The CURSE OF THE LAW

[Deborah13]

Somehow many think under the law you had to be perfect...and that's what changed in this New Covenant. Now we don't have to be perfect.

I can't speak for anyone else but I don't think they had to be perfect under the law to be saved, that is nonsense and the comparison is even worse.

That is not what I have heard anyone say.

Neither has anyone promoted sin in any way whatsoever.

God says, "there are not any who are righteous, not one"
"to break one point in the law is to break them all"

The whole point is that one cannot be saved by obeying the Law of Moses, and you have agreed with that several times.

It is only by Jesus work on the cross, His forgiveness of our sins....and His righteousness that has been imputed to us, that we can be found righteous.

So do you believe that when you accepted Jesus as your Savior and Lord that Jesus righteousness was given to you as a gift?

Blessings

 

[Mitspa]

Cursed is everyone who continues not IN ALL THINGS WRITTEN in the book of the law to do them.

Could you cite me an OT Scripture that says one must keep the law to the letter or be cast out of the chosen People?

What was Yom Kippur for, Mitspa?

Ever think that Paul was being a good lawyer with his polemics? Cite me something from the OT, that the people would know that they had to obey every single point of the Law or be considered wicked...

I anxiously await your proof...

Look I do not think Paul wrote ONE WORD apart from the intention of the Holy Spirit. I believe the the scriptures mean what they say, and say what they mean.

As far as feeling I need to prove anything to you? I do not!
Read my post above! For I have given the truth of Gods Word in clear and evident terms.

Mitspa,

The more I have read about Paul and the Law, the more I believe you are incorrect regarding the "unfulfillability" of the Law that you claim that Paul has...

Phil 3 shows Paul had NO PROBLEM fulfilling the Law satisfactorily. Paul's argument concerning the Law does not rest on man's inability to fulfil it.

Perhaps you will cite Romans 7. There is no evidence that this was Paul's state of mind WHEN HE WAS A ZEALOUS JEW! Paul contrasts the life in Christ with his past life under the Law. Looking at the Law through a Christian's eyes does not mean that Paul experienced frustration with the Law before his own conversion.

I believe that your understanding of what the Law does in the JEW'S mind is deficient. In addition, it is clear to me that you are ignoring the obvious - that God had established a system to return the individual who had fallen back to the grace of God and the community. You seem to totally ignore that, as well.

Thus, your idea that one must fulfill each and every iota of the Law to be just in God's eyes are simply false. "All seemed rubbish" because of what Paul had experienced through Christ. Once one experienced Christ, there was no reason to return to the Law, but it is more of a "better than" argument, not the argument that you continue to make that has Paul indecisively calling the Law "holy" and regarding zeal for the Law in a positive light versus Paul calling the Law evil and the cause of sin...

Because of such contradictory teachings that you continue to present and refuse to address, one must consider your gospel as incomplete and corrupt.

Not sure of your point? Because Paul makes it very clear in Php 3:8-9 That the righteousness he attain through keeping the law (ALL THE LAW) is not the righteousness of God, and cannot be compared. He goes on to say that those who do not walk in Gods righteouness, as he did, will be destroyed Php 3:17-19

So here we have the same warning as in 2 Pet 2:21-22
FOR IT WOULD HAVE BEEN BETTER FOR THEM NOT TO HAVE KNOWN THE "WAY OF RIGHTEOUSNESS"

So again, I am not sure of what point you are trying to make?
There was a "form" of righteousness that one could attain by keeping ALL THE LAW. but now the RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD has been revealed from heaven. Those who do not heed His Righteousness will be destroyed Php 3:19

 

[Mitspa]

We who are bornAgain are in fact "perfect" in spirit. We are saved in spirit, not in flesh.
Col 2:10

KAIESTEENAUTW PEPLHRWMENOI. And, ye are filled with him. It has nothing to do with what you are implying...

The philosophy of the world was empty. In Christ, there is fulness.

No fanciful completeness in Christ, of a believer, while incomplete in himself, is either expressed or
intended by St. Paul.

