@LeeWoofenden So I guess we're just dumb then?

@LeeWoofenden If we understand "Works of the Law" as ritual law...how does ritual law give us knowledge of our sin? Romans 3:20 This is evidenced by Paul's turning of the phrase in 3:27 where it becomes "a law of works" I don't see how the phrase "works of the law" can be a unified idiom for a singular thing. Also as he continues speaking of the law it is clear he is talking about it in a larger context(3:31 how can this uphold ritual law? it can only be said to uphold judicial law)

^ Though I did miss a portion of the earlier discussion. I read that you are limiting "Law" to only referencing those 3 items? I really don't think that is how Paul often uses the term Law. He does not always use it as a proper noun, it is actually usually a normal noun he modifies or uses law to modify another.

@LeeWoofenden Also, I was thinking about your barn. And I concluded that your analogy has a fatal flaw: you are using an adjective, which will always modify. Saying "we are saved by faith" is not like saying "the barn is red". Rather it is like saying "We keep the horse in the barn at night." When I say that you are not thinking I keep the horse in the barn and somewhere else. Requiring me to say "we only keep the horse in the barn at night" is unnecessary for understanding.

(I did modifying it with "at night" but only because I may keep it elsewhere during the day. Clearly thats just a flaw in the nature of analogy, I added it for realism :p)

I was watching the last Hobbit movie today and i was thinking about how spiritual it is.And sound minded,and crazy off course

@Eagle Regarding what you said earlier, they are only prophetic in that they reflect the prophecy contained in scripture.

Much becomes clear with the gift of prophecy. To obtain this gift study Mark 4.

And to prove that indeed all men shall have the ability to prophecy.

"For you can all prophesy one by one, so that all may learn and all may be exhorted;" (1 Corinthians 14:31 NASB)

And to prove that it should happen sooner then later.

@Eagle I don't see how more study at home is a bad thing :D I also don't think that just because we're studying at home means we're not getting it at church. In fact it can be the opposite. What you learn at church may be driving you to learn more. Or, yes, a lack of teaching can leave you with a void to fill. It varies by individual case.

"Pursue love, yet desire earnestly spiritual gifts, but especially that you may prophesy." (1 Corinthians 14:1 NASB)

@Joshua No, I truly do not think that you are dumb. I think that you are laboring under the effects of false doctrine, which prevents you from seeing the meaning of the text because you are looking at it through the distorting lens of that doctrine. It's not a matter of intelligence or lack thereof.

@LeeWoofenden Ok so you're saying I'm incapable of reading it objectively, free from that lens, but that you are? Or that your lens is just better?

@fredsbend In answer to this question "But I'm turning the tables on everybody. Why is anybody needed at all if God is able to reveal truth to us personally?"

@Joshua Paul's letters are not simple. His arguments turn this way and that way as he follows the thread of his thinking. And along the way, he uses words such as "the Law" in various meanings in various contexts. For example, Romans 3:21 reads:

> But now, apart from law, the righteousness of God has been disclosed, and is attested by the law and the prophets,

@fredsbend God reveals his truth to people through the gift of prophecy.

"But one who prophesies speaks to men for edification and exhortation and consolation." (1 Corinthians 14:3 NASB)

His second use of "the Law" here is a reference to the Torah, or pentateuch, as it always is when used in the phrase, "the Law and the Prophets." But his first use is not speaking about a division of Scripture, but about the ritual law, as he is in Romans 3:28 and elsewhere.

Yes, I said that in my following post, he uses the word many ways, we have to understand it by its immediate grammatical use and wider context.

Similarly, Romans 3:20 reads:

> For “no human being will be justified in his sight” by deeds prescribed by the law, for through the law comes the knowledge of sin.

@LeeWoofenden Where in this context do you read the first law as being ritual law? That is no where in it. He is speaking generally about how law (don't do X) reveals our sin.

Here he also uses "the Law" twice, with a more subtle difference in meaning. "deeds prescribed by the law" is, in this context, a reference to the ritual law. But "through the law comes the knowledge of sin" is speaking more generally of the effect of law on the human mind: without it, we have no idea that we are sinning.

There is also a more general theme in Paul, which is that the new covenant in Christ is no longer one of blind obedience to law, but rather one of "faith," which is an inner light that gives us an understanding of the spirit of the law. We then obey the broader law of God not from mere obedience, but from understanding.

