OkCornel:
1. Genesis 3 v 22;
And the Lord God said, “The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever

2. That being said, how did Cain know murder is a sin, if he didn't know by heart hmmm? I thought you mentioned earlier there was a law in place at the time. Where was this law existing hmmm?

3. Kobojunkie, with the above points … even an idiot can figure it out. And I don’t think you’re worse off than an idiot. That being said, how was God’s law known by man in the days of Adam to Noah even before writing was invented?

1. Stop twisting scripture abeg!

For the umpteenth time, that verse says absolutely nothing of what it is you continue to claim..

2. Again, what we have instead is enough evidence in the same scripture to suggest that God spoke His Law to Adam's descendants in similar way as He did their father. Or is it your assumption that God only ever spoke to Cain after he murdered His brother?

3. I beg to differ! When it comes to the Word of God, that which an eejit would do, and majority of Christians are guilty of this very sin, is take it upon it upon themselves to conclude on that which is not scriptural and this without evidence. An eejit would outrightly deny that which there is evidence for, all so he can assert that which he has conveniently accepted ought to be instead, an Ought-is Fallacy!

Kobojunkie:
1. Stop twisting scripture abeg!

For the umpteenth time, that verse says absolutely nothing of what it is you continue to claim..

2. Again, what we have instead is enough evidence in the same scripture to suggest that God spoke His Law to Adam's descendants in similar way as He did their father. Or is it your assumption that God only ever spoke to Cain after he murdered His brother?

3. I beg to differ! When it comes to the Word of God, that which an eejit would do, and majority of Christians are guilty of this very sin, is take it upon it upon themselves to conclude on that which is not scriptural and this without evidence. An eejit would outrightly deny that which there is evidence for, all so he can assert that which he has conveniently accepted ought to be instead, an Ought-is Fallacy!

Kobojunkie, before mankind invented writing, in what form was God’s law kept, and how?

Abi God came down everyday and was speaking his laws from Adam to Noah? They didn’t have a heart/mind to retain God’s instructions?


Since you’re hell bent on embarrassing yourself, I’m more than happy to oblige you.

Answer the question above.

OkCornel:
1. Kobojunkie, before mankind invented writing, in what form was God’s law kept, and how?
2. Since you’re hell bent on embarrassing yourself, I’m more than happy to oblige you.
Answer the question above.

1. What in the world has man's ability to write or not to do with this conversation abeg?

Are you insinuating now that God wrote His Law down on either tablet or paper to either of Adam, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, or even Jacob such that writing would be of relevance to this here discussion?

There is no evidence of this so why drag that subject into this here unresolved issue for Pete's sake?

2. I think you should focus your energy instead on processing and responding to the topic. These many attempts at what seems red herrings don't help you at all.

Kobojunkie:
1. What in the world has man's ability to write or not to do with this conversation abeg?

Are you told that God wrote His Law down on either tablet or paper to either of Adam, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, or even Jacob such that writing would be of relevance to this here discussion?

2. I think you should focus your energy instead on processing and responding to the topic. These many red herrings don't help you at all.

So how was man conscious of God’s laws prior to the time of Moses if the laws were not committed to memory?

Please keep on embarrassing yourself, you’re entertaining me.

OkCornel:
1. So how was man conscious of God’s laws prior to the time of Moses if the laws were not committed to memory?

Please keep on embarrassing yourself, you’re entertaining me.

Again .. Before the 10 commandments aka the Law of Moses, God is written, in scripture, to have spoken His Law directly to men. Albeit, not all men who God spoke to are written of in scripture but the record does show that God spoke His Law to some of those recorded - Adam, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob... so we have evidence of God doing this.

And we also have evidence of God reminding Cain that he, Cain, already had God's standard of righteousness meaning this information, God's Law had been communicated to Cain before He murdered His brother, Abel.

Again, all this we have evidence of right there in scripture.

What I am asking you is this. Provide evidence for your claim that God Himself instead wrote His Law in the hearts of men, this prior to given them the Law of Moses which was written down, not by God but by men, albeit as commanded by God.

