Humility And Calvinism?

[civic]

What Law?

Gen. 26: 4 And I will make thy seed to multiply as the stars of heaven, and will give unto thy seed all these countries; and in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed; 5 Because that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws.

God's Laws, Commandments and Statutes were given to Abraham, and Abraham obeyed them, at least according to my God and Jesus' God.

So Yes, there was a Law "ADDED" because of Transgression, "till the Seed should come". According to what is written, it was the Levitical Priesthood offerings and sacrifices for sin, that was "ADDED".

Jer. 7: 22 For I spake not unto your fathers, nor commanded them in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt, concerning burnt offerings or sacrifices: 23 But this thing commanded I them, saying, Obey my voice, and I will be your God, and ye shall be my people: and walk ye in all the ways "that I have commanded you", that it may be well unto you.

There was no Law given that required a man to bring a goat for his sins, and kill it before a Levite Priest in the day God led Israel out of Egypt, you can read for yourself, if you are interested in Biblical Truth.

But Israel "Transgressed" with the Golden Calf, so God ADDED a LAW concerning sacrifices and offerings for sin that wasn't commanded to them in the day HE led them out of Egypt. This is the "Added" Law that led men to Christ for remission of their sins. (The true unblemished sacrifice)

As God defines for us in His promise of a New covenant.

Heb. 8: 12 For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities "will I remember no more".

A New Priesthood as Prophesied, changed from what was ADDED 430 years after Abraham.

Heb. 10: 3 But in those sacrifices there is "a remembrance again made of sins every year". 4 For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.

So the implication of your preaching, that God didn't give Abraham His Judgments, Statutes, Commandments and Laws, until 430 years after him is proved to be false, according to what God Himself says. Abraham didn't have the Levitical Priesthood, as Levi wasn't even born yet. Abraham was justified "Apart" from the Law "ADDED" because of Transgressions.

The deceiver would have men believe Abraham didn't know God, or His Judgments as to what is clean and what is not. What was Holy, what Day God sanctified and made Holy, etc. Noah did, but somehow not Abraham. There is nothing in scriptures which support this gospel.

unreal the way you twist scripture to adhere to the law even when there was no law in Abrahams day falsely claiming there were clean and unclean animals. Talk about legalism this post takes the cake- oh wait eating sugar is a sin lol.

 

[Studyman]

You didn't have to quote it. I already know the verse. Do you think you're the only one that knows how to read here?



I'm not going to let you "bloviate" on this as if your actually mounting a defense of your claims. You're not.

Heb 6:4 For it is impossible for those who were once "enlightened", and have tasted (Eaten, EXPERIENCED) of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost,
Heb 6:5 And have tasted (Eaten, Experienced) the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come,
Heb 6:6 If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.

The Kingdom of God isn't for tasters. It is for drinkers. There are many that "taste" of God yet never follow through in repentance. Repentance is a two street. God must change His mind about the sinner.

You're appealing to tasters. Not drinkers.

γεύομαι "geuomal" = "to taste" by implication, "To Eat", figuratively "To experience".

It seems the message the Hebrew Author was intending to promote, was not like licking or tasting, rather, according to the Greek word used, Men who were once "Enlightened" and have "consumed or experienced" the good word of God.

 

[Studyman]

unreal the way you twist scripture to adhere to the law even when there was no law in Abrahams day falsely claiming there were clean and unclean animals. Talk about legalism this post takes the cake- oh wait eating sugar is a sin lol.

I get that God's word is a joke for you, and that your master doesn't allow you to believe God concerning HIS Laws, Commandments and Statutes HE gave to Abraham. But I posted God's Own Words about Abraham and God's Laws, Statutes and Commandments, and I believe in them even if you don't.

Abraham didn't have God's Laws??? That's a doozy even coming for you.

God preserved clean and Unclean animals through Noah. It's in your own Bible. To preach that Abraham didn't know God, or know about Noah and the Ark, or about His Creation, is foolishness. But in your mission to turn men away from this God and His instruction in Righteousness, I can see why you would make such a baseless assumption.