This, I think, is what he means in Romans 3:31:

The Law indeed is very important to the christian.

> Do we then overthrow the law by this faith? By no means! On the contrary, we uphold the law.

However, this differs from the "law of functionality".

Paul was probably not the author of Hebrews. But Hebrews does hold the key to understanding how Paul could say such seemingly contradictory things. The Law, according to Hebrews, has a deeper meaning related to the work of Christ and our relationship with Christ. So Paul "upholds the law" in a spiritual sense as it relates to Christ's fulfilling of the law.

Therefore please try to understand the difference.

There is a way that Christ fulfills the law. And through his way, we also do to.

Now, some parts of the Law of Moses are no longer necessary because Christ fulfilled them and because we have a different relationship with God in Christ now that he has come. Other parts are more universal, and remain in effect regardless of the particular dispensation or relationship with God. It is universal law that we are not to kill, commit adultery, steal, covet, and so on. These laws are not abrogated. They are still in force.

This is why the two governmental structures need clarified.

Realize that Moses came down with the ten commandments as the first governmental structure.

And it was after the incident with the idol that God punished them with the "second law".

Remember Moses pleaded for them.

And God responded his response.

@LeeWoofenden This is all fine, but you've moved on to application and living. What we would call sanctification. The fact remains, just before this in 3:28,30 we see that it is our justification by faith that is doing the upholding of the law.

@Joshua False doctrine is a distorted lens that distorts everything seen through it. And yes, of course i think that my lens is better. If I didn't, I wouldn't hold to it, and I wouldn't put it forward forcefully, as I do.

Then this is how you are both correct.

@LeeWoofenden AHAH We may have a breakthrough. I believe that Christ DID fulfill ALL works of righteousness. The purpose of those laws is not abrogated, but the judgement and guilt of the sin that they have revealed is abrogated.

I believe that Luther's doctrine of sola fide, and the concomitant doctrine of penal substitution, completed the doctrinal destruction of Christianity. At that point, all the fundamental doctrines of Christianity had been falsified, and there was no longer any sound foundation for a Christian church.

See the Law of the second government gets replace with the law of grace.

This does not mean all Christians are dumb, evil, or any such thing. It means that doctrinally there was no soundness to the foundation anymore. And that infected the thinking of the entire church--especially the educated leaders in the church.

However this only brings to application the first original government.

@Joshua Do you think that we must still obey the Ten Commandments?

Therefore Jesus fulfills the law through the activation of the first government.

Try to understand this from the perspective as a parent.

say I have a child and I tell the child, "You shall not eat chocolate".

Then behind my back they try to sneak into the kitchen and eat some chocolate.

Irritated, the new following command was given.

Eat much chocolate!

@LeeWoofenden I am no longer required to obey them for salvation but I AM "required" to want to. (I should, but if I don't then my faith must not be complete, that is James' point) My heart should want to draw near and to be holy.

Now the children then started to eat chocolate, and loved how it tasted.

Then they had belly aches, and felt tired after the sugar rush was over.

Let say that this continued for 400 years.

Passing down the law of "You must eat chocolate". From parent to child.

Then finally someone woke up and realized that the original law, "you shall not eat chocolate." was for there own good.

I am in fact, until sin is removed from me in that last great and final day of atonement, incapable of obeying them perfectly. For the moment I DID follow them perfectly it would become worthless to me. (Gal 2:21)

I'd probably immediately revert to them being like an idol and then I'm right back to not following them ;)

@Joshua realize that Paul's basically say it this way, "I do not nullify the grace of God, for if righteousness comes through eating chocolate, then Christ died needlessly.”"

If we read James 2 carefully you will see all his examples are presupposing the existence of faith. He is simply examining that faith by its works, which is entirely valid as Jesus said you will know by our fruit. But that does not mean it was not gained by faith first.

Wait what was not gained by faith first?

@Decrypted Justification (or being made/decreed righteous)

Which direction does the application go then?

I'm not saying it wasn't, I'm saying just because we are examining that faith by its works does not mean the faith for justification did not exist first. Works did not precede the faith.

So I still need to understand.

@Decrypted You kind of caught me right in the middle with Lee, so at what point should we start? Where did I lose you?

Are you saying that faith proceeded works?

@Decrypted In regards to Justification? yes.

Ok, thanks

This then does still need clarified then.

How does faith get defined, from your belief?