As usual, you go beyond what Paul is saying...

And you guys can await whatever you like! I will respond and post according to what I see as needed.

Of course, Mitspa, that's the type of response we have come to expect from you. Usually, when you can't answer something that doesn't fit your theology, you ignore it. That's why I sarcastically said "I await your response", because I knew you wouldn't give one.

Col 2:6-15 I think these scriptures speak for themselves.
if they seem "fanciful" to you, then maybe you are "incomplete"

AS YOU HAVE RECEIVED CHRIST JESUS, SO WALK YE IN HIM. Col 2:6
Gal 3:1-3 DID YE RECEIVE THE SPIRIT BY WORKS OF LAW, OR BY THE HEARING OF FAITH?
ARE YOU SO FOOLISH, HAVING BEGUN IN THE SPIRIT YOU ARE NOW MADE PERFECT BY THE FLESH.

put these two sections of the scriptures together, and it will set you free from the foolishness of trying to keep the written code of the law.

 

[francisdesales]

Mitspa,

The more I have read about Paul and the Law, the more I believe you are incorrect regarding the "unfulfillability" of the Law that you claim that Paul has...

Phil 3 shows Paul had NO PROBLEM fulfilling the Law satisfactorily. Paul's argument concerning the Law does not rest on man's inability to fulfil it.

Perhaps you will cite Romans 7. There is no evidence that this was Paul's state of mind WHEN HE WAS A ZEALOUS JEW! Paul contrasts the life in Christ with his past life under the Law. Looking at the Law through a Christian's eyes does not mean that Paul experienced frustration with the Law before his own conversion.

I believe that your understanding of what the Law does in the JEW'S mind is deficient. In addition, it is clear to me that you are ignoring the obvious - that God had established a system to return the individual who had fallen back to the grace of God and the community. You seem to totally ignore that, as well.

Thus, your idea that one must fulfill each and every iota of the Law to be just in God's eyes are simply false. "All seemed rubbish" because of what Paul had experienced through Christ. Once one experienced Christ, there was no reason to return to the Law, but it is more of a "better than" argument, not the argument that you continue to make that has Paul indecisively calling the Law "holy" and regarding zeal for the Law in a positive light versus Paul calling the Law evil and the cause of sin...

Because of such contradictory teachings that you continue to present and refuse to address, one must consider your gospel as incomplete and corrupt.

Not sure of your point? Because Paul makes it very clear in Php 3:8-9 That the righteousness he attain through keeping the law (ALL THE LAW) is not the righteousness of God, and cannot be compared. He goes on to say that those who do not walk in Gods righteouness, as he did, will be destroyed Php 3:17-19

Why are you adding what is not there in Scriptures???

Paul doesn't say "ALL THE LAW" in Phillipians, you are adding that in. Do you think Paul considered himself absolutely sinless??? YOU are PRESUMING that "keeping the Law" = being absolutely sinless throughout one's life. That is pattently false. There is no such requirement or expectation ANYWHERE in the Old Testament.

And that is my point. Paul, as a zealous Jew, was able to uphold the Law. You claim no one can uphold the Law.

Looking at his past life, Paul is able to see that what he has "now", in Christ, makes Law following as "a pile of rubbish". His experience in Christ far exceeds what he had in Judaism. As a Jew, though, he did not feel he was "deprived" of a relationship with God. He said he was BLAMELESS in righteousness of the Law, albeit a righteousness he "won".

In other words, Paul felt that he had "done enough" to warrant salvation and righteousness due to his zealous pursuit of the Law (which did NOT have to be absolutely perfect). But in Christ, Paul had discovered a better way in finding righteousness. Thus, the old ways were "as dung".

So here we have the same warning as in 2 Pet 2:21-22
FOR IT WOULD HAVE BEEN BETTER FOR THEM NOT TO HAVE KNOWN THE "WAY OF RIGHTEOUSNESS"

No, the false teachers of 2 Peter had previously converted. Judaizers wanted Gentiles to become Jewish in all ways, continuing the rite of circumcision and the keeping of holidays, etc... There is absolutely no indication that the teachers of 2 Peter were Judaizers, but rather, were teaching a false Pauline gospel of antinomianism. (the danger of twisting Paul's doctrines).

