leibowde84
Veteran Member
I already do this. That's my point. I trust God over any unknown author of scripture.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
The Law
- Thread starter Mattithyah
- Start date
Mountain_Climber
Active Member
Then I support you in that.
I realize that the appearance of skepticism can be but a personality trait and you may be expressing feelings more so than you are seeking to state indisputable truths.
And you are well within your right to do that.
leibowde84
Veteran Member
Honestly, I don't believe that absolute or indisputable truths exist or at least are not recognizable by human beings. Our experience in this reality is far too subjective.
Mountain_Climber
Active Member
I would agree that man's current ability to know always finds room for expansion.
Due to the world being born into an atmosphere which breeds error, it cannot be any other way.
I see that as all the more reason to ascribe to a higher intelligence and to seek constantly to refine our understanding of that higher intelligence.
And if that higher intelligence be of his own accord our designer and maker, then I cannot believe that he would not place his truth somewhere for us to find.
leibowde84
Veteran Member
Why do you believe this? Isn't this an example of your presuming to know the nature of God (at least this aspect of God)?
Mountain_Climber
Active Member
Psalms 119:9 "Wherewithal shall a young man cleanse his way? by taking heed thereto according to thy word."
Psalms 119:105 "Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path."
Psalms 119:142 "Thy righteousness is an everlasting righteousness, and thy law is the truth."
Translation: His word is truth + his law is the truth = his word is law.
John 17:14 I have given them thy word; and the world hath hated them, because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.
15 I pray not that thou shouldest take them out of the world, but that thou shouldest keep them from the evil.
16 They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.
17 Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.
18 As thou hast sent me into the world, even so have I also sent them into the world.
19 And for their sakes I sanctify myself, that they also might be sanctified through the truth.
And I find that adequate for me. Especially being as I can offer nothing better.
leibowde84
Veteran Member
But, then we are back to merely relying on claims about God made by unknown authors thousands of years ago, are we not?
Ron Hackel
Member
I can see why people start bad mouthing you. Daniel 9:24 has Gabriel telling Daniel that the Jews had 490 years to put an end to sin. The Jews sin from scripture was there not trusting in a loving Father (Psalm 78:32). That is the reason they failed the covenant and you, being so intelligent, know that Adam had failed in the same manner according to Scripture. I have never seen your babbling prior to a few weeks ago and came to the knowledge that the tree was not a test without your help, thank you! Adam's sin was the same as the Jews not trusting in a loving God. He transferred this doubt of God (sin) to his offspring. Yes 1 John 3:4 is a definition of sin, but it is one of the few that Satan could twist to bring on the deception he wanted. Doubting God results in not trusting in his laws. God's only punishment for this is to allow you in your folly of disregarding his laws. As in the story of the prodigal son, sooner or later you come to the realization that his laws are perfect. Try to make these verses fit your silly notion.
JEREMIAH 9 : 3 "They make their tongues like a bow, to shoot lies; it is not by truth that they triumph in the land. They go from one sin to another; they do not acknowledge me."
ROMANS 14 : 23 "everything that does not come from faith is sin."
JEREMIAH 9 : 5&6 "They have taught their tongues to lie; they weary themselves with sinning. You live in the midst of deception; in their deceit they refuse to acknowledge me."
And the sin of the Jews. PSALM 78:32 "In spite of all this, they kept sinning; in spite of his wonders, they did not believe."
His word is his law. You make God out to be a legalistic tyrant.
JEREMIAH 9 : 3 "They make their tongues like a bow, to shoot lies; it is not by truth that they triumph in the land. They go from one sin to another; they do not acknowledge me."
ROMANS 14 : 23 "everything that does not come from faith is sin."
JEREMIAH 9 : 5&6 "They have taught their tongues to lie; they weary themselves with sinning. You live in the midst of deception; in their deceit they refuse to acknowledge me."
And the sin of the Jews. PSALM 78:32 "In spite of all this, they kept sinning; in spite of his wonders, they did not believe."
His word is his law. You make God out to be a legalistic tyrant.
Mountain_Climber
Active Member
Ya don't say? And what is that on your part but testiness?
All of that after I said exactly what you said, "His word is his law." See my post 486.
Your interpretation of Daniel 9:24 is different than many people see it, not only me. There at Daniel 9:24 most of us understand that the angel Gabriel was in no way saying that the people should or would put an end to sin during that 490 year period. Far from God being a tyrant, God used Gabriel to decree that he in his great mercy would rescue them from that inability on their part in but another 490 years, releasing them from their captivity to sin.
That is where you need to be humble and listen to Latuwr in post 462, where he correctly stated, "The Apostle Paul clearly wrote in two places that all men were consigned to disobedience in order that ELOHIM might have mercy upon all." That part he has 100% correct.
It is the being released from that consignment to sin that Gabriel points forward to in Daniel 9:24. That consignment to sin is our captivity to futility as Paul speaks of at Romans 8:20 and in Jesus is the release from that consignment.
You have your own special little way of seeing certain things as they make sense to you and so you think that those ways should also make sense to others. And you do have many things right which most others have wrong but you have not yet gotten all you believe refined for it's flaws.
But as to your idea that Gabriel was saying that the people should do what Gabriel knew full well none of them could offer a sacrifice of themselves great enough to offset their confinement to sin in Adam's death in order to be able to do, is failing to fully appreciate how sorely we needed the ransom of Christ.
I have been at this for fifty years Ron, and I too yet find things about what i believe which yet need further refinement.
So don't loose heart so as to give way to resentment or bitterness. Keep trying, always being willing to be found a liar along with the rest of us, that God may be found true and we justified only in him and his word.
Ron Hackel
Member
You didn't relate how your definition relates to the verses I shared with you.
Mountain_Climber
Active Member
Now would be a good place and time to complete my comments concerning Latuwr's post #462.
Latuwr said, quote, "The Apostle Paul clearly wrote in two places that all men were consigned to disobedience in order that ELOHIM might have mercy upon all. Both ImAHebrew and I understand that "all" includes Adam and Eve. They were made flesh, and flesh is not subject to the Law of ELOHIM. So, I would counsel you to amend your thinking with respect to the teaching of the Apostle Paul by seeking to receive a portion of his spirit whereby you may come to know the things of Paul more accurately." End of Latuwr's Quote.
As I have shown in my post #489 to Ron Hackel, I am in complete agreement with Latuwr on the part I highlighted in green above.
And while I appreciate his saying, quote, "So, I would counsel you to amend your thinking with respect to the teaching of the Apostle Paul by seeking to receive a portion of his spirit whereby you may come to know the things of Paul more accurately." End Quote, I disagree with the part where he says, quote, "Both ImAHebrew and I understand that "all" includes Adam and Eve. They were made flesh, and flesh is not subject to the Law of ELOHIM." End Quote.
So let me here highlight that part in red to discuss it: "Both ImAHebrew and I understand that "all" includes Adam and Eve. They were made flesh, and flesh is not subject to the Law of ELOHIM."