@Decrypted Before we have faith all our good works are works of the law. We do them because we think the law of works requires it. But the law of faith demands we have faith first. Only then can we do works of faith.

Yes

How then do you define faith though?

@Decrypted In its simplest form it should probably be best understood as "Trust" are you asking for a more specific definition?

Yes

Trust in what?

Trusting in God to do what?

@Decrypted Trusting something means you have absolute conviction that it will do or be what you think it will and then actually relying upon that. You can have faith that a chair will hold you if you sit in it, but until you sit down you haven't trusted it. That is the part that completes it.

So I play the weakness card here, for I find it difficult to ask the question correctly.

@Decrypted I'm getting to it, but am building to it and choosing my words carefully.

Therefore please bear with me as this gets defined.

Using the chair metaphor, one could say trusting that God "holds them".

So I need a better definition that that.

@Decrypted Applying the above definition of trust: We must trust that Jesus will save us, that we are heirs of the promise. We trust he will deliver on that promise. We don't simply "believe" but we rely upon it. At that point it turns to action and we walk by faith, working by faith in love

Did you read that he said:

Simple faith like a child is all that is needed. They believe you will catch them and won't let them get hurt and they act on that. However, it does help us to learn more about Jesus so we can be convinced of who and why we are putting our faith in him.

That is where knowing who Jesus is matters.

@Decrypted Who said what?

"In that day you will ask in My name, and I do not say to you that I will request of the Father on your behalf;" (John 16:26 NASB)

Now I do want to be gentle with you, for many have conclusions that fall within a certain perspective.

And indeed many perspectives can be drawn, hence the number of versions of Christianity.

However actually using the gift of prophecy, a trusted conclusion has been found.

And I open that up to you, that the conclusion may come to you directly from him.

Then it's not a matter of trusting my logic.

And the answer is found, in Mark 4

Or a leading to the answer as a more specific conclusion.

I tell you as a witness, that I have seen the works of miracles.

I have seen many wield the gift of prophecy. Even unknowingly.

Even "unbelievers".

Even "Atheists"

Indeed when one knows what to look for, indeed God glory shines! Bro!!!!

And there is also another that has the understanding and the sight. Not just me.

Therefore I hope this comforts you that, he "came to the conclusion", earlier then I ever met him.

He is a genius, and obviously God gave him the gift of knowledge.

@Decrypted ???

Now I will admit weakness.

I had to read that almost a hundred times till the details started to become clear to me.

However the details, tell much.

And if willing, certain details may be pointed out to save the time of the contemplation if allowed.

Are you willing?

@Decrypted I'm not even sure what it is you are speaking about. What did you read a hundred times?

Mark 4

@Decrypted I see. Well I am trying to wrap something up here and then I'm headed to bed, so maybe another time. Or go ahead and I'll read it later :) Goodnight.

Good night

Now its important to realize that forgiveness from God is the deciding factor, as to if a persons forgiven. This may seem obvious, however. It is what it is.

Jesus makes a quote:

"so that while seeing, they may see and not perceive, and while hearing, they may hear and not understand, otherwise they might return and be forgiven.” Mark 4:12 NASB

Bible hub offers some insight (biblehub.com/mark/4-12.htm)

This concept God continually mentioned in the old testament (Ref: Isaiah 6:9, Isaiah 43:8, Jeremiah 5:21, Jeremiah 36:3, Ezekiel 12:2) All visible from the bible hub page.

Yet it was through the Jeremiah reference that he defines the condition of forgiveness.

"Perhaps the house of Judah will hear all the calamity which I plan to bring on them, in order that every man will turn from his evil way; then I will forgive their iniquity and their sin.” (Jeremiah 36:3)

Notice he says "will hear". Jesus also says "He who has ears to hear, let him hear." two times. Once in Mark 4:9 and once in Mark 4:23.

In Mark 4:24 He states, "Take care what you listen to."

Followed by a "how you measure what you hear statement".

In Mark 4:20 He states, "they hear the word" and makes reference to those that do hear as the "good ground".

Therefore by the statement that he made: "Do you not understand this parable? How will you understand all the parables?" in Mark 4:13

Since this parable specifically was about a person hearing, this gives us direction about "all the rest of his parables."

And when all of his parables become understood. Then indeed, a person will understand what Jesus was saying. Then they can believe him.

