Understanding what it means to be not under the law

[Colossians]

Smaller,

I have looked over your post and again find the same huffing and puffing without substance. You have run out of ammunition and so prefer to ask unrelated questions in order to side-track.

There are a 3 items that will serve to higlight your errant position:



NUMBER 1:

And you are in blatant denial of just what God's Law is. You have denied God's Law are THE LAWS from Moses in favor of "Melchizedek" laws
I almost have a heart attack when I read things like this. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. Here is what I have demonstrated from scripture:

[[[The law is the Torah. It’s administrators were the Levites, and its head the Levite Moses.
The law of God is found at 1 Jo 3:23. Its administrator and Head is found at Heb 7:10.
So then: “the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law” Heb 7:12]]]

To which you replied with your non-sequitur:
You presume The Law without purpose. If Paul served same and upheld same and did not nullify same by "faith" then I conclude you are in error.

To which I replied:
You have not attended to the point. Therefore it stands. (Rules of debate)

To which, rather than attend to the point, you falsely replied that I had personally attacked you:
More ad hom drivel and evasion.

The fact of Heb 7:12 remains: the law was changed from the law of Moses to the law of Melchizadek. That you do not submit to this, makes it no less true.










NUMBER 2:

You presist in you grammatically-illegal syntacto manipulation of the phrase “it is no longer I that do it, but sin ...”, with your erroneous Paul had sin indwelling him that he called "no longer I”.

Your “no longer I” is a fiction, not the noun phrase you try to make it.
What is actually said is that it is no longer “I”, but an alternative to “I” called “sin”: it is “sin” and not “I” that sins.










NUMBER 3: (concerning the important mechanics of the issue)

the LAWLESSNESS in you is UNDER THE LAW
Lawlessness is not a thing: it is the activity of the old man aroused by the law, which law is necessarily over him only.
"I" who live in my human being am not under the law: "I" am a complete spirit-person joined to Christ's headship. "I" include no flesh.
The flesh that “I” live in will manifest “I” (manifest Christ) as “I” understand that “I” am not under the law my flesh is under: “I” am enabled to take charge of the flesh only as “I” understand it was crucified by a law which “I” am not under, and that it is therefore dead to “I”.
Such taking charge will therefore not manifest itself in a keeping of the law, for the “I” that is in charge is not under the law, but under Christ, and therefore cannot hear the law.
I think we've already discovered that faith does not nullify The Law, but upholds and serves it.
All we have established is that you are not reading, or cannot read.
You have not attended to the point. Therefore it stands. (Rules of debate)


To which you have now replied again with your ridiculous:
I can see that you have roped yourself in a dead end in this conversation and are resorting to non answers to somehow declare yourself some sort of a victor. What is the point of that Colossians?

So not only to you not attend to what I have written, you do so purposely again after you have been told you haven’t attended to what I have written. And assume I am an idiot in the process.








SUMMARY
Your whole bent is to deny the emphasis and plain teaching of scripture. This is propelled by your bias which leads you to tell us that Christ’s declaration that those punished for not feeding or clothing Him are not people, but some anti-Christ scapegoat personfied as “lawless”, presumably Mr Lawless.

James is clear: people deceive themselves (Ja 1:22), and because of this, are worthy of punishment.
And there are countless inferences concerning eternal punishment for people. From Revelation’s “ the smoke of their torment ascendeth forever”, to Revelation’s account of who is excluded from the book of life, to Paul’s statement that many will perish, to Christ’s statements that our reward will be eternal life as opposed to the reward of the unjust, to Christ’s statement that he spoke in parables purposely so that many would not understand, to Christ’s statement in Jo 17 that He prayed not for the world but only for those whom the Father had given Him, and on and on and on. There are myriads.

If Christ had wanted to say that people will be punished, He would not have said it any other way. You are denying the prima facie of scripture in deference to your own ideas. Thus you render the bible redundant: it says what you say it says, and not what it says.

Usually one who argues against the natural grain of scripture as you do, has some deep emotional fear/bias for doing so. My guess is that you are not assured of your own eternal life, and therefore hold to a doctrine which provides you peace of mind in any event.

With your present tactics and mindset, I have no more time for you. I have engaged you twice now, and both times you simply deny scripture’s teaching when it doesn’t suit you. Thus you reveal that the bible is only ostensibly the referee: ultimately you call the shots.

It is highly unlikely that you will ever arrive at correct understanding while you are subject to your false teaching on hell for unbelievers. For this is the integral anti-issue of salvation.
Knowing scripture is not good enough: it will never say to you what it is supposed to say unless you listen to Jesus Christ.
And in order to listen to Jesus Christ, you must be born again.

[Nang]

Nang,

When one comes to Christ, he is a new creature that has never existed before: the "new man".
Unsustainable concept.
It is what is written. So the problem is with you.

When a man is born from above by the power of the Holy Spirit, he is born again. (John 3:3) First the natural birth, then the spiritual birth. (I Cor. 15:46) Two births. Same individual person.

The Spirit does not indwell your old self. You do not understand the dichotomy in Rom 7.

There is no dichotomy taught in Romans 7. There is tension. A tension between the old flesh and the new spirit that only Christians experience. An unsaved person does not feel this tension, but live his life serving his flesh members. But a believer is torn between the old and new and must consciously and deliberately choose to walk in the Spirit in order that he might "crucify" the flesh. (Romans 8:1-11, 6:2-22)

It is this new man who is not under the law, and to whom therefore the law does not apply to.

There is no such thing as living apart from the Law of God. We are not under obligation to live by the Law to find salvation or to maintain our salvation, but it is obedience to the Law of God that proves we have been saved, that we love God, and that we desire to walk according to His will. We are sanctified by God to walk in holiness and there is no such thing as holiness apart from God's Word, testaments, and Law.

To teach one can throw out the law of God from their consideration is to teach the heresy of Antinomianism.



[quote]The law will pass away when heaven and earth does, just like Jesus said.
In the meantime, those who are seated already in heavenly places, are necessarily not under that law.
Thus we are told “ye are not under the law”.

