Predestination destroys legalism

[Arial]

Maybe you should consider the moral imperative of patience and come to grips with the fact that outside of your circle, you're very likely to run into many on an open forum that will not accept you as a teacher and will test your knowledge and beliefs no matter your point of view of their actually being right or wrong.

Before you go telling others what they should consider and how they should behave, you should fist clean our own house. You are constantly making negative assumptions about me all of which so far have been wrong. A great many of your posts, this one included, are about me and all my failures and shortcomings and not about the topic at al

I did not find anything you have said to be remotely a challenge to respond to, I do not consider myself a teacher, and I love to have my knowledge and my beliefs tested. That is the main reason I am here. I learn to articulate what I believe and why I believe it and how to support it. I grow whether anyone else gains anything from it or not. The thing with you and your alias? you don't seem to be able to grasp or understand what I say, no matter how many times or ways in which I say it. So I have to keep going over the same ground again and again. Not only do I lose patience with it I get exceedingly bored with it. And instead of even entertaining the thought that the problem could be with you, you blame me and get on this self righteous pony.

So I am putting you both on ignore for the sake of my sanity, Go find someone else to harass is you can find anyone.

 

[Arial]

Referring you back to my post #80 and trying to ask this in the order of that post:

• Do you see as I see in his Chapter 8, that Calvin equates the Ten Commandments ("10C") to the "Moral Law" part of the [theory] of the tripartite division of the Mosaic Law that he identifies in the explanation of the chapter divisions in Chapter 7?
• So, when Calvin is speaking of "the Law" in Chapter 7, section 12 where he discusses the "third use of the Law", he is actually discussing the third use of the 10C as I see him doing?
• And after reading his 1st sentence in Chapter 7, section 12, do you see as I see that Calvin says the principal use and proper end (purpose, goal) of the 10C is the progressive sanctification of Christians?

Do you agree with Calvin that the principal use of the 10C is the progressive sanctification of Christians?

From there, if you care to comment on my second observation under Calvin Section 12, do you agree that he seems to be equating (1) the writing of the 10C on the hearts of Christians "by the finger of God" with (2) the ministry of God the Holy Spirit influencing and actuating the Christian's desire to obey God (and this too being in context for the progressive sanctification of Christians)?

Thanks!

This has already been addressed with two people or worse, one person posing as two, AD NAUSEAM!! For pete's sake, find another thread and another conversation.

 

[Rufus]

Arial in #85 wrote:

It is not Mosaic covenant Law in the NT it is moral imperatives, not Law, on godly Christian behavior. Those same things are embraced in the Law. How could they not be if through the Law God is teaching what His righteousness is? And all of it is. Everything the NT tells us about how we are to treat each other, those who are not believers, obedience to civil authorities, marriage etc will also be found in the Ten commandments If you keep the first four perfectly you will also be keeping the last six. In the written Law, these things are fleshed out.

Really? So you think all "moral" rule is embodied in the Ten Words, do you? You think God taught all we need to know about his holy, righteous character in the Ten? Where is fornication forbidden? Or bestiality? Or homosexuality? Or pedophilia? Or any of sins of the tongue? Or about a man's duty to help another pull his fallen ox up to his feet? Or what about the two greatest commandments upon which all the OT hinges? Or likewise, where is the "golden rule" (Mat 7:12) in the Ten upon which, also, the Law and the Prophets are hinged? Or where in the Ten are our instructions re our relationship to civil authorities? Or where is the law of faith in the Ten? After all, it's impossible to please God without faith (Heb 11:16). If you're going to insist that the OC consisted of just the Ten Words and these Ten are the ultimate moral expression of God's will for man's duty toward him, then this would create more problems for you than you would care to tackle. If the Ten are our ultimate, quintessential rule of life, then this logically implies we can do anything that is not forbidden in the Ten!

