Do you Think like Jesus or Yeshua?

[nebula]

What exactly do you mean by having said the some Christians go to far in thinking the law is void? Please explain.

We keep hearing it all the time here and there in the Board. They actually do say, "The law is void."

[Jake for Jesus]

Nebula wrote:

We keep hearing it all the time here and there in the Board (that the law is void). They actually do say, "The law is void."

My Response:

Firstly, I want acknowledge that I read "Yod's" last post.

Now to both "Nebula" and "Yod."

Thank you for choosing to take of your time to respond to my post, and while you did not really give an explanation of why you believe what you believe. At least you did answer the first part of my question and I appreciate that.

But so that I may better understand what you believe, and why you believe what you believe. Open with me please, to Romans 6:14 which is addressed to Christian believers.

In the translation I am using that passage reads:

For sin shall not have dominion over you, for you are not under law but under grace.

For my part, if I am to take this verse in context, and to take the Bible to mean what it says. Christian believers are not under law but under grace.

These are two alternatives which mutually exclude each other: A person who is under grace is not under law. No person can be under both law and grace at the same time.

Secondly, the very reason why sin shall not have dominion over Christian believers is because they are not under law.

So long as a person is under the law he is also under the dominion of sin.

To escape from the dominion of sin a person must come out from under the law.

Would you agree or disgree with that?

If you disagree. That is if do? Please tell me your understanding of the passage above we just read in Romans 6:14?

By the way, I appreciate that you do tend to keep your posts short. And it has been my thought that on Christian bulletion boards. If a post is longer than one page, it probably won't be read any way. That's why I try to keep my posts short to be no longer than one page, despite the fact that in doing so. I am often unable to complete my thought.

Edited September 15, 2005 by Jake for Jesus

[Guest shiloh357]

the translation I am using that passage reads:

For sin shall not have dominion over you, for you are not under law but under grace.

For my part, if I am to take this verse in context, and to take the Bible to mean what it says. Christian believers are not under law but under grace.

Under the law, and under grace have nothing to do with observing Torah in this context. Romans 6 is not dealing with that issue at all.

Paul juxtaposes several concepts in the Scriptures:

1. I 1 Cor. 15:22, Paul compares those who are "in Adam" vs. those who are "in Christ."

1 Cor. 15:22

For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.

We are taken out of Adam at the moment we are born again, and placed in Christ. This called "Positional Justification." We are no longer members of Adam's race but are now new creations in Christ (2 Cor. 5:17).

2. In Romans 6, Paul compares those who are "slaves of sin" vs. those who are "slaves of righteousness." Once in Christ we are no longer under the dominion of sin, but have been set free and now have taken upon ourselves the yoke of Christ. Just as in the Torah, we see that Israel was set free from the house of bondage in Egypt in order to that they might be obedient to the Lord and His commandments. Freedom in Christ is not the absence of God's Torah. Rather makes us more responsible for it.

3. Finally, Paul compares those who are "under law" vs. those who are "under grace." This is positional. It has to do with your standing before God. Sin has no dominion for those who are under grace since they are no longer "slaves to sin;" because they have been born again.

On one hand, "In Adam," "slave of sin," and "under the law," are three ways of saying the same thing. They describe a sinner. Anyone who dies without Christ will stand before God's judgement seat, under the law.

On the other hand, "In Christ," "slave of righteousness," and "under grace,"are three ways of describing a person who has been obedient to the gospel, and is born again. In Christ we stand before God under grace.

Romans 6:14 is not a repudiation of Torah observance. If anything it demonstrates why we have been set free and, taken with chapter five, why we can now observe Torah in a more spiritual, sober and responsible manner before the Lord. We are not set free to do as we please, but we are set free to love the Lord our God with all of our heart, all of our soul, and all of our strength. We who are under grace are empowered in a greater way to follow His commandments.

[Jake for Jesus]

Shiloh, before I comment on what you said in your last post. First I would like to know what Torah observance means to you?

I am not asking you to give a long explanation of what Torah observance is. For there had once been a time when I was orthodox in being Torah observant. Only, I am wanting to know what it means to you?

Does it mean being observant of the law? Keeping of a set of rules?

And if so for what purpose? What's the benefit of it?

Are you mixing law and grace?

Are you seeking to keep a good standing with God partly by law and partly by grace?

Edited September 15, 2005 by Jake for Jesus

[Guest shiloh357]

All of the Bible is Torah since Torah means "teaching" or, "instruction." The New Testament is just as much "Torah" as the first five books of Scripture. I am not necessarily talking about living like a Jew (though there is nothing wrong with living like a Jew, if one chooses to do so), I am talking about following the instructions God has put in His Word to show us how to live live sober, Godly lives. His commandments are a blueprint for living and we need to live in humility and obedience what God has told us to do. Torah oblservance means to allow God's commandments to be the moral code and guideposts for living that He intended them to be.