The Law of God is the spoken commands and Word of God. And Jesus taught, "Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will by no means pass away." Matthew 24:35

It is impossible to distinguish or separate God's Law from God's Word and God's commands. They are all the same.

So we are under the law but without obligation to keep it. Eh ……

"By the deeds of the Law no flesh will be justified in His sight, for by the law is the knowledge of sin." Romans 3:20

We are not saved by obliging the Law, because we can't. We all fall short of obedience to all the Law. We are saved by faith in Jesus Christ who kept all the Law perfectly on our behalf.

Does that mean we spend our Christian lives lawlessly? Can we continue in sin, now that we know God's grace? God forbid! We are called to be holy for He is holy, and to be holy and walk holy, we must walk according to the will and word of God (the Law). This is not to gain merit or earn reward of any kind, but simply because we love God and desire to live pleasing in His sight.

No we are dead to the law, and transferred to another Authority. You don’t know your bible.

I know the Bible quite well, and live according to the principle of Sola Scriptura. I consider the Law of God to be a part of Holy Scripture, which is "profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness." II Timothy 3:16

It is nullified for the believer. “There is verily a disannulling of the commandment going before”.
Clear.

"Jesus said to him, 'You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets." Matthew 22:37-40

Are you advocating we toss this in the garbage bin, too?

God obeys no-one but Himself.

The Son perfectly obeyed all the Law of the Father.

There is no law in the spiritual realm except His person.

No eternal, absolute, immutable, universal, moral law at all?

The universe of God is amoral.

Oh my gosh! This reflects the mind of an atheist!

Ugly.

Your idea overall is a standard legalist trick: you are justified by faith, but faith is justified by law. Thus you are indirectly justified by law. You say your eyes are only on Christ, but they are on Christ through you. Thus you are promulgating a doctrine of indirect justification by works.

Please explain how faith is justified by Law. Do you know what justified means? Justification pertains legally to the offense, not the remedy.

My current battle on other forums is against the damnable notion that works must follow justification. I believe faith alone is my justification and my entire salvation.

But faith is a work.

Does that mean I advocate a works-righteousness?

No.

Because I believe my faith came from without me from Christ. It is His work and His faithfulness and His righteousness imputed to my account before God that makes me fit for God to justify me from my sins.

So works do not fit into my thinking.

But living by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God certainly does. When I choose to obey God, according to His Word and His Law and His commands, statutes and precepts, I am living according to His Holy Spirit who abides within me. I am not living according to sinful flesh, but according to the holiness of God revealed to me throughout the entire Bible.

To throw out the Law from my thinking, would be equivalent to taking away from the words of God's Book, which is severely warned against. (Rev. 22:18&19, Deut. 4:2, 12:32)

I reject New Covenant Theology on this basis.

We retain our uniqueness, but we have a different headship, being placed within the Person of Christ.

This I almost agree with, for I believe in the federal headship of Jesus Christ. He is my head; I am part of His (spiritual) body, the church. But we are not "placed" within the Person of Christ, but ". .created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them." Ephesians 2:10

Thus we are not identifiable as our former selves from an external position, but are hidded in Christ.

These are untenable positions you take. Our spiritual life is hidden in Christ while we continue in our old flesh bodies. We are most definitely identifiable by name as the same person, for our names are written in the Lamb's Book of Life.


(Starting to skip some of your wierd ideas you repeated.)

When Christ died, He died the death of those "seed" He represented, in His body.
Which is why the law is finished for them, just as it was for Him.

So you think Jesus Christ died on the cross to abolish the Law of God?

Yikes!

Jesus Christ died on the cross to destroy the devil who held the Elect in bondage to sin and death. Jesus Christ died on the cross while taking all our sins upon His body and forever removing them from our account with God.

His suffering was fulfillment of God's Holy Law, for pity sake! For without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sins. His vicarious death satisfied the death sentence God's Law demanded we should pay.

There is no “in that respect” about it, no mere metaphorical sense. The proxy statement of faith results in a literal crucifixion.

We are to crucify sinfulness in us; not draw our own blood. You are in the realms of deep mysticism, aren't you? Dangerous ground.

You need to understand that not only are we imputed with righteousess, but are imparted with it.

I reject the Roman Catholic teaching that righteousness is "infused" within mortals.

No-one chooses his birth. Our being born-again was the result of our having been crucified with Christ.

It was our sins Christ removed when He represented us on the cross; He did not remove us!

Only the elect of God were crucified with Christ.

Again, I almost agree, but I would say Christ died only for His people.

The law was fulfilled in its punitive aspect. At the cross.
Christ never kept the law.

Then what was Jesus doing during His life. Ignoring the Law? Living lawlessly?

To keep the law, is to place one’s eyes on one’s own performance. Such is sin, and such would have rendered Him unacceptable as sacrifice for us.

When Adam sinned, Adam broke the covenant of works God had obliged him to keep. The last Adam kept that covenant of works; proving that God alone ultimately (and unconditionally) performs all Covenant. It was the very fact that Jesus Christ kept covenant with God that made Him an acceptable sacrifice for those unable to perform covenant.

To obey God is not sin. To fail to obey God and keep the covenant of works is sin. And our failure under the law was what Jesus Christ came to rectify.

You need to understand that to keep the law, paradoxically results in breaking it, for it necessitates that one take his eyes off God momentarily, and so transgress the greatest commandment.
In line with this, you need to understand that “the law” is synonomous with “self-effort”, and in a still wider sense, “life in the absence of the revelation of God”.

Nah . . .

What is needed to keep the Law of God is faith. It was faith that the first Adam lacked. He didn't have faith in God's command.

No man has the faith to obey God. It is not in us.

Only one Man was full of faith; the Man Jesus Christ. By His faithfulness He obeyed all the Law of God, demonstrating what a perfect human being should live like. And He imputed that faithfulness and righteousness to us after making us fit by removing the curse of sin and death from our account with God.

Christ came to demonstrate the works of another, His Father, necessarily precluding His own attention to what the law said. Of necessity then, the non-intuitive sabbath law, would not be kept. Which is why He did not keep it.

I have read of the dangers of Antinomianism, but this is my first exposure to the depths of the heresy. You have fallen down a very steep and slippery slope.