Also, it's highly doubtful that even if someone could keep the Ten perfectly whether that would suffice to get them to heaven. Have you ever noticed that 9 of the 10 commandments are negative imperatives!? Yet, where is the great emphasis on man's moral duty to God placed under the NC? Is it not on the positive imperatives!? The two greatest commandments require a proactive expression of our love toward God and towards God's image-bearers. Likwise for the Golden Rule. Even in the Titus 2 passage I quoted earlier, the text went on to say in v.14, "eager to do what is good"! Our moral duty towards God involves far more than mere abstinence from wrong-doing. The Ten Commandments are but a legal primer! The Ten is Law 101!

Finally, which covenant do you think best expressed God's righteousness: The Old or the New? Meditate on the following passage and then I'd like to hear your answer:

Rom 3:21-26
But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from the law, although the Law and the Prophets bear witness to it— 22 the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe. For there is no distinction: 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, 25 whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God's righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins. 26 It was to show his righteousness at the present time, so that he might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.
ESV

May I suggest that you pay close attention to the "BUT NOW" in v.21? Two very important little words. The "but" indicating a contrast with something. The "now" indicating an eschatological shift -- a shift from the past to the present (the "now" but "not yet"). We see a lot of these "but now(s)" in Pauline theology.

 

[Rufus]

Before you go telling others what they should consider and how they should behave, you should fist clean our own house. You are constantly making negative assumptions about me all of which so far have been wrong. A great many of your posts, this one included, are about me and all my failures and shortcomings and not about the topic at al

I did not find anything you have said to be remotely a challenge to respond to, I do not consider myself a teacher, and I love to have my knowledge and my beliefs tested. That is the main reason I am here. I learn to articulate what I believe and why I believe it and how to support it. I grow whether anyone else gains anything from it or not. The thing with you and your alias? you don't seem to be able to grasp or understand what I say, no matter how many times or ways in which I say it. So I have to keep going over the same ground again and again. Not only do I lose patience with it I get exceedingly bored with it. And instead of even entertaining the thought that the problem could be with you, you blame me and get on this self righteous pony.

So I am putting you both on ignore for the sake of my sanity, Go find someone else to harass is you can find anyone.

There are two GDLs...with two personalities?

 

[Rufus]

This is what you said:

1.Do you see any mention of the Holy Spirit in Calvin's quote? 2. Who is "them"? 3. What is his subject? 4. What does he say the Law does? 5. What does the Holy Spirit do?

1. No.
2. The ones who were given the Law.
3.The purposes and accomplishments of the Law.
4. Enabling them---those who were given the Law---to learn daily with truth and certainty what the will of the Lord is, and aspire to follow it.
5. Among other things, illuminate the scriptures in our mind and heart, giving us spiritual understanding of spiritual things. (John 14:15-17; Romans 8:1-4; 1 Cor 2:13;John 15:26; Acts 5:32.

The Israelites did not have the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. They had the Law as their tutor.

So, Calvin, was writing in the NC era. In CT, EVERYONE was given the "law", even though scripture clearly teaches that the law was given only to the Jews.

And, no, Calvin didn't mention the Holy Spirit in his quote. Why would he? After all, the Spirit was NOT the "best instrument for enabling". So why bother? His focus was on what he thought to be the "best instrument"?

Jn 14:15-17 is focused on messianic law, not OC law. Also, v. 17 does not say that the Counselor Jesus would send would be the Spirit of Law.

And the focus on Rom 8:1-4 is on the Spirit of Life that sets us free from law of sin and death. And v. says that the righteous requirements of the law might be fully met in us -- FULLY. The text does not say that we meet those requirements fully.

1Cor 2:13 talks about spiritual truths and spiritual words -- both of which consist more than just law.

Jn 15:26 does not talk about "the Spirit of Law". It talks about the Spirit of Truth. Truth is MORE than law, whether you want to accept this truth or not.

And Act 5:32 talks about obedience to God, which in this NC dispensation translates into obedience to his Son (Heb 1-2; Mk 9:7; Mat 17:5; Lk 9:35).

 

[gdl]

There are two GDLs...with two personalities?

Interesting, huh?

