The Victorious Christ

[jaybo]

This is a false dichotomy. I've given many rules for Christian conduct, and those aren't exhaustive. It suggests that your understanding of the matter is likely deficient.

That is simply your opinion. I could easily say that your understanding of the matter is likely deficient, but I don't engage in ad hominem tactics.

 

[Free]

That is simply your opinion. I could easily say that your understanding of the matter is likely deficient, but I don't engage in ad hominem tactics.

First, learn what an ad hominem is before implying someone else is engaging in one when they are not. Second, my opinion is very clearly supported by the numerous passages of Scripture I have posted.

 

[jaybo]

First, learn what an ad hominem is before implying someone else is engaging in one when they are not. Second, my opinion is very clearly supported by the numerous passages of Scripture I have posted.

Am ad hominen attack is an argument or reaction directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining. You wrote "It suggests that your understanding of the matter is likely deficient", which is a personal attack, i.e., ad hominem.

I can just as easily say that my opinion is very clearly supported by Scripture. John 16:13 is sufficient: "When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth, for he will not speak on his own but will speak whatever he hears, and he will declare to you the things that are to come." And as most everyone knows, the Holy Spirit has come, and He is our guide, not a set of written rules/laws. If you need them, you're putting yourself back under the Old Covenant.

 

[Free]

Am ad hominen attack is an argument or reaction directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining. You wrote "It suggests that your understanding of the matter is likely deficient", which is a personal attack, i.e., ad hominem.

Again, there was no personal attack.

I can just as easily say that my opinion is very clearly supported by Scripture. John 16:13 is sufficient: "When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth, for he will not speak on his own but will speak whatever he hears, and he will declare to you the things that are to come." And as most everyone knows, the Holy Spirit has come, and He is our guide, not a set of written rules/laws. If you need them, you're putting yourself back under the Old Covenant.

You could say that, but then you would have to ignore all the passages I provided, and many more. The Holy Spirit did guide the apostles into all the truth, which is how they learned and we got the written scriptures. The irony here is that you're appealing to a verse as a rule to say that we aren't to follow rules, only the Holy Spirit. It's a self-defeating argument.

What basis do you have for believing that we can ignore the NT commands and rules for believers and only rely on the Holy Spirit, as though the Holy Spirit 1) didn't have anything to do with the writing of the NT, and 2) doesn't guide us through what is written in the NT?

 

[jaybo]

Again, there was no personal attack.


You could say that, but then you would have to ignore all the passages I provided, and many more. The Holy Spirit did guide the apostles into all the truth, which is how they learned and we got the written scriptures. The irony here is that you're appealing to a verse as a rule to say that we aren't to follow rules, only the Holy Spirit. It's a self-defeating argument.

What basis do you have for believing that we can ignore the NT commands and rules for believers and only rely on the Holy Spirit, as though the Holy Spirit 1) didn't have anything to do with the writing of the NT, and 2) doesn't guide us through what is written in the NT?

One verse should be sufficient (although there are many more): "But now we are discharged from the law, dead to that which held us captive, so that we are enslaved in the newness of the Spirit and not in the oldness of the written code." Romans 7:6

It's tragic that you think that Holy Spirit guided the apostles, but nobody else. What Scripture says that the Holy Spirit was recalled as our guide?

Finally, suppose that people hear/heard what is/was preached? If they don't/didn't own a Bible or are illiterate (as most were when the Bible was written) are they therefore without a guide? Is the truth available only to those who read the Bible? Clearly, that is not the case.

 

[Free]

One verse should be sufficient (although there are many more): "But now we are discharged from the law, dead to that which held us captive, so that we are enslaved in the newness of the Spirit and not in the oldness of the written code." Romans 7:6

Yes, we are free from the curse of the law and works righteousness.

It's tragic that you think that Holy Spirit guided the apostles, but nobody else. What Scripture says that the Holy Spirit was recalled as our guide?

A plain reading of what I wrote shows that I never suggested such.