 

[francisdesales]

Col 2:6-15 I think these scriptures speak for themselves.
if they seem "fanciful" to you, then maybe you are "incomplete".

I am incomplete. So are you. We all are until we enter into heaven. The Greek does not suggest that the individual is a complete Christian just because they were baptized. Otherwise, WHY is Paul writing numerous letters to communities with PROBLEMS, Mitspa??? Why does he tell them they are as babes, children, immature? Why does he warn them - who needs to be warned if they are "complete" and "perfected"?

I realize your theology must pretend that you are full of the Spirit and "complete". John calls such people liars...

AS YOU HAVE RECEIVED CHRIST JESUS, SO WALK YE IN HIM. Col 2:6

That doesn't mean one is complete - we are exhorted to follow Christ. Why the exhortation if one is perfect? I wouldn't NEED someone to write me a letter to tell me that...

Put these two sections of the scriptures together, and it will set you free from the foolishness of trying to keep the written code of the law.

I am not arguing for a return to the written code. Where are you getting that from? Is that your stock rejoinder when you cannot actually answer the person's actual argument?

 

[John 8:32]

well a believer is not judged by the written code of moses, but by the Royal law of love.

you see a believer is not judged by the Old law, but by THE LAW OF CHRIST.

I always find this humorous, as if the Ten Commandments were not from Christ...

Joh 5:37 And the Father himself, which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me. Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape.

Who do you suppose spoke these words?

Exo 20:1 And God spake all these words, saying,
Exo 20:2 I am the LORD thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.

Might have been the Word...

Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Joh 1:2 The same was in the beginning with God.
Joh 1:3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

Who gave Israel the Ten Commandments?

1Co 10:1 Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea;
1Co 10:2 And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea;
1Co 10:3 And did all eat the same spiritual meat;
1Co 10:4 And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.

The same Christ who said...

Mat 5:17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
Mat 5:18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
Mat 5:19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

 

[John 8:32]

Somehow many think under the law you had to be perfect...and that's what changed in this New Covenant. Now we don't have to be perfect.

I can't speak for anyone else but I don't think they had to be perfect under the law to be saved, that is nonsense and the comparison is even worse.

That is not what I have heard anyone say.

Neither has anyone promoted sin in any way whatsoever.

God says, "there are not any who are righteous, not one"
"to break one point in the law is to break them all"

The whole point is that one cannot be saved by obeying the Law of Moses, and you have agreed with that several times.

It is only by Jesus work on the cross, His forgiveness of our sins....and His righteousness that has been imputed to us, that we can be found righteous.

So do you believe that when you accepted Jesus as your Savior and Lord that Jesus righteousness was given to you as a gift?

Blessings

David was a sinner and made many mistakes, some of them were blatant, consider Bathsheba. Yet, David was forgiven...

Psa 130:3 If thou, LORD, shouldest mark iniquities, O Lord, who shall stand?
Psa 130:4 But there is forgiveness with thee, that thou mayest be feared.

Psa 85:1 To the chief Musician, A Psalm for the sons of Korah. LORD, thou hast been favourable unto thy land: thou hast brought back the captivity of Jacob.
Psa 85:2 Thou hast forgiven the iniquity of thy people, thou hast covered all their sin. Selah.

Forgiveness has always been a part of God's character...

Psa 103:1 A Psalm of David. Bless the LORD, O my soul: and all that is within me, bless his holy name.
Psa 103:2 Bless the LORD, O my soul, and forget not all his benefits:
Psa 103:3 Who forgiveth all thine iniquities; who healeth all thy diseases;
Psa 103:4 Who redeemeth thy life from destruction; who crowneth thee with lovingkindness and tender mercies;

Somehow grace has been construed to mean there is no Law and therefore no sin. Grace is the free, unearned, undeserved forgiveness for sinning against God, but it is predicated on repentance...