Brings to mind proof-text moral imperatives like these:

NKJ Eph. 4:13 till we all come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ;​

​

NKJ 1 Cor. 1:10 NKJ Now I plead with you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment.​

​

NKJ Phil. 2:2 fulfill my joy by being like-minded, having the same love, being of one accord, of one mind.​

​

NKJ Phil. 3:16 Nevertheless, to the degree that we have already attained, let us walk by the same rule, let us be of the same mind.​

​

NKJ Phil. 4:2 I implore Euodia and I implore Syntyche to be of the same mind in the Lord.​

​

BTW, thanks for dealing with those verses in #105. Maybe this will spur some discussion on actual Scripture.

 

[Rufus]

God"s word is law and not a philosophical opinion . His law is called the law of faith. The "let there be" and "it was good law" also referred to as His labor of love.

His word as Law. He lifts it up above all his attributes .He himself subject to His own law

Psalm 138:2I will worship toward thy holy temple, and praise thy name for thy lovingkindness and for thy truth: for thou hast magnified thy word above all thy name.

The phrase "law of faith" is not found in the OT. It's only found in the New. So, for example, when John said in Jn 1:17a that the Law came by Moses, he wasn't talking about "the law of faith" -- a "law" (or principle), by the way, that is contrary to OC law (Gal 3:12). The Mosaic Law Covenant was a law-works covenant; whereas the New Covenant is a covenant of Grace and Truth.

 

[prism]

The Mosaic Law Covenant was a law-works covenant; whereas the New Covenant is a covenant of Grace and Truth.

Then where would you place the Abrahamic Covenant?

 

[Mr GLee]

The phrase "law of faith" is not found in the OT. It's only found in the New. So, for example, when John said in Jn 1:17a that the Law came by Moses, he wasn't talking about "the law of faith" -- a "law" (or principle), by the way, that is contrary to OC law (Gal 3:12). The Mosaic Law Covenant was a law-works covenant; whereas the New Covenant is a covenant of Grace and Truth.

The law of Moses the letter is death. You shall surely die

The law of faith is what developed the old testament. The law of Christ's faith also called a labor of his unseen love. . yoked with him our load is lightened .

"Let there be" as the law and a witness to the law "a good testimony" seen with the eyes. The law of Christians as a new creation

What I call good example of Christ faith in action is with Thomas . He demanded to see what he thought was proof the flesh of the Son of man Jesus the prophet, was God . Thomas hoping seeing, before believing. . executing faith the pagn foundation out of sight out of mind (as in who believe in a unseen God?)

The Lord gave words to His prophet Jesus and lovingly commanded thomas (let there be) be not faithless, but believing."and the testimony the confession "My Lord and my God ."it was very good "


John 20: 24-40 But Thomas, one of the twelve, called Didymus, was not with them when Jesus came.
The other disciples therefore said unto him, We have seen the Lord. But he said unto them, Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe. And after eight days again his disciples were within, and Thomas with them: then came Jesus, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said, Peace be unto you.Then saith he to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing.And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God. Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book:

 

[Arial]

Really? So you think all "moral" rule is embodied in the Ten Words, do you? You think God taught all we need to know about his holy, righteous character in the Ten? Where is fornication forbidden? Or bestiality? Or homosexuality? Or pedophilia? Or any of sins of the tongue? Or about a man's duty to help another pull his fallen ox up to his feet?

Here you show again that you read with little to no comprehension, and then you continue your defense according to what you have already decided that someone is saying, not what they are saying. You even bolded the portion of my quote that you are refuting and respond with exactly what I said.

Everything the NT tells us about how we are to treat each other, those who are not believers, obedience to civil authorities, marriage etc will also be found in the Ten commandments If you keep the first four perfectly you will also be keeping the last six. In the written Law, these things are fleshed out.

What does the part I put in bold say?

Finally, which covenant do you think best expressed God's righteousness: The Old or the New? Meditate on the following passage and then I'd like to hear your answer:

This has no relationship to anything I have said. It comes from you not understanding that when Calvin gave the three functions of the Law he was talking about how the Law functioned in the OT BOOK for those who it was given to. Not how it functions in the new covenant. Your whole argument is based on a fallacy.

