Where does the justification for The New Testament doers of the law in Romans 2:13 originate from?

[gb9]

Ah, thanks for clarifying. I'm rejecting your teaching though.


🍨

a lot of this type teaching comes out of what is called " Hebrew Roots movement" , which teaches that believers have to keep the Sabbath, and the dietary Laws along side of trusting Christ for salvation.

they reason that if one breaks a Command, then they have sinned, and are not saved, one must keep the Sabbath to be saved, otherwise is a breaking a Command.

 

[Soyeong]

Ah, thanks for clarifying. I'm rejecting your teaching though.


🍨

You certainly have the freedom to do that. Care to discuss why?

 

[Soyeong]

a lot of this type teaching comes out of what is called " Hebrew Roots movement" , which teaches that believers have to keep the Sabbath, and the dietary Laws along side of trusting Christ for salvation.

they reason that if one breaks a Command, then they have sinned, and are not saved, one must keep the Sabbath to be saved, otherwise is a breaking a Command.

In Proverbs 3:5-7, we have a choice between whether we are going to lean on our own understanding of right and wrong by doing what is right in our own eyes or whether we are going to trust God with all of our heart to correctly divide between right and wrong through obeying what He has instructed in all of our ways and He will make our way straight. So it is not that we need to add obeying God’s instructions in addition to trusting Him for salvation, but that obeying God’s instructions is the way to trust God for salvation. God is trustworthy, therefore His instructions are also trustworthy (Psalms 19:7), so again the way to trust God is by obeying His instructions and it is contradictory to think that we should trust God for salvation, but not His instructions.

Our salvation is from sin (Matthew 1:21) and it is by the Mosaic Law that we have knowledge of what sin is (Romans 3:20), so while we are not required to earn our salvation as the result of having first obeyed it, living in obedience to it through faith in Jesus is intrinsically the content of the gift of him saving us from not living in obedience to it. For example, honoring our parents through faith in Jesus is intrinsically the content of his gift of saving us from not honoring our parents, and so forth for God’s other commands. In Titus 2:11-13, our salvation is described as being trained by grace to do what is godly, righteous, and good, and to renounce doing what is ungodly, so God graciously teaching us to do those works is the content of His gift of saving us from not doing those works.

 

[2ndTimeIsTheCharm]

You certainly have the freedom to do that. Care to discuss why?

No. I'm not really into debates that just keep going and going and I don't mind if I don't have the last word. Everything that needed to be said has already been done so.

But have a blessed day though!


🍨

 

[Soyeong]

I think labors of a command are law enforcement. Just saying what would be the point if you couldn't justify yourself by free will.

According to Romans 3:21-22, the only way to become righteous that is testified in the prophets is through faith in Christ for all who believe, so obedience to the law is not about earning our righteousness, but about having faith in Christ. Becoming righteous through faith means becoming someone who practices righteousness through faith. God's law is His instructions for how to practice righteousness through faith, not for how to earn our righteousness. For example, God's law reveals that a way to practice righteousness is by helping the poor, but no amount of helping the poor will ever cause someone to earn their righteousness as a wage because the only way to become righteous is through faith (Romans 4:1-5). So when God declares us to be righteous through faith, He is declaring us to be someone who practices His righteousness through faith in obedience to His instructions for how to do that found in His law in accordance with the example that Christ set for us to follow.

 

[Soyeong]

We have been set free from the law that we were bound to which judges that we should die if we fail to obey it, by a greater law that judges us to have already died in Christ, if we believe. Your position is that we were set free from what? It seems that you've interpreted that we are set free from our bondage of sin rather than our bondage to sin that leads to death.

If there were a law that commands against adultery and we were set free from it, then that would mean that we are free to commit adultery, but if we are still required to refrain from committing adultery, then we have not been set free from that law. In Titus 2:14, it does not say that Jesus gave himself to free us from God's law, but in order free us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people of his own possession who are zealous for doing good works, so becoming zealous for doing good works in obedience to God's law is the way to believe in what he accomplished through the cross, which is the opposite of believing that we have been set free from God's law. Likewise, in Matthew 4:15-23, Jesus began his ministry with the Gospel message to repent for the Kingdom of God is at hand, so repenting from our disobedience to God's law is the way to believe the Gospel while the message that we have been set free from God's law is the anti-Gospel. My position is that we have been set free from lawlessness in order to be free to obey God's law.

What do you think is the difference between our bondage of sin and our bondage to sin?