@Joshua All for home studying.But im really wondering What and how much should we learn while living in this world.Very few has any deep spiritual insight,that we need to understand to discover the spiritual structure of the world and know how to fight evil.But I also think simple faith can be strong and God has a solution close by for every problem WE live by faith one should never forget,we are to trust in him

@Eagle To understand the "spiritual structure" go confirm within the self that the root concept to the word "soul" defines ones "psychology."

5590 psyxḗ (from psyxō, "to breathe, blow" which is the root of the English words "psyche," "psychology") (biblehub.com/greek/5590.htm)

Notice also that the word for "spirit" also carries the meaning of "breath" (biblehub.com/greek/4151.htm)

Therefore dependent on ones psychology this will define what spirit a person actuates.

Both the spirit and the soul have a one or the other attribute.

@Decrypted If your trying to say(correct me if im wrong)that there is no spiritual world,that this is all psychology.I do not agree

The soul unclean or clean, the spirit evil or Holy.

Sin entered into the word with the knowledge of good and evil.

Knowledge deals with the mind.

In many religions in history people agree that This world is a picture of the spiritual world,everything has a deeper meaning.So the breath as you say have a connection with the spirit.The world gives the spirit a body.Humans gives the spirit a voice

The person thinks a thing, they say a thing, they act a thing.

You are correct when you say, "Humans gives the spirit a voice."

@Decrypted What is your point?

Therefore its the "type of voice" that will help reveal ones spirit.

Jesus says, "you will know them by there fruits".

Yes there is a spirit behind everything

A person either has one or the other, "acting as a bad tree or as a good tree."

agree

The "word" is behind everything, and what the word is saying depends on ones spirit.

yes you might say so,but this is beyond intention.Like Peter had good intentions to save Jesus But Jesus said it was satanic and a mindset of the world

When he says, "you will recognize them by their fruits". This shows that theirs a physical substance that we can gauge from.

Then understand that Satan actually means "adversarial".

Peter was label adversarial since he went against the path that Jesus chose.

Realize also this occurred directly after Jesus said "God revealed it to Peter".

One moment God was in him, and the next Satan.

Therefore it shows the importance of agreement.

The Yeah, and the Yes.

Which have the same definition.

There are rabbis that say God created a spiritual world and the one we" live in" that is both off course. Creation are created to create but when it does not create good fruit it will still create,but just not after "the good plan for the world" So it creates evil.So God has not created evil and here demons are created on "earth",all that works against God

"I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord do all these things." (Isaiah 45:7 KJV)

So there is Gods good plan and there is evil

Yes! I agree

Or there's deciding what God does as evil. Perhaps he doesn't like that.

But there is a court system,heavenly court

And there's the knowledge of good and evil.

Was God happy, when man did not have this knowledge?

happy,I dunno if thats a good word.But thats a complicated question.But if you know of evil,then evil is there.If we do not know of it its not there

evil was not a concept it seems for Adam

because its outside the garden and Adam was in the garden

"I make peace, and create evil" Just to answer that.I think where talking about a court system where God creates evil for evil people and peace for others.And so on. So I do not think God created evil"in the first place".

These are complicated questions

@Decrypted Evil likely does not mean moral sinful evil in that verse. It is more peace vs chaos, calm vs strife and calamity. The word for evil there has a wide range of meaning. So it can simply be referring to the strife and suffering he creates as discipline.

@Joshua About the barn analogy, I think it works even with the differing parts of speech. And about the horse in the barn analogy, saying that we are justified by faith alone is not saying, "We only keep the horse in the barn at night," but, "We keep only the horse in the barn at night."

@LeeWoofenden I understand what you are saying, yes. And before I should have said the problem was the switching of the referent. And I think you are doing it again. All you've said in that form is that we are Only justified, or justified alone by faith. So the only thing faith can do is justify, but it's not the only thing that justifies.

And I can even agree with that, since justification by works is still valid. The problem is that I am incapable of it. But I am justified by Christ's works instead, applied to and gifted to those who believe.

@Joshua What is the verse in question?

@PaulVargas Well that's just it, I think quite many verses speak on it but Lee thinks none do :D but really he's just objecting to the idea of justification by faith alone being biblical.

I have a bounty out on a question,Im not impressed with the answers,should I just give it to the best one anyway?

@Eagle Personally I would award bounties even if I'm unhappy with the answers, unless none of them have any merit. As it stands now, Ken's answer will get half the bounty amount if you do nothing.

@Nathaniel I was thinking the same, a 100 extra is a nice gift