Act 5:30 The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree.
Act 5:31 Him hath God exalted with his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins.

Act 11:18 When they heard these things, they held their peace, and glorified God, saying, Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life.

God did not solve the problem of sin doing away with the Law that defined sin, He solved the probelm by sending His Son to pay the debt (death) for our sin, so that we may be forgiven and receive life.

 

[Mitspa]

Mitspa,

The more I have read about Paul and the Law, the more I believe you are incorrect regarding the "unfulfillability" of the Law that you claim that Paul has...

Phil 3 shows Paul had NO PROBLEM fulfilling the Law satisfactorily. Paul's argument concerning the Law does not rest on man's inability to fulfil it.

Perhaps you will cite Romans 7. There is no evidence that this was Paul's state of mind WHEN HE WAS A ZEALOUS JEW! Paul contrasts the life in Christ with his past life under the Law. Looking at the Law through a Christian's eyes does not mean that Paul experienced frustration with the Law before his own conversion.

I believe that your understanding of what the Law does in the JEW'S mind is deficient. In addition, it is clear to me that you are ignoring the obvious - that God had established a system to return the individual who had fallen back to the grace of God and the community. You seem to totally ignore that, as well.

Thus, your idea that one must fulfill each and every iota of the Law to be just in God's eyes are simply false. "All seemed rubbish" because of what Paul had experienced through Christ. Once one experienced Christ, there was no reason to return to the Law, but it is more of a "better than" argument, not the argument that you continue to make that has Paul indecisively calling the Law "holy" and regarding zeal for the Law in a positive light versus Paul calling the Law evil and the cause of sin...

Because of such contradictory teachings that you continue to present and refuse to address, one must consider your gospel as incomplete and corrupt.

Not sure of your point? Because Paul makes it very clear in Php 3:8-9 That the righteousness he attain through keeping the law (ALL THE LAW) is not the righteousness of God, and cannot be compared. He goes on to say that those who do not walk in Gods righteouness, as he did, will be destroyed Php 3:17-19

Why are you adding what is not there in Scriptures???

Paul doesn't say "ALL THE LAW" in Phillipians, you are adding that in. Do you think Paul considered himself absolutely sinless??? YOU are PRESUMING that "keeping the Law" = being absolutely sinless throughout one's life. That is pattently false. There is no such requirement or expectation ANYWHERE in the Old Testament.

And that is my point. Paul, as a zealous Jew, was able to uphold the Law. You claim no one can uphold the Law.

Looking at his past life, Paul is able to see that what he has "now", in Christ, makes Law following as "a pile of rubbish". His experience in Christ far exceeds what he had in Judaism. As a Jew, though, he did not feel he was "deprived" of a relationship with God. He said he was BLAMELESS in righteousness of the Law, albeit a righteousness he "won".

In other words, Paul felt that he had "done enough" to warrant salvation and righteousness due to his zealous pursuit of the Law (which did NOT have to be absolutely perfect). But in Christ, Paul had discovered a better way in finding righteousness. Thus, the old ways were "as dung".

So here we have the same warning as in 2 Pet 2:21-22
FOR IT WOULD HAVE BEEN BETTER FOR THEM NOT TO HAVE KNOWN THE "WAY OF RIGHTEOUSNESS"

No, the false teachers of 2 Peter had previously converted. Judaizers wanted Gentiles to become Jewish in all ways, continuing the rite of circumcision and the keeping of holidays, etc... There is absolutely no indication that the teachers of 2 Peter were Judaizers, but rather, were teaching a false Pauline gospel of antinomianism. (the danger of twisting Paul's doctrines).

0f course Paul was under ALL THE LAW! he did not "break" the law into parts. For he made this very point in Gal.
You who desire to be under the law, do you not hear the law?
For cursed are those who continue not IN ALL THINGS WRITTEN IN THE BOOK OF THE LAW, to do them.

 

[Mitspa]

Col 2:6-15 I think these scriptures speak for themselves.
if they seem "fanciful" to you, then maybe you are "incomplete".

