The curse of the law

  • 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.
Apr 9, 2015
995
10
0
"Keep back thy servant also from presumptuous sins; let them not have dominion over me: then shall I be upright, and I shall be innocent from the great transgression. Psalms 19:13

We all could probably take this to heart. True grace of Christ compels one to esteem the law God gave to Moses, for we are not under it but subject to it. That might seem like an oxymoron to those that still have a carnal mind "Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be." (Romans 8:7) Sorry about my assumption. My mistake if you believe as I do.

No problem.. here.... I enjoy the conversation, the posts, and the fellowship.
 
Jan 19, 2013
11,909
141
0
"Keep back thy servant also from presumptuous sins; let them not have dominion over me: then shall I be upright, and I shall be innocent from the great transgression. Psalms 19:13

We all could probably take this to heart. True grace of Christ compels one to esteem
the law God gave to Moses,
we are
not under it but subject to it.
We are no longer subject to the Mosaic regulations, only to the Ten Commandments,
for the Levitical priesthood is no more, the sacrifices are no more, the Sinaitic covenant is no more, etc..

That might seem like an oxymoron to those that still have a carnal mind "Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be." (Romans 8:7) Sorry about my assumption. My mistake if you believe as I do.
 
Apr 9, 2015
995
10
0
We are no longer subject to the Mosaic regulations, only to the Ten Commandments,
for the Levitical priesthood is no more, the sacrifices are no more, the Sinaitic covenant is no more, etc..
So Jesus didn't fulfill the 10 Commandments? we have to 'fulfill' them on our Own because Christ could not get it done? is that what you are saying?
 
D

DesiredHaven

Guest
Here is InSpiritInTruth's post, I separated his points ...



Many believe the law itself is “the curse”
(who cares many believe, lets just go with scripture InSpirit, get to...)

but scripture (Atta boy...) tells us Gods law is holy, just, and good (where does it tell us this?)

in Romans 7:12Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.” (I gotcha, Paul says so then)

So what was
the curse? (I dont know know, is it in scripture somewheres?)

The curse of the law came in by 2 ways, (show me! I wanna know! where could it possibly show this??)

the first is shown here in (Okay, 1 law, the curse in 2 ways)

Deuteronomy 27:26 (cool, let me look....)

Cursed be he that confirmeth not all the words of this law to do them.

And all the people shall say , Amen.” (Hey thats the verse Paul shows too!)

The first part of
this curse has todo with sin (what?)

as it is written in (oh goody I love these...)

Romans 7:10-11[SUP]“ [/SUP]And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death. For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, (the commandment and sin! Yes!) deceived me, and by it slew me.” (oh my gosh! Paul did say that! Yes I see it, thanks!)

Again we see the law was ordained unto life,
(Yes! Paul sure said that!)

but the curse came when man could not keep the law (why? Cause they were wimps? or no?) because of the weakness of his flesh and sin. (Thats what Romans 8:3 says yes!)

So who’s the bad guy here, the law,
or sin? (ummm...the law?)

If you
answered sin then you would be correct. :) (I was so wrong on that one, can I change my answer to Romans 7:5 for a door prize?)

Now for the second part of
the curse, (first part down, second part, okay I am ready)
which is swearing to the oath. (what? under a curse, and the law, even an oath?)

It is written (where at?)

Galatians 3:10 “For as many as are of the works of the law
are under the curse: (Paul says, yes!! Cool....which is from where? please continue...) for it is written, (Oh good, I really got to be more patient...)

Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them.(There it is! thank you! I thought you were pulling my leg)

After Moses had read the law, all the blessings and the curses, the people then bound themselves to the oath by agreeing to keep everything that was written in the law. (Duet 27:26 again, yes!)

(Yes! it says... Curse be...
And all the people shall say, Amen.” ) Got anything else?

The word
oath in Hebrew can also be defined and shown as the word curse in scripture. (Yes!! LOOK! I added the word definition numbers to the next verse both wordscurse H423 and oath is[SUP]H7621 [/SUP])

And swearing to an oath can also be shown as binding ones soul to a curse as in
(Pfft...where at??)

Nehemiah 10:29They clave to their brethren, their nobles,
and entered into (here?) a curse,[SUP]H423[/SUP] andinto an oath,[SUP]H7621[/SUP] (and here?) to walk in God's law, (here?) which was given by Moses the servant of God, (Yes Moses!) and to observe and do all the commandments of the Lord our Lord, and his judgments and his statutes;”

(
Yes! and again And all the people shall say, Amen.” )

(Got anything else?)