Does the word, "all" ("pas") include Adam and Eve in the following statements made by Paul?
Romans 11:32 "For God hath shut up all unto disobedience, that he might have mercy upon all." (ASV) --- and --- Galatians 3:22 "But the scriptures shut up all things under sin, that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe." (ASV)
Many Bible translators have concluded that "pas" ("all) at Romans 11:32 references the Jews only, as that is what the context supports. And indeed the implications of the word, "pas", are often limited by the context. So we do see that verse often rendered with the added word, "them" placed in front of "all: Romans 11:32 "For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all." (KJV) --- and --- Romans 11:32 "For God has confined all of them together in disobedience (*e)
so that he might show all of them mercy.(*f)" (NWT - rev.2013)
The reference (*e) in the NWT points us to Romans 3:9 and the reference (*f) to 1 Timothy 2:3-4.
Romans 3:9 "What then? are we better than they? No, in no wise: for we before laid to the charge both of Jews and Greeks, that they are all under sin;" --- and --- 1 Timothy 2:3 "This is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour;4 who would have all men to be saved, and come to the knowledge of the truth"
So we can see that the Jehovah's Witnesses do recognize that what is said at Romans 11:32 does indeed apply to all men without regard to their nationality. And that does not necessarily mean they have to agree that Paul said it in that way at Romans 11:32, for even if he did say it in a way which was referring only to the Jews we know he believed that same thing was true of all men. And thus there is no need for fruitless debate concerning that.
Still, we want to know if this included Adam and Eve, and if it did include them, then, what are the implications of it?
Latuwr asserts that he and his friends know that it does include Adam and Eve. And of course we have seen how it would offend our brother Ron Hackel for us to say that it does not include Adam and Eve.
Do we just cave in for their sake and accept that it includes Adam and Eve? Ought we to put pleasing them above finding the truth? As for me, I answer as did Paul, Galatians 1:10 "For am I now seeking the favor of men, or of God? or am I striving to please men? if I were still pleasing men, I should not be a servant of Christ."
The Greek word, "pas", is indeed subject to interpretation by the context it appears in. So all we need ask, is, 'Was Adam and Eve included in the context of what Paul was discussing at Romans chapter 11?' --- and --- 'Was Adam and Eve included in the context of what Paul spoke at Galatians 3:22 or at Romans 3:9?'
What do we learn from Romans 5:20 "Moreover the law entered, that the offence might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound:"?
Our friends are trying desperately to assert that the Law stepped in before sin. They assert that the commandment not to eat of that tree of the knowledge of good and bad (or, evil) signifies that the Law was in place before sin. But, make no mistake about it, Paul there at Romans 5:20 is speaking specifically of that Old Law Covenant. That grace had not yet stepped in when the commandment not to eat of that tree was given is clear in that a definite punishment for doing so was prescribed, the punishment of death. For the Law provided for sacrifices in place of death. And to claim it had already stepped in is to claim the serpent was not a liar when he said, "Ye shall not surely die." Genesis 3:4
So the issue becomes who we are to believe? Jesus who said of that original serpent called Satan and the devil (Revelation 12:9), John 8:44 ".... He was a murderer from the beginning, and standeth not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father thereof."? Or they who claim that serpent did not lie?
Please humbly allow me to introduce your minds to how they get this confused. They read at Genesis 3:22 "And Jehovah God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil; ..." Thus they say to themselves, 'Look!!! The serpent did not lie!!!"
Now let us reason that through. Had Adam really become like God and the one or ones in heaven to whom God was there speaking? Adam had only a new awareness of sin but unlike God and his heavenly helpmeet, Adam had no understanding of sin's deceptive nature. So Adam had only become vaguely like God but yet so tremendously unlike God in that Adam had presumptuously taken to himself knowledge of things he was unqualified to handle.
God said, "in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die." Genesis 2:17
"Surely die", in other words, you most positively will die, no if ands or buts about it.
But the serpent said, "Ye shall not surely die." Genesis 3:4
Which one do you choose to believe?
And when it comes to being like God, was not what the serpent said a lie by misrepresentation? Had Adam really become like God as the serpent was implying? Or, did Adam become like God in a way that would burn him to death as it was too hot for him to handle?
It was not until sin entered the picture that God met that challenge with the abundance of grace. But he met that challenge for the as yet innocent children of Adam and Eve, for God did not lie when he said very specifically to Adam, " thou shalt surely die."
And I have left other ways of showing this as yet untouched but may not even being able to post all of this.
Well, I am pleased to find it did allow me to post that much. Bear in mind that God's grace did not step in to make his statement to Adam and Eve a lie. They would and did most certainly die and have no hope of ever living again. We on the other hand were not able to make a choice at that time and so God's grace stepped in to provide the opportunity to make that choice.
That in no way makes God a tyrant but to the minds of those whose reasoning fails them. It is righteous justice which accords with the greater love for all who refuse to share in a like rebellion against him, continuing to love him in appreciation for how he loves them.
Latuwr said, quote, "The Apostle Paul clearly wrote in two places that all men were consigned to disobedience in order that ELOHIM might have mercy upon all. Both ImAHebrew and I understand that "all" includes Adam and Eve. They were made flesh, and flesh is not subject to the Law of ELOHIM. So, I would counsel you to amend your thinking with respect to the teaching of the Apostle Paul by seeking to receive a portion of his spirit whereby you may come to know the things of Paul more accurately." End of Latuwr's Quote.
As I have shown in my post #489 to Ron Hackel, I am in complete agreement with Latuwr on the part I highlighted in green above.
And while I appreciate his saying, quote, "So, I would counsel you to amend your thinking with respect to the teaching of the Apostle Paul by seeking to receive a portion of his spirit whereby you may come to know the things of Paul more accurately." End Quote, I disagree with the part where he says, quote, "Both ImAHebrew and I understand that "all" includes Adam and Eve. They were made flesh, and flesh is not subject to the Law of ELOHIM." End Quote.
So let me here highlight that part in red to discuss it: "Both ImAHebrew and I understand that "all" includes Adam and Eve. They were made flesh, and flesh is not subject to the Law of ELOHIM."
Does the word, "all" ("pas") include Adam and Eve in the following statements made by Paul?
Romans 11:32 "For God hath shut up all unto disobedience, that he might have mercy upon all." (ASV) --- and --- Galatians 3:22 "But the scriptures shut up all things under sin, that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe." (ASV)
Many Bible translators have concluded that "pas" ("all) at Romans 11:32 references the Jews only, as that is what the context supports. And indeed the implications of the word, "pas", are often limited by the context. So we do see that verse often rendered with the added word, "them" placed in front of "all: Romans 11:32 "For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all." (KJV) --- and --- Romans 11:32 "For God has confined all of them together in disobedience (*e)
so that he might show all of them mercy.(*f)" (NWT - rev.2013)
The reference (*e) in the NWT points us to Romans 3:9 and the reference (*f) to 1 Timothy 2:3-4.