 

[civic]

I get that God's word is a joke for you, and that your master doesn't allow you to believe God concerning HIS Laws, Commandments and Statutes HE gave to Abraham. But I posted God's Own Words about Abraham and God's Laws, Statutes and Commandments, and I believe in them even if you don't.

Abraham didn't have God's Laws??? That's a doozy even coming for you.

God preserved clean and Unclean animals through Noah. It's in your own Bible. To preach that Abraham didn't know God, or know about Noah and the Ark, or about His Creation, is foolishness. But in your mission to turn men away from this God and His instruction in Righteousness, I can see why you would make such a baseless assumption.

Projecting Gods word is true and let every man be a liar. You twist scripture to obedience to the law for salvation when salvation existed hundreds and hundreds of years before the law and was based upon faith.

 

[civic]

I get that God's word is a joke for you, and that your master doesn't allow you to believe God concerning HIS Laws, Commandments and Statutes HE gave to Abraham. But I posted God's Own Words about Abraham and God's Laws, Statutes and Commandments, and I believe in them even if you don't.

Abraham didn't have God's Laws??? That's a doozy even coming for you.

God preserved clean and Unclean animals through Noah. It's in your own Bible. To preach that Abraham didn't know God, or know about Noah and the Ark, or about His Creation, is foolishness. But in your mission to turn men away from this God and His instruction in Righteousness, I can see why you would make such a baseless assumption.

There were no unclean animals before the law.

Got Scripture?

 

[synergy]

In my opinion, while you have spoken truth, it is dynamically more than this. Paul is saying that because of being set free from sin’s dominion, sin is no longer compatible with life in Christ. We are not just capable of not sinning we are compelled to stop sinning.

You need to explain how you make use of the word "compelled". We are exhorted to stop sinning. We are convicted, by the Holy Spirit, to stop sinning. There are many forces around us that influence us in one way or another to stop sinning but it's ultimately our choice whether we sin or not. If not, we get dangerously close to the calvinist usage of the word "compelled".

I disagree! Paul never mentions the Spirit in Ron 7.

Yes he does. Read verse 6.

And it is not the sinful nature that he trying to live by, but rather the law; which the sinful nature prohibits him from doing. Living by the sinful nature is why we can’t live by the law, though that is what he desperately wants to do.

How is that different than what I've been saying all along?

Again, Rom 7 is all about incapacity and utter failure of life by means of the law. Paul’s circumstance is total bondage and incarceration to sin. That is not the Christian condition. It is not just a procedural issue of how we live our lives, it it a constitutional question of our being. Paul was, before Christ, a prisoner to sin.

How is that different than what I've been saying all along?

Christ, however is the remedy to our body of death situation. And after Christ, we emerge into chapter 8. And in this, I think we’re on the same page.

In summary, it's only by living in the Spirit that doing the good is possible. So just like everyone else in his audience, Paul needs to choose to live by the Spirit and not by the flesh.

 

[praise_yeshua]

So Yes, there was a Law "ADDED" because of Transgression, "till the Seed should come". According to what is written, it was the Levitical Priesthood offerings and sacrifices for sin, that was "ADDED".

There is no such thing as ceremonial laws and sacrificial laws. Even Abraham offered sacrifices long before Aaron.

Where were these "laws" written for Abraham?

Men fabricate distinction in laws to disobey them without thought to consequence.

 

[praise_yeshua]

γεύομαι "geuomal" = "to taste" by implication, "To Eat", figuratively "To experience".

It seems the message the Hebrew Author was intending to promote, was not like licking or tasting, rather, according to the Greek word used, Men who were once "Enlightened" and have "consumed or experienced" the good word of God.

I didn't say anything about spitting anything out. Think....... Tasting can involve eating.

There are THINGS (plural) that have be accepted by non-believers.

 

[praise_yeshua]

You need to explain how you make use of the word "compelled". We are exhorted to stop sinning. We are convicted, by the Holy Spirit, to stop sinning. There are many forces around us that influence us in one way or another to stop sinning but it's ultimately our choice whether we sin or not. If not, we get dangerously close to the calvinist usage of the word "compelled".

Yes he does. Read verse 6.

How is that different than what I've been saying all along?

How is that different than what I've been saying all along?