I must remind you that Jesus said that on Judgment Day, only those "who does the will of My Father," shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but to those who lived lawlessly he will say, "I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!" Matthew 7:21-23



Nang

[Colossians]

Nang,



When one comes to Christ, he is a new creature that has never existed before: the "new man".
Unsustainable concept.
It is what is written. So the problem is with you.
When a man is born from above by the power of the Holy Spirit, he is born again. (John 3:3) First the natural birth, then the spiritual birth. (I Cor. 15:46) Two births. Same individual person.
Same uniqueness, not the same person. Christ has absorbed the believer into His person and thus the new creature is the Creator Himself with the member of the Body nestled snuggly inside Him.





The Spirit does not indwell your old self. You do not understand the dichotomy in Rom 7.
There is no dichotomy taught in Romans 7. There is tension. A tension between the old flesh and the new spirit that only Christians experience. An unsaved person does not feel this tension, but live his life serving his flesh members. But a believer is torn between the old and new and must consciously and deliberately choose to walk in the Spirit in order that he might "crucify" the flesh. (Romans 8:1-11, 6:2-22)
The tension is the result of the dichotomy revealed in “It is no longer I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me”.
Accordingly, you miss the understanding that the Spirit does not indwell our old self (as you stated), but replaces our old self with regard to our identity before God, resulting in a new “I” which cannot be attributed with sin.
If you mean that the Spirit indwells our flesh in which the old man is also resident, this is correct, but you have wrongly expressed it as a merger of old self and new self (the latter within the former). The new is not within the old, but has replaced the old.





It is this new man who is not under the law, and to whom therefore the law does not apply to.
There is no such thing as living apart from the Law of God.
This is your idea, not what is Christianity.
The scripture is clear: “Ye have become dead to the law .. that ye should be married to another”.
At the moment you are preaching spiritual adultery.

You need to understand that one cannot be both dead to the law and alive to it simultaneously. Accordinlgy the law that we are dead to is the Mosaic law. The law that we serve with our minds along with Paul is the "law of God" explained at 1 Jo 3:23. It is faith. Also known as "the law of liberty".





We are not under obligation to live by the Law to find salvation or to maintain our salvation, but it is obedience to the Law of God that proves we have been saved,
So if you do not try to keep the law, you prove you are not saved. Therefore your doctrine is justification by works of the law.
It is the SDA doctrine, built upon the false dichotomy of “salvation” vs “love for God”.
To be saved is to love God and to love God is to be saved: they are the same thing. Thus to be released from the requirement to keep the law to be saved, is to be released from the requirement to keep the law to love God.





The law will pass away when heaven and earth does, just like Jesus said.
In the meantime, those who are seated already in heavenly places, are necessarily not under that law.
Thus we are told “ye are not under the law”.
The Law of God is the spoken commands and Word of God. And Jesus taught, "Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will by no means pass away." Matthew 24:35
It is impossible to distinguish or separate God's Law from God's Word and God's commands. They are all the same.
You overlooked: “TILL heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled."
Thus the law will pass away with the expiration of the physical realm: there is no need for law when all are either in heaven or hell.
For those in Christ, they are already seated in heavenly places, therefore for them heaven and earth are as good as passed away, and so also the law.

You idea here is further founded on the superficial notion that because Christ is God, the OT laws are appropriated as Christ’s words.
Christ’s words were the words that He spoke in the flesh, not as the God of Sinai. The God of Sinai was the God of the law, whereas Christ is the God of Zion. Thus Hebrews: “Ye are not come unto the mount that might be touched…but ye are come unto mount Zion” Heb 12:18,22. . They were quantifiably the same person, but not bearing the same ‘signature of intent’.
The Ten commandments, althought dictated by God, were not His signature work: thus they are called “the law of Moses”; they are that which kept the non-elect at a distance from Him in order to preserve the privacy and sanctuary of His marriage with His Bride.
To this the Jews unwittingly gave witness: “The secret things belong to the Lord our God” Deut 29:29.
In contrast, the NT declares the mystery revealed to the Bride. Thus the law was not part of the secret things of Christ which are hidden from the world, and thus it plays no part in Christ whatsoever.





"By the deeds of the Law no flesh will be justified in His sight, for by the law is the knowledge of sin." Romans 3:20. We are not saved by obliging the Law, because we can't. We all fall short of obedience to all the Law.
You miss the intent of Rm 3:20. It tells us that we are not to come to Christ retaining that which reminds us of sin.
Such would be to promote a God who militates against Himself, on the one hand telling us that “we have been made the righteousness of God” and at the same time reminding us of deficiencies. Schizophrenia.
You also employ once again the false dichotomy of “salvation” vs “love for God”, which I have dealt with earlier.





We are saved by faith in Jesus Christ who kept all the Law perfectly on our behalf.
This stems from your idea that the God’s universe is some huge system of morality, that morality is coextant with God’s eternality. Nothing could be more abominable.
The law is only for the physical realm: it has no place in the spiritual realm. This is why Satan is not under the law, but is judged according to his autonomy which flies in the face of God.
To follow the law is to follow similar autonomy: it is to bring to the banqueting table your own meal.
But rather, as the writer of “Rock of Ages” penned: “Nothing in my hands I bring, simply to thy Cross I cling”.





Can we continue in sin, now that we know God's grace?
Of course not. We are not under the law. No law, no transgression of law.

To keep the law is to sin, for “the law is not of faith” and “whatsoever is not of faith is sin”.
To keep the law is self effort, and therefore a negation of the faith which justifies us.
You need to sit down and read through Galations verrrrrry slowly.





No we are dead to the law, and transferred to another Authority. You don’t know your bible.
I know the Bible quite well, and live according to the principle of Sola Scriptura.
Not Sola enough I’m afraid. It is written that we are “dead to the law”. It doesn’t get any plainer than that.





It is nullified for the believer. “There is verily a disannulling of the commandment going before”.
Clear.
"Jesus said to him, 'You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets." Matthew 22:37-40
Jesus was still OT. The mystery of righteousness was not revealed until the epistles.
The epistle to the Hebrews is clear: the law was disannulled, as I have quoted. You simply stuck your fingers in your ears when you read it.





God obeys no-one but Himself.
The Son perfectly obeyed all the Law of the Father.
The Son obeyed the Father directly, through the Spirit. Spontaneously. Nothing to do with the Ten Commandments.
This is why He said to the Pharisees that the OT law was “your law”and not “my law”.





There is no law in the spiritual realm except His person.
No eternal, absolute, immutable, universal, moral law at all?
None at all. To declare such, is to declare that there is another god besides God: a god called “law”.
Why do you think He told Adam not to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil? Because it lacked vitamin B?
Why do you think He made man without such knoweldge? Did He forget to include it in the package?





The universe of God is amoral.
Oh my gosh! This reflects the mind of an atheist!
What is reflected is that you are still eating from the wrong tree.





But faith is a work.
A work of God. Not us.
So faith is a rest, not a work. Thus law is precluded, for the law is work.





Does that mean I advocate a works-righteousness? No.
In fact you do: unless you try to keep the commandments you are in your mind on your way to hell. Thus you retain your salvation by your efforts, for if you do not make an effort, you misuse your grace, and if you misuse your grace, you are not saved. This is the doctrine of SDA guru Ellen White.
So your salvation is contingent upon that which you say should follow it.





But living by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God certainly does.
The mouth of God does not speak the law, but faith. The law is not of faith.
“We serve in newness of spirit and not in oldness of the letter” does not mean “we serve the letter in newness of the spirit”. It means “we serve God in newness of the spirit without attention to the law”.





When I choose to obey God, according to His Word and His Law and His commands, statutes and precepts, I am living according to His Holy Spirit who abides within me.
You are infact doing the opposite. You are sinning via self-effort.
You reveal you are of the ilk of the Jews, for whom “the word of God was unto them precept upon precept, line upon line”, and not one who serves in newness of spirit as opposed to oldness of the letter as instructed in Rm 7:6.





We retain our uniqueness, but we have a different headship, being placed within the Person of Christ.
This I almost agree with, for I believe in the federal headship of Jesus Christ. He is my head; I am part of His (spiritual) body, the church. But we are not "placed" within the Person of Christ, but ". .created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them." Ephesians 2:10
Thus we are not identifiable as our former selves from an external position, but are hidden in Christ.
These are untenable positions you take. Our spiritual life is hidden in Christ while we continue in our old flesh bodies. We are most definitely identifiable by name as the same person, for our names are written in the Lamb's Book of Life.
We are identifiable by name in as much as we are different parts of the Body, but that is all.
We are joined to the Lord as one spirit indivisible, and that is the very reason we are saved.

Concerning your focussing on the sinful flesh: “If Christ be in you the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness.” God has declared the flesh dead. You should stop trying to tell Him it is alive. He doesn’t want to know about it. That is why He told us we are not under the law.





When Christ died, He died the death of those "seed" He represented, in His body.
Which is why the law is finished for them, just as it was for Him.
So you think Jesus Christ died on the cross to abolish the Law of God?
His death fufilled the law. Once it was fulfilled, it was redandant, and died a natural death. Just like a bee which dies after it stings you.

As I said, and that which you chose to ignore, the foreshadow of the demise of the law for those in Christ, is found in the story of Rachel, who being the first love of Jacob, represented Israel and thus the law. (Leah represented the Gentiles.)
Rachel was fulfilled in bringing forth her last son Benoni (“son of my sorrow”) who represented Christ on the cross, and so she died. Her death with the event of the birth of the “son of sorrow”, spoke of the death of the law with the crucifixion of Christ, for she represented the law, and Benoni Christ crucified.
Thus Benoni was necessarily renamed "Benjamin" ("Son of the right hand") by his father Jacob, thus signifying that the old had passed away, and the new had come.
And so "Benjamin”, “Son of the Right Hand”, which spoke of the risen Christ seated at the right hand of the Father, free of the law, together with those in Him.
At present your Rachel is still alive and giving birth. But what saith the Lord? “Wisdom is justified of all her children”





There is no “in that respect” about it, no mere metaphorical sense. The proxy statement of faith results in a literal crucifixion.
We are to crucify sinfulness in us;
No-one can crucify himself. Even Christ couldn’t: there is a practicle problem nailing one hand with a hand already nailed.
All crucifixion is done by God. Thus: “It pleased Him to bruise Him”.





You need to understand that not only are we imputed with righteousess, but are imparted with it.
I reject the Roman Catholic teaching that righteousness is "infused" within mortals.
It is not the mortal in us who is so infused, but the spirit.
The scripture is clear: “we [are] MADE the righteousness of God in Him”, and “he that is born of God cannot sin”.
Thus we have abundant life which is an experience of righteousness, not merely imputation.





To keep the law, is to place one’s eyes on one’s own performance. Such is sin, and such would have rendered Him unacceptable as sacrifice for us.
When Adam sinned, Adam broke the covenant of works God had obliged him to keep.
Adam sinned by His desire to forfeit living by faith for living according to the knowledge of good and evil (law).
He chose to keep the law instead of faith.
That he had to break law in order to do so, simply shows you that the law is the child of law, and never the child of faith.





You need to understand that to keep the law, paradoxically results in breaking it, for it necessitates that one take his eyes off God momentarily, and so transgress the greatest commandment.
In line with this, you need to understand that “the law” is synonomous with “self-effort”, and in a still wider sense, “life in the absence of the revelation of God”.
What is needed to keep the Law of God is faith.
“The law is not of faith”. Gal 3:12

[7thangel]

7th angel,

the baptism that saves us is, not the putting away of the filth of the flesh(referring to carnal body), but the answer of a good conscience towards God.
Baptism declares that the filth of the flesh is put away, regardless of its activity thereafter. It is a statement 'death by faith', which is why baptism implies buriel.
So then it is the very cause of a good conscience toward God.

If you have read my blog, you will notice that when I meant of being directed by the Spirit is being directed by wisdom, even saying that the Christ(the Spirit of Christ) is become unto us the wisdom of God. And when we are guided by wisdom, we are actually free to do all things. But as Paul said, "All things are lawful for me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but all things edify not." It is anymore about "obedience" to the law, but the expediency and edification of doing things, even of hating and making war. In the law, we are being dommanded of dos and donts, but of being guided by wisdom. So thus Eclesiates says:

Ecclesiastes 3

1To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven: 2A time to be born, and a time to die; a time to plant, and a time to pluck up that which is planted; 3A time to kill, and a time to heal; a time to break down, and a time to build up; 4A time to weep, and a time to laugh; a time to mourn, and a time to dance; 5A time to cast away stones, and a time to gather stones together; a time to embrace, and a time to refrain from embracing; 6A time to get, and a time to lose; a time to keep, and a time to cast away; 7A time to rend, and a time to sew; a time to keep silence, and a time to speak; 8A time to love, and a time to hate; a time of war, and a time of peace.

In wisdom we do not speak anymore about mere obedience but of timing. The law says, Thou shalt not kill. But sometimes it is "expedient" that we should kill; in time of self defense, for example. Do you "always" offer your other cheek? No, but sometimes it is "expedient" that we even follow the command literally.

You see, the problem with the law is that, as Hebrew says, "For there is verily a disannulling of the commandment going before for the weakness and unprofitableness thereof. If we do not realize the weakness and unprofitableness of the law, then we may not be doing things to edify, and in some case doing the law is actually destroying edification. In such a case where obedience of the law is inexpedient or destroying edification, then love is not actually consumated in the actions. That is why sometimes we kill, and sometimes we disobey Christ by not turning the other cheek. And of course, without wisdom, which is the Spirit of Christ that is in us, we cannot understand the weakness and unprofitableness of the law.

And as you can see, if man have not yet wisdom, we command them to do "as told." That is what we do to our children. Since we knew that children have not wisdom yet, we enforce our laws unto them by the letter, or "as told." Now the same with a person who is lacking wisdom of God, they are being commanded to obey by the letter, or "as told." And like the children that we command make laws that are not binding when they grow up, the person lacking wisdom of God is also commanded of things that are not binding when the gained the wisdom of God. For example the children are commanded to sleep before midnight, you do not tell that to your married son, or daughter, do you? Likewise the a person lacking wisdom is commanded to not to eat certain things, but when Christ(representing the Spirit, Wisdom, and Truth) came, representing the coming into knowledge and understanding, we can now eat even those disallowed food. There are other laws, of course.

So these people who are igmorant of the wisdom of God, they are at the estate as "living soul." They are earthly, and those they are needed to be under the law, until the time they come to have the wisdom of God themselves. They are commanded of laws that are not expedient. And when a person cannot realize the inexpediency of the laws, it is a sign that they still lack the wisdom of God.

So as you can see, it does not necessarily mean that you are obeing the law of Moses to be under the law. Anyone who is ignorant, and is being commanded of some inexpedient laws are people who are under the law. And like our children that we command inexpedient laws to become wise, those ignorant of the wisdom of God are being commanded of inexpedient laws , like the laws of Moses, that will guide them to know wisdom. Do we ground children nonsensically? No, rather, we ground them knowing that such command will make them realize their fault, and thus they learn.

I deal with the dichotomy of the flesh and spirit, and the pragmatics thereof, in my above latest post to "smaller", particularly under the paragraph responding to smaller's statement that "the LAWLESSNESS in you is UNDER THE LAW".

You seem to be talking of something you cannot even really know if you can experience them.

Wisdom, that is the Spirit, the Christ that will guide us and not subject us under the law. What you are proposing as flesh as spirit is like a failry tale, like smaller's theology.

[smaller]

Smaller,

I have looked over your post and again find the same huffing and puffing without substance. You have run out of ammunition and so prefer to ask unrelated questions in order to side-track.

And I reject your phony attempt at meaningless accusational categorizations in some vain attempt to "win" something. So what else is new?

There are a 3 items that will serve to higlight your errant position:

NUMBER 1:

And you are in blatant denial of just what God's Law is. You have denied God's Law are THE LAWS from Moses in favor of "Melchizedek" laws
I almost have a heart attack when I read things like this. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. Here is what I have demonstrated from scripture:

[[[The law is the Torah. It’s administrators were the Levites, and its head the Levite Moses.
The law of God is found at 1 Jo 3:23.

And you think the Torah and 1 John 3:23 are not in agreement?

And this has "what" to do with the "Melchizedek Laws" that you claimed Paul was following and upholding and serving?

Its administrator and Head is found at Heb 7:10.

So then: “the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law” Heb 7:12]]]

When are you going to realize that lawlessness is UTTERLY CONDEMNEDunder both the Old Covenant and the NEW?

Are you excusing yourself for sins and sinning under the NEW COVENANT whilst eternally damning your neighbors and enemies to burn alive forever for doing the same things. I say your practice is MORE condemned under the New Covenant than it is under The Law.

To which you replied with your non-sequitur:
You presume The Law without purpose. If Paul served same and upheld same and did not nullify same by "faith" then I conclude you are in error.

To which I replied:
You have not attended to the point. Therefore it stands. (Rules of debate)

IF Paul said he served The Law my dear debate artiste, and he did say so, it is INCUMBENT upon YOU to show why Paul LIED.

To which, rather than attend to the point, you falsely replied that I had personally attacked you:
More ad hom drivel and evasion.

That response of "ad hom drivel" is to your non-sequitur/rules of debate DODGING. You should as a supposed gentlemen and "christian" address the points PER POINT AND stop calling me what were those terms of FALSE accusations again (scrolling down) OH YEAH:

--->"Your braggacio in your sign off “enjoy” is starting to run weak"
--->"your "Jesus" is merely an alias"
--->"you have reached the extent of your ability to refute"
--->"the knowledge being presented is beyond yours"
--->"You need to go to remedial English classes"

Need I say more? You think this stiff necked" you have not attended to the point" and "false accusastions" will make "the points" that you cannot answer go away?

Here are my claims yet once again in brief. See if you can focus and respond:

-Paul served The Law and that LAW was THE LAW OF MOSES.

-The Law of Moses REVEALS sin indwelling men and AS SUCH it's purposes still remain, EVEN WITH BELIEVERS.

-Sin indwelling men REMAINS utterly condemned UNDER both Moses Law and EVEN MORESO under the New Covenant.

-Believers STILL have SIN.

-Faith does not NULLIFY The Law of Moses.

The fact of Heb 7:12 remains: the law was changed from the law of Moses to the law of Melchizadek. That you do not submit to this, makes it no less true.

I am not denying the New Covenant NOR how God deals with men under IT.

Nevertheless I do not find ANY of the writers trying to ELIMINATE The Law of Moses which is also in AGREEMENT with the "New Covenant" or what you want to call "The Laws of Melchizedek" with regards to SIN INDWELLING MANKIND. Do you understand this?

-One cannot say you have NO SIN or are SINLESS or I say they are a LIAR.

-One cannot USE The New Covenant as their EXCUSE to SIN.

Add these to your unaddressed points.

The Law is not "of faith" because it does not take "FAITH" to understand and say THE TRUTH, that we have SIN. All men's consciouses attend to that FACT of sin indwelling/guilt and the associated condemnation that comes with same.

NUMBER 2:

You presist in you grammatically-illegal syntacto manipulation of the phrase “it is no longer I that do it, but sin ...”, with your erroneous Paul had sin indwelling him that he called "no longer I”.

You have tried to say that the position of "sin indwelling" that Paul called "no longer I" is in fact SAUL. I don't find that presentation ANYWHERE in the scriptures NOR do I find PAUL blaming SAUL for being the "cause" of his sin indwelling. I also do not find PAUL calling SAUL the "evil present" with him.

So if you have any other guesses as to WHOM that "sin indwelling" that was "NO LONGER I" that was REVEALED BY THE LAW, have at it.

I am saying that EVIL PRESENT and "SIN INDWELLING" that Paul called "no longer I" are the devil and his messengers who HAVE THEIR INFLUENCES and CONTROLS over the flesh and minds of MANKIND and it is to THEM that The Law was written against and STANDS to this day.

Now do you think you can at least sort through this simplicity and find some form of dialog OR are you going to continue on in denial of "your condition" as well?

Your “no longer I” is a fiction, not the noun phrase you try to make it.
What is actually said is that it is no longer “I”, but an alternative to “I” called “sin”: it is “sin” and not “I” that sins.

And that little dance means WHAT? You think you are cute with these types of semantic non-chantings? Paul's statement was abundantly clear. The "sin indwelling him" was NOT HIM. Make of it what you will.

That sin indwelling was AROUSED by The Law and it's presence was made beyond DENIAL and that is exactly what The Law is meant to show men. The EVIL VILENESS within their hearts.

All your claims of perfection are belied by The Scriptures. Concession to The Truth is a portion of being IN same.

NUMBER 3: (concerning the important mechanics of the issue)

the LAWLESSNESS in you is UNDER THE LAW
Lawlessness is not a thing: it is the activity of the old man aroused by the law, which law is necessarily over him only.

I did not see Paul calling the activity of "sin indwelling him" Saul NOR did he say it was "his old man" doing it. His "old man" was a blinded slave of same. One is not a slave to himself. There is also that little fact that Paul had a MESSENGER OF SATAN in his flesh. Connect the dots.

"I" who live in my human being am not under the law: "I" am a complete spirit-person joined to Christ's headship. "I" include no flesh.

Paul never denied that in his flesh HE SERVED THE LAW OF SIN. (Romans 7:25) You do as well even in the midst of your denial of same.

The flesh that “I” live in will manifest “I” (manifest Christ) as “I” understand that “I” am not under the law my flesh is under: “I” am enabled to take charge of the flesh only as “I” understand it was crucified by a law which “I” am not under, and that it is therefore dead to “I”.

YET every single time you pick up that LAW OF MOSES what do we find???

YOU cannot follow THE LAW of MOSES and SIN is revealed and aroused in your flesh by SAME.

Surprise!

Such taking charge will therefore not manifest itself in a keeping of the law, for the “I” that is in charge is not under the law, but under Christ, and therefore cannot hear the law.

Sin indwelling WILL manifest every single time you pick up Moses' Law. It's just a FACT. And a FACT that you do not want to SEE. Wonder why?

I think we've already discovered that faith does not nullify The Law, but upholds and serves it.
All we have established is that you are not reading, or cannot read.

Then PROVE those statements by Paul were LIES.

You have not attended to the point. Therefore it stands. (Rules of debate)

I don't have to attend a point. I believe EXACTLY what was written. It is incumbent upon YOU to PROVE Paul's statements were FALSE. Paul said "I serve The Law with my mind" and "We UPHOLD The Law" and yes, he was speaking about "The Law of Moses" which is ALSO The Law of God.

To which you have now replied again with your ridiculous:
I can see that you have roped yourself in a dead end in this conversation and are resorting to non answers to somehow declare yourself some sort of a victor. What is the point of that Colossians?

So not only to you not attend to what I have written, you do so purposely again after you have been told you haven’t attended to what I have written. And assume I am an idiot in the process.

I think we have a complete failure to communicate quite frankly. I've tried to keep the response points simple. You have not gotten by the initial hurdles in favor of some sort of bizarre construct that you seem to have fallen into that I do not understand AND when these obvious DISCREPENCIES between your imaginations and what WAS ACTUALLY WRITTEN are pointed out you resorted to false accusations and pointless "point of debate" "I therefore win" worthless statements. So what else is new. I see this kind of behaviour everyday on posting boards.

SUMMARY
Your whole bent is to deny the emphasis and plain teaching of scripture. This is propelled by your bias which leads you to tell us that Christ’s declaration that those punished for not feeding or clothing Him are not people, but some anti-Christ scapegoat personfied as “lawless”, presumably Mr Lawless.

Uh, yeah. You are getting closer to my understanding. And you still to just prefer blaming others for what you also do. I find no understanding in that approach BECAUSE the scriptures PROHIBIT it.

James is clear: people deceive themselves (Ja 1:22), and because of this, are worthy of punishment.

What you measure to others you should measure to yourself as well.

I do not deny that each man's deceptions are his own burdens to bear, but that still does not mean those indwelt deceptions and the man who bears them are THE SAME. That is just your mistaken notion and it results in your ETERNAL CONDEMNATION of your "neighbors" whom you are commanded TO LOVE. Is this a difficult concept to you???

And there are countless inferences concerning eternal punishment for people.

A. The bodies of mankind were clearly revealed to have 'OTHER OCCUPANTS' by Jesus Christ. You'd have to be nearly BLIND to have missed that.

B. There is not ONE SINGLE NAMED PERSON in the entire Bible who is stated as about to be going to THE LAKE OF FIRE or even ONE SINGLE NAMED PERSON even threatened with such a fate

SO

I find it just as credible that the OTHER THINGS that are IN MEN are the ones being so sentenced to the flames AND your position is FALSE and one that is even FROM THEIR PRESENCE.

Now you know what I think of you.

Those who cannot love their neighbors as themselves, even their unsaved ones, have already revealed themselves by their LACK of LOVE. By "their fruits" I know YOU.

I also understand that there is a child of God hidden in that fleshly understanding who is currently enslaved to the desire to burn other people alive in fire and I FEEL VERY SORRY FOR YOU!

From Revelation’s “ the smoke of their torment ascendeth forever”, to Revelation’s account of who is excluded from the book of life, to Paul’s statement that many will perish, to Christ’s statements that our reward will be eternal life as opposed to the reward of the unjust, to Christ’s statement that he spoke in parables purposely so that many would not understand, to Christ’s statement in Jo 17 that He prayed not for the world but only for those whom the Father had given Him, and on and on and on. There are myriads.

"I see people, people! Billions upon Billions burning alive forever in conscious torment" proclaims Colossians.

Sorry pal. It's your imagination! The devil and his messengers are OVERLAYED upon THE FLESH and every eternal torment scripture is TO THEM and ONLY THEM.

If Christ had wanted to say that people will be punished, He would not have said it any other way. You are denying the prima facie of scripture in deference to your own ideas. Thus you render the bible redundant: it says what you say it says, and not what it says.

And I say what you think you see so clearly DOESN'T EVEN EXIST as it pertains to PEOPLE. And do you know WHY it doesn't exist? Because PEOPLE are GOD'S OFFSRING! (Acts 17:25-31)

God is not about to be burning His offspring alive in conscious eternal torment.

Usually one who argues against the natural grain of scripture as you do, has some deep emotional fear/bias for doing so. My guess is that you are not assured of your own eternal life, and therefore hold to a doctrine which provides you peace of mind in any event.

I am not under the obligations to understand what does not exist OR even make sense no matter how much dancing around the "facts" certain doctrines try to do.

With your present tactics and mindset, I have no more time for you.

Why don't you just do what you REALLY WANT TO DO then Mr. Col. Just damn me to burn alive forever in fire because that IS what you REPRESENT to others who don't "agree" with you.

I have engaged you twice now, and both times you simply deny scripture’s teaching when it doesn’t suit you. Thus you reveal that the bible is only ostensibly the referee: ultimately you call the shots.

The "facts" are on the table and you can run if you want. The facts ain't going away but your reaction is SOOOO typical. When the dialog doesn't go your way you get INFLAMED and fall into false accusations and proclaimations of "I am right no matter what!" typical.

It is highly unlikely that you will ever arrive at correct understanding while you are subject to your false teaching on hell for unbelievers. For this is the integral anti-issue of salvation.
Knowing scripture is not good enough: it will never say to you what it is supposed to say unless you listen to Jesus Christ.
And in order to listen to Jesus Christ, you must be born again.

Whatever. I still say you are dodging the facts. If you want to leave all the "dogma" behind and pick up the bullet points above HAVE AT IT. Leave the nonsense behind next time.

enjoy!

smaller

[Unpastorized]

[i](Rom 6:14) For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace.

Yup, in the book of Romans we can find words written that say we are not under the law. Its really not easy to understand what this means. Is it the penalty of the law if we are walking in the spirit of the law? After you graduated from law school? Even Peter understood that Pauls writings were hard to understand.

2 PETER 3 [15] And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; [16] As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.

But if you were to go through the whole book of Romans you would have to conclude that we still must keep the law.

ROMANS 2 [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.

Thats rather easy to understand

ROMANS 3 [30] Seeing it is one God, which shall justify the circumcision by faith, and uncircumcision through faith. [31] Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.

Romans 3 is clearly pointing out that we could never be justified by the works of the law. We can only truly be justified by grace through faith. For all have sinned, and come short of keeping the commandments. Filthy rags we are! With all that being said, are we to make void the law? GOD FORBID!

ROMANS6 [1] What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? [2] God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?

The fact that Romans asks the question "should we continue in sin" is a dead give away that you can sin. You know what sin is Flimflam?

ROMANS 6 [15] What then? shall we sin, because we are not under the law, but under grace? God forbid.

All these scriptures out of Romans are telling us the same thing. We as christians are capable of sinning and transgressing the law. They also tell us we are not to sin. You know what sin is Flimflam?

1 JOHN 3 [4] Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law

Its really not that hard to understand (just believe what it says) after there is no more need for the school master. Did you go to the schoolmaster?

Id like to talk about the Hebrews scripture next. I broke one of the boards commandments and posted back to back. Through mercy and grace they forgave me. Does that mean i can now ignore their commandment and post back to back whenever i get the itch? I dont think so. Do you?

[Colossians]

Smaller,

Are you born again?

[Colossians]

7th angel.

You seem to be talking of something you cannot even really know if you can experience them.
If I didn't experience it, I couldn't talk about it.

You need to read what I have written again alongside Romans 7, 8.

[7thangel]

7th angel.

You seem to be talking of something you cannot even really know if you can experience them.
If I didn't experience it, I couldn't talk about it.

You need to read what I have written again alongside Romans 7, 8.

I read only the part of the "heading" you mentioned on your response to smaller. I will try to read your posts and see if what I though of your position was the same.

[smaller]

Smaller,

Are you born again?