Romans 3:9 "What then? are we better than they? No, in no wise: for we before laid to the charge both of Jews and Greeks, that they are all under sin;" --- and --- 1 Timothy 2:3 "This is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour;4 who would have all men to be saved, and come to the knowledge of the truth"
So we can see that the Jehovah's Witnesses do recognize that what is said at Romans 11:32 does indeed apply to all men without regard to their nationality. And that does not necessarily mean they have to agree that Paul said it in that way at Romans 11:32, for even if he did say it in a way which was referring only to the Jews we know he believed that same thing was true of all men. And thus there is no need for fruitless debate concerning that.
Still, we want to know if this included Adam and Eve, and if it did include them, then, what are the implications of it?
Latuwr asserts that he and his friends know that it does include Adam and Eve. And of course we have seen how it would offend our brother Ron Hackel for us to say that it does not include Adam and Eve.
Do we just cave in for their sake and accept that it includes Adam and Eve? Ought we to put pleasing them above finding the truth? As for me, I answer as did Paul, Galatians 1:10 "For am I now seeking the favor of men, or of God? or am I striving to please men? if I were still pleasing men, I should not be a servant of Christ."
The Greek word, "pas", is indeed subject to interpretation by the context it appears in. So all we need ask, is, 'Was Adam and Eve included in the context of what Paul was discussing at Romans chapter 11?' --- and --- 'Was Adam and Eve included in the context of what Paul spoke at Galatians 3:22 or at Romans 3:9?'
What do we learn from Romans 5:20 "Moreover the law entered, that the offence might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound:"?
Our friends are trying desperately to assert that the Law stepped in before sin. They assert that the commandment not to eat of that tree of the knowledge of good and bad (or, evil) signifies that the Law was in place before sin. But, make no mistake about it, Paul there at Romans 5:20 is speaking specifically of that Old Law Covenant. That grace had not yet stepped in when the commandment not to eat of that tree was given is clear in that a definite punishment for doing so was prescribed, the punishment of death. For the Law provided for sacrifices in place of death. And to claim it had already stepped in is to claim the serpent was not a liar when he said, "Ye shall not surely die." Genesis 3:4
So the issue becomes who we are to believe? Jesus who said of that original serpent called Satan and the devil (Revelation 12:9), John 8:44 ".... He was a murderer from the beginning, and standeth not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father thereof."? Or they who claim that serpent did not lie?
Please humbly allow me to introduce your minds to how they get this confused. They read at Genesis 3:22 "And Jehovah God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil; ..." Thus they say to themselves, 'Look!!! The serpent did not lie!!!"
Now let us reason that through. Had Adam really become like God and the one or ones in heaven to whom God was there speaking? Adam had only a new awareness of sin but unlike God and his heavenly helpmeet, Adam had no understanding of sin's deceptive nature. So Adam had only become vaguely like God but yet so tremendously unlike God in that Adam had presumptuously taken to himself knowledge of things he was unqualified to handle.
God said, "in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die." Genesis 2:17
"Surely die", in other words, you most positively will die, no if ands or buts about it.
But the serpent said, "Ye shall not surely die." Genesis 3:4
Which one do you choose to believe?
And when it comes to being like God, was not what the serpent said a lie by misrepresentation? Had Adam really become like God as the serpent was implying? Or, did Adam become like God in a way that would burn him to death as it was too hot for him to handle?
It was not until sin entered the picture that God met that challenge with the abundance of grace. But he met that challenge for the as yet innocent children of Adam and Eve, for God did not lie when he said very specifically to Adam, " thou shalt surely die."
And I have left other ways of showing this as yet untouched but may not even being able to post all of this.
Well, I am pleased to find it did allow me to post that much. Bear in mind that God's grace did not step in to make his statement to Adam and Eve a lie. They would and did most certainly die and have no hope of ever living again. We on the other hand were not able to make a choice at that time and so God's grace stepped in to provide the opportunity to make that choice.
That in no way makes God a tyrant but to the minds of those whose reasoning fails them. It is righteous justice which accords with the greater love for all who refuse to share in a like rebellion against him, continuing to love him in appreciation for how he loves them.
Last edited:
Mountain_Climber
Active Member
I will leave that up to you to figure out.
Mountain_Climber
Active Member
We get no two shots at life and most everyone admits that.
Why then do they not see that Adam and Eve had their shot at life everlasting but chose to throw that shot away to sin?
If Adam and Eve had remained faithful there is no doubt that the sentence of death would never have been a worry for them. They had life far grander than any of us born from them have ever had the chance thus far to know.
Paul said, "For as touching those who were once enlightened and tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Spirit, and tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the age to come, and then fell away, it is impossible to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame." Hebrews 6:4-6
Adam and Eve had that heavenly free gift. All they had to do was to love God enough to never allow thought of disobeying him to enter their hearts and minds. The pressures upon them were not there to even tempt them until the serpent spoke that temptation into existence. We on the other hand are assaulted by temptations every day a million times greater than anything Adam and Eve had to endure. And God certainly knew that would be the case for Adam and Eve's as yet unborn offspring when Adam and Eve chose to sin. In that fact God had reason for showing us the kindness of his love which overlooks much of our sin as it does. But he had no such reason to mitigate Adam and Eve's willful choice to be unfaithful to him and so justice and truth demanded he follow through on his word and remove life all together from them at the appropriate time. A time he concluded as necessary to give us our chance at life.
What do we learn from Paul's words at 1 Timothy 2:12-15?
12 "But I permit not a woman to teach, nor to have dominion over a man, but to be in quietness.
13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve;
14 and Adam was not beguiled, but the woman being beguiled hath fallen into transgression:
15 but she shall be saved through her child-bearing, if they continue in faith and love and sanctification with sobriety." (ASV)
In verse 15 it is important to note that "she shall be saved" applies to "if they continue in faith and love" and so does not mean Eve. Paul clearly means those women he does not permit to teach and so the Tyndale Bible reads, "notwithstanding they shall be saved thorow bearing of children, if <through bearing of children they shall be saved, so> they continue in the faith and in love, and in sanctifying. <holiness with discretion.>"
What Paul is telling us is that Eve erred in usurping her husband's rightful headship as being created first by God. If God wanted Eve to have that position he would have created Eve first and then he would have taken Adam from Eve's body. And Paul was here speaking concerning women in the church who he saw were repeating Eve's error. (We see this theme played out in Christ in that he is the first of God and thus head over all else that has come to be since. Thus God's heavenly Son was the perfect choice to replace the Adam who God created first as regards headship of the dominion of this earth.)
Paul is not saying that a woman is unable to teach her husband anything. But he is saying that a woman ought to not usurp her husbands headship as Eve did Adam's headship.
This is where Paul is helping us to look at the order of what took place there in the garden, "And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat; and she gave also unto her husband with her, and he did eat." Genesis 3:6
"she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat" and then, "she gave also unto her husband with her, and he did eat."