I am incomplete. So are you. We all are until we enter into heaven. The Greek does not suggest that the individual is a complete Christian just because they were baptized. Otherwise, WHY is Paul writing numerous letters to communities with PROBLEMS, Mitspa??? Why does he tell them they are as babes, children, immature? Why does he warn them - who needs to be warned if they are "complete" and "perfected"?

I realize your theology must pretend that you are full of the Spirit and "complete". John calls such people liars...

AS YOU HAVE RECEIVED CHRIST JESUS, SO WALK YE IN HIM. Col 2:6

That doesn't mean one is complete - we are exhorted to follow Christ. Why the exhortation if one is perfect? I wouldn't NEED someone to write me a letter to tell me that...

Put these two sections of the scriptures together, and it will set you free from the foolishness of trying to keep the written code of the law.

I am not arguing for a return to the written code. Where are you getting that from? Is that your stock rejoinder when you cannot actually answer the person's actual argument?

Well there are some who are spiritual and some who are carnal.
The spiritual know very well they are complete in Christ. The carnal are yet those who are subject to the flesh.

 

[John 8:32]

I am incomplete. So are you. We all are until we enter into heaven. The Greek does not suggest that the individual is a complete Christian just because they were baptized. Otherwise, WHY is Paul writing numerous letters to communities with PROBLEMS, Mitspa??? Why does he tell them they are as babes, children, immature? Why does he warn them - who needs to be warned if they are "complete" and "perfected"?

I realize your theology must pretend that you are full of the Spirit and "complete". John calls such people liars...



That doesn't mean one is complete - we are exhorted to follow Christ. Why the exhortation if one is perfect? I wouldn't NEED someone to write me a letter to tell me that...

Put these two sections of the scriptures together, and it will set you free from the foolishness of trying to keep the written code of the law.

I am not arguing for a return to the written code. Where are you getting that from? Is that your stock rejoinder when you cannot actually answer the person's actual argument?

Well there are some who are spiritual and some who are carnal.
The spiritual know very well they are complete in Christ. The carnal are yet those who are subject to the flesh.

I think I'll take my chances with the carnal...

Rom 7:14 For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.

 

[francisdesales]

0f course Paul was under ALL THE LAW! he did not "break" the law into parts.

Eh? I didn't say Paul broke the Law into parts. Where did i say that? Read what I wrote. I said you are mistaken by adding to Phillipians what Paul did not say - that one had to perfectly follow the law to be righteous under the Law.

Mitspa, you need to explain to me or yourself - why did God provide a sacrificial system for the atonement of sin in the days of the OT?

IF a person had to perfectly - absolutely perfectly - follow the Law, WHY does God provide such a system that PRESUMES, ABSOLUTELY PRESUMES that man will fail and NEED such a system???

Once you answer that, maybe you'll put aside your error about perfectly following the Law...

 

[francisdesales]

Well there are some who are spiritual and some who are carnal.

The spiritual know very well they are complete in Christ. The carnal are yet those who are subject to the flesh.

Are you saying you never sin???

If you sin, you are incomplete. You are still subject to the flesh.
If you say you do not sin, you are a liar - so says John.

So which is it?

 

[Deborah13]

Somehow grace has been construed to mean there is no Law and therefore no sin. Grace is the free, unearned, undeserved forgiveness for sinning against God, but it is predicated on repentance...

I just don't know or hear anyone that preaches that so I am surprised when I hear that is what is going on? I wish one person would give one example of one person or church that is saying that.
To me grace is unearned, unmerited favor from God to me. Jesus paid a dear price for me to be saved, the price was very steep.
I hear there is a law that is the Law of Love. I don't hear "we should go on sinning that grace should abound."
If there is no sin we have no need for grace at all. Where is that coming from? I don't hear that either. Maybe I'm listening to the wrong preachers to hear that and reading the wrong threads to hear that or maybe God has given me the grace to not hear that.