Yet, I trust that you would agree that, because we are now dead to sin, does not translate that we die in order to sin, as you suggest some must otherwise believe if they don't believe as you do.

Sin is the transgression of God's law, so dying to sin is dying to living in transgression of it so that we are now living in obedience to it. On the hand, dying to God's law would be dying in order to sin, which is why I don't think it is correct to interpret the Bible as speaking about dying to God's law.

8

Now if we died with Christ, we believe that we will also live with Him. 9For we know that since Christ was raised from the dead, He cannot die again; death no longer has dominion over Him. 10The death He died, He died to sin once for all; but the life He lives, He lives to God. 11So you too must count yourselves dead to sin, but alive to God in Christ Jesus.

Christ died to sin once for all... certainly doesn't translate that Jesus had sinned before He died so, there is something you are missing about what it actually does mean.

Dying to sin is the opposite of dying to God's law. Living for God is also the opposite of dying to His law.

 

[Mem]

If there were a law that commands against adultery and we were set free from it, then that would mean that we are free to commit adultery, but if we are still required to refrain from committing adultery, then we have not been set free from that law. In Titus 2:14, it does not say that Jesus gave himself to free us from God's law, but in order free us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people of his own possession who are zealous for doing good works, so becoming zealous for doing good works in obedience to God's law is the way to believe in what he accomplished through the cross, which is the opposite of believing that we have been set free from God's law. Likewise, in Matthew 4:15-23, Jesus began his ministry with the Gospel message to repent for the Kingdom of God is at hand, so repenting from our disobedience to God's law is the way to believe the Gospel while the message that we have been set free from God's law is the anti-Gospel. My position is that we have been set free from lawlessness in order to be free to obey God's law.

What do you think is the difference between our bondage of sin and our bondage to sin?



Sin is the transgression of God's law, so dying to sin is dying to living in transgression of it so that we are now living in obedience to it. On the hand, dying to God's law would be dying in order to sin, which is why I don't think it is correct to interpret the Bible as speaking about dying to God's law.


Dying to sin is the opposite of dying to God's law. Living for God is also the opposite of dying to His law.

You make no sense to me because it is true that unless two agree, how can they walk together. You would lead me to observe the law of sin and death, and under the pretense that it is for my own good. That's just creepy. Why do you think it is called the law of sin and death? and yet you will continue to masquerade it as an angel of light. As I said before, I'm not so bored to continue talking into the air seeing that we do not walk together, it is impossible for us to talk together. The difference between us is that you think you've found someone you can correct, but I know when I've encountered someone with which correction would be an exercise in vanity.

And now cues the drama the profession of the most godlike concern for my lost soul, surely.

 

[Soyeong]

You make no sense to me because it is true that unless two agree, how can they walk together. You would lead me to observe the law of sin and death, and under the pretense that it is for my own good. That's just creepy. Why do you think it is called the law of sin and death? and yet you will continue to masquerade it as an angel of light. As I said before, I'm not so bored to continue talking into the air seeing that we do not walk together, it is impossible for us to talk together. The difference between us is that you think you've found someone you can correct, but I know when I've encountered someone with which correction would be an exercise in vanity.

And now cues the drama the profession of the most godlike concern for my lost soul, surely.

No, I am leading away from from observing the law of sin and death. In Romans 7:25-8:2, Paul contrasted the Law of God with the law of sin and contested the Law of the Spirit with the law of sin and death, so he equated the Law of God with the Law of the Spirit, and the Bible refers to the Law of Moses as the Law of God in verses like Nehemiah 8:1-8, Ezra 7:6-12, and Luke 2:22-23. In Deuteronomy 6:24 and 10:12-13, it says that the Mosaic Law was given for our own good, so that is not a pretense, but rather that is directly stated in Scripture.

in Romans 7, Paul said that the Law of God is holy, righteous, and good and that he wanted to do good, but contrasted that with the law of sin that was causing him not to do the good of obeying the Law of God that he wanted to do. In Romans 7:7, the Law of God is not sinful, but is how w e know what sin is, and when our sin is revealed, then that leads us to repent and causes sin to decrease, however, in Romans 7:5, the law of sin stirs up sinful passions in order to bear fruit unto death, so it is sinful and causes sin to increase. A law that stirs up sinful passions in order to bear fruit unto death is not holy, righteous, and good. In Romans 7:22, Paul delighted in obeying the Law of God and it would be absurd to interpret Romans 7:5 as referring to the Law of God as if Paul delighted in stirring up sinful passions in order to bear fruit unto death.