Finally, suppose that people hear/heard what is/was preached? If they don't/didn't own a Bible or are illiterate (as most were when the Bible was written) are they therefore without a guide? Is the truth available only to those who read the Bible? Clearly, that is not the case.

Of course not. That is why God has always gifted certain persons and instituted the offices of pastor, teacher, and evangelist. The Holy Spirit can also bring things to remembrance when needed.

Perhaps you can answer the two questions I asked:

What basis do you have for believing that we can ignore the NT commands and rules for believers and only rely on the Holy Spirit, as though the Holy Spirit 1) didn't have anything to do with the writing of the NT, and 2) doesn't guide us through what is written in the NT?

 

[jaybo]

Yes, we are free from the curse of the law and works righteousness.


A plain reading of what I wrote shows that I never suggested such.


Of course not. That is why God has always gifted certain persons and instituted the offices of pastor, teacher, and evangelist. The Holy Spirit can also bring things to remembrance when needed.

Perhaps you can answer the two questions I asked:

What basis do you have for believing that we can ignore the NT commands and rules for believers and only rely on the Holy Spirit, as though the Holy Spirit 1) didn't have anything to do with the writing of the NT, and 2) doesn't guide us through what is written in the NT?

You didn't answer my earlier question: Suppose that people hear/heard what is/was preached? If they don't/didn't own a Bible or are illiterate (as most were when the Bible was written) are they therefore without a guide? Is the truth available only to those who read the Bible?

 

[Free]

You didn't answer my earlier question: Suppose that people hear/heard what is/was preached? If they don't/didn't own a Bible or are illiterate (as most were when the Bible was written) are they therefore without a guide? Is the truth available only to those who read the Bible?

I very clearly did answer your question: "Of course not. That is why God has always gifted certain persons and instituted the offices of pastor, teacher, and evangelist. The Holy Spirit can also bring things to remembrance when needed."

Are you going to answer the two I asked you?

 

[jaybo]

I very clearly did answer your question: "Of course not. That is why God has always gifted certain persons and instituted the offices of pastor, teacher, and evangelist. The Holy Spirit can also bring things to remembrance when needed."

Are you going to answer the two I asked you?

I have already given my response. You're either under the written code, a.k.a., the law or you're guided by the Spirit.

 

[Free]

I have already given my response. You're either under the written code, a.k.a., the law or you're guided by the Spirit.

That doesn't answer my questions:

What basis do you have for believing that we can ignore the NT commands and rules for believers and only rely on the Holy Spirit, as though the Holy Spirit 1) didn't have anything to do with the writing of the NT, and 2) doesn't guide us through what is written in the NT?

 

[Robert Pate]

That doesn't answer my questions:

What basis do you have for believing that we can ignore the NT commands and rules for believers and only rely on the Holy Spirit, as though the Holy Spirit 1) didn't have anything to do with the writing of the NT, and 2) doesn't guide us through what is written in the NT?

Under the New Covenant Christians are not under laws, rules or religion because, "Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to those that believe" Romans 10:4. Jesus is the end and the fulfillment of the law. This is why Paul said, "The just shall live by faith" Romans 1:17. They live by faith in Christ and his Gospel.

 

[Free]

Under the New Covenant Christians are not under laws, rules or religion because, "Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to those that believe" Romans 10:4. Jesus is the end and the fulfillment of the law. This is why Paul said, "The just shall live by faith" Romans 1:17. They live by faith in Christ and his Gospel.

Then please explain all the rules and commands for Christians I posted from the NT, which is far from an exhaustive list. You can keep stating the same thing over and over, but you're not addressing a significant number of verses which show otherwise, verses which I have now posted twice in this thread. And, for the record, Christianity is a religion.

 

[jaybo]

That doesn't answer my questions:

What basis do you have for believing that we can ignore the NT commands and rules for believers and only rely on the Holy Spirit, as though the Holy Spirit 1) didn't have anything to do with the writing of the NT, and 2) doesn't guide us through what is written in the NT?

I am done trying to explain things to you. If you want to put yourself under the written law, go ahead. I am free in Christ, as are many others.