So, Calvin, was writing in the NC era. In CT, EVERYONE was given the "law", even though scripture clearly teaches that the law was given only to the Jews.

Calvin was writing in the new covenant era ABOUT the old covenant era. Your entire argument in all your posts is based on a fallacy. One you will not acknowledge because then you might have to shut up about it.

And, no, Calvin didn't mention the Holy Spirit in his quote. Why would he? After all, the Spirit was NOT the "best instrument for enabling". So why bother? His focus was on what he thought to be the "best instrument"?

Calvin was giving the function of the Mosaic Law during the time when it was active and for those to whom it was given, not its function in the new covenant. Your entire argument in all your posts is based on a fallacy.

Jn 14:15-17 is focused on messianic law, not OC law. Also, v. 17 does not say that the Counselor Jesus would send would be the Spirit of Law.

I gave those verses where I did to validate what it related to, which is the answer to the question 5. What does the Holy Spirit do? It had only to do with the work of the Holy Spirit, not messianic law or the Mosaic covenant Law. Therefore, more evidence of your inability to comprehend what is being read, or deliberate obtuses and jumping on the back of your fallacious arguments---and in doing so creating another one.

And the focus on Rom 8:1-4 is on the Spirit of Life that sets us free from law of sin and death. And v. says that the righteous requirements of the law might be fully met in us -- FULLY. The text does not say that we meet those requirements fully.

1Cor 2:13 talks about spiritual truths and spiritual words -- both of which consist more than just law.

Jn 15:26 does not talk about "the Spirit of Law". It talks about the Spirit of Truth. Truth is MORE than law, whether you want to accept this truth or not.

And Act 5:32 talks about obedience to God, which in this NC dispensation translates into obedience to his Son (Heb 1-2; Mk 9:7; Mat 17:5; Lk 9:35).

See above. Failure to read with comprehension what is being said. Arguing from fallacies. (Things that do not exist and never did exist in what you are arguing against.)

 

[gdl]

God"s word is law and not a philosophical opinion .

What Scripture(s) do you use that say(s) "God's word is law"?

His law is called the law of faith.

In one place I know of per your statement - Rom3:27.

The phrase "law of faith" is not found in the OT. It's only found in the New.

Rom3:27, yes?

Then where would you place the Abrahamic Covenant?

Interesting question.

I actually think this is an interesting phrase, "law of faith" to explore conceptually from Gen forward. My sense is that it could lead to some clarifications re: law. I'll wait to see where this might go between you three.

 

[Mr GLee]

What Scripture(s) do you use that say(s) "God's word is law"?

As words of the law written by the finger. . . of God words . . is law that moves dying mankind enabling them to do it to His good pleasure.

By a work of Christ faith or labor of love working with Josiah the Father performed it to his own good pleasure.

2 Kings 23:24 Moreover the workers with familiar spirits, and the wizards, and the images, and the idols, and all the abominations that were spied in the land of Judah and in Jerusalem, did Josiah put away, that he might perform the words of the law which were written in the book that Hilkiah the priest found in the house of the Lord

 

[Mr GLee]

In one place I know of per your statement - Rom3:27.

I would think once was all that was needed its what it represents. . . a labor of Christ love.

 

[Rufus]

Then where would you place the Abrahamic Covenant?

It's a covenant of promise.

 

[Arial]

Interesting question.

And not answered.

 

[Arial]

It's a covenant of promise.

That is what it is, but that is not the question that was asked? The question was where would you place the Abrahamic covenant?

 

[Mr GLee]

I would offer. It was before the name change from Abram exalted father of one nation to Abraham the father of all the nations of the world

The seed as a gospel is the spiritual eternal seed Christ . it would be a strange land used to represent heavenly Jerusalem. . after comes the great substance all the nations of the world called By the father in Acts. . Christian the bride made up of all nations


Genisi15:13 And he said unto Abram, Know of a surety that thy seed shall be a stranger in a land that is not theirs, and shall serve them; and they shall afflict them four hundred years; And also that nation, whom they shall serve, will I judge: and afterward shall they come out with great substance.

Christ a stranger in the land of pagans .