And in
(cool...)

Daniel 9:11
Yea, all Israel have transgressed thy law, even by departing, that they might not obey thy voice; therefore the curse is poured upon us, and the oath that is written in the law of Moses the servant of God, because we have sinned against him.” (Gotcha thanks a bunch!)

And here is where the curse came in by swearing themselves to the oath in (Yeah, I was so wondering...)

Numbers 30:2 “If a man
vow a vow unto the Lord, or swear an oath to bind his soul with a bond; he shall not break his word, he shall do according to all that proceedethout ofhis mouth.”

(
Yes! its like that... And all the people shall say, Amen.” Yes!)


And so being unable to perform the vow to God to keep the whole law, (what? Really why?) because of the weakness of the flesh and of sin, then the curses mentioned in the law were put into effect.

(Whats with these folks? Something like this then??) For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not.( ????)


Which is why Jesus said

Matthew 5:33-37 “Again, ye have heard that it hath been said by them of old time, Thou shalt not forswear thyself, but shalt perform unto the Lord thine oaths: [SUP]34 [/SUP]But I say unto you, Swear not at all; neither by heaven; for it is God's throne:[SUP]35[/SUP]Nor by the earth; for it is his footstool: neither by Jerusalem; for it is the city of the great King.[SUP]36 [/SUP]Neither shalt thou swear by thy head, because thou canst not make one hair white or black.[SUP]37 [/SUP]But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil.”

(Im not quite sure here though)

And here again also in

James 5:12But above all things, my brethren, swear not, neither by heaven, neither by the earth, neither by any other oath: but let your yea be yea; and your nay, nay; lest ye fall into condemnation.”

(Time to make dinner.. thanks!)

What great confirmation of the scriptures one with the other.
 
B

Biblelogic01

Guest
The fact remains that to say:

entering into the Sinaitic covenant was a curse (the wrong thing to do), or
Israel should not have agreed to the Sinaitic Covenant because it bound them to curses in the event of its violation

means that:


Israel should have told God, "Thanks, but no thanks."

God made them a false offer when he promised blessings for compliance with the covenant,
because all he was actually promising were curses.

God tricked them.

That in itself shows the error of this preposterous notion that
Israel should not have agreed to the Sinaitic Covenant (Ex 24:3, 7-8).

Oh so Israel was dumb for obeying God. . . That makes plenty of sense. . . . If that's the case then why do we even have them in the bible? You do realize it's prophecied that God is going to restore Israel. It doesn't say He'll restore the Jews, it doesn't say He'll retore the gentiles (which in the original definition of gentile it means idolater); it says He'll restore Israel.
God is not a trickster; you have God and the fallen one mixed up there.

I would beg to differ on your theory because that does not really line up with scripture; I do not think God would give a false covenant (those only come from the fallen one). Those blessings in Deut. 25 are real (but so are the curses) and do happen. I've lived it and seen the blessings happen. I've also seen the other side of the whole thing.

What it came down to was faith and obedience in God.
When Israel was faithful, obedient, and had the correct leadership; they were a prosperous nation and no one messed with them. So based off of that how would that covenant be a false covenant
Just like we see in our lives today, if we are obedient to God's word and follow His instructions we are prosperous.


And this post isn't on the fact of following Torah or not following it. It's on the fact that you just called God, the Most High, the creator of heaven and earth a trickster. Yet He states not to jest or joke. So you are calling God a hyprocrite.
 
B

Biblelogic01

Guest
We are no longer subject to the Mosaic regulations, only to the Ten Commandments,
for the Levitical priesthood is no more, the sacrifices are no more, the Sinaitic covenant is no more, etc..

Why did Paul do/attempt to do sacrifices? 0_o

I guess Paul is an exception to everyone else.
 
D

DesiredHaven

Guest
Wow, that was good! And you confirmed it all by scripture. Great post! :) (my zipper came off) LOL
I knew that wouldnt last long

I dont understand the wresting of the scriptures here, they obviously confirm in Pauls words on the same things.
 