In summary, it's only by living in the Spirit that doing the good is possible. So just like everyone else in his audience, Paul needs to choose to live by the Spirit and not by the flesh.

Yep....

Whatsoever is NOT of faith..... is.....###

You can do the right things for all the wrong reasons..... If not done in faith toward God, then what value is it?

 

[Studyman]

There is no such thing as ceremonial laws and sacrificial laws. Even Abraham offered sacrifices long before Aaron.

Where were these "laws" written for Abraham?

Men fabricate distinction in laws to disobey them without thought to consequence.

Nevertheless, God, according to His Inspired Word, said that "Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws." I have no agenda to promote, or religious sect to preserve, therefore I have no reason to doubt or disbelieve what God said about Abraham in His Inspired Word.

And Levi wasn't even born until centuries after Abraham, therefore, Abraham could not have been and was not under the "Levitical Priesthood" sacrifices for sin.

This too, is undeniable biblical fact. Abraham was "justified" apart from the sacrifices and burnt offerings of the Levitical Priesthood Law that was "ADDED" 430 years after Abraham. At least this is what Paul teaches.

 

[synergy]

Yep....

Whatsoever is NOT of faith..... is.....###

You can do the right things for all the wrong reasons..... If not done in faith toward God, then what value is it?

Exactly! Being forcefully compelled into doing something is not being faithful in doing it.

 

[praise_yeshua]

The truth of consequence......

Rom 2:15 Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another

Rom 14:23 And he that doubteth is damned if he eat, because he eateth not of faith: for whatsoever is not of faith is sin.

I've often mentioned that many people see the Christian life as nothing more that "compliance". "Keeping the rules". However, there is a much greater requirement to the demands of faith than just "keeping the rules"....

It is written in the very consequence of humanity. A requirement to be true to ourselves. True to how we feel. True to our consequence. True the construct of our faith. The "why" is often more important than the "how". It is the core of Character in our lives.

Just what are we when no one is looking. WHY do we believe the things we believe. The contrast of hypocrisy. Honesty. Integrity.

 

[Studyman]

Exactly! Being forcefully compelled into doing something is not being faithful in doing it.

This is true also according to Scriptures.

Deut. 30: 19 I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore "choose life", that both thou and thy seed may live: 20 That thou mayest love the LORD thy God, and that thou mayest obey his voice, and that thou mayest cleave unto him: for he is thy life, and the length of thy days: that thou mayest dwell in the land which the LORD sware unto thy fathers, to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, to give them.

Walking in the "Way of the Lord" was a "WAY of Life" for the examples of faithful men God gave us in Scriptures. No one forced these men to honor God with respect and trust, or as Paul called it, "a voluntary humility".

 

[TibiasDad]

You need to explain how you make use of the word "compelled". We are exhorted to stop sinning. We are convicted, by the Holy Spirit, to stop sinning. There are many forces around us that influence us in one way or another to stop sinning but it's ultimately our choice whether we sin or not. If not, we get dangerously close to the calvinist usage of the word "compelled".

By compelled, I mean that it is, as Paul says in Rom 8:12, and obligatory necessity. Yes it is our choice, not a divine causation, but it has an urgency to it that is too often overlooked or swept under the rug.

Yes he does. Read verse 6.

My mistake! I was referring to the 7:14-ff section.

How is that different than what I've been saying all along?

The end result is the same, but the contrast is not to live by the flesh/sinful nature or the Spirit as in chapter 8, but the law and the Spirit.

The old Saul/Paul was trying to live by the keeping of the law in his own strength and will power, but the sinful nature foiled his efforts. That is the recurrent theme in Romans, that the law was not meant to be a means to salvation, but rather a means exposing sin as being utterly sinful!

How is that different than what I've been saying all along?

You have Paul being a Christian struggling with the sinful nature; I have Paul in a pre-Christian state trying to keep the law, but realizing the he is incapable of not being covetous because he is in bondage to the sinful nature.

In summary, it's only by living in the Spirit that doing the good is possible. So just like everyone else in his audience, Paul needs to choose to live by the Spirit and not by the flesh.

