount Ebal is all about, in Deuteronomy 11 -- and likewise those under the Law, if they could keep it, would be blessed under it: Mt. Gerizim. But Christ says, His true worshipers will worship neither on this mountain nor some other -- and He redeemed us from the curse - from every curse.
it's the "must" part. Salvation doesn't have anything to do with the Law, period.
now that iv'e said that, we'll go back into that cycle of discussion again, right? someone will say "well that means license to sin" -- or in other words, "why not continue in sin so grace will abound all the more?"
surely there is a reason to do what is right that is totally separated from "you must keep the law 'or else' ?"
because AFAIK it isn't "or else" or else grace isn't grace, and salvation isn't salvation, and redemption isn't redemption, and freedom isn't freedom, and 'not under the curse' isn't 'not under the curse' at all -- we're either all under threat of eternal hellfire because of works, or we're not at all. we either must do certain works ((in addition to believing on the Son)) or we don't 'absolutely have to' -- and if we must then it's by works. but it's not by works; it's by grace. if we must obey the Law we are under Law. if we're under grace - not under Law - then "must" is absolutely not an accurate description, IMO.
BTW
i didn't get any of this from Calvin. i'd literally never heard of "TULIP" before i came to CC, and i didn't know anything about Mssr. Calvin apart from that he was a famous reformer preacher who wrote a very large book called 'Institutes'
i just read the Bible, and worked it out myself ((or as i see it, was shown by the Spirit)). when i started reading people ripping on 'calvinism' here, it dawned on me that i actually agree with a lot of the things they're all up in arms about calling heresy. i learned, too, that it was 'arminianism' ((whatever that is)) which the church actually declared to be heresy. which i find kinda interesting
it's the "must" part. Salvation doesn't have anything to do with the Law, period.
now that iv'e said that, we'll go back into that cycle of discussion again, right? someone will say "well that means license to sin" -- or in other words, "why not continue in sin so grace will abound all the more?"
surely there is a reason to do what is right that is totally separated from "you must keep the law 'or else' ?"
because AFAIK it isn't "or else" or else grace isn't grace, and salvation isn't salvation, and redemption isn't redemption, and freedom isn't freedom, and 'not under the curse' isn't 'not under the curse' at all -- we're either all under threat of eternal hellfire because of works, or we're not at all. we either must do certain works ((in addition to believing on the Son)) or we don't 'absolutely have to' -- and if we must then it's by works. but it's not by works; it's by grace. if we must obey the Law we are under Law. if we're under grace - not under Law - then "must" is absolutely not an accurate description, IMO.
BTW
i didn't get any of this from Calvin. i'd literally never heard of "TULIP" before i came to CC, and i didn't know anything about Mssr. Calvin apart from that he was a famous reformer preacher who wrote a very large book called 'Institutes'
i just read the Bible, and worked it out myself ((or as i see it, was shown by the Spirit)). when i started reading people ripping on 'calvinism' here, it dawned on me that i actually agree with a lot of the things they're all up in arms about calling heresy. i learned, too, that it was 'arminianism' ((whatever that is)) which the church actually declared to be heresy. which i find kinda interesting
Last edited:
E
Yeah, They are.
The law. Thou shalt mot murder" will not stop people from committing murder It not only is a sin, but is a law in every country, some even have the death penalty. Yet people still murder. so much for laws causing sinners to stop sin.
you want to save a murderer, show him love, Better yet show him Gods love, you not only may win friend, you may win a brother in christ,
Judging them? Again, Jesus said he did not come to judge, what makes you better than Jesus?
The law. Thou shalt mot murder" will not stop people from committing murder It not only is a sin, but is a law in every country, some even have the death penalty. Yet people still murder. so much for laws causing sinners to stop sin.
you want to save a murderer, show him love, Better yet show him Gods love, you not only may win friend, you may win a brother in christ,
Judging them? Again, Jesus said he did not come to judge, what makes you better than Jesus?