In other words Eve took and ate without consulting Adam. Some argue that because it says, "her husband with her", that this means Adam and Eve did this sin together at the same time. That is not what Paul taught. Paul taught that Eve took and ate without consulting Adam and then brought her husband into her sin with her by giving to him to eat.
Clearly Paul told us Adam was not beguiled or deceived. Now, if they had been doing this exactly at the same time together then neither would Eve have been as she would have had Adam there to keep her from being deceived, which surely a man who loves his wife would have done. So we ought to side with Paul and understand that when it says, "her husband with her", it means Eve brought her husband into her sin with her. And if she had respected her husbands headship so that he being not deceived could have helped her, then the whole affair could have been prevented.
Why then do they not see that Adam and Eve had their shot at life everlasting but chose to throw that shot away to sin?
If Adam and Eve had remained faithful there is no doubt that the sentence of death would never have been a worry for them. They had life far grander than any of us born from them have ever had the chance thus far to know.
Paul said, "For as touching those who were once enlightened and tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Spirit, and tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the age to come, and then fell away, it is impossible to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame." Hebrews 6:4-6
Adam and Eve had that heavenly free gift. All they had to do was to love God enough to never allow thought of disobeying him to enter their hearts and minds. The pressures upon them were not there to even tempt them until the serpent spoke that temptation into existence. We on the other hand are assaulted by temptations every day a million times greater than anything Adam and Eve had to endure. And God certainly knew that would be the case for Adam and Eve's as yet unborn offspring when Adam and Eve chose to sin. In that fact God had reason for showing us the kindness of his love which overlooks much of our sin as it does. But he had no such reason to mitigate Adam and Eve's willful choice to be unfaithful to him and so justice and truth demanded he follow through on his word and remove life all together from them at the appropriate time. A time he concluded as necessary to give us our chance at life.
What do we learn from Paul's words at 1 Timothy 2:12-15?
12 "But I permit not a woman to teach, nor to have dominion over a man, but to be in quietness.
13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve;
14 and Adam was not beguiled, but the woman being beguiled hath fallen into transgression:
15 but she shall be saved through her child-bearing, if they continue in faith and love and sanctification with sobriety." (ASV)
In verse 15 it is important to note that "she shall be saved" applies to "if they continue in faith and love" and so does not mean Eve. Paul clearly means those women he does not permit to teach and so the Tyndale Bible reads, "notwithstanding they shall be saved thorow bearing of children, if <through bearing of children they shall be saved, so> they continue in the faith and in love, and in sanctifying. <holiness with discretion.>"
What Paul is telling us is that Eve erred in usurping her husband's rightful headship as being created first by God. If God wanted Eve to have that position he would have created Eve first and then he would have taken Adam from Eve's body. And Paul was here speaking concerning women in the church who he saw were repeating Eve's error. (We see this theme played out in Christ in that he is the first of God and thus head over all else that has come to be since. Thus God's heavenly Son was the perfect choice to replace the Adam who God created first as regards headship of the dominion of this earth.)
Paul is not saying that a woman is unable to teach her husband anything. But he is saying that a woman ought to not usurp her husbands headship as Eve did Adam's headship.
This is where Paul is helping us to look at the order of what took place there in the garden, "And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat; and she gave also unto her husband with her, and he did eat." Genesis 3:6
"she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat" and then, "she gave also unto her husband with her, and he did eat."
In other words Eve took and ate without consulting Adam. Some argue that because it says, "her husband with her", that this means Adam and Eve did this sin together at the same time. That is not what Paul taught. Paul taught that Eve took and ate without consulting Adam and then brought her husband into her sin with her by giving to him to eat.
Clearly Paul told us Adam was not beguiled or deceived. Now, if they had been doing this exactly at the same time together then neither would Eve have been as she would have had Adam there to keep her from being deceived, which surely a man who loves his wife would have done. So we ought to side with Paul and understand that when it says, "her husband with her", it means Eve brought her husband into her sin with her. And if she had respected her husbands headship so that he being not deceived could have helped her, then the whole affair could have been prevented.
Hi Ron Hackel,
Blessings to you through Messiah Yahushua, My YAHWEH and My ELOHIM!
Both ImAHebrew and I believe that the idea that exists within almost all men, that is, that men and women each have or possess a free will is erroneous. Oh, for sure, all men and women have the ability to make certain choices, but why is it that no man or woman save for Messiah Yahushua has made the choice to wholly please ELOHIM and thereby live and not suffer the reward for their sin which is physical death? Why, if free will within us is indeed a valid concept, why does it appear that all men and women have chosen to engage in sin and thereby choose physical death for themselves?
Messiah Yahushua said this:
John 8:34
34 Yahushua answered them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whosoever committeth sin is a slave of sin.
Slaves are not free. If Adam and Eve became slaves of sin through their direct disobedience of a command of YAHWEH ELOHIM, what was their state of existence before they sinned? Were they prior to their disobedience, were they free? How can anyone lacking the knowledge of good and evil, how can it be said that such a one is able to make a free choice? So, Adam and Eve were not free prior to their sin. Having no knowledge of good and evil, Adam and Eve had no power to overcome their fleshly inclination, and so they disobeyed ELOHIM. Their activity from the perspective of the ELOHIM was completely predictable.
How about after their sin? Does the possession of the knowledge of good and evil now give them freedom of choice? Their immediate activity shows that they were still wholly controlled by their flesh eventhough they now were aware of their sin. They were mastered by their flesh, and thereby, they became slaves to sin as Messiah says above.
I ask all, can the saving work of My Messiah Yahushua make Adam and Eve free from sin and death?
Thanking you in advance should you or anyone be moved to reply, I am,
Sincerely, Latuwr
P. S. I humbly request that if you do reply to me that you address me at the top of your post so that I know that you are writing to me. Thanks!
Blessings to you through Messiah Yahushua, My YAHWEH and My ELOHIM!
Both ImAHebrew and I believe that the idea that exists within almost all men, that is, that men and women each have or possess a free will is erroneous. Oh, for sure, all men and women have the ability to make certain choices, but why is it that no man or woman save for Messiah Yahushua has made the choice to wholly please ELOHIM and thereby live and not suffer the reward for their sin which is physical death? Why, if free will within us is indeed a valid concept, why does it appear that all men and women have chosen to engage in sin and thereby choose physical death for themselves?
Messiah Yahushua said this:
John 8:34
34 Yahushua answered them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whosoever committeth sin is a slave of sin.
Slaves are not free. If Adam and Eve became slaves of sin through their direct disobedience of a command of YAHWEH ELOHIM, what was their state of existence before they sinned? Were they prior to their disobedience, were they free? How can anyone lacking the knowledge of good and evil, how can it be said that such a one is able to make a free choice? So, Adam and Eve were not free prior to their sin. Having no knowledge of good and evil, Adam and Eve had no power to overcome their fleshly inclination, and so they disobeyed ELOHIM. Their activity from the perspective of the ELOHIM was completely predictable.