 

[John 8:32]

Somehow grace has been construed to mean there is no Law and therefore no sin. Grace is the free, unearned, undeserved forgiveness for sinning against God, but it is predicated on repentance...

I just don't know or hear anyone that preaches that so I am surprised when I hear that is what is going on? I wish one person would give one example of one person or church that is saying that.
To me grace is unearned, unmerited favor from God to me. Jesus paid a dear price for me to be saved, the price was very steep.
I hear there is a law that is the Law of Love. I don't hear "we should go on sinning that grace should abound."
If there is no sin we have no need for grace at all. Where is that coming from? I don't hear that either. Maybe I'm listening to the wrong preachers to hear that and reading the wrong threads to hear that or maybe God has given me the grace to not hear that.

Apparently you haven't read through this thread. If there is no law, there is no sin...

Rom 7:7 What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.

But there are those wh keep saying the Law is done away. If the Law is done away then there is no sin...

1Jn 3:4 Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.

And if there is no sin, you are absolutely correct, there is no need for a Savior.

 

[Deborah13]

Phil 3 shows Paul had NO PROBLEM fulfilling the Law satisfactorily. Paul's argument concerning the Law does not rest on man's inability to fulfil it.

This is really a good scripture as to what Paul thought and believed about his righteousness and to me clearly explains "none are righteous, no not one". And that we must be more righteous than the Pharisees to obtain salvation.
Phil 3
as to the Law, a Pharisee; 6 as to zeal, a persecutor of the church; as to the righteousness which is in the Law, found blameless.

Was Paul proud of his zealousness in persecuting the church? Yes, found blameless under the Law but then what does he say about this righteousness in the Law.....

count them but rubbish so that I may gain Christ, 9 and may be found in Him, not having a righteousness of my own derived from the Law

I think he is saying that the righteousness he obtained in obeying the Law was a righteousness of his own doing. self-righteousness.

So when it says that "there are none righteous, no not one" this is speaking of the righteousness unto justification which cannot be obtained no matter how well one obeys the Law of Moses but is only obtained by receiving the righteousness available in Christ.

 

[John 8:32]

Phil 3 shows Paul had NO PROBLEM fulfilling the Law satisfactorily. Paul's argument concerning the Law does not rest on man's inability to fulfil it.

This is really a good scripture as to what Paul thought and believed about his righteousness and to me clearly explains "none are righteous, no not one". And that we must be more righteous than the Pharisees to obtain salvation.
Phil 3
as to the Law, a Pharisee; 6 as to zeal, a persecutor of the church; as to the righteousness which is in the Law, found blameless.

Was Paul proud of his zealousness in persecuting the church? Yes, found blameless under the Law but then what does he say about this righteousness in the Law.....

count them but rubbish so that I may gain Christ, 9 and may be found in Him, not having a righteousness of my own derived from the Law

I think he is saying that the righteousness he obtained in obeying the Law was a righteousness of his own doing. self-righteousness.

So when it says that "there are none righteous, no not one" this is speaking of the righteousness unto justification which cannot be obtained no matter how well one obeys the Law of Moses but is only obtained by receiving the righteousness available in Christ.

To my knowledge, no one in this thread has alledged that righteousness comes from obedience.

 

[Deborah13]

To my knowledge, no one in this thread has alledged that righteousness comes from obedience.

My post was not to be accusing anyone of saying this. Just a reflection on Phil 3 say to what Paul says here.

I quoted FDS because he brought up the scripture and I appreciate his posts, they usually make me dig deeper.

 

[John 8:32]

To my knowledge, no one in this thread has alledged that righteousness comes from obedience.

My post was not to be accusing anyone of saying this. Just a reflection on Phil 3 say to what Paul says here.

I quoted FDS because he brought up the scripture and I appreciate his posts, they usually make me dig deeper.

And it was in that spirit that I made the comment I did. It was not directed to you in particular, just using it as a reference point.

 

[Mitspa]

Somehow grace has been construed to mean there is no Law and therefore no sin. Grace is the free, unearned, undeserved forgiveness for sinning against God, but it is predicated on repentance...

I just don't know or hear anyone that preaches that so I am surprised when I hear that is what is going on? I wish one person would give one example of one person or church that is saying that.
To me grace is unearned, unmerited favor from God to me. Jesus paid a dear price for me to be saved, the price was very steep.
I hear there is a law that is the Law of Love. I don't hear "we should go on sinning that grace should abound."
If there is no sin we have no need for grace at all. Where is that coming from? I don't hear that either. Maybe I'm listening to the wrong preachers to hear that and reading the wrong threads to hear that or maybe God has given me the grace to not hear that.

Apparently you haven't read through this thread. If there is no law, there is no sin...

Rom 7:7 What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.

But there are those wh keep saying the Law is done away. If the Law is done away then there is no sin...

1Jn 3:4 Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.

And if there is no sin, you are absolutely correct, there is no need for a Savior.

Gee thats exactly what John says in the next few verses? IN HIM WE HAVE NO SIN AND CANNOT SIN.

so the only ones who are unrighteous and lawless are those who are going about to establish their own righteousness by the written code of the law!

 

[Mitspa]

Look I do not think Paul wrote ONE WORD apart from the intention of the Holy Spirit. I believe the the scriptures mean what they say, and say what they mean.

As far as feeling I need to prove anything to you? I do not!
Read my post above! For I have given the truth of Gods Word in clear and evident terms.

Mitspa,

The more I have read about Paul and the Law, the more I believe you are incorrect regarding the "unfulfillability" of the Law that you claim that Paul has...

Phil 3 shows Paul had NO PROBLEM fulfilling the Law satisfactorily. Paul's argument concerning the Law does not rest on man's inability to fulfil it.

Perhaps you will cite Romans 7. There is no evidence that this was Paul's state of mind WHEN HE WAS A ZEALOUS JEW! Paul contrasts the life in Christ with his past life under the Law. Looking at the Law through a Christian's eyes does not mean that Paul experienced frustration with the Law before his own conversion.

I believe that your understanding of what the Law does in the JEW'S mind is deficient. In addition, it is clear to me that you are ignoring the obvious - that God had established a system to return the individual who had fallen back to the grace of God and the community. You seem to totally ignore that, as well.

Thus, your idea that one must fulfill each and every iota of the Law to be just in God's eyes are simply false. "All seemed rubbish" because of what Paul had experienced through Christ. Once one experienced Christ, there was no reason to return to the Law, but it is more of a "better than" argument, not the argument that you continue to make that has Paul indecisively calling the Law "holy" and regarding zeal for the Law in a positive light versus Paul calling the Law evil and the cause of sin...

Because of such contradictory teachings that you continue to present and refuse to address, one must consider your gospel as incomplete and corrupt.

Not sure of your point? Because Paul makes it very clear in Php 3:8-9 That the righteousness he attain through keeping the law (ALL THE LAW) is not the righteousness of God, and cannot be compared. He goes on to say that those who do not walk in Gods righteouness, as he did, will be destroyed Php 3:17-19

So here we have the same warning as in 2 Pet 2:21-22
FOR IT WOULD HAVE BEEN BETTER FOR THEM NOT TO HAVE KNOWN THE "WAY OF RIGHTEOUSNESS"

So again, I am not sure of what point you are trying to make?
There was a "form" of righteousness that one could attain by keeping ALL THE LAW. but now the RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD has been revealed from heaven. Those who do not heed His Righteousness will be destroyed Php 3:19

I think some has missed the whole point of Pauls words here in Php 3:17-19 Those who reject Gods righteousness and go about to establish their own by the written code of the law, will be DESTROYED.
just as 2 Pet 2:21-22 says, They have rejected the "way of righteousness" GODS RIGHTEOUSNESS. and are "cursed children" FOR THOSE WHO ARE UNDER LAW ARE UNDER ITS CURSE.
for they are like dogs that return to its vomit and sows that desire to roll around in their own sins.
FOR THE STRENGTH OF SIN IS THE LAW.
Rom 7:7-8