---

If you are unable to directly with evidence respond to the question there, then we need to stop wasting each other's time here.

Kobojunkie:
Again .. Before the 10 commandments aka the Law of Moses, God is written, in scripture, to have spoken His Law directly to men. Albeit, not all men who God spoke to are written of in scripture but the record does show that God spoke His Law to some of those recorded - Adam, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob... so we have evidence of God doing this.

And we also have evidence of God reminding Cain that he, Cain, already had God's standard of righteousness meaning this information, God's Law had been communicated to Cain before He murdered His brother, Abel.

Again, all this we have evidence of right there in scripture.

What I am asking you is this. Provide evidence for your claim that God Himself instead wrote His Law in the hearts of men, this prior to given them the Law of Moses which was written down, not by God but by men, albeit as commanded by God.

How did Cain know murder was a sin?
You’re telling us Cain did not know good and evil?

The requirements of God’s law was written in the hearts of men from the moment they knew good and evil (Genesis 3 v 22)

That’s what Paul is bringing attention to in Romans 2 v 13-15. Now argue with the scriptures

OkCornel:


What was abolished? The customary and ceremonial requirements of the law? Or the weightier matters of the law?

To get a better understanding of what happened, let me use our constitution in Nigeria as an example. Right now, we are using the 1999 constitution as amended.

We had a previous one.

There is no lawyer who will make reference to the previous constitution in any court of law in Nigeria. It does not mean that there is nothing worth knowing from it. But the new constitution replaces the old one. You can't merge both.

The Old covenant has been set aside for a new one. The law of Moses is completely abolished.

It does not mean that the New covenant does not contain moral principles to guide us. It does.

You can't use any quote from the law of Moses to judge the church. We are not under the law of Moses.

God will judge the New Testament saints based on the teachings of our Lord Jesus and his Apostles. He will never make reference to the law of Moses to judge us.

The issue of weightier matter of the law only concerns those who were under the law of Moses.

We have a new constitution which is the New Testament and the teachings of our Lord Jesus and his Apostles are enough to guide us to live a holy life.

Ken4Christ:


To get a better understanding of what happened, let me use our constitution in Nigeria as an example. Right now, we are using the 1999 constitution as amended.

We had a previous one.

There is no lawyer who will make reference to the previous constitution in any court of law in Nigeria. It does not mean that there is nothing worth knowing from it. But the new constitution replaces the old one. You can't merge both.

The Old covenant has been set aside for a new one. The law of Moses is completely abolished.

It does not mean that the New covenant does not contain moral principles to guide us. It does.

You can't use any quote from the law of Moses to judge the church. We are not under the law of Moses.

God will judge the New Testament saints based on the teachings of our Lord Jesus and his Apostles. He will never make reference to the law of Moses to judge us.

The issue of weightier matter of the law only concerns those who were under the law of Moses.

We have a new constitution which is the New Testament and the teachings of our Lord Jesus and his Apostles are enough to guide us to live a holy life.

So God’s law was not abolished, but amended?

Just to be sure I understand you correctly.

By the way, the customary requirements of the Mosaic law wasn’t expected for the gentiles to keep. Deuteronomy 14 v 21 & Acts 15 are some of the examples that elaborates this clearly. Hence, my focus on the weightier matters, and not the customary requirements Jesus deemed trivial in Matthew 23 v 23.

OkCornel:


So God’s law was not abolished, but amended?

Just to be sure I understand you correctly.

By the way, the customary requirements of the Mosaic law wasn’t expected for the gentiles to keep. Deuteronomy 14 v 21 & Acts 15 are some of the examples that elaborates this clearly. Hence, my focus on the weightier matters, and not the customary requirements Jesus deemed trivial in Matthew 23 v 23.

I have opened a new thread on my book titled, Is The Church Under the Law of Moses. Please, read slowly as I post all the chapters. Maybe, you will fully understand the point I am making.

Meanwhile, the law of Moses was not ammended. It is completely abolished. The New Testament Saints have no business with the law of Moses.

The teachings of our Lord Jesus and his Apostles gives us enough moral instruction to live a godly life.

Ken4Christ:


I have opened a new thread on my book titled, Is The Church Under the Law of Moses. Please, read slowly as I post all the chapters. Maybe, you will fully understand the point I am making.

Meanwhile, the law of Moses was not ammended. It is completely abolished. The New Testament Saints have no business with the law of Moses.

The teachings of our Lord Jesus and his Apostles gives us enough moral instruction to live a godly life.

Even the weightier matters of the law of Moses is “completely abolished”?

The same law Jesus clearly mentioned he came to fulfill rather than abolish?

Seems one isn’t clear on what exactly was abolished. Which were the customary laws and conditions for atonement.

Research, research, research. Don’t just go off regurgitated theology.

My two cents.

By the way, the teachings of Christ and the Apostles were not based on God’s laws?

OkCornel:


Even the weightier matters of the law of Moses is “completely abolished”?

The same law Jesus clearly mentioned he came to fulfill rather than abolish?

Seems one isn’t clear on what exactly was abolished. Which were the customary laws and conditions for atonement.

Research, research, research. Don’t just go off regurgitated theology.

My two cents.

By the way, the teachings of Christ and the Apostles were not based on God’s laws?

The word fulfill in this context means to bring the law to a justified end. And he did just that.

Ken4Christ:


The word fulfill in this context means to bring the law to a justified end. And he did just that.

So why then are we required to also fulfill a supposed law brought to an end as well?

Galatians 5 v 14
For the entire law is fulfilled in keeping this one command: “Love your neighbor as yourself.”

And why did God put the requirements of his law in the heart of the gentiles as per Romans 2?


I’m still looking for where Jesus mentioned he came to bring an end to God’s law, rather than fulfill them.

OkCornel:


So why then are we required to also fulfill a supposed law brought to an end as well?

Galatians 5 v 14
For the entire law is fulfilled in keeping this one command: “Love your neighbor as yourself.”

And why did God put the requirements of his law in the heart of the gentiles as per Romans 2?


I’m still looking for where Jesus mentioned he came to bring an end to God’s law, rather than fulfill them.

Apostle Paul which Jesus ordained into the ministry said so in several passages.

Jesus said that there were so many things he would have told them but he couldn't. He has done that as the Holy Spirit revealed them to his Apostles.

Ken4Christ:


Apostle Paul which Jesus ordained into the ministry said so in several passages.

Jesus said that there were so many things he would have told them but he couldn't. He has done that as the Holy Spirit revealed them to his Apostles.

Please where are the scriptural references where Jesus said he came to abolish God’s law?

Can you show me please?

Ken4Christ,

Take note of Apostle Peter’s warning before you delve into Paul’s letters without an understanding of God’s law. You will run into a faulty conclusion.

2 Peter 3 v 15-16;

15 Bear in mind that our Lord’s patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him.

16 He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction.

Cc: Dtruthspeaker

OkCornel:
Ken4Christ,

Take note of Apostle Peter’s warning before you delve into Paul’s letters without an understanding of God’s law. You will run into a faulty conclusion.

2 Peter 3 v 15-16;

15 Bear in mind that our Lord’s patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him.

16 He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction.

Cc: Dtruthspeaker

To see that KJV even used the exact words used for describing lawyers which is "learned/unlearned" of which Paul is a lawyer, hence the hardness and difficulty because his letters are exactly a Lawyer's Letter.

Dtruthspeaker:


To see that KJV even used the exact words used for describing lawyers which is "learned/unlearned" of which Paul is a lawyer, hence the hardness and difficulty because his letters are exactly a Lawyer's Letter.

The statements Paul made that attest to the abolition of the Law are not ambiguous. They are easy to understand. You don't want to accept them because it counters your pre conceived opinions.

Ken4Christ:


The statements Paul made that attest to the abolition of the Law are not ambiguous. They are easy to understand. You don't want to accept them because it counters your pre conceived opinions.

I have shown you before and you could not answer because both I and Paul are Lawyers and Paul did not say The Law is abolished when you read his letters as a "learned" (lawyer) person. His letters are what you people will call a legal document which you people normally take such documents to another lawyer for the interpretation of it.

I have explained that in legal language "end of The Law" means Destination/Goal of The Law and not "death/termination of The Law as you unlearned people will think.

So it is you who chooses to maintain you unlearned opinion that Paul said abolish when in fact you still do not understand that Paul is a Lawyer like Gani Fahwemi and would speak as one.

Dtruthspeaker:


I have shown you before and you could not answer because both I and Paul are Lawyers and Paul did not say The Law is abolished when you read his letters as a "learned" (lawyer) person. His letters are what you people will call a legal document which you people normally take such documents to another lawyer for the interpretation of it.

I have explained that in legal language "end of The Law" means Destination/Goal of The Law and not "death/termination of The Law as you unlearned people will think.

So it is you who chooses to maintain you unlearned opinion that Paul said abolish when in fact you still do not understand that Paul is a Lawyer like Gani Fahwemi and would speak as one.

You are a spiritual fraudster.

If End of the Law means destination, tell me what it means to be DELIVERED FROM THE LAW.

Sabbath was a day of rest-No work is to done-but a day to thank God, He took His people out from Egypt, and His creation in 6 days, 7th day rest, it was never a day going to a church meetings-neither is the first day of the week theory, people also claim this is the day we must worship, "Rev 1:10"
Everyday is a prefect day to honor God.
When people meet in Churches on the Sabbath day-the first thing they do is begin working which of course it's defiling the sabbath.
Plus the Sabbath isn't mentioned a day to keep in the New Testament-Jesus made a New Covenant with us,"Hebrews 8: 7-13,
and in Galatians 3:24-25 the law was our Tutor to bring us to Christ, that we might be Justified by faith, But after faith has come, we are no-longer under a Tutor,,
So if you were to keep the hole law-then you are cursed by the law Galatians 3:10-12,

Ken4Christ:


You are a spiritual fraudster.

If End of the Law means destination, tell me what it means to be DELIVERED FROM THE LAW.

Delivered from Law means delivered from The Law which accuses and holds you guilty of an offence.

Eg Mathew 5:22 takes place. You are immediately captured by The Law of "Thou shalt not hate thy brother" Leviticus 19:17/18.

But if you and when you obey God's advice in Mathew 5:24/25, The Law (Lev 19:17/18) The Law will let you go and ye are escaped (delivered) from The Law of Offence (Sin) and Disobedience, back to The Law of The Holy and the Obedient.

And you have just shown me another proof that Paul did not say abolish because He knows The Law and how Great and Vast it is which is why he clearly said at the beginning of the passage where your "DELIVERED FROM THE LAW" comes from

Romans 7:1, NIV: Do you not know brothers and sisters--for I am speaking to those who know the law--that the law has authority over someone only as long as that person lives?

Kjv
Know ye not, brethren, (for I speak to them that know the law, the learned/law'ers) HOW THAT THE LAW HATH DOMINION OVER A MAN AS LONG AS HE LIVETH?

Do you see the clear statement?

HOW THAT THE LAW HATH DOMINION OVER A MAN AS LONG AS HE LIVETH?

NO MAN IS OUTSIDE THE LAW.

WHICH IS PROVEN BY THE SAME ROMANS 7 WHERE PAUL SHOWS YOU WHAT I HAVE EXPLAINED IN MATHEW THAT YOU ARE LOOSED FROM THE LAW THAT PRONOUNCES YOU GUILTY

Romans 7:2
For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband (marriage) so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband. (Marriage)

Is she loosed from The Law of stealing, covetousness, murder and whoredom?

No! She is always bound by Law

Verse 3 shows further explains it.

So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man.

The word is "THAT LAW" and not from all Law!

Now you see, you are Wrong and you very much err in not seeing that Paul is a Lawyer and therefore as Peter warned, unless you are a lawyer, you would misinterprete and misunderstand him.