Are you mixing law and grace?

Law and grace are two wings of the same bird. If the there is law or standard by which we are to live, then there is no need of grace.

My Landlord says that my rent has to be in his office on the 1st day of the month. He gives me a 7 day "grace period" just in case, as an act of kindness. The grace period does not nullify his requirement that the rent be in on time. If there was no commandment to pay my rent on time, of what value would be the grace period.

Grace does not abrogate the Torah or make it void. Rather grace is there when we break God's commandments to say, "I forgive you." The Bible says in 1John 3:4, that sin is the transgression of the law. Therefore, if there is no law to transgress, grace would be made void. We need grace, we need God's favor but we also need God's commandments. They go hand in hand.

Are you seeking to keep a good standing with God partly by law and partly by grace?

I obey God since obedience is an outworking of my rightstanding with God. I don't earn rightstanding; it is a gift of grace. My obedience to God is an expression of love to Him for the gift salvation. As I pointed out in my last post, the children of Israel were not given the Torah and told to obey it in order to earn their freedom from Egypt. They were freed from bondage first, in order that they could obey God's Torah. The Torah, in Scripture is connected with freedom from bondage. It was that freedom that was acknowledge first, when God gave the Torah.

Obedience to God should be an outworking, a product of who we are in Christ.

[nebula]

But so that I may better understand what you believe, and why you believe what you believe. Open with me please, to Romans 6:14 which is addressed to Christian believers.

In the translation I am using that passage reads:

For sin shall not have dominion over you, for you are not under law but under grace.

For my part, if I am to take this verse in context, and to take the Bible to mean what it says. Christian believers are not under law but under grace.

These are two alternatives which mutually exclude each other: A person who is under grace is not under law. No person can be under both law and grace at the same time.

Secondly, the very reason why sin shall not have dominion over Christian believers is because they are not under law.

So long as a person is under the law he is also under the dominion of sin.

To escape from the dominion of sin a person must come out from under the law.

Would you agree or disgree with that?

If you disagree. That is if do? Please tell me your understanding of the passage above we just read in Romans 6:14?

Going back to theme of this thread - is righteousness about believing the right thing, or doing the right thing?

I'm not trying to ignore your question, but I don't want this thread to get hijacked.

The frame of reference from which your statements were made come from the Hellenistic mindset.

But what is Paul talking about? Throughout the whole chapter, Paul is talking about not sinning but instead living righteously. You need to look at law vs. grace from that perspective.

[Jake for Jesus]

Shiloh --- this will let you know I read your last post! Would it be possible for you to take out a new folder, and to take your last post and to start a new thread and to put your post there? For I fear that when I begin to respond to your post it may lead this discussion off topic.

[Guest shiloh357]

Shiloh --- this will let you know I read your last post! Would it be possible for you to take out a new folder, and to take your last post and to start a new thread and to put your post there? For I fear that when I begin to respond to your post it may lead this discussion off topic.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Sure...

[Guest Zayit]

as I really do like the discussions pertaining to Law and Grace---and the discussion pertaining to what Law means...

I wouldnt, and dont care for the threads separative implications by its title!!!!

JESUS---IS YESHUA.

they arent 2 people, with 2 missions, to 2 Gods.

I understand, that trying to imply a paganistic standard based on the majority of Christianity now being gentile,

its just the opposite division of what orthodoxy and ECF did in separating Jews from the Body/church/ecclesia.....

2 wrongs---dont make a right.

I voted  republican because of bush(white person)

I voted republican because of rice(black person)

do you see how the prejudices and separation continue----because of "pain"?????

the only way YAH'S body for his Son is going to be able to fit in her wedding gown, is if all the parts "SHAPE UP"

this gets to be really stressful and harmful in fellowship with bretheren.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Shalom Mark. I take it you don't like the title of my thread? Is that it, or is it you don't agree that there are two perspectives of looking at the bridegroom? :Some see a AngloSaxon bridegroom and others a 'Nice Jewish boy', how do you see him?

[Guest Zayit]

Kinda reminds me, now don't take this wrong people! Like the Greek 'g0ds' and the Roman 'g0ds', they had different names and but were in essence the same 'g0d' but looked at differntly because the Romans didn't want to have the greek names or what attributes they said they had. Just like why didn't the RCC use the original of the main of the nt writings in gReek, but had to translate them in to the language of the "Empire" pagan,then claimed holy because they called it Holy Roman Empire, and changed it to Latin, had it taught in Latin, no matter what language you understood so you couldn't understand what the true word of G-d was saying. The one who protested and translatied in to English for the common man to hear what the L-rD's word truly said, was murdered for it!