How about after their sin? Does the possession of the knowledge of good and evil now give them freedom of choice? Their immediate activity shows that they were still wholly controlled by their flesh eventhough they now were aware of their sin. They were mastered by their flesh, and thereby, they became slaves to sin as Messiah says above.
I ask all, can the saving work of My Messiah Yahushua make Adam and Eve free from sin and death?
Thanking you in advance should you or anyone be moved to reply, I am,
Sincerely, Latuwr
P. S. I humbly request that if you do reply to me that you address me at the top of your post so that I know that you are writing to me. Thanks!
Mountain_Climber
Active Member
Once again. let's examine the logic being offered to see is it is in balance:
Latuwr states, quote, "Both ImAHebrew and I believe that the idea that exists within almost all men, that is, that men and women each have or possess a free will is erroneous. Oh, for sure, all men and women have the ability to make certain choices, but why is it that no man or woman save for Messiah Yahushua has made the choice to wholly please ELOHIM and thereby live and not suffer the reward for their sin which is physical death? Why, if free will within us is indeed a valid concept, why does it appear that all men and women have chosen to engage in sin and thereby choose physical death for themselves?" End of the first part of Latuwr's Quote.
There we see that Latuwr correctly recognizes that men who believe they are exercising free will are self deceived.
Latuwr continues on, stating, quote, Messiah Yahushua said this:
John 8:34 Yahushua answered them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whosoever committeth sin is a slave of sin." End of the second part of Latuwr's Quote.
Has Latuwr ignored that Jesus said very clearly that it is when a person commits sin that they become a slave to sin?
Or, is Latuwr opting for a different argument, that before they are a slave to sin they are a slave to ignorance?
As we proceed on we will see that Latuwr is opting for the latter, that before becoming a slave to sin a man is a slave to ignorance.
And after we see that, then we will discuss why that is not at all applicable to the situation Adam and Eve were in before they sinned. In fact, most should already be able to glean why from my previous posts. But we will discuss it anyway.
Latuwr continues on, stating, quote, "Slaves are not free. If Adam and Eve became slaves of sin through their direct disobedience of a command of YAHWEH ELOHIM, what was their state of existence before they sinned? Were they prior to their disobedience, were they free?" End of Latwr's third Quote.
What was Adam and Eve's state prior to their disobedience to God? Latuwr is right that this is the appropriate question but he comes up with an inappropriate answer, for his answer fails to consider that they had full connection with God not interfered with by sin, so that God could at that time direct their steps if they but remained in his love.
Latuwr seems to be one of many who are self deceived that God's plan is to make us totally free from his having to direct us. But as Jeremiah (at Jeremiah 10:23) said it does not belong to man to direct his own steps, and he means it never willbe ours to do so , for even as God's natural laws direct the motions of and in all things, so also his law will always direct us that we will always be his glory and not our own glory.
Thus, Proverbs 16:9 "A man's heart deviseth his way; But Jehovah directeth his steps."
Latuwr continues on, stating, quote, "How can anyone lacking the knowledge of good and evil, how can it be said that such a one is able to make a free choice? So, Adam and Eve were not free prior to their sin. Having no knowledge of good and evil, Adam and Eve had no power to overcome their fleshly inclination, and so they disobeyed ELOHIM. Their activity from the perspective of the ELOHIM was completely predictable." End of Latuwr's fourth Quote.
Notice the huge assumptions Latuwr has there entered into. Where in that has he taken into consideration anything to do with an atmosphere prior to the serpents introduction of temptation, wherein unhindered love and trust ruled the day?
Latuwr is as those that cannot perceive of Adam and Eve having been any different from himself, and that even though he knows not what it was like to live in paradise with a completely innocent love. And prior to the serpents introduction of temptation, that was the case.
Latuwr should have been able to glean these simple things from my previous post but evidently is posed more to find fault than to try to understand. Will you be like him in that?
Latuwr continues on, stating, quote, "How about after their sin? Does the possession of the knowledge of good and evil now give them freedom of choice? Their immediate activity shows that they were still wholly controlled by their flesh even though they now were aware of their sin. They were mastered by their flesh, and thereby, they became slaves to sin as Messiah says above." End of Latwr's fifth Quote.
Were is the evidence that they were controlled by their flesh before they sinned? No where but in Latuwr's stubbornness of imagination. For had they been so controlled by their flesh then the serpent would not have had to introduce them to temptation. Their own flesh would have already been that temptation. (And that is where some deceivers even turn that serpent into other than what Jesus said and what john taught, claiming that the serpent was but the ego of man. Beware of the deceivers for the master of them all has done a masterful job of shaping them as soldiers for his purpose.)
Latuwr continues on, stating, quote, "I ask all, can the saving work of My Messiah Yahushua make Adam and Eve free from sin and death?" End of Latwr's sixth and final Quote.
The answer is no Latuwr. Because God does not lie and he already judged what the outcome of their completely willful disobedience would be. They do not get two judgments Latuwr, any more than we do.
Latuwr states, quote, "Both ImAHebrew and I believe that the idea that exists within almost all men, that is, that men and women each have or possess a free will is erroneous. Oh, for sure, all men and women have the ability to make certain choices, but why is it that no man or woman save for Messiah Yahushua has made the choice to wholly please ELOHIM and thereby live and not suffer the reward for their sin which is physical death? Why, if free will within us is indeed a valid concept, why does it appear that all men and women have chosen to engage in sin and thereby choose physical death for themselves?" End of the first part of Latuwr's Quote.
There we see that Latuwr correctly recognizes that men who believe they are exercising free will are self deceived.
Latuwr continues on, stating, quote, Messiah Yahushua said this:
John 8:34 Yahushua answered them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whosoever committeth sin is a slave of sin." End of the second part of Latuwr's Quote.
Has Latuwr ignored that Jesus said very clearly that it is when a person commits sin that they become a slave to sin?
Or, is Latuwr opting for a different argument, that before they are a slave to sin they are a slave to ignorance?
As we proceed on we will see that Latuwr is opting for the latter, that before becoming a slave to sin a man is a slave to ignorance.
And after we see that, then we will discuss why that is not at all applicable to the situation Adam and Eve were in before they sinned. In fact, most should already be able to glean why from my previous posts. But we will discuss it anyway.
Latuwr continues on, stating, quote, "Slaves are not free. If Adam and Eve became slaves of sin through their direct disobedience of a command of YAHWEH ELOHIM, what was their state of existence before they sinned? Were they prior to their disobedience, were they free?" End of Latwr's third Quote.
What was Adam and Eve's state prior to their disobedience to God? Latuwr is right that this is the appropriate question but he comes up with an inappropriate answer, for his answer fails to consider that they had full connection with God not interfered with by sin, so that God could at that time direct their steps if they but remained in his love.
Latuwr seems to be one of many who are self deceived that God's plan is to make us totally free from his having to direct us. But as Jeremiah (at Jeremiah 10:23) said it does not belong to man to direct his own steps, and he means it never willbe ours to do so , for even as God's natural laws direct the motions of and in all things, so also his law will always direct us that we will always be his glory and not our own glory.