 

[Rufus]

Here you show again that you read with little to no comprehension, and then you continue your defense according to what you have already decided that someone is saying, not what they are saying. You even bolded the portion of my quote that you are refuting and respond with exactly what I said.

What does the part I put in bold say?

This has no relationship to anything I have said. It comes from you not understanding that when Calvin gave the three functions of the Law he was talking about how the Law functioned in the OT BOOK for those who it was given to. Not how it functions in the new covenant. Your whole argument is based on a fallacy.

Calvin was writing in the new covenant era ABOUT the old covenant era. Your entire argument in all your posts is based on a fallacy. One you will not acknowledge because then you might have to shut up about it.

Calvin was giving the function of the Mosaic Law during the time when it was active and for those to whom it was given, not its function in the new covenant. Your entire argument in all your posts is based on a fallacy.

I gave those verses where I did to validate what it related to, which is the answer to the question 5. What does the Holy Spirit do? It had only to do with the work of the Holy Spirit, not messianic law or the Mosaic covenant Law. Therefore, more evidence of your inability to comprehend what is being read, or deliberate obtuses and jumping on the back of your fallacious arguments---and in doing so creating another one.

See above. Failure to read with comprehension what is being said. Arguing from fallacies. (Things that do not exist and never did exist in what you are arguing against.)

That is what it is, but that is not the question that was asked? The question was where would you place the Abrahamic covenant?

Of course it is. Where I would "place it" means in what category would I place it? And that would be in the category of Promise -- right where Paul placed it (Gal: 3:18).! Where would you place it? In Central Park, maybe?

 

[Rufus]

As words of the law written by the finger. . . of God words . . is law that moves dying mankind enabling them to do it to His good pleasure.

By a work of Christ faith or labor of love working with Josiah the Father performed it to his own good pleasure.

2 Kings 23:24 Moreover the workers with familiar spirits, and the wizards, and the images, and the idols, and all the abominations that were spied in the land of Judah and in Jerusalem, did Josiah put away, that he might perform the words of the law which were written in the book that Hilkiah the priest found in the house of the Lord

You do know that the term "law" has different meanings, depending on the context in which the term is found? Law can mean the Pentateuch or it can mean the entire OT (Pentateuch, Writings, Prophets). But neither the ancient Jews or even the religious Jews of today , ever thought of the term "law" as being only the Ten Commandments. In fact, that is not even taught in the bible either. That would be a totally foreign concept to the bible and to both classes of Jews.

 

[Rufus]

Rufus said:
Really? So you think all "moral" rule is embodied in the Ten Words, do you? You think God taught all we need to know about his holy, righteous character in the Ten? Where is fornication forbidden? Or bestiality? Or homosexuality? Or pedophilia? Or any of sins of the tongue? Or about a man's duty to help another pull his fallen ox up to his feet?

Here you show again that you read with little to no comprehension, and then you continue your defense according to what you have already decided that someone is saying, not what they are saying. You even bolded the portion of my quote that you are refuting and respond with exactly what I said.

Maybe you should your own advice. Here's what you wrote in 85:

Arial in #85 wrote:

It is not Mosaic covenant Law in the NT it is moral imperatives, not Law, on godly Christian behavior. Those same things are embraced in the Law. How could they not be if through the Law God is teaching what His righteousness is? And all of it is. Everything the NT tells us about how we are to treat each other, those who are not believers, obedience to civil authorities, marriage etc WILL ALSO BE FOUND in the Ten commandments If you keep the first four perfectly you will also be keeping the last six. In the written Law, these things are fleshed out.

(emphasis mine)

This, of course, is a patently false statement. There are many "moral" laws stated in the OT and New,for that matter, that are NOT found in the Ten. You have made the false dichotomy between "law" and "Law". With one of these supposedly representing the "moral code" in the Ten.

And so, what about all the OTHER "MORAL" laws that are not in the Ten? Wouldn't that mean that the ancient Jews and even us today have the liberty to lie, for example, providing we're not bearing false witness against our neighbor? What about lying for gain? Or for self-promotion?