John 16:13, "When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth, for he will not speak on his own but will speak whatever he hears, and he will declare to you the things that are to come."

Galatians 4:21-5:1, "Tell me, you who desire to be subject to the law, will you not listen to the law? For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by an enslaved woman and the other by a free woman. One, the child of the enslaved woman, was born according to the flesh; the other, the child of the free woman, was born through the promise. Now this is an allegory: these women are two covenants. One woman, in fact, is Hagar, from Mount Sinai, bearing children for slavery. Now Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia and corresponds to the present Jerusalem, for she is in slavery with her children. But the other woman corresponds to the Jerusalem above; she is free, and she is our mother. For it is written,

“Rejoice, you childless one, you who bear no children,
burst into song and shout, you who endure no birth pangs,
for the children of the desolate woman are more numerous
than the children of the one who is married.”

Now you, my brothers and sisters, are children of the promise, like Isaac. But just as at that time the child who was born according to the flesh persecuted the child who was born according to the Spirit, so it is now also. But what does the scripture say? “Drive out the enslaved woman and her child, for the child of the enslaved woman will not share the inheritance with the child of the free woman.” So then, brothers and sisters, we are children, not of an enslaved woman but of the free woman.

For freedom Christ has set us free. Stand firm, therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery."

I don't know why you have such a hard time understanding the freedom that we have in Christ. But I consider you unable to understand this basic principle.

Romans 7:4-6, "In the same way, my brothers and sisters, you have died to the law through the body of Christ, so that you may belong to another, to him who was raised from the dead in order that we may bear fruit for God. For while we were living in the flesh, our sinful passions, aroused by the law, were at work in our members to bear fruit for death. But now we are discharged from the law, dead to that which held us captive, so that we are enslaved in the newness of the Spirit and not in the oldness of the written code.

I am writing this primarily for others to read, as I am fully convinced that you will never understand this principle truth of the New Covenant!

 

[Free]

I am done trying to explain things to you. If you want to put yourself under the written law, go ahead. I am free in Christ, as are many others.

John 16:13, "When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth, for he will not speak on his own but will speak whatever he hears, and he will declare to you the things that are to come."

Galatians 4:21-5:1, "Tell me, you who desire to be subject to the law, will you not listen to the law? For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by an enslaved woman and the other by a free woman. One, the child of the enslaved woman, was born according to the flesh; the other, the child of the free woman, was born through the promise. Now this is an allegory: these women are two covenants. One woman, in fact, is Hagar, from Mount Sinai, bearing children for slavery. Now Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia and corresponds to the present Jerusalem, for she is in slavery with her children. But the other woman corresponds to the Jerusalem above; she is free, and she is our mother. For it is written,

“Rejoice, you childless one, you who bear no children,
burst into song and shout, you who endure no birth pangs,
for the children of the desolate woman are more numerous
than the children of the one who is married.”

Now you, my brothers and sisters, are children of the promise, like Isaac. But just as at that time the child who was born according to the flesh persecuted the child who was born according to the Spirit, so it is now also. But what does the scripture say? “Drive out the enslaved woman and her child, for the child of the enslaved woman will not share the inheritance with the child of the free woman.” So then, brothers and sisters, we are children, not of an enslaved woman but of the free woman.

For freedom Christ has set us free. Stand firm, therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery."

I don't know why you have such a hard time understanding the freedom that we have in Christ. But I consider you unable to understand this basic principle.

Romans 7:4-6, "In the same way, my brothers and sisters, you have died to the law through the body of Christ, so that you may belong to another, to him who was raised from the dead in order that we may bear fruit for God. For while we were living in the flesh, our sinful passions, aroused by the law, were at work in our members to bear fruit for death. But now we are discharged from the law, dead to that which held us captive, so that we are enslaved in the newness of the Spirit and not in the oldness of the written code.

I am writing this primarily for others to read, as I am fully convinced that you will never understand this principle truth of the New Covenant!