Thus, Proverbs 16:9 "A man's heart deviseth his way; But Jehovah directeth his steps."
Latuwr continues on, stating, quote, "How can anyone lacking the knowledge of good and evil, how can it be said that such a one is able to make a free choice? So, Adam and Eve were not free prior to their sin. Having no knowledge of good and evil, Adam and Eve had no power to overcome their fleshly inclination, and so they disobeyed ELOHIM. Their activity from the perspective of the ELOHIM was completely predictable." End of Latuwr's fourth Quote.
Notice the huge assumptions Latuwr has there entered into. Where in that has he taken into consideration anything to do with an atmosphere prior to the serpents introduction of temptation, wherein unhindered love and trust ruled the day?
Latuwr is as those that cannot perceive of Adam and Eve having been any different from himself, and that even though he knows not what it was like to live in paradise with a completely innocent love. And prior to the serpents introduction of temptation, that was the case.
Latuwr should have been able to glean these simple things from my previous post but evidently is posed more to find fault than to try to understand. Will you be like him in that?
Latuwr continues on, stating, quote, "How about after their sin? Does the possession of the knowledge of good and evil now give them freedom of choice? Their immediate activity shows that they were still wholly controlled by their flesh even though they now were aware of their sin. They were mastered by their flesh, and thereby, they became slaves to sin as Messiah says above." End of Latwr's fifth Quote.
Were is the evidence that they were controlled by their flesh before they sinned? No where but in Latuwr's stubbornness of imagination. For had they been so controlled by their flesh then the serpent would not have had to introduce them to temptation. Their own flesh would have already been that temptation. (And that is where some deceivers even turn that serpent into other than what Jesus said and what john taught, claiming that the serpent was but the ego of man. Beware of the deceivers for the master of them all has done a masterful job of shaping them as soldiers for his purpose.)
Latuwr continues on, stating, quote, "I ask all, can the saving work of My Messiah Yahushua make Adam and Eve free from sin and death?" End of Latwr's sixth and final Quote.
The answer is no Latuwr. Because God does not lie and he already judged what the outcome of their completely willful disobedience would be. They do not get two judgments Latuwr, any more than we do.
Last edited:
Mountain_Climber
Active Member
Another proof that they are wrong who claim that God's law in connection with sin was in place from before sin is found among the many words of Paul which they also have twisted in their minds:
Romans 7:9 "For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died."
Clearly then it is just as i said in post #491
What do we learn from Romans 5:20 "Moreover the law entered, that the offence might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound:"?
Our friends are trying desperately to assert that the Law stepped in before sin. They assert that the commandment not to eat of that tree of the knowledge of good and bad (or, evil) signifies that the Law was in place before sin. But, make no mistake about it, Paul there at Romans 5:20 is speaking specifically of that Old Law Covenant. That grace had not yet stepped in when the commandment not to eat of that tree was given is clear in that a definite punishment for doing so was prescribed, the punishment of death. For the Law provided for sacrifices in place of death. And to claim it had already stepped in is to claim the serpent was not a liar when he said, "Ye shall not surely die." Genesis 3:4
And the point is that Paul had said: "Moreover the law entered, that the offence might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound:" Romans 5:20
Clearly then if Paul could speak of being alive before the Law which made sin abound came, that law could not have came before Adam and Eve sinned. In fact, that law did not come until the wilderness of Sinai.
This is why Paul could say, "For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law;" Romans 2:12
It is just that God kept putting off our punishment as if to let sin die uncontested during that interim. Romans 7:9 "For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died."
Acts 17:30 "And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent.."
Where did ignorance get it's start? Did it get it's start in Adam and Eve's innocence before the serpent introduced their minds and hearts to temptation? Or did it get it's start after that?
Where is there any ignorance in an innocent love that completely trusts in God so that left uninterfered with it goes about doing all God says to do?
Clearly ignorance came as a result of sin. For ignorance is the lack of that innocent unhindered trust in God.
Romans 7:9 "For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died."
Clearly then it is just as i said in post #491
What do we learn from Romans 5:20 "Moreover the law entered, that the offence might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound:"?
Our friends are trying desperately to assert that the Law stepped in before sin. They assert that the commandment not to eat of that tree of the knowledge of good and bad (or, evil) signifies that the Law was in place before sin. But, make no mistake about it, Paul there at Romans 5:20 is speaking specifically of that Old Law Covenant. That grace had not yet stepped in when the commandment not to eat of that tree was given is clear in that a definite punishment for doing so was prescribed, the punishment of death. For the Law provided for sacrifices in place of death. And to claim it had already stepped in is to claim the serpent was not a liar when he said, "Ye shall not surely die." Genesis 3:4
And the point is that Paul had said: "Moreover the law entered, that the offence might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound:" Romans 5:20
Clearly then if Paul could speak of being alive before the Law which made sin abound came, that law could not have came before Adam and Eve sinned. In fact, that law did not come until the wilderness of Sinai.
This is why Paul could say, "For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law;" Romans 2:12
It is just that God kept putting off our punishment as if to let sin die uncontested during that interim. Romans 7:9 "For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died."
Acts 17:30 "And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent.."
Where did ignorance get it's start? Did it get it's start in Adam and Eve's innocence before the serpent introduced their minds and hearts to temptation? Or did it get it's start after that?
Where is there any ignorance in an innocent love that completely trusts in God so that left uninterfered with it goes about doing all God says to do?
Clearly ignorance came as a result of sin. For ignorance is the lack of that innocent unhindered trust in God.
Hi Mountain Climber,
Blessings to you through Messiah Yahushua, My YAHWEH and My ELOHIM!
Shabbat Shalom!
I ask you, Mountain Climber, did sin exist prior to Moses? Yes, sin did absolutely exist, and if sin did exist, then it is for certain that the Law did exist because sin is anomia, that is, sin is activity apart from compliance with the Law.
I do not know what mountain you have been climbing, Mountain Climber, but it is not the highest of the Mountains, that is, My Messiah Yahushua; otherwise, you would not dispute what My Messiah has clearly stated:
John 8:34
34 ............., Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whosoever committeth sin is the servant of sin.
Did Adam and Eve commit sin? Absolutely! Scripture indicates that they sinned. So, it is indisputable that some law existed prior to their sin. If no law existed, then they were judged unfairly by YAHWEH ELOHIM. As it is, sin was imputed to them so some law was necessarily given to them.
Can sin exist without any knowledge of the Law? Absolutely, YES! Otherwise, what does it mean that sin is dead apart from the Law? Eventhough sin might be dead according to our individual awareness, the transgression of the Law still exists; otherwise, how could the Apostle Paul conclude that many from Adam to Moses were made sinners through the Offence of Adam (see Romans 5:19)? Those sinners had no knowledge of the Law of Moses or any knowledge of their sin; yet, Paul concludes that they were sinners. Sin was imputed to them, but the imputed sin was not their own sin, rather it was the sin of Adam that was imputed to them, and they all died not for their own sin, but for the sin of Adam. In their case, sin and death were gifts given to them by the Offence of Adam.