In contrast, the Bible repeatedly states that obedience to the Mosaic Law brings life and a blessing while disobedience brings death and a curse (Deuteronomy 30:11-20) and that is the word of faith that we proclaim (Romans 10:5-8). Satan does not have the role of leading us to follow Christ's example of obedience to what God has commanded. I've changed my views on many topics, even something as major as the role of the Mosaic Law, so I'm not above correction, and if I am wrong about something, then I want to know about it, though the case for that needs to be made.

 

[Mem]

No, I am leading away from from observing the law of sin and death. In Romans 7:25-8:2, Paul contrasted the Law of God with the law of sin and contested the Law of the Spirit with the law of sin and death, so he equated the Law of God with the Law of the Spirit, and the Bible refers to the Law of Moses as the Law of God in verses like Nehemiah 8:1-8, Ezra 7:6-12, and Luke 2:22-23. In Deuteronomy 6:24 and 10:12-13, it says that the Mosaic Law was given for our own good, so that is not a pretense, but rather that is directly stated in Scripture.

in Romans 7, Paul said that the Law of God is holy, righteous, and good and that he wanted to do good, but contrasted that with the law of sin that was causing him not to do the good of obeying the Law of God that he wanted to do. In Romans 7:7, the Law of God is not sinful, but is how w e know what sin is, and when our sin is revealed, then that leads us to repent and causes sin to decrease, however, in Romans 7:5, the law of sin stirs up sinful passions in order to bear fruit unto death, so it is sinful and causes sin to increase. A law that stirs up sinful passions in order to bear fruit unto death is not holy, righteous, and good. In Romans 7:22, Paul delighted in obeying the Law of God and it would be absurd to interpret Romans 7:5 as referring to the Law of God as if Paul delighted in stirring up sinful passions in order to bear fruit unto death.

In contrast, the Bible repeatedly states that obedience to the Mosaic Law brings life and a blessing while disobedience brings death and a curse (Deuteronomy 30:11-20) and that is the word of faith that we proclaim (Romans 10:5-8). Satan does not have the role of leading us to follow Christ's example of obedience to what God has commanded. I've changed my views on many topics, even something as major as the role of the Mosaic Law, so I'm not above correction, and if I am wrong about something, then I want to know about it, though the case for that needs to be made.

Ok, I'm really not reading your copious responses, and neither would I recommend anyone else to but leave them to their liberty while reserving the right to my own. I'm not here to do that much 'work.' In fact, I'd rather 'rest.' You know, since I've entered into that rest. Have a happy new year!

 

[Soyeong]

Ok, I'm really not reading your copious responses, and neither would I recommend anyone else to but leave them to their liberty while reserving the right to my own. I'm not here to do that much 'work.' In fact, I'd rather 'rest.' You know, since I've entered into that rest. Have a happy new year!

In Romans 7:25, Paul contrasted the Law of God with the law of sin. My position is that we should obey the Law of God, not the law of sin.

In Hebrews 3:18-19, the Israelites did not enter into God's rest because their unbelief and disobedience to the Mosaic Law, and in Hebrews 4:11, we should strive to enter into that rest so that no one will fall away by the same sort of disobedience.

Merry New Year!

 

[Cameron143]

No, I am leading away from from observing the law of sin and death. In Romans 7:25-8:2, Paul contrasted the Law of God with the law of sin and contested the Law of the Spirit with the law of sin and death, so he equated the Law of God with the Law of the Spirit, and the Bible refers to the Law of Moses as the Law of God in verses like Nehemiah 8:1-8, Ezra 7:6-12, and Luke 2:22-23. In Deuteronomy 6:24 and 10:12-13, it says that the Mosaic Law was given for our own good, so that is not a pretense, but rather that is directly stated in Scripture.

in Romans 7, Paul said that the Law of God is holy, righteous, and good and that he wanted to do good, but contrasted that with the law of sin that was causing him not to do the good of obeying the Law of God that he wanted to do. In Romans 7:7, the Law of God is not sinful, but is how w e know what sin is, and when our sin is revealed, then that leads us to repent and causes sin to decrease, however, in Romans 7:5, the law of sin stirs up sinful passions in order to bear fruit unto death, so it is sinful and causes sin to increase. A law that stirs up sinful passions in order to bear fruit unto death is not holy, righteous, and good. In Romans 7:22, Paul delighted in obeying the Law of God and it would be absurd to interpret Romans 7:5 as referring to the Law of God as if Paul delighted in stirring up sinful passions in order to bear fruit unto death.

