Durk,

Good point. But isn't "accepting Jesus" the beginning of obedience? If we fail to accept Jesus as our personal Saviour what good is grace?

I like Hebrews 12:28 (KJV) for a working definition of grace - "Let us have grace, whereby we may serve God acceptably with reverence and godly fear." I also like Romans 1:5 (KJV) - "We have received grace... for obedience to the faith."

As I see it, grace is the power of God that empowers us to imitate the example of Jesus, who lived to please the Father. This sounds like an unmerited, undeserved gift to me. Yes, grace includes pardon, but it also involves power. I don't see how we can separate pardon and the power to obey.

What do you think?

Actually, when I stop to think about it, (which SHOULD HAVE BEEN the first step) I don't think grace is conditional upon anything. If it were, it would no longer be a gift, but a reward, and grace by its very definition is "unmerrited favor". ie: no conditions.

We must do something to ACCESS this grace, but there are no CONDITIONS to recieving it.

Although I quibble with your first post, I really like your second one. The more I think about it the more sense it makes. Thanks.

Durk,

We're probably working off the same page... but let me ask this question. If in order to "access" grace we must first "accept" it in what way is that not a condition upon recieving grace? Do you see what I mean?

If there were no conditions upon the grace of God - His unmerited favor - who then can be lost? By the way, what is the "favor" that we cannot earn if it isn't pardon and power over sin?

A good example of the need to define terms in any serious discussion. I understood the term "condition" to mean somethin we had to achieve in order to qualify for grace, a notion which I reject. However, I do agree that we must "do something" in order to access the grace freely offered, 'else all would be saved even without the knowledge of Christ or accepting Him, a position which Scripture does not (IMHO) support.

And yes, I do think we are opperating off the same page, praise the Lord.

Ah, now I see what you were dealing with. Man, if it weren't for words people would be able to communicate, eh? Ha!

I'll be away on business until the 5th of June. So, I'll see ya when I get back. God bless.

LOL

I think the following text clearly says that God's grace does not nullify His law:

quote:

---

Romans 2:8 But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath,
9 Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile;
10 But glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile:
11 For there is no respect of persons with God.
12 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;
13 (For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.
14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:
15 Which show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;)

---

Now what does the above tell us, especially in relation to the Gentiles?

Daryl,

I think your question about Romans 6:14 is misleading. Nothing is stated in that text about nullifying the law. That texts indicates the fact that one can be under the law or not under the law.

Just because I’m not under the law does not mean it has been nullified or doesn’t exist for those under it.

Here is what scripture states:

First, Paul indicates there are three types of scenarios:

“19Though I am free and belong to no man, I make myself a slave to everyone, to win as many as possible. 20To the Jews I became like a Jew, to win the Jews. To those under the law I became like one under the law (though I myself am not under the law), so as to win those under the law. 21To those not having the law I became like one not having the law (though I am not free from God's law but am under Christ's law), so as to win those not having the law.


1. Under the OT law (Jews born under the OT law [Gal 4:4])

2. Without the OT law (Gentiles not having the OT law or knowing it [Rom 2:14])

3. Under Christ’s NT law of love (All men who are saved by faith and lead by the spirit [Gal 6:2, 5:18])


Those in category 1 and 2 are both judged as sinners [Rom 2:12].

The OT law only leads those who are under it [Rom 3:19]

True believers are not under the law [Rom 6:14, Gal 3:25]


So based on scripture, the OT law is not removed or nullified. It is doing it jobs to convict the unsaved as sinners to drive them to Christ, because that is the ONLY role for the OT law after the cross [Gal 3:24].

So it’s not that the OT law is gone. It is that it doesn’t speak to or direct the saved. It only functions for the unsaved. This is all supported by the above texts.

So the question would be that if the OT law “speaks” to you, you should be concerned because scripture states that the law only speaks to those under it and those under it are not saved.

The KJV says it this way:

quote:

---

1 Corinthians 9:19 For though I be free from all men, yet have I made myself servant unto all, that I might gain the more.
20 And unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to them that are under the law, as under the law, that I might gain them that are under the law;
21 To them that are without law, as without law, (being not without law to God, but under the law to Christ,) that I might gain them that are without law.

---

We have here:

1 - under the law.

2 - without law.

3 - being not without law to God

4 - under the law to Christ.

What do each of these mean?

What are each of these saying?

By the way, Lobo, in what way is my question misleading?

And why do you avoid the question by going on to another text?

That text about the Gentiles seems clear enough to me. Why isn't it clear enough to you?

Why won't you let God's Word speak to your heart?

Why won't you let the Holy Spirit lead you into all truth?

I came from believing that the law was done away with to believing that the law was not done away with.

I came from believing that I was under the law to believing that I am not under the condemnation of the law. Big difference! And a true difference!

I am not going to go back into believing the devil's lie. I am going to continue to believe in God's truth about His law that is for all mankind and not only for the Jews in the same way the Sabbath is for al mankind and not only for the Jews.

Anyway, here is what under the law really means.

First of all, the words are literally under law rather than under the law.

Paul's point is that Christians are not under law as a way of salvation, but under grace.

Law cannot save a sinner, nor can law put an end to sin or its dominion.

Law reveals sin (ch. 3:20), and because of the sinfulness of man, law, as it were, causes transgression to increase (ch. 5:20).

Law cannot forgive sin, nor can law provide any power to overcome it. The sinner who seeks to be saved under law will find only condemnation and deeper enslavement to sin.

Wherever the principle is held that man can save himself by his own works, there is no effective barrier against sin (See Desire of Ages 35, 36).

The Christian does not look for salvation legalistically, as if he could be saved by his own works of obedience (ch. 3:20, 28).

He acknowledges that he is a transgressor of the divine law, that in his own strength he is wholly incapable of fulfilling its requirements, that he justly deserves to be under its condemnation, and surrenders himself through faith in Christ to the grace and mercy of God.

Then, by the grace of God (see on v. 24), his sinful past is forgiven and he receives divine power to walk in newness of life.

When a man is under law, despite his best efforts sin continues to have dominion over him, because the law cannot set him free from the power of sin.

Under grace, however, the struggle against sin is no longer a forlorn hope, but a certain triumph.

The offer to be under grace, thus to have victory over sin, and the enabling power for the attainment of every virtue, have been extended to every one of the descendants of Adam (John 3:16).

But many have blindly or stubbornly chosen to remain under law. Even many who profess an earnest desire to be saved prefer to remain under law, as if they could commend themselves to God and earn salvation by their own obedience to law.

Such was the experience of the Jews, and such is the experience of many professed Christians today, who in their pride of self-righteousness are not willing to acknowledge their own helplessness and to surrender themselves wholly to the mercy and transforming grace of God.

Paul is saying that as long as a man is under law he remains also under the dominion of sin, for law cannot save one from either the condemnation or the power of sin.

But those who are under grace receive not only release from condemnation (Rom. 8:1) but also power to overcome (ch. 6:4). Thus sin no longer will have dominion over them.

That is what under law really means. There is nothing there about the law being done away with.

God's amazing grace doesn't annul the law, His law. Instead, God's amazing grace establishes the law, His law.