Now, you yourself, Mountain Climber, are presently alive apart from the Law of Moses, but when the commandment comes to your attention, sin is activated within you, and you yourself will, barring physical death by violence, will grow older and eventually physically die because you have now yourself committed the offence of Adam, should you not repent of your sin. Do I falsely accuse you? Maybe, but I am thinking here of the specific commandment that commands that we should remember the physical Sabbath Day to keep it holy. Do you observe Friday night sunset to Saturday night sunset as the Sabbath Day? If not, then why can someone like me properly judge you a sinner deserving of physical death when you previously have had no knowledge or awareness of your sin?
Thanking you in advance should you be moved to reply, I am,
Sincerely, Latuwr
Blessings to you through Messiah Yahushua, My YAHWEH and My ELOHIM!
Shabbat Shalom!
I ask you, Mountain Climber, did sin exist prior to Moses? Yes, sin did absolutely exist, and if sin did exist, then it is for certain that the Law did exist because sin is anomia, that is, sin is activity apart from compliance with the Law.
I do not know what mountain you have been climbing, Mountain Climber, but it is not the highest of the Mountains, that is, My Messiah Yahushua; otherwise, you would not dispute what My Messiah has clearly stated:
John 8:34
34 ............., Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whosoever committeth sin is the servant of sin.
Did Adam and Eve commit sin? Absolutely! Scripture indicates that they sinned. So, it is indisputable that some law existed prior to their sin. If no law existed, then they were judged unfairly by YAHWEH ELOHIM. As it is, sin was imputed to them so some law was necessarily given to them.
Can sin exist without any knowledge of the Law? Absolutely, YES! Otherwise, what does it mean that sin is dead apart from the Law? Eventhough sin might be dead according to our individual awareness, the transgression of the Law still exists; otherwise, how could the Apostle Paul conclude that many from Adam to Moses were made sinners through the Offence of Adam (see Romans 5:19)? Those sinners had no knowledge of the Law of Moses or any knowledge of their sin; yet, Paul concludes that they were sinners. Sin was imputed to them, but the imputed sin was not their own sin, rather it was the sin of Adam that was imputed to them, and they all died not for their own sin, but for the sin of Adam. In their case, sin and death were gifts given to them by the Offence of Adam.
Now, you yourself, Mountain Climber, are presently alive apart from the Law of Moses, but when the commandment comes to your attention, sin is activated within you, and you yourself will, barring physical death by violence, will grow older and eventually physically die because you have now yourself committed the offence of Adam, should you not repent of your sin. Do I falsely accuse you? Maybe, but I am thinking here of the specific commandment that commands that we should remember the physical Sabbath Day to keep it holy. Do you observe Friday night sunset to Saturday night sunset as the Sabbath Day? If not, then why can someone like me properly judge you a sinner deserving of physical death when you previously have had no knowledge or awareness of your sin?
Thanking you in advance should you be moved to reply, I am,
Sincerely, Latuwr
Mountain_Climber
Active Member
Sorry for being slow getting back to you. The last I knew the cloud that passes this area of the country to this debate site was unable to connect us. Was the site having problems?
Latuwr, you are side-stepping understanding what love is and why love was all that was needed until the serpent interfered. As a result you are confusing the picture for yourself by trying to figure this out apart from understanding love.
Yes, sin is an aphasia which affects man's ability to communicate. So it is an anomia, just as you said. But the question is, when did that aphasia begin? Did it begin before the serpent infected his polluted thinking into Eve's mind and heart, or, after?
But you are so very much missing the point, Latuwr. There was no law but one needed by Adam and Eve. And that one law was the loving admonition to remain loyal to God's love. No other sin was yet born or ever committed in man's realm so as to need a specific law written to it. And that one loving admonition if heeded would have prevented any potential for any other sins to have ever have been devised in man's hearts.
Jesus is to us the serpent pole which was raised there in the wilderness. Not many persons see how this relates to the purity of our love for Christ: John 14:21 "He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him." -- and -- John 14:24 "He that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings: and the word which ye hear is not mine, but the Father's which sent me."
The word translated as, "commandments", there at John 14:21 does not mean that Old Law Covenant or it's laws. Notice how that word, "commandments" in verse 24 is contrasted to the phrase, "keeps my sayings", in verse 24.
The Greek word, "entole", in verse 24, which means "an authoritative injunction", is speaking of Christ's authority under God to admonish us as to how we should walk. And what Christ has admonished us to do is to return to that innocent love which was free of sin prior to the serpent corrupting Eve's thinking.
You are totally wrong if you think that sin or evil will always exist. And if you do know that God's goal is to crush all evil out of existence then why are you helping to keep it alive by supporting a hand-written law code which keeps sin's memory perpetually living? That added law served it's purpose in highlighting sin that we would see the need to return to that first innocent love in which there is no sin because that perfect love perfectly let's God's direct our steps.
Just as there is no fear in perfect love (1 John 4:18) there is no sin in perfect love. Once sin has been entered into a man's love, then there cannot help but be fear in that love. And once sin is introduced to love, then is when man's hearts begin to devise more sin. Remember, Latuwr, "A man's heart deviseth his way ..." Proverbs 16:9a
Solomon recognized: Ecclesiastes 8:11 "Because sentence against an evil work is not executed speedily, therefore the heart of the sons of men is fully set in them to do evil."
So then some say that God is then neglectful for not having executed justice to sin speedily. But had God done that, we would not be here to even know about it, as he would have had to destroy mankind. And so God has withheld justice for a loving purpose, but will soon carry that justice out fully.
The love that Adam and Eve began with was perfect because they had no other place to learn that love than from God himself. And it would have remained perfect with no need of all of this extra understanding if the serpent had not interfered with that love and placed that wrong idea into Eve's mind that she needed that knowledge concerning good and bad..
Sin was authored into existence by that serpent there in the garden and from that point forward the minds of men being corrupted by that serpents thinking devise evils beyond even what that serpent ever dreamed of. Isaiah 30:1 "Woe to the rebellious children, saith the LORD, that take counsel, but not of me; and that cover with a covering, but not of my spirit, that they may add sin to sin."
Yes, Adam and Eve sinned, but that does not mean the law which existed was the same as the Mosaic Law Covenant and it's laws which the scriptures clearly say were first given through the mediator Moses there at Mount Sinai.