I don't deny any of the passages above and they fit quite well into my beliefs as one who is free in Christ. But you haven't explained the verses I posted and you haven't answered the questions I asked. Why is that? All you have explained is your understanding of "'law' vs freedom in Christ," but it leaves no room for the verses I have given, which is why I asked the questions I did. If you would answer those questions, we could make progress in the discussion.

 

[jaybo]

I don't deny any of the passages above and they fit quite well into my beliefs as one who is free in Christ. But you haven't explained the verses I posted and you haven't answered the questions I asked. Why is that? All you have explained is your understanding of "'law' vs freedom in Christ," but it leaves no room for the verses I have given, which is why I asked the questions I did. If you would answer those questions, we could make progress in the discussion.

You clearly want to dominate this discussion and force me to debate on your terms. I have no interest in doing that. I have stated my position clearly. You clearly don't understand the freedom in Christ that Christians have. Freedom in Christ means freedom from the law.

 

[Free]

You clearly want to dominate this discussion and force me to debate on your terms. I have no interest in doing that.

No, I'm simply asking two questions, which you continue to avoid answering, and posting verses which are problematic for your position, which you continue to avoid addressing. Asking questions and posting things which prove problematic to another person's claims are simply how debate and discussion are done. The hypocrisy of your claim is duly noted.

I have stated my position clearly.

I know, and as I stated, that is all you have done. You have avoided answering anything that shows difficulty with your position, which really is disrespectful and not honest. Yet, you want me to answer everything you ask, which I do or at least try to.

You clearly don't understand the freedom in Christ that Christians have. Freedom in Christ means freedom from the law.

Now you are misrepresenting my position which is a violation of the ToS. Please don't do it again.

 

[jaybo]

No, I'm simply asking two questions, which you continue to avoid answering, and posting verses which are problematic for your position, which you continue to avoid addressing. Asking questions and posting things which prove problematic to another person's claims are simply how debate and discussion are done. The hypocrisy of your claim is duly noted.


I know, and as I stated, that is all you have done. You have avoided answering anything that shows difficulty with your position, which really is disrespectful and not honest. Yet, you want me to answer everything you ask, which I do or at least try to.


Now you are misrepresenting my position which is a violation of the ToS. Please don't do it again.

So now you resort to threats because you can't control the discussion?

You have avoided answering anything that shows difficulty with your position, which really is disrespectful and not honest. Yet, you want me to answer everything you ask, which I do or at least try to.

 

[Robert Pate]

Then please explain all the rules and commands for Christians I posted from the NT, which is far from an exhaustive list. You can keep stating the same thing over and over, but you're not addressing a significant number of verses which show otherwise, verses which I have now posted twice in this thread. And, for the record, Christianity is a religion.

Much of the New Testament was written under the Old Covenant of law and religion. All of Paul's epistles were written under the New Covenant of faith and Gospel.

The preaching of the law like Jesus did, convicts' people of sin, "By the law is the knowledge of sin" Romans 3:20.

Paul preached the law as well as the Gospel, both are instrumental in bringing people to Christ, Galatians 3:24.

 

[Free]

Much of the New Testament was written under the Old Covenant of law and religion. All of Paul's epistles were written under the New Covenant of faith and Gospel.

The preaching of the law like Jesus did, convicts' people of sin, "By the law is the knowledge of sin" Romans 3:20.

Paul preached the law as well as the Gospel, both are instrumental in bringing people to Christ, Galatians 3:24.

Please show how you have determined that "Much of the New Testament was written under the Old Covenant of law and religion" while "All of Paul's epistles were written under the New Covenant of faith and Gospel." What specific criteria have you applied to come to this conclusion? When, exactly, did the Old Covenant end and the new one begin?

And you're still not addressing the numerous verses I posted, all written by Paul, that are rules and commands for believers. Why haven't you addressed those?

 

[Free]

So now you resort to threats because you can't control the discussion?

No, because you clearly violated the ToS by misrepresenting my position.

You have avoided answering anything that shows difficulty with your position, which really is disrespectful and not honest. Yet, you want me to answer everything you ask, which I do or at least try to.