Jan 7, 2015
6,057
78
0
I knew that wouldnt last long

I dont understand the wresting of the scriptures here, they obviously confirm in Pauls words on the same things.
What are you saying, I can't keep my mouth shut? LOL And I think the problem is deeper rooted in the "enmity" :)
 
D

DesiredHaven

Guest
What are you saying, I can't keep my mouth shut? LOL And I think the problem is deeper rooted in the "enmity" :)
You are better than I am at that, I have to give you that one.

And it sure seems like that is the case
 
Jan 19, 2013
11,909
141
0
Elin said:
We are no longer subject to the Mosaic regulations, only to the Ten Commandments,
for the Levitical priesthood is no more, the sacrifices are no more, the Sinaitic covenant is no more, etc.
So Jesus didn't fulfill the 10 Commandments?
we have to 'fulfill' them on our Own because Christ could not get it done?
is that what you are saying?
Not at all. . .obedience to them is how the Holy Spirit sanctifies us.

To those who shall remain nameless: Please note that I answered the question regarding what I meant by what I said, because I do not need to disown neither what I implied or what I meant.
 
Last edited:
Jan 19, 2013
11,909
141
0
Elin said:
The fact remains that to say:

entering into the Sinaitic covenant was a curse (the wrong thing to do), or
Israel should have refused the Sinaitic Covenant because it bound them to curses in the event of its violation

means that:


Israel should have told God, "Thanks, but no thanks."

God made them a false offer when he promised blessings for compliance with the covenant,
because all he was actually promising were curses.

God tricked them.

That in itself shows the error of this preposterous notion that
Israel should have refused the Sinaitic Covenant
(Ex 24:3, 7-8).
Oh so Israel was dumb for obeying God. . . That makes plenty of sense. . . . If that's the case then why do we even have them in the bible?
We are agreed. . .

God is not a trickster;
Agreed. . .which is what the preposterous notion that Israel should have refused the Sinaitic Covenant unavoidably implies.

I would beg to differ on your theory because that does not really line up with scripture;
I do not think God would give a false covenant (those only come from the fallen one).
Agreed. . .which is why the notion that Israel should have refused the covenant is preposterous.
 

MarcR

Senior Member
Feb 12, 2015
5,486
183
63
Well done. . .are you leaving the possibility they could have made another decision in the circumstances?


Certainly they could have; but I wouldn't want to speculate on God's response to that.

Your original question was whether they should have.

While they certainly can't go back and follow my advice; I think that they should have responded in faith.

If they had responded in faith there would have been no golden calf, and no 40 wasted years in the wilderness, and a very different history of Israel.


So much for what if!
 
Jan 19, 2013
11,909
141
0
Elin said:
Well done. . .are you allowing for the possibility they could have made another decision in the circumstances?
Certainly they could have; but I wouldn't want to speculate on God's response to that.

Your original question was whether they should have.
Yes, that idea is proposed by ISIT, which is why I asked.

While they certainly can't go back and follow my advice;
I think that they should have responded in faith.

If they had responded in faith
there would have been no golden calf, and no 40 wasted years in the wilderness, and
a very different history of Israel.

So much for what if!
Agreed. . .so much for what if Israel had refused the covenant, then they would not have been under a curse.
 
Last edited:
D

DesiredHaven

Guest

-----------------------


 
D

DesiredHaven

Guest
ISIT did not propose that idea, that is your straw man proposal. Thou shalt not bear false witness.

Yeah, caught that (like my burning strawpersons)?

This has truly been an eye opening experience.

Especially if using another person by drawing them in just to spring board another strawman.

No respect left in me towards that doing
 
Jan 7, 2015
6,057
78
0
Yeah, caught that (like my burning strawpersons)?

This has truly been an eye opening experience.

Especially if using another person by drawing them in just to spring board another strawman.

No respect left in me towards that doing
Many believe if you repeat a lie over and over again eventually some people will receive it as the truth. :) Have a good night Sis, peace and God bless.
 
D

DesiredHaven

Guest
Many believe if you repeat a lie over and over again eventually some people will receive it as the truth. :) Have a good night Sis, peace and God bless.
The scriptures you had put forth confirm the apostle Paul's own words, so I would have to say they were put together beautifully using his own references, which only serve to further confirm what he expounds upon.

You show these things as being in accord with Paul (and not contradicting).

So this is really bizarre.

A strawman would be necessary to debate that which confirms so beautifully in itself and in the apostle Paul.

As we can see these are still in the making, but what motivates no longer remains to be seen.

God richly bless you in Christ Jesus the Lord

Good night to you Bro,
 
Last edited: