What constitutes violation of the Law?

Discussion in 'Calvinism/Arminianism Debate' started by The Biblicist, Dec 13, 2013.

  1. The Biblicist

    The Biblicist
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2011
    Messages:
    14,081
    Likes Received:
    204
    Mt. 5:22 But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.......27 ¶ Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery:
    28 But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.



    Ro 13:10 Love worketh no ill to his neighbour: therefore love is the fulfilling of the law.

    Please read the following thoughtfully, prayerfully and carefully before responding.

    I believe that every point of the law is connected with and based upon one mutual priniciple, which when broken violates every point of the law as the very same principle that ultimately defines violation of one point of the law is the very same principle that defines violation of every point of that law.

    For example, if the initial violation of law occurs at the point of motive, and only one proper motive underlies the intial fulfillment of law then every law is equally violated when the wrong motive occurs in connection with any point of the law.

    Let us say that the only proper motive essential to initial fulfillment of any law is love and thus the initial violation of any law is the absence of love as the right motive then to initially violate one point of the law constitutes the same violation of every point of the law as every point's initial violation is the same.

    For example, take the commandments of murder and adultery. If violation of both laws occurs at the same INITIAL point (any other motive but love) then to violate that principled motive necessarily violates every point of the law because every point requires the same motive/principle (love) for initial obedience.

    Hence, violation of the law occurs at the level of motive. Only one motive underlies the whole law and therefore the initial fulfillment of any point requires the same motive. Thus, in reverse the absence of this right principle/motive violates every point of the law.

    Isn't this exactly why Christ could say the commandments of murder and adultery were already violated INTERNALLY by wrong ATTITUDES rather than the consequences of those attitudes or actions? Did not these wrong attitudes equally violate the only proper motive behind all commandments - love? Hence, a person manifesting the wrong motive is in violation of every point of the Law becasue every point of the law requires love to prevent its violation.

    Carefully reread what I have said and prayerfully consider it and I think you will see it is impossible to violate one point of the Law without violating every point and thus it is equally impossible to obey one point of the Law without obeying every point of the Law as disobedience and fulfillment are determined and defined at the point of motive.
     
  2. The Biblicist

    The Biblicist
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2011
    Messages:
    14,081
    Likes Received:
    204
    The fallen nature "IS" by its very nature antithetical to the very principle/motive essential to obey God - love.

    1. Romans 8:7 cannot possibly be attributed to the inward new man or the spiritual mind but must have the fallen nature as its source and character.

    2. It "IS" enmity against God which is the very antithesis to the prinicple of love as God IS love but the carnal mind "IS" enmity against God.

    3. Hence, the fallen nature by its INHERENT NATURE 'is" not subject to the Law fo God and neither indeed can be. Therefore it is by nature fundementally void of the very principle necessary to obey God or submit to God.

    When these facts are considered with the fact that God can justly condemn violation of His law by those inherently void of ability to "submit to the law of God and neither indeed can be" then the only justification possible for this condemation of disobedience by those void of ability to comply is that they willfully forfeited that ability when the whole of human nature existed and consisted in ONE MAN (Rom. 5:12) wherein it acted in unison to forfeit the SINLESS ABILITY PREFALLEN STATE and thus entering into the complete state of inability to be subject "to the law of God, and neither indeed can be."
     
  3. BobRyan

    BobRyan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    30,837
    Likes Received:
    4
    And of course as even the "Baptist Confession of Faith" points out that Law of God includes the Ten Commandments and is rightly called the "moral law of God", defining sin - vs obedience and binding on both the saints and the lost.

    That much in your post is true.

    But you leave some things out like the universal supernatural work of God on the heart of mankind. ALL mankind.

    1. God supernaturally places "enmity" (war as even you say) between all mankind in fallen stated - and Satan's kingdom of darkness. Genesis 3

    2. God supernaturally "Convicts the WORLD of sin and righteousness and judgment" not just Calvinism's arbitrarily select "few" of Matt 7.

    3. Jesus supernaturally "Draws ALL mankind unto Him" John 12:32 and even Calvinists admit that the supernatural drawing of God ENABLES the choice to accept the Gospel freely (when Calvinists are not argument that it does even more than that).

    4. The same text in Romans 8 above that says that the lost are NOT able to obey the WORD of God - says that the born-again saints ARE - thus with the drawing of ALL - God is indeed just with the lost.

    A key point your argument often misses.

    [FONT=&quot]Rom 8[/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot]5 For those who are according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who are according to the Spirit, the things of the Spirit.[/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot]6 For the mind set on the flesh is death, but the mind set on the Spirit is life and peace,[/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot]7 because [/FONT][FONT=&quot]the mind set on the flesh is hostile toward God;[/FONT][FONT=&quot] for it [/FONT][FONT=&quot]does not subject itself to the Law of God[/FONT][FONT=&quot], for it [/FONT][FONT=&quot]is not even able to do so[/FONT][FONT=&quot],[/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot]8 and those who are in the flesh cannot please God[/FONT][FONT=&quot].[/FONT]




    When these facts are considered with the fact that God can justly condemn violation of His law by those inherently void of ability to "submit to the law of God and neither indeed can be" then the only justification possible for this condemation of disobedience by those void of ability to comply is that they willfully forfeited that ability when they refuse the "light that coming into the world enlightens EVERY man" John 1 , when they refuse the "drawing of ALL mankind" by Christ, when they reject the "Conviction of the Holy Spirit - convicting even THEM of sin and righteousness and judgment" and turning from the light God sends them Paul says in Romans 1 'they are without EXCUSE".

    This is the point where your argument fails to grasp how the whole Bible fits so well as an Arminian statement and does not need the Calvinist assumptions about original sin where via extreme 'inference' the idea is to blame the lost for the decision they made 1000's of years ago "as if" a sort of magic were at work.

    in Christ,

    Bob
     
    #3 BobRyan, Dec 13, 2013
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 13, 2013
  4. The Biblicist

    The Biblicist
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2011
    Messages:
    14,081
    Likes Received:
    204
    The fallen nature is not something subequent to natural birth but is inherent with the human nature in the fall of mankind in Adam. There is only ONE FALL rather than BILLIONS OF FALLS. Yet the idea of some is that each individual human being experiences a FALL and obtains the fallen nature sometime subsequent to Adam's fall and human birth.

    Furthermore, if the fallen nature was subsequent to Adam's fall and physical birth surely there would be at least ONE natural born human being who would MAINTAIN the nature received at physical birth and CONTINUE in righteousness rather than FALL from it! However, the scripture cannot find anyone but a superntural born Incarnation birth without a human father that has done that.
     
  5. kyredneck

    kyredneck
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2009
    Messages:
    10,545
    Likes Received:
    272
    5 And Jehovah saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. Gen 6

    19 For out of the heart come forth evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, railings:
    20 these are the things which defile the man…. Mt 12

    13 for not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified:
    14 (for when Gentiles that have not the law do by nature the things of the law, these, not having the law, are the law unto themselves;
    15 in that they show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness therewith, and their thoughts one with another accusing or else excusing them); Ro 2

    7….the law had said, Thou shalt not covet Ro 7

    Sin is an attitude.
     
  6. preacher4truth

    preacher4truth
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2010
    Messages:
    8,121
    Likes Received:
    0
    Being born.
     
  7. The Biblicist

    The Biblicist
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2011
    Messages:
    14,081
    Likes Received:
    204
    Yes, because sin is the wrong motive which is the source of all wrong attitudes. The only proper motive is whatever you do, whether you eat or drink DO ALL FOR THE GLORY OF GOD - and nobody can show me in the Bible where infants and or children prior to ability to rationally discern right from wrong operate by any other motive than PURE SELFISHNESS.
     
  8. thisnumbersdisconnected

    thisnumbersdisconnected
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2013
    Messages:
    8,448
    Likes Received:
    0
    Contradiction in views. If they operate from pure selfishness, then the have discerned right from wrong.
     
  9. Van

    Van
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2011
    Messages:
    9,515
    Likes Received:
    49
    When does the Law of Liberty, or the Law of Christ apply to the lost?

    If we are conceived in iniquity, what does that mean. We are classified as sinners already, because otherwise we would not be conceived in iniquity.

    The wages of sin is death, and people died before the Law of Moses was given.

    Is it a sin to violate the law of God unknowingly, like the Gentiles who did not have the oracles of God. Paul lays this all out in Romans.
     
  10. The Biblicist

    The Biblicist
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2011
    Messages:
    14,081
    Likes Received:
    204
    So you are saying a person cannot have a selfish disposition and act selfishly if they merely do not recognize that?

    Now, I am not asking if they can be condemned, that is another matter altogether. I am simply asking if they can BE something and DO something they do not realize?
     
  11. BobRyan

    BobRyan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    30,837
    Likes Received:
    4
    [FONT=&quot]Rom 8[/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot]5 For those who are according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who are according to the Spirit, the things of the Spirit.[/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot]6 For the mind set on the flesh is death, but the mind set on the Spirit is life and peace,[/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot]7 because [/FONT][FONT=&quot]the mind set on the flesh is hostile toward God;[/FONT][FONT=&quot] for it [/FONT][FONT=&quot]does not subject itself to the Law of God[/FONT][FONT=&quot], for it [/FONT][FONT=&quot]is not even able to do so[/FONT][FONT=&quot],[/FONT]
    [FONT=&quot]8 and those who are in the flesh cannot please God[/FONT][FONT=&quot].[/FONT]




    When these facts are considered with the fact that God can justly condemn violation of His law by those inherently void of ability to "submit to the law of God and neither indeed can be" then the only justification possible for this condemation of disobedience by those void of ability to comply is that they willfully forfeited that ability when they refuse the "light that coming into the world enlightens EVERY man" John 1 , when they refuse the "drawing of ALL mankind" by Christ, when they reject the "Conviction of the Holy Spirit - convicting even THEM of sin and righteousness and judgment" and turning from the light God sends them Paul says in Romans 1 'they are without EXCUSE".

    This is the point where your argument fails to grasp how the whole Bible fits so well as an Arminian statement and does not need the Calvinist assumptions about original sin where via extreme 'inference' the idea is to blame the lost for the decision they made 1000's of years ago "as if" a sort of magic were at work.
     

Share This Page

Loading...