In contrast, the Bible repeatedly states that obedience to the Mosaic Law brings life and a blessing while disobedience brings death and a curse (Deuteronomy 30:11-20) and that is the word of faith that we proclaim (Romans 10:5-8). Satan does not have the role of leading us to follow Christ's example of obedience to what God has commanded. I've changed my views on many topics, even something as major as the role of the Mosaic Law, so I'm not above correction, and if I am wrong about something, then I want to know about it, though the case for that needs to be made.

You are above correction. Any and every law leads to death. Adam only had 1 commandment. He died. And he didn't have a sinful nature.
The problem isn't the law. It is holy. The problem is found in the weakness of the flesh.
Adam was mankind's best chance. He was created without a sinful nature. He was placed in an ideal environment. He enjoyed God's presence on a daily basis. Yet he faltered and fell into sin. If he couldn't find life through keeping 1 commandment, how can fallen people find life in over 600?

 

[Soyeong]

You are above correction. Any and every law leads to death. Adam only had 1 commandment. He died. And he didn't have a sinful nature.
The problem isn't the law. It is holy. The problem is found in the weakness of the flesh.
Adam was mankind's best chance. He was created without a sinful nature. He was placed in an ideal environment. He enjoyed God's presence on a daily basis. Yet he faltered and fell into sin. If he couldn't find life through keeping 1 commandment, how can fallen people find life in over 600?

I'm not above correction, though the correction needs to be correct. In Deuteronomy 30:15-16, obedience to God's law leads to life. In Deuteronomy 32:46-47, God's law is our very life. In Proverbs 3:18, it is a Tree of Life for all who take hold of it. In Proverbs 6:23, for the commandment is a lamp and the teaching a light, and the reproofs of discipline are the way of life. In Matthew 19:17, Jesus said that the way to enter eternal life is by obeying God's commandments. In Luke 10:25-28, Jesus said that obeying the greatest two commandments is the way to inherit eternal life. In Romans 2:6-7, eternal life is gift to those who persist in doing good. In Hebrews 5:9, Jesus has become a source of eternal life for those who obey Him. In Revelation 22:14, those who obeyed God's commandments are given the right to eat from the Tree of Life. In Romans 6:19-23, no longer presenting ourselves as slaves to impurity, lawlessness, and sin is contrasted with now presenting ourselves as slaves to God and to righteousness leading to sanctification and the goal of sanctification is eternal life in Christ, which is the gift of God, so obedience to God's law is the content of His gift of eternal life, but you say it leads to death, so are you above correction?

 

[Cameron143]

I'm not above correction, though the correction needs to be correct. In Deuteronomy 30:15-16, obedience to God's law leads to life. In Deuteronomy 32:46-47, God's law is our very life. In Proverbs 3:18, it is a Tree of Life for all who take hold of it. In Proverbs 6:23, for the commandment is a lamp and the teaching a light, and the reproofs of discipline are the way of life. In Matthew 19:17, Jesus said that the way to enter eternal life is by obeying God's commandments. In Luke 10:25-28, Jesus said that obeying the greatest two commandments is the way to inherit eternal life. In Romans 2:6-7, eternal life is gift to those who persist in doing good. In Hebrews 5:9, Jesus has become a source of eternal life for those who obey Him. In Revelation 22:14, those who obeyed God's commandments are given the right to eat from the Tree of Life. In Romans 6:19-23, no longer presenting ourselves as slaves to impurity, lawlessness, and sin is contrasted with now presenting ourselves as slaves to God and to righteousness leading to sanctification and the goal of sanctification is eternal life in Christ, which is the gift of God, so obedience to God's law is the content of His gift of eternal life, but you say it leads to death, so are you above correction?

You don't recognize truth. You keep trying to get people to live under a failed covenant. Whether people can keep the law given at Sinai is immaterial. No one can love one another as Jesus loves them. That is the NT standard. Only Jesus living in someone can. Keeping all the law of Moses will give you the same righteousness as the Pharisees. Jesus in you provides His righteousness.

