The CURSE OF THE LAW

[Mitspa]

I agree in large part with this post, but it does prove the point that I was seeking to make? That until one dies to the law and sees the New law of the Spirit of life in Christ. They are yet subject to the flesh.

As Paul says "I through the law, died to the law" One must be set free from the condemning power of the law and all attempts to justifiy oneself by the law, in order to walk in the Spirit and in life.

Now I know many attempt to claim they are not under the law, but you see that they are very much trying to justify themselves by the Ten Commandments and other parts of the law, which proves they are yet bound to the flesh.

Not in "large part" - but I agree with this "entire" post of yours. My only point was that you weren't distinguishing between the Law(set of God's decrees) and the law(rule of principle for justification/self-righteous meriting)

Obeying the Ten Commandments itself isn't wrong - Obeying them by their own works of the flesh in order to earn justification by self-righteousness is wrong. Similarly with all the other commandments of God - keeping them in the spirit by the grace of God devoid of any self-merit is not wrong; keeping them to earn/maintain justification by self-righteousness is wrong. The former set of decrees is still valid in its spiritual connotation today - the latter rule of principle to the self/flesh has been nailed to the cross and has passed away.

My only point all along has been to distinguish between these two. And the reason for that is - if we don't distinguish between the self-righteous principle of justification and God's set of decrees, then when I say that the principle has passed away, I'd have to concede that God's set of decrees in the OT has also passed away - but they haven't passed away and are still valid in their true spiritual significance today, having entirely fulfilled the role of a physical model back then.

Again, I agree. The issue of and point of this thread, is to make it understood that those who seek to keep the written code are under the curse. I would gladly speak and enjoy a coversation of how the believer finds that the love of God and growth in the Spirit actually makes the "law" of God known, and walked out in a believers life.
But like many issues on the forum, we are limited by the understanding of others. I have found that the legalist often just use this knowledge to cover and promote legalism.
So I have attempted to challenge the issue of the "letter" that some might understand this great error. Now the answer to legalism is not to call a legalist "brother" it is to bring the weight and warning of the scriptures upon these doctrines.
So I have written much on the forum about "walking in the Spirit" or "the new man" Gods love etc...
There is a time to build upon the truth, and there us a time to challenge the false. I would glad to start a coversation on this thread of the "blessedness of grace" in contrast to the "curse of legalism".
I would say that many use scriptures that show how the law is fulfilled in love, to lay again the yoke of law. I know you must have seen this? So I started this thread to challenge the very principle that a believer could keep the written code.

For only when one has been slain and brought to death by the law, do they understand the purpose of the law "written code"

To attempt to teach one (deeper things) who will not admit they are wretched and "nothing good in their flesh" is to waste ones time, in my veiw.

 

[francisdesales]

I have made very clear and biblical points, that no one is justified in the sight of God by the law is evident.

And I have made it very clear that I agree! That is not my point of contention with you.

Now when Christ came, the Kingdom of God came. When He was Crucified this was the end of the law for righteousness.

Mitspa, don't you realize that the Law NEVER NEVER EVER justified???

Ever?

Never?

Can I or Paul make this any clearer? PAUL uses ABRAHAM to prove his point. Don't you understand the meaning? Even BEFORE the Mosaic Law came into being, people were justified by FAITH.

Jesus didn't usher in a totally new way of pleasing God. It remains the same, except now, we have faith in Christ and His work, not just in an incomplete manner that faithful Jews worshipped God (the Father).

I hope this is sinking in, I tire of repeating it. Please read it carefully.

Be a student for a change and stop trying to teach.

The just live by faith. Can we agree on that? Even during OT times, people were just in God's eyes as a result of their faith - not because God owed them, but because God is merciful.

If you missed that in OT reading, you need to seriously go back and read the Bible. ALL OF IT, not just Paul. Your explanation is nonsense. People were NOT justified by completely fulfilling the Law, since YOU YOURSELF said NO ONE CAN DO THAT. That is why your theology is a bust. It contradicts itself.

Now if you cannot see that all things changed at the Cross? I cannot help you. And as Paul said if anyone seeks to keep any part of the written code, THEY MUST KEEP IT ALL.

Pray tell, how could ANYONE keep ALL of the Law absolutely perfectly BEFORE the days of Christ??? Doesn't Paul say that is impossible? Yet, you tell me it was possible before Christ???

Step back for a minute and read that sentence again. Your theology makes no sense.

Those who 'turn back to the law' are stating that one must be Jewish to be saved - (and thus, faith in Christ is not necessary, to them) NOT that they can perfectly follow the Law. NO ONE thought that they could perfectly follow the Law, and the Jewish cultic religion had a number of provisions for the people to call upon God to forgive their covenant-breaking. Again, this is elementary.

 

[ivdavid]

To attempt to teach one (deeper things) who will not admit they are wretched and "nothing good in their flesh" is to waste ones time, in my veiw.

Fair enough. I wouldn't want to add anything more here.

 

[WIP]

I ask for discretion when posting please. We can discuss this like reasonable adults I think.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

So it sounds like you are trying to have it both ways?
That we are dead to sin and the law, but yet we must keep the written code?

If your faith does not 'keep' the moral requirements of the law of Moses through the fruit of the Spirit, love, joy, peace, patience, etc. you have a 'faith' that can not save you. You are lost.

Upholding the moral requirements of the law is how we can know if we have the faith that saves. That is not looking to the law to be made righteous before God. That is validating your faith as genuine and able to save by whether or not it obeys God.

"...he who loves his neighbor has fulfilled the law. 9 For this, “You shall not commit adultery, You shall not murder, You shall not steal, You shall not covet,” and if there is any other commandment, it is summed up in this saying, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” 10 Love does no wrong to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfillment of the law." (Romans 13: NASB)

If it's okay for Paul to mention the requirements of the law (gasp!) to teach us how saving faith upholds that law then it's okay for us to know what the law says, too, and to then know how the fruit of the Spirit 'keeps' that law.

It's not a sin, nor is it making yourself a slave to sin, to know what the moral requirements of the law are and then see if the faith you have in Christ has been effectively fulfilling that law. I know of lots of 'Christians' who insist they are safe in Christ by faith, but whose faith does NOT uphold the moral requirements of the law. They are the one's that are deceived and are under the curse of the law, just as the person who doesn't do all of the law in his effort to be justified by that law is cursed for not doing it. Don't forget, Mitspa, the curse of the law is NOT DOING THE LAW! Not simply reading it.

 

[Deborah13]

The faith that saves is the faith that says, Jesus died on the cross and shed His blood for me. He paid the price for ALL my sin, past, present, and future. He rose from the died, the firstfruit of many, so that I too will be raised from the dead to eternal life with Him. His righteousness, righteous standing, has been imputed to me. He lives in me. He has made me a new creature in Him. He did this by grace because He is a merciful and loving God. I did not and do not deserve this gift of salvation and gift of righteousness by anything I did or will ever do.

If the only thing I ever did was believe these things I will be saved. This is the first faith that I had at the beginning.

It is when we forget this first faith, the faith that is ALL about what He did that we run into problems. It starts to become about what we do and then we start looking at self instead of Christ.
Then we start looking at others that we think are not obeying and judge them and their salvation. What we are really doing is comparing our faith to theirs and saying things like they don't have the faith that saves.

 

[Deborah13]

Do you have the GIFT of RIGHTEOUSNESS? If you are born again you DO have the gift of righteousness. Who's righteousness is it? It's Christ's righteousness, the only perfect saving righteousness that exists.
It is a GIFT, it cannot be earned or paid for, if it could be it would no longer be a gift. Jesus did that with His precious blood. Jesus does not take is gift away when we sin "miss the mark" and then give it back after we repent.

Someone please give me a scripture that says we are to judge ourselves by the law. We are to judge ourselves by who we are in Christ, by what He did. If we do this we will keep looking at Jesus not at the water under our feet. "Sink or swim?" No, look up at Jesus and walk on the water. We "sink" we die. We "swim" we work. We look at Christ we "walk in the Spirit" in the living water.

 

[childeye]

Since God performs this circumcision not by hands but the spiritual connotation, why do people think they sin willfully? How does one crucify his flesh with Christ?

When you ask why people think they "sin" willfully, you're actually referring to 'sin' as the act of transgressing God's law. I believe people do use the power of the flesh to act(commit sin/transgress the law) - ie they act upon the counsel('will') of the flesh to satisfy their fleshly desires(also 'will' in the Bible). But there is "Sin" in the flesh that inclines man towards such continual transgressions(sinning).

So, I think I'd say that - Sin in the flesh makes people sin(transgress) willfully, where people can perhaps be made aware of their sinning but not aware of Sin in their flesh until God regenerates them. And when God does His miraculous supernatural redemptive work in him, man would find his flesh being crucified with Christ.

I've written what I thought would address your question - if you're looking for something more specific, I could elaborate.

Thank you for the response ivdavid. Good to hear from you. Your effort is a good response to my question. I actually should have asked, why do people think they willfully sin when they don't want to be sinners? Apart from that, I have asked how does one crucify his flesh with Christ? And here I am looking for as much detail as possible. It is of course a metaphor applied to the putting away the fleshly desires. I expect most people would respond with a biblical phrase such as we must walk in the spirit so as not to sin. I am looking for descriptions that are personal testimony of what walking in the Spirit looks like, whether in the face of the temptor or putting away what was once familiar. I'm looking for stories of the Holy Spirit working in ones life, that would show what crucifying the flesh is.

I really wanted to compare my testimony of crucifying the flesh with others. But in truth I don't think anyone is going to respond. Therefore I want you to know I am thankful that you noticed my questions. For I am not ever comfortable saying I don't sin, nor am I very comfortable saying I do sin. I believe there are semantics at work here in my brain. I also would therefore ask that if you get the chance, you might find time to read a heartfelt post that I wrote concerning this subject. It is under apologetics/how do we overcome sinful habits/post #17. After reading, perhaps you might return here and comment on your experience of crucifying the flesh.

 

[childeye]

Do you have the GIFT of RIGHTEOUSNESS? If you are born again you DO have the gift of righteousness. Who's righteousness is it? It's Christ's righteousness, the only perfect saving righteousness that exists.
It is a GIFT, it cannot be earned or paid for, if it could be it would no longer be a gift. Jesus did that with His precious blood. Jesus does not take is gift away when we sin "miss the mark" and then give it back after we repent.

Someone please give me a scripture that says we are to judge ourselves by the law. We are to judge ourselves by who we are in Christ, by what He did. If we do this we will keep looking at Jesus not at the water under our feet. "Sink or swim?" No, look up at Jesus and walk on the water. We "sink" we die. We "swim" we work. We look at Christ we "walk in the Spirit" in the living water.

A complicated issue is this sin. It certainly should not be defined by the law although on this thread the curse of death is. The truth is, I am never comfortable saying I don't sin, nor am I comfortable saying I do sin. What's up with that?

 

[Mitspa]

I have made very clear and biblical points, that no one is justified in the sight of God by the law is evident.

And I have made it very clear that I agree! That is not my point of contention with you.

Now when Christ came, the Kingdom of God came. When He was Crucified this was the end of the law for righteousness.

Mitspa, don't you realize that the Law NEVER NEVER EVER justified???

Ever?

Never?

Can I or Paul make this any clearer? PAUL uses ABRAHAM to prove his point. Don't you understand the meaning? Even BEFORE the Mosaic Law came into being, people were justified by FAITH.

Jesus didn't usher in a totally new way of pleasing God. It remains the same, except now, we have faith in Christ and His work, not just in an incomplete manner that faithful Jews worshipped God (the Father).

I hope this is sinking in, I tire of repeating it. Please read it carefully.

Be a student for a change and stop trying to teach.

The just live by faith. Can we agree on that? Even during OT times, people were just in God's eyes as a result of their faith - not because God owed them, but because God is merciful.

If you missed that in OT reading, you need to seriously go back and read the Bible. ALL OF IT, not just Paul. Your explanation is nonsense. People were NOT justified by completely fulfilling the Law, since YOU YOURSELF said NO ONE CAN DO THAT. That is why your theology is a bust. It contradicts itself.

Now if you cannot see that all things changed at the Cross? I cannot help you. And as Paul said if anyone seeks to keep any part of the written code, THEY MUST KEEP IT ALL.

Pray tell, how could ANYONE keep ALL of the Law absolutely perfectly BEFORE the days of Christ??? Doesn't Paul say that is impossible? Yet, you tell me it was possible before Christ???

Step back for a minute and read that sentence again. Your theology makes no sense.

