You didn't pick that up from the first part of my answer?If they violate the other nine, do they suffer the wages of sin? Yes or no.
No.
There, is that clear enough for you?
You didn't pick that up from the first part of my answer?If they violate the other nine, do they suffer the wages of sin? Yes or no.
Doormat said:How many of the remaining nine commandments does Israel have to keep today exactly? Please list them.
Lighthouse said:The covenant with Israel is on hold; so none.
Now, how many should they follow because they're the right thing to do? The other nine.
Doormat said:If they violate the other nine, do they suffer the wages of sin? Yes or no.
That is not my position.Then your position necessarily is that unbelievers no longer suffer the wages of sin.
Explain how your answer can be true if you believe Israel was cut off for unbelief.
Are you so incapable of reason that you take the idea that the wages of sin are not suffered for not keeping the commandments that means the wages of sin are then not suffered at all?
Which you did not address or refute, but instead are now focusing on the excommunication issue. This will be my last post to you.
You are bearing false witness and will be judged by the same measure you judge others.
Your sentence makes no sense.
Proving he was cut off and could be grafted in again, consistent with what Paul wrote in Romans 11:23.
Romans 11:23 And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be graffed in: for God is able to graff them in again.
A person committing incest, adultery, murder, etc., is in unbelief:
1Jo 2:9 He that saith he is in the light, and hateth his brother, is in darkness even until now.
1Jo 2:11 But he that hateth his brother is in darkness, and walketh in darkness, and knoweth not whither he goeth, because that darkness hath blinded his eyes.
1Jo 3:15 Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer: and ye know that no murderer hath eternal life abiding in him.
1Jo 4:20 If a man say, I love God, and hateth his brother, he is a liar: for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how can he love God whom he hath not seen?
Proof he was an unbeliever. See the above verses from John's first epistle and Luke 6:43. Need more? See Ezekiel 18:24 to leave no doubt.
If he repented per Romans 11:23.
You are bearing false witness. The Mosiac law was abrogated and I have never taught adherence the Mosiac ordinances.
You have conceded the seventh day is still sanctified. The argument was actually over when you conceded that.
You are bearing false witness. No flesh is justified by the works of the law. That you fail to understand my point of view is no excuse to make false accusations against me.
You should stop bearing false witness.
Yet the same author in the same book said "if we sin we have an advocate with the Father". Why do you ignore that fact?
For if those who are of the law are heirs, faith is made void and the promise made of no effect, because the law brings about wrath; for where there is no law there is no transgression.Your position is contrary to sound doctrine.
Sin is transgression of the law (1Jo 3:4).
The wages of sin is death (Ro 6:23).
John 15:10 If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father's commandments, and abide in his love.
The implications are clear:5 To deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.
The implications are clear:
1- The man was caught in incest
2- he was unrepentant
3- the church was told to hand him over to satan
4- he was turned over to be killed by the devil
5- the man was still going to be saved "in the day of The Lord Jesus"
The man was not killed by satan.You just made that up. It says the exact opposite. The man was unrepentant and was being handed over to satan to be killed. The verse then says he will be saved anyway. He is unrepentant and will be killed while in his state of unrepentance and will still be saved. You are inventing theology while adding to the passage.
That has nothing to do with what we are talking about. You are taking a verse out of context while ignoring the fact that the man was to be saved anyway while being killed by satan.
2 Corinthians 2:6-11 6 Sufficient to such a man is this punishment, which was inflicted of many. 7 So that contrariwise ye ought rather to forgive him, and comfort him, lest perhaps such a one should be swallowed up with overmuch sorrow. 8 Wherefore I beseech you that ye would confirm your love toward him. 9 For to this end also did I write, that I might know the proof of you, whether ye be obedient in all things. 10 To whom ye forgive any thing, I forgive also: for if I forgave any thing, to whom I forgave it, for your sakes forgave I it in the person of Christ; 11 Lest Satan should get an advantage of us: for we are not ignorant of his devices. |
For if those who are of the law are heirs, faith is made void and the promise made of no effect, because the law brings about wrath; for where there is no law there is no transgression.
-Romans 4:14-15
For sin shall not have dominion over you, for
you are not under law but under grace.
-Romans 6:14
Those under grace are under no law and therefore cannot transgress the law.
Hebrews 10:16 16 This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws into their hearts, and in their minds will I write them; |
Romans 3:31 31 Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law. |
The implications are clear:
1- The man was caught in incest
2- he was unrepentant
3- the church was told to have no fellowship with him
4- he was kicked out so he could choose between his flesh and salvation
5- if he chose to mortify his flesh while excommunicated, then he could still be saved in the day of the lord
...where there is no law there is no transgression....
Those under grace are under no law and therefore cannot transgress the law.
Those not under grace live in transgression of the law ...
, but in this dispensation the law is not in effect in that manner for anyone, and it was never in effect in that manner for anyone other than Israel.
The law was in effect during the covenants with Israel, those covenants are on hold until the fullness of the Gentiles comes in. [Romans 11:25]
You and doormat are inventing theology ...
Stop bearing false witness.
Acts 8:13 Then Simon himself believed also: and when he was baptized, he continued with Philip, and wondered, beholding the miracles and signs which were done. |
Acts 8:18,19 And when Simon saw that through laying on of the apostles' hands the Holy Ghost was given, he offered them money, saying, Give me also this power, that on whomsoever I lay hands, he may receive the Holy Ghost. But Peter said unto him, Your money perish with you, because you have thought that the gift of God may be purchased with money. Thou hast neither part nor lot in this matter: for thy heart is not right in the sight of God. Repent therefore of this thy wickedness, and pray God, if perhaps the thought of thine heart may be forgiven thee. |
For He nowhere has dissolved the law, as Simon pretends, but fulfilled it; for He says: “One iota, or one tittle, shall not pass from the law until all be fulfilled.” For says He, “I come not to dissolve the law, but to fulfil it.”[8] |
XX. Now the law is the decalogue, which the Lord promulgated to them with an audible voice,[10] before the people made that calf which represented the Egyptian Apis.[11] And the law is righteous, and therefore is it called the law, because judgments are thence made according to the law of nature, which the followers of Simon abuse, supposing they shall not be judged thereby, and so shall escape punishment. This law is good, holy, and such as lays no compulsion in things positive. |
stop lying to people with your works based "gospel"