Okay, but I don’t think that is Paul’s intention in Rom 7. And again, the urgency factor of Rom 8:12-13 is too often minimized.


Doug

 

[synergy]

The truth of consequence......

Rom 2:15 Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another

Rom 14:23 And he that doubteth is damned if he eat, because he eateth not of faith: for whatsoever is not of faith is sin.

I've often mentioned that many people see the Christian life as nothing more that "compliance". "Keeping the rules". However, there is a much greater requirement to the demands of faith than just "keeping the rules"....

It is written in the very consequence of humanity. A requirement to be true to ourselves. True to how we feel. True to our consequence. True the construct of our faith. The "why" is often more important than the "how". It is the core of Character in our lives.

Just what are we when no one is looking. WHY do we believe the things we believe. The contrast of hypocrisy. Honesty. Integrity.

Do you think this "compelling" belief is a product of the Weslyan belief of "Prevenient Grace"? I was always suspicious of that term and I can see how Weslyan Arminianism can be dangerously close to Calvinism in that respect.

 

[praise_yeshua]

Nevertheless, God, according to His Inspired Word, said that "Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws." I have no agenda to promote, or religious sect to preserve, therefore I have no reason to doubt or disbelieve what God said about Abraham in His Inspired Word.

So you actually believe that is an answer?

I have no desire other than to know the absolute Truth. I abandon my religion as a young man and embraced God. I wanted to know what God has to say. Contrary to what you believe, there is no absolute and perfect "collection" of writings that have been preserved throughout all of human history that records every single word that God wants us to know. He still speaks today. He has never stopped speaking. It is what Abraham experienced. He was taught by God. Not by some written law or even oral traditions. He lived the Gospel. That is what all of us in Christ do. We live the Gospel. The written law you reference are for those who do not have such a relationship with God. Those without.......

That is why if you're lead by the Spirit of God, you are under no obligation to written words that can never perfectly guide every individual in every aspect of their lives to please God. We have His voice to guide us. Appealing to the Scriptures as if God is speaking directly to YOU.... is rather empty isn't it???? It only gets you so far with God.

And Levi wasn't even born until centuries after Abraham, therefore, Abraham could not have been and was not under the "Levitical Priesthood" sacrifices for sin.

Never said he was. He did know Melchizedek personally.

This too, is undeniable biblical fact. Abraham was "justified" apart from the sacrifices and burnt offerings of the Levitical Priesthood Law that was "ADDED" 430 years after Abraham. At least this is what Paul teaches.

Never said differently. My issue is with the false distinctions of ceremonial law/etc....

 

[praise_yeshua]

Do you think this "compelling" belief is a product of the Weslyan belief of "Prevenient Grace"? I was always suspicious of that term and I can see how Weslyan Arminianism can be dangerously close to Calvinism in that respect.

Yes. However, I believe is much wider than those that hold to Prevenient Grace.

To me this comes down to the very core of what it means to be made in the image of God. It is not just complying with an artificial construct of how mankind's "god" is constructed.

It is a willful desire to be just like Him.... not matter what "Christ" is...... It is a reaching trust in conformity. It is our hope ground in Christ. It is accepting of "I AM that I AM" without context or assurity from within ourselves.

This can not be gifted. It demands that we desire what we do not fully know. It is what Adam lost in his actions. Adam didn't trust that God would forgive. He was fearful.

Such things take time and experience. There is no "puff" you're there.....

 

[synergy]

You have Paul being a Christian struggling with the sinful nature; I have Paul in a pre-Christian state trying to keep the law, but realizing the he is incapable of not being covetous because he is in bondage to the sinful nature.

I understand Paul as speaking of both his pre-Christian and his Christian states, his entire life in other words, which is a perfect lead into the solution presented in Rom 8.

 

[praise_yeshua]

I understand Paul as speaking of both his pre-Christian and his Christian states, his entire life in other words, which is a perfect lead into the solution presented in Rom 8.

Also, the common experience of all of humanity.

 

[TibiasDad]

I understand Paul as speaking of both his pre-Christian and his Christian states, his entire life in other words, which is a perfect lead into the solution presented in Rom 8.

Which parts of Rom 7 are pre and which are post?

Doug