Rufus said:
Finally, which covenant do you think best expressed God's righteousness: The Old or the New? Meditate on the following passage and then I'd like to hear your answer:

This has no relationship to anything I have said. It comes from you not understanding that when Calvin gave the three functions of the Law he was talking about how the Law functioned in the OT BOOK for those who it was given to. Not how it functions in the new covenant. Your whole argument is based on a fallacy.

You have a short memory for you did say:

How could they not be if through the Law God is teaching what His righteousness is?

Therefore, my question was pertinent. Apparently, "the Law" (not sure what you mean by the big L) was not the only means used by God to teach us about his righteousness. So, why don't you take a shot at the question?

Rufus said:
So, Calvin, was writing in the NC era. In CT, EVERYONE was given the "law", even though scripture clearly teaches that the law was given only to the Jews.

Calvin was writing in the new covenant era ABOUT the old covenant era. Your entire argument in all your posts is based on a fallacy. One you will not acknowledge because then you might have to shut up about it.

Rufus said:
And, no, Calvin didn't mention the Holy Spirit in his quote. Why would he? After all, the Spirit was NOT the "best instrument for enabling". So why bother? His focus was on what he thought to be the "best instrument"?

Calvin was giving the function of the Mosaic Law during the time when it WAS active and for those to whom it was given, not its function in the new covenant. Your entire argument in all your posts is based on a fallacy.

[emphasis mine)

Your own words will betray your lack of reading comprehension. "Was" as in the past tense, right? So, how come Calvin wrote in the present tense! If Calvin was discussing the past -- then why didn't he write in the past tense? Here's the quote again. Listen up, please and take very careful note of all the PRESENT TENSE verbs he uses, which I'll put in bold.



For it is the best instrument for enabling them daily to learn with greater truth and certainty what that will of the Lord is which they aspire to follow, and to confirm them in this knowledge; just as a servant who desires with all his soul to approve himself to his master, must still observe, and be careful to ascertain his master’s dispositions, that he may comport himself in accommodation to them.

But this even gets better. Calvin, after all, was writing to the Church, generally, or more specifically to the French persecuted church of his day. This was his primary audience. So, with this in mind, here he is again:

Let none of us deem ourselves exempt from this necessity, for none have as yet attained to such a degree of wisdom, as that they may not, by the daily instruction of the Law, advance to a purer knowledge of the Divine will.

He clearly was binding the conscience of his audience by telling them basically that they should not exempt themselves from doing what others have done -- calling it a NECESSITY. His audience, too, (and Calvin himself) must use this "best instrument" that would also enable them daily to learn with greater truth and certainty. And why must the church (and Calvin) use this tool? So that like the slave in his analogy, they too may COMPORT in accommodation to their Master's disposition (as revealed through the master's law, of course).

Rufus said:
Jn 14:15-17 is focused on messianic law, not OC law. Also, v. 17 does not say that the Counselor Jesus would send would be the Spirit of Law.

I gave those verses where I did to validate what it related to, which is the answer to the question 5. What does the Holy Spirit do? It had only to do with the work of the Holy Spirit, not messianic law or the Mosaic covenant Law. Therefore, more evidence of your inability to comprehend what is being read, or deliberate obtuses and jumping on the back of your fallacious arguments---and in doing so creating another one.

Rufus said:
And the focus on Rom 8:1-4 is on the Spirit of Life that sets us free from law of sin and death. And v. says that the righteous requirements of the law might be fully met in us -- FULLY. The text does not say that we meet those requirements fully.

1Cor 2:13 talks about spiritual truths and spiritual words -- both of which consist more than just law.

Jn 15:26 does not talk about "the Spirit of Law". It talks about the Spirit o Truth. Truth is MORE than law, whether you want to accept this truth or not.

And Act 5:32 talks about obedience to God, which in this NC dispensation translates into obedience to his Son (Heb 1-2; Mk 9:7; Mat 17:5; Lk 9:35).

See above. Failure to read with comprehension what is being said. Arguing from fallacies. (Things that do not exist and never did exist in what you are arguing against.)

Pot calling the kettle black. Classic!