Speaking as a man of mankind in general, Paul said, "For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died." Romans 7:9
Paul also told us, "For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law." Romans 5:13
That Law Covenant, which you are yet ascribing to in a physical form, was not administered until it was issued through a mediator, Moses, at Mount Sinai. But now, to stubbornly continue to serve that Law in it's physical form after Christ took that Law of hand-written letters out of the way by nailing it with him onto the torture stake, is to make that hand-written Law an idol in between your self and God's royal spiritual law of love which is written upon tablets of the hearts of men. So long as you insist upon using that Old law Covenant your way, so that refuse to let it go now that it has served it's purpose to expose sin to us, so long as you do that you are fighting against God's plan of returning us to that innocent first love which Adam and Eve had before the serpent introduced corruption to Eve's mind and caused sin to be born into the human realm.
Romans 3:20 "Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin."
Why is that, Latuwr?
It is because what it takes to be righteous is only the knowledge of one single law etched indelibly into a man's heart. And that one law tells us that we are to love God as he loves us and so always listen to him, letting him direct our steps. And what he tells us is not written in stone inflexibly like that Mosaic law. His word is law and can be what ever it needs to be given the time and the situation we are in. And one day soon sin will be a thing of the past so that no laws to deal with it will need be spoken to us of him.
Get your eyes on the serpent pole that is Christ and stop using that Old Law Covenant as though it is that serpent pole.
Last edited:
Hi Mountain Climber,
Blessings to you through Messiah Yahushua, My YAHWEH and My ELOHIM!
Torture Stake? My, My, it does appear that in dealing with a mountain climber like yourself, that is, one that does claim not to be a part of any organized religion, that you yourself hold to several of the identifying characteristics of a Jehovah's Witness. Witnesses reject mercy for Adam and Eve, and Witnesses also are rather adamant that Messiah Yahushua was crucified on an upright stake and not a stake with a cross member. So, am I right in concluding, Mountain Climber, that you yourself are a former Jehovah's Witness?
The Torture Stake issue itself abundantly shows that you and I are not climbing the same Mountain. I am climbing the highest of the Mountains which is My Messiah Yahushua, and I believe just like the Apostle Paul that our Messiah Yahushua is the fulfillment or completion of the Law (the Torah). This necessarily means that the LOVE of Messiah also includes aspects of the Oral Law which are deemed relevant by HIM.
In my study of the Talmud, I have read that the Oral Torah (the Customs, see Acts 21:20-24)) requires that an artificial doorway must be established in order for a Jewish family to leave a private domain and enter a common public domain on the Sabbath Day. The minimum requirement for this doorway was an upright pole with one cross member. The top of the upright pole was often decorated with something similar to a bird's nest. When I saw that, I immediately understood that the Cross of My Messiah Yahushua was my artificial doorway if Messiah is indeed the completion of the Torah. In a Jewish Ghetto, Erubin were established in a public Courtyard so that Jewish families could bury a meal prior to the Sabbath Day to be shared on the Sabbath Day; hence, the necessity of the artificial doorways so that objects could be carried from their private homes into a public domain made private by the Crosses which the Jews did erect to extend their individual property into the Courtyard. Not only is My Messiah Yahushua the Artificial Doorway, but HE also is the Erub from which we may all eat on the Spiritual Sabbath Day.
The Apostle Paul teaches that the Law (the Torah) entered so that the Offence of Adam might abound, and in your case, I see that with respect to the physical Sabbath Day, you are indeed guilty of a premeditated sin just like Adam. You deliberately disregard YAHWEH ELOHIM'S commandment to remember the physical Sabbath Day to keep it holy showing that Adam's Offence has indeed abounded with you:
Romans 5:20
20 Moreover the law entered, that the offence might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound:
If the Law (the Torah) proves you a sinner just like Adam, why do you and other Jehovah's Witnesses deny mercy for Adam and Eve all the while imagining that you yourselves are worthy of mercy?
Thanking you in advance should you be moved to reply, I am,
Sincerely, Latuwr
Blessings to you through Messiah Yahushua, My YAHWEH and My ELOHIM!
Torture Stake? My, My, it does appear that in dealing with a mountain climber like yourself, that is, one that does claim not to be a part of any organized religion, that you yourself hold to several of the identifying characteristics of a Jehovah's Witness. Witnesses reject mercy for Adam and Eve, and Witnesses also are rather adamant that Messiah Yahushua was crucified on an upright stake and not a stake with a cross member. So, am I right in concluding, Mountain Climber, that you yourself are a former Jehovah's Witness?
The Torture Stake issue itself abundantly shows that you and I are not climbing the same Mountain. I am climbing the highest of the Mountains which is My Messiah Yahushua, and I believe just like the Apostle Paul that our Messiah Yahushua is the fulfillment or completion of the Law (the Torah). This necessarily means that the LOVE of Messiah also includes aspects of the Oral Law which are deemed relevant by HIM.
In my study of the Talmud, I have read that the Oral Torah (the Customs, see Acts 21:20-24)) requires that an artificial doorway must be established in order for a Jewish family to leave a private domain and enter a common public domain on the Sabbath Day. The minimum requirement for this doorway was an upright pole with one cross member. The top of the upright pole was often decorated with something similar to a bird's nest. When I saw that, I immediately understood that the Cross of My Messiah Yahushua was my artificial doorway if Messiah is indeed the completion of the Torah. In a Jewish Ghetto, Erubin were established in a public Courtyard so that Jewish families could bury a meal prior to the Sabbath Day to be shared on the Sabbath Day; hence, the necessity of the artificial doorways so that objects could be carried from their private homes into a public domain made private by the Crosses which the Jews did erect to extend their individual property into the Courtyard. Not only is My Messiah Yahushua the Artificial Doorway, but HE also is the Erub from which we may all eat on the Spiritual Sabbath Day.
The Apostle Paul teaches that the Law (the Torah) entered so that the Offence of Adam might abound, and in your case, I see that with respect to the physical Sabbath Day, you are indeed guilty of a premeditated sin just like Adam. You deliberately disregard YAHWEH ELOHIM'S commandment to remember the physical Sabbath Day to keep it holy showing that Adam's Offence has indeed abounded with you:
Romans 5:20
20 Moreover the law entered, that the offence might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound:
If the Law (the Torah) proves you a sinner just like Adam, why do you and other Jehovah's Witnesses deny mercy for Adam and Eve all the while imagining that you yourselves are worthy of mercy?
Thanking you in advance should you be moved to reply, I am,
Sincerely, Latuwr
Mountain_Climber
Active Member
You assume far too much in the absence of any knowledge of what I do and don't do.
You have lost this debate miserably and so now must resort to shear non-sense as if to try and save face.
It matters not that you are unwilling to accept how miserably your arguments have failed. Those who are God's true sheep have benefited from our debate.
By the way, many faiths use the words "torture stake" and "cross" interchangeably.
stauros -- from the base of 2476; a stake or post (as set upright), i.e. (specially), a pole or cross (as an instrument of capital punishment); figuratively, exposure to death, i.e. self-denial; by implication, the atonement of Christ: KJV -- cross.
In places like Mark 8:34 the thought is that we need to die to ourselves with Christ and be willing to bear the suffering (aka, torture) that the world will put us through for doing so, even as Christ went through along the way to death, if we can rightly claim we are his followers.
Last edited: