The doctrine of the Law

[Fat]

• 

Rather, I let the scriptures interpret themselves.

Really? Who would have thought 

2 Tim 2:
15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

About 25 years ago a man told me, "Outside of the classroom, what every student of God needs is, a King James Bible, a Strong's Concordance, and a Noah Webster 1828 Dictionary". I took the advice, and it has served me well.

Noah Webster 1828 Dictionary
dividing

DIVIDING, ppr.

    1. Parting; separating; distributing; disuniting; apportioning to each his share.

    2. a. That indicates separation or difference; as a dividing line.

    DIVIDING, n. Separation.

[Jack Koons]

• 

The denomination of Jack's interpretation. I like it

I also am non-denominational but I find it useful to listen to other views and hold it up against the Scripture.

When I said I went "independent", that doesn't mean I have my own 'denomination'. It means I refused to be conformed to 'one' particular 'platform of interpretation'.

Think about this:

It is my belief that there is an amount of truth in 'dispensationalism'. However, I disagree with major Dispensationalists like Scofield who taught that all of the OT dispensations except the 'dispensation of promise', included work for salvation. Sorry, I don't see that in scripture.

On the other hand, I see covenants throughout scripture, salvation by grace, from Adam to Revelation. I also see how each dispensation works hand in hand with some of God's Covenants.

This simply means that I can see, both merit, and falsehood, in both of these major views.

Jack

[Jack Koons]

• 

Really? Who would have thought 

Noah Webster 1828 Dictionary
dividing

DIVIDING, ppr.

    1. Parting; separating; distributing; disuniting; apportioning to each his share.

    2. a. That indicates separation or difference; as a dividing line.

    DIVIDING, n. Separation.

Fat,

When the scriptures give internal evidence to define and interpret what has been written therein; only a fool would question that witness.

2 Timothy 2
15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

That is the Word of God; it is not up for dispute.

If you don't like what God said, change your 'likes', not God's Word!

Jack

[Fat]

• 

Fat,

When the scriptures give internal evidence to define and interpret what has been written therein; only a fool would question that witness.

2 Timothy 2
15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

That is the Word of God; it is not up for dispute.

If you don't like what God said, change your 'likes', not God's Word!

Jack

About 25 years ago a man told me, "Outside of the classroom, what every student of God needs is, a King James Bible, a Strong's Concordance, and a Noah Webster 1828 Dictionary". I took the advice, and it has served me well.

Rather, I let the scriptures interpret themselves.

Jack,
That's not the point if you check back you'll see it was not me that the question about the meaning of dividing it was calluna.

You have two conflicting statements here. It is obvious that Noah's Webster's dictionary is wrong even by your standards. Why would you rely on something like that when you have the Scriptures in front of you?

2 Tim 2:15 Be diligent to present yourself approved to God as a workman who does not need to be ashamed, accurately handling the word of truth. (NAS)

[Jack Koons]

• 

Really? Who would have thought 

Noah Webster 1828 Dictionary
dividing

DIVIDING, ppr.

    1. Parting; separating; distributing; disuniting; apportioning to each his share.

    2. a. That indicates separation or difference; as a dividing line.

    DIVIDING, n. Separation.

Fat,

Look up in the left corner, it reads:

"quote author Fat"

Plus your name is in red letters at the top left of the original post.

The Noah Webster is not in error, nor is the King James Bible. Try looking up each and every definition found in both the Strong's, and the Noah Webster under "divid"; your knowledge will increase. That is studying. Looking "all" the words represented in a definition, and thereby learning from it.

When studying God's Word, it is necessary to divide a doctrine into its separate parts in order to get the correct understanding. While Eschatology, Soteriology, and Pnuematology, are all doctrines of the Bible; the scriptures pertaining to these doctrines are studied separately in order to accomplish a systematic theology.

Jack

Jack

[Fat]

• 

Fat,

Look up in the left corner, it reads:

"quote author Fat"

Plus your name is in red letters at the top left of the original post.

The Noah Webster is not in error, nor is the King James Bible. Try looking up each and every definition found in both the Strong's, and the Noah Webster under "divid"; your knowledge will increase. That is studying. Looking "all" the words represented in a definition, and thereby learning from it.

When studying God's Word, it is necessary to divide a doctrine into its separate parts in order to get the correct understanding. While Eschatology, Soteriology, and Pnuematology, are all doctrines of the Bible; the scriptures pertaining to these doctrines are studied separately in order to accomplish a systematic theology.

Jack

Jack

If you did not make those post Jack, apparently somebody is logging in using your name.

http://biblediscussion.org/index.php/topic,658.msg2616.html#msg2616

http://biblediscussion.org/index.php/topic,630.msg2531.html#msg2531

Fat

[Jack Koons]

• 

« previous next »
REPLY
NOTIFY
MARK UNREAD
SEND THIS TOPIC
PRINT
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down
AuthorTopic: The doctrine of the Law  (Read 127 times)
Active members:
Theodore A. Jones(1) calluna(2) macuser(2) Hal(2) Fat(3) Zant Law(4) Jack Koons(7)
Fat
Sr. Member

Posts: 457
 

Re: The doctrine of the Law
« Reply #15 on: Yesterday at 12:19:12 PM »
Quote
Quote from: Jack Koons on Yesterday at 11:08:14 AM
Rather, I let the scriptures interpret themselves.



Really? Who would have thought 

Quote from: Jack
2 Tim 2:
15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

About 25 years ago a man told me, "Outside of the classroom, what every student of God needs is, a King James Bible, a Strong's Concordance, and a Noah Webster 1828 Dictionary". I took the advice, and it has served me well.


Noah Webster 1828 Dictionary
dividing

DIVIDING, ppr.

    1. Parting; separating; distributing; disuniting; apportioning to each his share.

    2. a. That indicates separation or difference; as a dividing line.

    DIVIDING, n. Separation.

Report to moderator     Logged
Jack Koons
Jr. Member

Posts: 81
   

Re: The doctrine of the Law
« Reply #16 on: Yesterday at 01:23:22 PM »
QuoteModify
Quote from: Zant Law on Yesterday at 11:21:44 AM
The denomination of Jack's interpretation. I like it

I also am non-denominational but I find it useful to listen to other views and hold it up against the Scripture.

When I said I went "independent", that doesn't mean I have my own 'denomination'. It means I refused to be conformed to 'one' particular 'platform of interpretation'.

Think about this:

It is my belief that there is an amount of truth in 'dispensationalism'. However, I disagree with major Dispensationalists like Scofield who taught that all of the OT dispensations except the 'dispensation of promise', included work for salvation. Sorry, I don't see that in scripture.

On the other hand, I see covenants throughout scripture, salvation by grace, from Adam to Revelation. I also see how each dispensation works hand in hand with some of God's Covenants.

This simply means that I can see, both merit, and falsehood, in both of these major views.

Jack

Report to moderator     166.147.104.165
Jack Koons
Jr. Member

Posts: 81
   

Re: The doctrine of the Law
« Reply #17 on: Yesterday at 03:33:41 PM »
QuoteModify
Quote from: Fat on Yesterday at 12:19:12 PM
Really? Who would have thought 

Noah Webster 1828 Dictionary
dividing

DIVIDING, ppr.

    1. Parting; separating; distributing; disuniting; apportioning to each his share.

    2. a. That indicates separation or difference; as a dividing line.

    DIVIDING, n. Separation.

Fat,

When the scriptures give internal evidence to define and interpret what has been written therein; only a fool would question that witness.

2 Timothy 2
15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

That is the Word of God; it is not up for dispute.

If you don't like what God said, change your 'likes', not God's Word!

Jack

Report to moderator     166.147.104.149
Fat
Sr. Member

Posts: 457
 

Re: The doctrine of the Law
« Reply #18 on: Yesterday at 04:49:15 PM »
Quote
Quote from: Jack Koons on Yesterday at 03:33:41 PM
Fat,

When the scriptures give internal evidence to define and interpret what has been written therein; only a fool would question that witness.

2 Timothy 2
15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

That is the Word of God; it is not up for dispute.

If you don't like what God said, change your 'likes', not God's Word!

Jack


Quote from: Jack
About 25 years ago a man told me, "Outside of the classroom, what every student of God needs is, a King James Bible, a Strong's Concordance, and a Noah Webster 1828 Dictionary". I took the advice, and it has served me well.

Quote from: Jack
Rather, I let the scriptures interpret themselves.
Jack,
That's not the point if you check back you'll see it was not me that the question about the meaning of dividing it was calluna.

You have two conflicting statements here. It is obvious that Noah's Webster's dictionary is wrong even by your standards. Why would you rely on something like that when you have the Scriptures in front of you?

2 Tim 2:15 Be diligent to present yourself approved to God as a workman who does not need to be ashamed, accurately handling the word of truth. (NAS)
Report to moderator     Logged
Jack Koons
Jr. Member

Posts: 81
   

Re: The doctrine of the Law
« Reply #19 on: Yesterday at 05:39:35 PM »
QuoteModify
Quote from: Fat on Yesterday at 12:19:12 PM
Really? Who would have thought 

Noah Webster 1828 Dictionary
dividing

DIVIDING, ppr.

    1. Parting; separating; distributing; disuniting; apportioning to each his share.

    2. a. That indicates separation or difference; as a dividing line.

    DIVIDING, n. Separation.


Fat,

Look up in the left corner, it reads:

"quote author Fat"

Plus your name is in red letters at the top left of the original post.

The Noah Webster is not in error, nor is the King James Bible. Try looking up each and every definition found in both the Strong's, and the Noah Webster under "divid"; your knowledge will increase. That is studying. Looking "all" the words represented in a definition, and thereby learning from it.

When studying God's Word, it is necessary to divide a doctrine into its separate parts in order to get the correct understanding. While Eschatology, Soteriology, and Pnuematology, are all doctrines of the Bible; the scriptures pertaining to these doctrines are studied separately in order to accomplish a systematic theology.

Jack

Jack

Report to moderator     166.147.104.167
Fat
Sr. Member

Posts: 457
 

Re: The doctrine of the Law
« Reply #20 on: Yesterday at 06:21:49 PM »
Quote
Quote from: Jack Koons on Yesterday at 05:39:35 PM

Fat,

Look up in the left corner, it reads:

"quote author Fat"

Plus your name is in red letters at the top left of the original post.

The Noah Webster is not in error, nor is the King James Bible. Try looking up each and every definition found in both the Strong's, and the Noah Webster under "divid"; your knowledge will increase. That is studying. Looking "all" the words represented in a definition, and thereby learning from it.

When studying God's Word, it is necessary to divide a doctrine into its separate parts in order to get the correct understanding. While Eschatology, Soteriology, and Pnuematology, are all doctrines of the Bible; the scriptures pertaining to these doctrines are studied separately in order to accomplish a systematic theology.

Jack

Jack


If you did not make those post Jack, apparently somebody is logging in using your name.

http://biblediscussion.org/index.php/topic,658.msg2616.html#msg2616

http://biblediscussion.org/index.php/topic,630.msg2531.html#msg2531

Fat
Report to moderator     Logged
REPLY
NOTIFY
MARK UNREAD
SEND THIS TOPIC
PRINT
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up
« previous next »
Bible Discussion » Bible Talk » Sound doctrine » The doctrine of the Law
Jump to: 
  Quick Reply
Recent Post
Re: What about those who have never heard the gospel?
by Jack Koons
[Today at 05:34:20 AM]
Re: Fideism
by JB Horn
 [Today at 12:39:17 AM]
Re: Fideism
by Fat
 [Yesterday at 10:51:54 PM]
Re: Fideism
by Moss
 [Yesterday at 06:35:55 PM]
User
Hello Jack Koons
Personal Messages
Show unread posts
Show unread replies
Show my posts
Logged in: 0d 13h 7m
10 Jul 2013, 05:37:43 am
Stats
 Members
Total Members: 50
Latest: HS83
 Stats
Total Posts: 2336
Total Topics: 579
Online Today: 80
Most Online: 86
(July 08, 2013, 05:45:54 PM)
 Users online
Users: 1
Guests: 5
Total: 6
Jack Koons


Fat,

You have the first post on the second page.

Jack

[michaelf]

• 

Hello everyone,

I think that sometimes the teachings of "Dispensationalism" can be misunderstood.  For example, many believe (as dis Scofield) that during the period we call "The Law" (the 1500 years from Sinai to Christ), people were saved with a combination of "faith and obedience to the Law". This is not true. The written Law (613 shalts and shalt nots) were given for the purpose of identifying sin, to show the need of the Saviour.

The Law did not "produce" sin; it identified sin as sin. A speed limit sign doesn't make speeders, it identifies speeders.

Before salvation, we are under the condemning power of the Law because we are only unrighteous. After salvation we are no longer under the condemning power of the Law, because we now have the righteousness of Christ (that is our legal standing before God). However, while the Law has no more condemning power, it is our guide to identify sin in our lives, for the purpose of glorifying our God.  For example, is it now legal for Christians to steal, commit adultery, or murder? No. The Law still identifies sin, but after being saved; it has no power to condemn.

Romans 8:1 There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

Jack

Not disagreeing but...
Was there sin before the Law of Moses?

[Theodore A. Jones]

• 

Man you just spam this board with Romans 2:13 didn't you.
Not once in the entire Law of Moses does it say that it was the means for people earning eternal salvation or a ticket to heaven. There is no salvation in the Law.

The word law in Rom. 2:13 is not referencing the law of Moses, i.e. written code.

[Fat]

• 

The word law in Rom. 2:13 is not referencing the law of Moses, i.e. written code.

 Matthew 22:36 "Teacher, which commandment in the law (nomoß) is the greatest?" Answer was Deuteronomy 6:5

Romans 2:13 (For not the hearers of the law (nomoß) are just before God, but the doers of the law (nomoß) shall be justified.

Also James theme.

James 1
22 But be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves. 23 For if any be a hearer of the word, and not a doer, he is like unto a man beholding his natural face in a glass: 24 For he beholdeth himself, and goeth his way , and straightway forgetteth what manner of man he was . 25 But whoso looketh into the perfect law (nomoß) of liberty, and continueth therein, he being not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed.

[Theodore A. Jones]

• 

 Matthew 22:36 "Teacher, which commandment in the law (nomoß) is the greatest?" Answer was Deuteronomy 6:5

Romans 2:13 (For not the hearers of the law (nomoß) are just before God, but the doers of the law (nomoß) shall be justified.

Also James theme.

James 1
22 But be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves. 23 For if any be a hearer of the word, and not a doer, he is like unto a man beholding his natural face in a glass: 24 For he beholdeth himself, and goeth his way , and straightway forgetteth what manner of man he was . 25 But whoso looketh into the perfect law (nomoß) of liberty, and continueth therein, he being not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed.

The law was changed after Jesus was crucified and that change was put into effect through angles. Rom. 2:13 is referencing the change. If Rom. 2:13 was referencing the OT written code then a person would be declared righteous by observing the written code and there would not be any reason for Jesus's crucifixion or a change of the law by a mediator. Also the term the 'perfect law of liberty' is referencing the change not the OT written code.   

[Fat]

• 

The law was changed after Jesus was crucified and that change was put into effect through angles. Rom. 2:13 is referencing the change. If Rom. 2:13 was referencing the OT written code then a person would be declared righteous by observing the written code and there would not be any reason for Jesus's crucifixion or a change of the law by a mediator. Also the term the 'perfect law of liberty' is referencing the change not the OT written code.   

G

Changed was it?

Matthew 5:17–18
17 "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18 For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished.

Christ obeyed the law and you say you are a follower of Christ ?

[biblebuf]

• 

The law was changed after Jesus was crucified and that change was put into effect through angles. Rom. 2:13 is referencing the change. If Rom. 2:13 was referencing the OT written code then a person would be declared righteous by observing the written code and there would not be any reason for Jesus's crucifixion or a change of the law by a mediator. Also the term the 'perfect law of liberty' is referencing the change not the OT written code.   

There is no salvation in the law but violating it is still a sin. If not then murder is a righteous sport for fun and entertainment.

BB

[Theodore A. Jones]

• 

There is no salvation in the law but violating it is still a sin. If not then murder is a righteous sport for fun and entertainment.

BB

There is no salvation for anyone by observing the OT written code of law. But that does not mean that there is not a law you must have the faith to obey to be saved.

[biblebuf]

• 

There is no salvation for anyone by observing the OT written code of law. But that does not mean that there is not a law you must have the faith to obey to be saved.

Christians love Christ.

If ye love me, keep my commandments. (John 14:15 KJV)

Do you?