Those who 'turn back to the law' are stating that one must be Jewish to be saved - (and thus, faith in Christ is not necessary, to them) NOT that they can perfectly follow the Law. NO ONE thought that they could perfectly follow the Law, and the Jewish cultic religion had a number of provisions for the people to call upon God to forgive their covenant-breaking. Again, this is elementary.

Well it seems that many are still looking to the Ten Commandments, and are in fact trying to be righteous by the written code. This is error and those who look to the strength of sin, are yet in bondage to sin.
Rom 7:8

But it is good to see that you have changed your opinions and doctrines, because it is clear to me, that you have very much attempted to establish "parts" of the law as needed to justifiy a believer who is justified by faith.

 

[Deborah13]

I am never comfortable saying I don't sin, nor am I comfortable saying I do sin. What's up with that?

I think it is as Paul says, he said he did the things he did not want to do but that he did them in the flesh which is evil, so it was no longer him that did them.

It seems to me Paul could separate himself from the sin he saw rise up in his flesh and know that he was saved by the blood of Christ. That is a miracle in itself to me. Paul was a Pharisee, he was radical about the law to the destruction of the saints. When Jesus did His work in Paul, Paul became just a radical for the Gospel of Grace. I believe that is why he was chosen to deliver so much of it. Once he got a hold on the Truth he was like a pitbull, he wasn't letting go even if he was beat to death.

I read your #17 post just now and I think I understood much of what you were saying although my own experience has been different. Although, I too had to repent for me, of thinking that my God was so strict in the law, so without grace and mercy, that He would not understand and give me grace in my time of weakness. Many hours of remorse and tears over 5 mths was spent in this process, admitting that I was without understanding about anything (beliefs in doctrine) and even my own salvation was the end of the torment and the beginning of new teaching that taught me I had been set free from the curse of the law, I just hadn't known it.

 

[Mitspa]

So it sounds like you are trying to have it both ways?
That we are dead to sin and the law, but yet we must keep the written code?

If your faith does not 'keep' the moral requirements of the law of Moses through the fruit of the Spirit, love, joy, peace, patience, etc. you have a 'faith' that can not save you. You are lost.

Upholding the moral requirements of the law is how we can know if we have the faith that saves. That is not looking to the law to be made righteous before God. That is validating your faith as genuine and able to save by whether or not it obeys God.

"...he who loves his neighbor has fulfilled the law. 9 For this, “You shall not commit adultery, You shall not murder, You shall not steal, You shall not covet,†and if there is any other commandment, it is summed up in this saying, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.†10 Love does no wrong to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfillment of the law." (Romans 13: NASB)

If it's okay for Paul to mention the requirements of the law (gasp!) to teach us how saving faith upholds that law then it's okay for us to know what the law says, too, and to then know how the fruit of the Spirit 'keeps' that law.

It's not a sin, nor is it making yourself a slave to sin, to know what the moral requirements of the law are and then see if the faith you have in Christ has been effectively fulfilling that law. I know of lots of 'Christians' who insist they are safe in Christ by faith, but whose faith does NOT uphold the moral requirements of the law. They are the one's that are deceived and are under the curse of the law, just as the person who doesn't do all of the law in his effort to be justified by that law is cursed for not doing it. Don't forget, Mitspa, the curse of the law is NOT DOING THE LAW! Not simply reading it.

Paul was not putting believers under the "moral requirments" of the law, but using the law as a witness to the Commandment of love. Which does not come by looking to the written code, but through the Holy Spirit.

This is his point over and over, do not look to the written code but walk in the spirit. So paul is just uses the law as a witness to the Spirit. Thats it!

For the letter kills but the Spirit gives life.
I think Paul assumes one would consider all he has taught, concerning the law, and understand his point?

So again paul uses this to set believers free from the written code, not put them in bondage again to the law of sin and death.

He has already made the point that the law produces sinful desires and apart from the law sin is dead.
So he is teaching others to walk in love, not legalism.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Do you have the GIFT of RIGHTEOUSNESS? If you are born again you DO have the gift of righteousness. Who's righteousness is it? It's Christ's righteousness, the only perfect saving righteousness that exists.
It is a GIFT, it cannot be earned or paid for, if it could be it would no longer be a gift. Jesus did that with His precious blood. Jesus does not take is gift away when we sin "miss the mark" and then give it back after we repent.

The Bible says we can ultimately tell if we have the free gift of righteousness by how we act. And Jesus goes so far as to tell us we can tell bad trees from good trees by the fruit they bear. But you insist we can not do that?

Someone please give me a scripture that says we are to judge ourselves by the law.

8 If, however, you are fulfilling the royal law according to the Scripture, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself,” (Leviticus 19:18) you are doing well. 9 But if you show partiality (Leviticus 19:15), you are committing sin and are convicted (judged) by the law as transgressors." (James 2:8-9 NASB)

This is just two of four examples of lawful requirements that he uses to make this point:

"14 What use is it, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but he has no works? Can that faith save him?" (James 2:14 NASB)

Of course, it's a rhetorical question, and the obvious answer is, 'no'! The faith that does not cause works (in compliance with the law, as he illustrates) is the faith that can not save a person. Do you want to argue the point?

This doesn't mean our works MAKE us righteous before God. They SHOW whether we have the faith that justifies or not. We know this because he then makes this point here:

"...show me your faith without the works, and I will show you my faith by my works." (James 2:18 NASB)

We are to judge ourselves by who we are in Christ, by what He did. If we do this we will keep looking at Jesus not at the water under our feet. "Sink or swim?" No, look up at Jesus and walk on the water. We "sink" we die. We "swim" we work. We look at Christ we "walk in the Spirit" in the living water.

Just as the dry person can not boast of having gone swimming, neither can the works dry 'believer' boast effectively of having been renewed in the living water of God's Spirit.

The swimming analogy is my favorite for illustrating how works is the expected and obligatory outcome of the faith that justifies all by itself. Works ultimately accompany justifying faith, not because they somehow justify (MAKE one righteous before God), but because justifying faith results in God giving the indwelling Spirit. The Spirit which then manifests himself in works of love (Galatians 5:6 NIV). Similar to the swimming analogy: we didn't go swimming because we're wet. We're wet because we went swimming! And we scoff at the one who says he went swimming...but is bone dry. It is in that way that 'righteousness apart from works' is not 'righteousness with no works attached'. But so many people think it is.

Our works validate the presence of the indwelling Spirit. The person who can't validate the presence of the Spirit in them through acts of righteousness, done through the fruit of the Spirit, may well not have the Spirit at all. That's the Bible's warning to us.

We are commanded to validate our profession of faith...for OUR sake's, not God's, so we can get truly saved if our barrenness is the result of having not really trusted in the blood of Christ for justification. We are to examine ourselves to see if we are in the faith (2 Corinthians 13:5). Works inspection is one of those ways.

If you are not convinced, there is more. You can either close your eyes to this truth, or you can rationalize it away, but the plain truth in our Bibles is the plain truth.

 

[francisdesales]

Well it seems that many are still looking to the Ten Commandments, and are in fact trying to be righteous by the written code. This is error and those who look to the strength of sin, are yet in bondage to sin.Rom 7:8

Romans 3 is clear that no one, by human effort alone, can achieve righteousness. Whether with or without the Mosaic Law. Thus, the need for faith.

The discussion on whether someone could KEEP the Mosaic Law is inconsequential and was a distraction. Who cares if someone COULD keep the Law, what is important is whether THAT was the CORRECT MOTIVE. I posit that even the "perfectly righteous" are made so by God's mercy. The truth is that the sacrificial system for Jews was part of God's merciful plan to allow faithful following of the Law. So Luke 1:5-6 is a statement of Zechariah and Elizebeth's FAITH, not their utter perfection in following the Law. Otherwise, as I stated before, why would Moses say that the Law COULD be followed - and not too difficult. Because God would forgive faults, if one turned to Him.

Again, I point you to the numerous Psalms that make this clear - man is nothing without God's grace. That idea did not originate with Paul. It is STILL my contention that this "avenue to God" has always been open, that faith in God's mercy has always been the way to seek out God.

I still disagree that people who are trying to follow "portions" of the Law are necessarily "of sin". There is some confusion on the Divine Law - what we would call "Natural Law" vs the Mosaic Law. Thus, definitions are important. But to lump ALL people who attempt to obey God's commandments with "SIN" is wrong. Some people were legitimately trying to follow God BY following the Law. Whether written on stone or the heart. It is not the attempt to obey God that is wrong. It is the motive, Mitspa.

And Paul's motive is not a "works" v "faith" argument, it is a Jewish Law following v Faith in Christ argument. The Gentiles are also loved by God, and God's Oneness is seen in the one plan offered to save man - Jesus Christ and faith.

But it is good to see that you have changed your opinions and doctrines, because it is clear to me, that you have very much attempted to establish "parts" of the law as needed to justifiy a believer who is justified by faith.

If you will recall, I have posted about a dozen requests to read what I wrote - that you were misunderstanding my point as you gave me a strawman argument (arguing against a point that I was not making). Is it conceivable that you misunderstood my point and I have NOT changed it???

Be that as it may, it is good that you have taken the time to read what I wrote and have found some agreement in it.

 

[childeye]

I am never comfortable saying I don't sin, nor am I comfortable saying I do sin. What's up with that?

I think it is as Paul says, he said he did the things he did not want to do but that he did them in the flesh which is evil, so it was no longer him that did them.

It seems to me Paul could separate himself from the sin he saw rise up in his flesh and know that he was saved by the blood of Christ. That is a miracle in itself to me. Paul was a Pharisee, he was radical about the law to the destruction of the saints. When Jesus did His work in Paul, Paul became just a radical for the Gospel of Grace. I believe that is why he was chosen to deliver so much of it. Once he got a hold on the Truth he was like a pitbull, he wasn't letting go even if he was beat to death.

I read your #17 post just now and I think I understood much of what you were saying although my own experience has been different. Although, I too had to repent for me, of thinking that my God was so strict in the law, so without grace and mercy, that He would not understand and give me grace in my time of weakness. Many hours of remorse and tears over 5 mths was spent in this process, admitting that I was without understanding about anything (beliefs in doctrine) and even my own salvation was the end of the torment and the beginning of new teaching that taught me I had been set free from the curse of the law, I just hadn't known it.

That's an excellent reply. As for never being comfortable saying I don't sin\do sin, I always find myself wondering if I've given enough, suffered enough, cared enough. At the same time I don't want to be stuck in some sort of vain glory or self pity. It seems that sometimes, I can't tell if the devil is accusing me or God is encouraging me. Kind of a paradox there. I usually can note the difference by whether it feels like Light or darkness upon my heart.

I think what you say about your experience is not different than my experience spoken of in post#17 on the other thread. I also had a false image of god as strict and merciless. The narrow road was defined as don't break one commandment. Freewill was my ability (power) to choose to be good or bad. There was a time when it was easy in my mind to think I had killed the Christ with my sin. Rather than removing guilt, I actually felt more guilty through the cross. What was supposed to be Light unto my soul was a darkness upon it. I was raised Catholic, but I didn't want to partake of communion in my church. Because in truth I would rather die than to see Christ punished such as he was because of my sin. Nobody would help me with my honest questions about the discrepencies I perceived. In fact it seemed like nobody else even cared to question what it meant to drink his blood or eat his flesh. As a Catholic, one tends to assume the church will tell you what you need to believe.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Paul was not putting believers under the "moral requirments" of the law...

Your problem is all these little phrases you keep tossing around. Only you know what they mean in your mind. What does 'under the moral requirements' mean to you that somehow it DOESN'T mean we are to uphold them????? But that is exactly what saving faith is expected to do. Because that's what genuine justifying faith does! Not so you can be justified, but to show you are justified.

... but using the law as a witness to the Commandment of love.

So, when you don't love what is the law the witness to? That you've upheld the law by your faith????? Hardly. How can you not see this?

Which does not come by looking to the written code, but through the Holy Spirit.

So, the law is a witness...but just not when you're violating the law, right? How absurd. James says we are convicted BY THE LAW when we don't love. He plainly says that. Plainly.

This is his point over and over, do not look to the written code but walk in the spirit.

...but use the law as a way to know if you've been walking in the Spirit. I've shown you where the Bible says this...but for some reason you are compelled to reject it because you can only think in terms of 'saved', 'not saved'. That's why you can't see what the Bible is saying.

So paul is just uses the law as a witness to the Spirit. Thats it!

Which means if I am violating the law I'm not walking in the Spirit. This is so simple, yet you do everything you can to deny it.

For the letter kills but the Spirit gives life.

...If you try to be justified by the letter. This has NOTHING to do with gauging your spiritual walk by whether or not you have been coveting, stealing, lying, being a false witness, etc.

So again paul uses this to set believers free from the written code, not put them in bondage again to the law of sin and death.

In regard to how to be justified YES! But that hardly means we can't use the law to gauge whether or not we've been walking in the Spirit!

He has already made the point that the law produces sinful desires and apart from the law sin is dead.

...IF you rely on the written Word all by itself to somehow make you able to obey God.

You're not arousing sinful desire when you do what the Bible does teach about the law, that you can know if you've been loving by whether you have, for example, kept the law forbidding favoritism.

So he is teaching others to walk in love, not legalism.

...and walking in love UPHOLDS THE LAW. Upholding the law through faith via the fruit of the Spirit IS NOT LEGALISM! If it is then even YOU (assuming you walk by the Spirit) are an accursed legalist! Don't you realize that?

 

[Deborah13]

The swimming analogy

I'm not using any "swimming" analogy, never heard of it. I point was "sinking and swimming" are not of God, to walk on water, walk in the Sprit we must judge ourselves by what Jesus, grace, says about the born again believer. We are not to judge ourselves or anyone else for justification unto salvation, by the LAW. I can't find anywhere in the Word that we are to do this.

James is not saying this. Read the whole thing Jethro, he's actually speaking against this. He is settling some obvious disputes that were going on about faith and works, yes but not saying that we are to judge ourselves or anyone else by works. Yes, he says faith without works is dead faith but what is he going by, not the works of the law (sin/not sin) but the fruit of the Spirit. LOVE

The Law does not produce LOVE, it produces judgment. What does Jesus produce? LOVE It is His love that draws us to Him. It is His Love that produces repentance. We love because He first love us. Love is the fruit of the Spirit.

If you want to judge yourself " judge am I walking in love?" If you find yourself lacking the solution is......Look to Jesus and what He says about you. You are beloved, you are a saint, you are a priest, you are His (the Father's) child, you are LOVED. You didn't do anything to deserve it. It's by His Grace (unmerited favor). Steep yourself in His love. His love produces love. It's what the Law cannot do.

As far as knowing others by their fruit, most of us can't, our discernment is not that developed. You would say that if you see someone not doing, then they are not saved. What about the person who is doing, for all intense and purposes they look good. Can you see their heart and mind? There are people in the secular world who do more to show love then some who are saved.

You still have not given me a scripture that says we are to judge ourselves by the LAW.


James 2:11-13

New American Standard Bible (NASB)

11 For He who said, “Do not commit adultery,” also said, “Do not commit murder.” Now if you do not commit adultery, but do commit murder, you have become a transgressor of the law. 12So speak and so act as those who are to be judged by the law of liberty. 13 For judgment will be merciless to one who has shown no mercy; mercy triumphs over judgment.

 

[Deborah13]

Nobody would help me with my honest questions about the discrepencies I perceived. In fact it seemed like nobody else even cared to question what it meant to drink his blood or eat his flesh. As a Catholic, one tends to assume the church will tell you what you need to believe.

You know in another response I almost brought up receiving the body and blood of Christ. You may not agree with me about this and that's OK I won't be offended, frankly at one time I would not have agreed with me.
I was taught that we must exam ourselves for sin and repent of it before taking this sacrament because if you weren't worthy you could get sick or even die.
Since receiving a better understanding of our Lord's grace and mercy, I also learned this.
I read and reread that scripture and thought, it is talking about the way they were receiving, eating and drinking as though it were not sacred and not sharing. This is what worthily meant. Then
I thought more about "do this to remember Me". Well that really means remember what I did for you. He died to pay for my sin and He took the stripes for my healing. So if I have sin or if I am sick that's just what He was taking care of at the cross and I need to receive forgiveness and healing when I receive His body and His blood. This is why some may be sick or even die because of not receiving Him.
I don't know that I explained that very well but it was such a wonderful revelation to me. Now I could receive the sacrament without any fear and with more of a revelation of why and receive once again from Him just as I received from Him when I became born again. Remission of sin and healing. What an amazing Lord we have.

 

[Mitspa]

Nobody would help me with my honest questions about the discrepencies I perceived. In fact it seemed like nobody else even cared to question what it meant to drink his blood or eat his flesh. As a Catholic, one tends to assume the church will tell you what you need to believe.

You know in another response I almost brought up receiving the body and blood of Christ. You may not agree with me about this and that's OK I won't be offended, frankly at one time I would not have agreed with me.
I was taught that we must exam ourselves for sin and repent of it before taking this sacrament because if you weren't worthy you could get sick or even die.
Since receiving a better understanding of our Lord's grace and mercy, I also learned this.
I read and reread that scripture and thought, it is talking about the way they were receiving, eating and drinking as though it were not sacred and not sharing. This is what worthily meant. Then
I thought more about "do this to remember Me". Well that really means remember what I did for you. He died to pay for my sin and He took the stripes for my healing. So if I have sin or if I am sick that's just what He was taking care of at the cross and I need to receive forgiveness and healing when I receive His body and His blood. This is why some may be sick or even die because of not receiving Him.
I don't know that I explained that very well but it was such a wonderful revelation to me. Now I could receive the sacrament without any fear and with more of a revelation of why and receive once again from Him just as I received from Him when I became born again. Remission of sin and healing. What an amazing Lord we have.

Dont want to get the thread off topic but I just had to mention also the context in which the "unworthy manner" should be seen? Folks were GETTING DRUNK and some were eating while others went without. Now I dont care what branch of religion some are, if one is getting drunk and being a selfish pig at the Lords table, I doubt they can receive the "childrens bread" and be healed?

Just thought it was important to mention the context of Pauls warning. But so many want make legalism part of our faith, fear and guilt is NOT part of the Lords body.

 

[Mitspa]

Your problem is all these little phrases you keep tossing around. Only you know what they mean in your mind. What does 'under the moral requirements' mean to you that somehow it DOESN'T mean we are to uphold them????? But that is exactly what saving faith is expected to do. Because that's what genuine justifying faith does! Not so you can be justified, but to show you are justified.




So, when you don't love what is the law the witness to? That you've upheld the law by your faith????? Hardly. How can you not see this?



So, the law is a witness...but just not when you're violating the law, right? How absurd. James says we are convicted BY THE LAW when we don't love. He plainly says that. Plainly.

This is his point over and over, do not look to the written code but walk in the spirit.

...but use the law as a way to know if you've been walking in the Spirit. I've shown you where the Bible says this...but for some reason you are compelled to reject it because you can only think in terms of 'saved', 'not saved'. That's why you can't see what the Bible is saying.

So paul is just uses the law as a witness to the Spirit. Thats it!

Which means if I am violating the law I'm not walking in the Spirit. This is so simple, yet you do everything you can to deny it.

For the letter kills but the Spirit gives life.

...If you try to be justified by the letter. This has NOTHING to do with gauging your spiritual walk by whether or not you have been coveting, stealing, lying, being a false witness, etc.

So again paul uses this to set believers free from the written code, not put them in bondage again to the law of sin and death.

In regard to how to be justified YES! But that hardly means we can't use the law to gauge whether or not we've been walking in the Spirit!

He has already made the point that the law produces sinful desires and apart from the law sin is dead.

...IF you rely on the written Word all by itself to somehow make you able to obey God.

You're not arousing sinful desire when you do what the Bible does teach about the law, that you can know if you've been loving by whether you have, for example, kept the law forbidding favoritism.

So he is teaching others to walk in love, not legalism.

...and walking in love UPHOLDS THE LAW. Upholding the law through faith via the fruit of the Spirit IS NOT LEGALISM! If it is then even YOU (assuming you walk by the Spirit) are an accursed legalist! Don't you realize that?

I know jethro, it really seems to bother you that a born-again believer is not under the written code of the law. Now you can a scripture out of its context and meaning and try all you like to prove what cannot be proven in scripture.
Now I know the gospel is hard for some to understand, this why Paul spends so much time telling us theat the natural mind cannot understand the things of the Spirit. That one must become as a fool to be made wise.

Now I have made clear biblical points and I have answered all your questions with clear biblical truth. You keep going back to the same thing over and over, I explain over and over.

The law is not of faith.
The strength of sin is the law.
The letter kills and Spirit gives life.
For sin will not have dominion over you because you are not under law but under grace.
Those who seek to be justified by the law have FALLEN FROM GRACE.
etc.... These scriptures and so many more, prove you do not yet understand the gospel. I could teach you, if you would be humble, but you will not.