Are you going to resort to pure accusation for your "debate" now? go figure

[Unpastorized]

Seems, according to scripture no one is yet "Born Again"

1PETER1
[4] To AN INHERITANCE INCORRUPTIBLE, and undefiled, and that fadeth not away, reserved in heaven for you,
[5] Who are kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation READY TO BE REVEALED IN THE LAST TIME.[9] Receiving the END OF YOUR FAITH, even the salvation of your souls.[10] Of which salvation the prophets have inquired and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that should come unto you:
[13] Wherefore gird up the loins of your mind, be sober, and hope to the end FOR THE GRACE THAT IS TO BE BROUGHT UNTO YOU AT THE REVELATION OF JESUS CHRIST;
[23] BEING BORN AGAIN, NOT OF CORRUPTIBLE SEED, BUT OF INCORRUPTIBLE, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.
[24] For all flesh is as grass, and all the glory of man as the flower of grass. The grass withereth, and the flower thereof falleth away.

I dont know why people insist they are born again when the scriptures clearly say you will not be "born again" till....Well just read the above scriptures. I cant make it any more clear than what they say. And yes, the dead in Christ will rise first (1 Cor.15) and be raised in INCORRUPTION

1COR.15
[42] So also is the resurrection of the dead. IT IS SOWN IN CORRUPTION; IT IS RAISED IN INCORRUPTION:[43] It is sown in dishonour; it is raised in glory: it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power:
[44] It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. THERE IS A NATURAL BODY, AND THERE IS A SPIRITUAL BODY.

A natural body! A spiritual body! Whats so hard to understand?

JOHN3
[49] And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly.
[50] Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; NEITHER DOTH CORRUPTION INHERIT INCORRUPTION.
[51] Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but WE SHALL ALL BE CHANGED,
[52] In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.[53] FOR THIS CORRUPTIBLE MUST PUT ON INCORRUPTION, and this mortal must put on immortality.

You cant put on incorruption 1Peter1(23) until....Its so clear.

JOB 14 [10] But man dieth, and wasteth away: yea, man giveth up the ghost, and where is he?[11] As the waters fail from the sea, and the flood decayeth and drieth up:[12] So man lieth down, and riseth not: till the heavens be no more, they shall not awake, nor be raised out of their sleep.[13] O that thou wouldest hide me in the grave, that thou wouldest keep me secret, until thy wrath be past, that thou wouldest appoint me a set time, and remember me![14] If a man die, shall he live again? all the days of my appointed time will I wait, till my change come.

Nicodemus asks the question how can a man be born when he is old? Job asks the same question. If a man die, shall he live again? YES! After the heavens be no more, after the wrath of God spoken of in revelations has taken place, then the change will come. We will be “born again” (corruption will put on incorruption) as the last trumpet of God is blown. So simple.

[Colossians]

Smaller,


Are you born again?
Are you going to resort to pure accusation for your "debate" now? go figure
There is no accusation. It is a simple question. Are you born again?

[7thangel]

Colossians,

You had an excellent question against smaller's theology. I guess he knows the damage it can dot to his(smaller) theology that is why he did not respond directly.

[smaller]

Colossians,

You had an excellent question against smaller's theology. I guess he knows the damage it can dot to his(smaller) theology that is why he did not respond directly.

Uh, did I miss something?

Colossians left a huge unaddressed post just below and instead has resorted to false accusations and classic non-sequitur head in sand.

If Colossians has not figured out that I have a personal relationship with The Living Word he would be a blind man indeed.

[7thangel]

There is no dichotomy taught in Romans 7. There is tension. A tension between the old flesh and the new spirit that only Christians experience. An unsaved person does not feel this tension, but live his life serving his flesh members. But a believer is torn between the old and new and must consciously and deliberately choose to walk in the Spirit in order that he might "crucify" the flesh. (Romans 8:1-11, 6:2-22)

Colossians,

If you would note the underlined, there is where I guess we have a fine line of difference. You seem to be speaking that there is a dual entity in our being once we were regenerated. I do not have that position.

You see, as what I implied on my thread "in him we live..." my point of being contolled/guided by the spirit is very much the same as of being predestined; that is, that God is totally in control of us through the Spirit of Christ. God created all things that exists, and all things moves, lives and have their being because God made them thus way according to His plans in Christ. All things were created "through" him(Christ). It is God who is doing all things, a statement that implies we have no free will.

We have a spirit with us that is distinct to the Spirit of Christ:

Romans 8:16
The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God:

Our spirit that is being mentioned speaks of our creaturely nature, being a creature that possesses a "mind" image. We picture insane people as having a spirit, a mind, though if we scrutinize them, we really say that these peole are "out of their minds." But for the sake of speaking of what a mind is and the nature of man is, we speak of saying that an insane has a mind, though we hardly think that he(the insane) possesses it.

We are being projected as having minds, though the truth of the conclusion of our being is that we are mere automatons, having no free will and real minds. Our minds are actually mere artificial, being created by God, and that there is no such thing a "I" independently from God. Our referencing of saying "my" spirit, or "his" spirit, or somebody elses, is to have and understanding that there exists a spirit(a mind) image in us, and that such spirit may differ on every other person.

And, mind you, the Spirit of Christ that is mortifying the deed of our body is not really the person of Christ, nor as if there is a being of person living in us besides ourselves. Rather, of the whole truth, the Spirit of Christ being referred to is the over all "PLAN/PURPOSE" of God according to Christ, especifically the Word. That is, that we are living according to the "plans/purpose" of God; that God is actually making us to live, and move and have our being according to His "plan/purpose" in Christ. It is not like how the Open Theist's View that the future is not yet realized. No, rather the whole history of all things were already set according the Word(Plan),

I have to say that it is really hard convince that God is in control of all things, and that we are actually void of free will, and that we do not have an independent state of being apart of God. It requires us to have a mature knowledge and understanding of these things to understand. Experiences will also tell us of the truth of these things. And that Bible also is "leading" us to conclude in these things. I said "the Bible is leading us," because some parts of the Bible are intended to the "unlearned" being taught of some inexpedient rules that will actually be done away with after recieving knowledge and understanding; the wisdom. Those inexpedient laws are leading us to be wise, but those laws are soon to vanish after we receive wisdom.

7thangel