 

[Soyeong]

You don't recognize truth. You keep trying to get people to live under a failed covenant. Whether people can keep the law given at Sinai is immaterial. No one can love one another as Jesus loves them. That is the NT standard. Only Jesus living in someone can. Keeping all the law of Moses will give you the same righteousness as the Pharisees. Jesus in you provides His righteousness.

In Psalms 119:142, the Mosaic Law is truth and Jesus embodied that truth by living in sinless obedience to it (John 14:6), so I am not the one who doesn't recognize truth. I have never suggest that we should live under the Mosaic Covenant, but rather I have been speaking about how to live under the New Covenant, which involves God putting the Mosaic Law in our minds and writing in on our hearts (Jeremiah 31:33). In Matthew 22:36-40, Jesus summarized the Mosaic Law as being about how to love God and our neighbor, so that is how he loved us and how we are able to love as he loved. Jesus expressed His righteousness through living in obedience to the Mosaic Law, so that is the way that we live when he is living in us.

The invisible aspects of God's nature/character are holiness, righteousness, goodness, justice, mercy, faithfulness, love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, gentleness, self-control, and so forth. The Son is the image of the invisible God (Colossians 1:15) and the radiance of God's glory the exact image of His nature (Hebrews 1:3), so if all of the invisible aspects of God's nature/character that the Mosaic Law was given to teach us how to express were personified in the form of body that we can see, then that would be the Son, which he expressed through living in sinless obedience to the Mosaic Law. In other words, the Son is who we see when we look at the Father. We can't believe the Son while refusing to believe in the nature of who he is.

 

[Mem]

You don't recognize truth. You keep trying to get people to live under a failed covenant. Whether people can keep the law given at Sinai is immaterial. No one can love one another as Jesus loves them. That is the NT standard. Only Jesus living in someone can. Keeping all the law of Moses will give you the same righteousness as the Pharisees. Jesus in you provides His righteousness.

The law was given to show you, or thou if you like, art not God nor can be as much as ye trieth. Ye wouldst tireth and stubbeth thy toe. Shirley, thou knowest.

 

[Soyeong]

The law was given to show you, or thou if you like, art not God nor can be as much as ye trieth. Ye wouldst tireth and stubbeth thy toe. Shirley, thou knowest.

[citation needed]

 

[Cameron143]

In Psalms 119:142, the Mosaic Law is truth and Jesus embodied that truth by living in sinless obedience to it (John 14:6), so I am not the one who doesn't recognize truth. I have never suggest that we should live under the Mosaic Covenant, but rather I have been speaking about how to live under the New Covenant, which involves God putting the Mosaic Law in our minds and writing in on our hearts (Jeremiah 31:33). In Matthew 22:36-40, Jesus summarized the Mosaic Law as being about how to love God and our neighbor, so that is how he loved us and how we are able to love as he loved. Jesus expressed His righteousness through living in obedience to the Mosaic Law, so that is the way that we live when he is living in us.

The invisible aspects of God's nature/character are holiness, righteousness, goodness, justice, mercy, faithfulness, love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, gentleness, self-control, and so forth. The Son is the image of the invisible God (Colossians 1:15) and the radiance of God's glory the exact image of His nature (Hebrews 1:3), so if all of the invisible aspects of God's nature/character that the Mosaic Law was given to teach us how to express were personified in the form of body that we can see, then that would be the Son, which he expressed through living in sinless obedience to the Mosaic Law. In other words, the Son is who we see when we look at the Father. We can't believe the Son while refusing to believe in the nature of who he is.

John 13:34...A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another, as I have loved you,...
This law cannot be kept without walking in the Spirit. This is the new standard. It requires Christ living in you. One cannot of themselves live this way.
This is what I mean by you living under the old covenant. You still want to live under the law and in your own endeavor. That's why you continue to bring up the verses in Deuteronomy saying the commandments can be kept through human effort. Whether it is true or not is immaterial. The new standard Jesus established cannot be met this way.

 

[Cameron143]

The law was given to show you, or thou if you like, art not God nor can be as much as ye trieth. Ye wouldst tireth and stubbeth thy toe. Shirley, thou knowest.

I dost. And refrained from callingeth me Shirley.

 

[Cameron143]

The law was given to show you, or thou if you like, art not God nor can be as much as ye trieth. Ye wouldst tireth and stubbeth thy toe. Shirley, thou knowest.

Airplane was such a great movie. Looks like you picked the wrong week to give up amphetamines.

 

[Mem]

Airplane was such a great movie. Looks like you picked the wrong week to give up amphetamines.